Stastny: Grand Center Needs to be a Community, not a District
Last week I attended the Grand Center Master Plan Public Forum held at Powell Hall. Rather than email in my feedback I thought I’d post it here and email the committee a link to this post.
Background
Here are a few paragraphs from a recent press release to introduce you to the topic:
Top executives of Grand Center’s major institutions have taken a significant next step in the district’s redevelopment process by launching an initiative to create a master plan for the Grand Center District. The plan will address such areas as recommendations regarding land use, zoning possibilities and design guidelines.
At the request of Grand Center Inc. and several key executives of district institutions, Mayor Francis G. Slay has asked 30 institutional, business and community leaders to serve on a Planning Committee to create a common vision for the next phase of development in Grand Center. To achieve that goal, a Steering Committee made up of 14 members of the Planning Committee agreed to engage Donald Stastny, the Portland, Ore.-based, award-winning architect and urban designer, to lead the creation of an overall vision and implementation plan.
The goal of the initiative is to develop a long-range vision for the Grand Center District that is commonly created, enabling a shared ownership. The plan will be based on the input of the cultural institutions, community organizations, businesses, residents and patrons who visit the district as well as interested citizens throughout the region.
Stastny is not new to St. Louis. Last year, he and his team led the process that resulted in the selection of lead designer Michael Van Valkenburg and museum planner and architect Scott Newman to create a new master plan for the Gateway Arch grounds. Visit www.stastnybrun.com for more information about the firm.
The planning process is expected to wrap up over the summer with a presentation of the final master plan in the fall.
Selected Institutions/Venues
- Fox Theater
- Saint Louis University
- Jazz St. Louis
- St. Louis Symphony
- Urban League of Metropolitan St. Louis
- Scottish Rite
- Moto Museum
- St. Louis Public Radio
- Nine Network of Public Media
- Grand Center Arts Academy
- Contemporary Art Museum St. Louis
- Big Brothers Big Sisters of Eastern Missouri
- Cardinal Ritter College Prep
- The Black Repertory Company
- Third Baptist Church
- KDHX Community Media
- Craft Alliance
- The Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts
- St. Louis VA Medical Center – John Cochran Division
- The Sheldon
Presentation
Donald Stastny began by contradicting the very people that hired him! He said Grand Center should be viewed as a community, not a district. Grand Center’s marketing of late has been all about making the area a district. Â Stastny said his work is not to produce a master plan with a “pretty picture” but a framework for the community to evolve. Â I agree with this approach, our long held notions of master plan is you build what the pretty pictures show, no matter how many years or decades later. Thinking instead, about desired outcomes and processes that allow an area to grow and evolve organically. Cities, including St. Louis, didn’t start with a pretty picture. They slowly evolved over time.
Stastny took several jabs at the amount of parking already in the area as well as local views on needing more parking, free especially. Hopefully he will be able to get institutions to share parking and to “connect the dots” by reducing the visual impact of the numerous large surface parking lots.
Stastny said the center point is Grand & Washington, showing a circle with a radius of 1/4 mile, the distance pedestrians are generally willing to walk. With that he said focusing attention to the public realm on Grand from Olive to Delmar and three east-west transects (Delmar, Washington & Delmar) made sense.
My bullet points
ok, here are my thoughts.
- Drop the name Grand Center, go back to Midtown.
- If you go a 1/4 mile from each of the individual institutions that someone may visit you get a much larger area (see map below). This is too large to do detailed streetscape drawings but typical street sections can be suggested that could be used for the entire area. Areas outside the planning area will never get any planning attention.
- Talk about the key elements needed to connect the dots so these can be applied to the larger area: wider sidewalks, building walls serving as walls to the outdoor room, etc. With that in place we can work to improve Grand north to Page and south to MetroLink on the new viaduct.
- Transit will be a key to reducing the massive parking lots. MetroLink at the south edge of my map (below) and four bus lines (#10, #70, #94, #97) serve the area. If the #70 and an east-west line became enhanced routes, with fewer stops & greater frequency, more people will use transit rather than drive their vehicles.
- Despite the neatly cut grass, walking along Grand through SLU is dull. Â Sidewalks with no street trees to separate the pedestrian from passing vehicles and block after block of fencing that screams “keep out.”
- Breaking up the long blocks west of Grand makes sense but but eyes need to watch these pedestrian connector routes.
- Not crazy about using alleys for pedestrian circulation. The alley is a great asset for services such as the collection of recycling and trash.
- Also not crazy about having the ability to close Grand from Olive to Delmar too easily. Â Doing so creates havoc for transit riders and motorists.
Okay readers, add your thoughts below so the committee and professionals from Stastny’s office can read them.
– Steve Patterson
No more parking lots!
No more parking lots!
Change the name back to Midtown, make midtown a cultural and transit center between downtown and cwe simular to that of LOOP or South Grand get rid of dull office space bring everything to sidewalks for better density. Make midtown family/college-town friendly and is it too much to ask to have an AMC theatres or outdoor performing arts and vending area or something of the like in the “Theatre District” with free parking????? Culture and density=people and jobs!!??
Change the name back to Midtown, make midtown a cultural and transit center between downtown and cwe simular to that of LOOP or South Grand get rid of dull office space bring everything to sidewalks for better density. Make midtown family/college-town friendly and is it too much to ask to have an AMC theatres or outdoor performing arts and vending area or something of the like in the “Theatre District” with free parking????? Culture and density=people and jobs!!??
It’s folly to think Powell Hall or Fox Theater patrons will be embrace transit with the elimination of surface parking.
It’s folly to think Powell Hall or Fox Theater patrons will be embrace transit with the elimination of surface parking.
Folks in KC take the Max from The Plaza to cultural events downtown. The right transit will work. You are right, our regular bus system won’t entice them.
Most of the folks coming to Powell and the Fox will NEVER take public transit. If the parking is gone, they will stop attending. A large number come from West County and go elsewhere to dine before/after the show, and we will never have a transit system that works for them.
Yes, Grand Center has a lot of surface lots, but on nights when all the venues have events, the lots and the on-street parking fill up. If the number of lots is reduced, parking garages will be necessary. And I’ve not seen anything that would lead me to believe that Grand Center Inc. will be able to get over their control issues long enough to actually work WITH others to make that happen.
Folks in KC take the Max from The Plaza to cultural events downtown. The right transit will work. You are right, our regular bus system won’t entice them.
Work on more residential. Work hand-in-glove with Metro on the study of enhancing the #70. roll streetscape and pedestrian amenities into any improvement. Capitalize on the improvements Metro will be making to the Grand MetroLink station so it would be a pleasant experience to walk from the station to the center of “Midtown.”
Work on more residential. Work hand-in-glove with Metro on the study of enhancing the #70. roll streetscape and pedestrian amenities into any improvement. Capitalize on the improvements Metro will be making to the Grand MetroLink station so it would be a pleasant experience to walk from the station to the center of “Midtown.”
I know you’re the perpetual optimist, but I see the Grand MetroLink station as THE biggest impediment to getting most arts patrons to even consider using public transit. Those that can use the 70 bus without transferring may consider using public transit to attend a show, but 95%+ of the potential Metrolink riders simply aren’t comfortable / don’t feel safe either walking to or waiting for a train at 9, 10 or 11 at night, down below the Grand viaduct, and that’s the bulk of transit serving Grand Center!
In case you haven’t seen it, the old viaduct and the old MetroLink station no longer exist — both are just memories. Let’s use the reconstruction of both to start with a new attitude and let the past stay in the past. If the #70 Grand had the sleek buses that I’ve ridden on KC’s MAX line with info at stops to tell you how many minutes until the next bus then arts patrons would indeed use transit. No reason to believe we are so different from persons in Kansas City.
I’m well aware of the changes and I’m certainly willing to see if they improve things. But, as much as you may want to deny it, perception is reality. The memories of elevators that reek of urine and a light rail platform with nothing much around for blocks (“eyes on the street”) was, is and will continue to be intimidating, especially at night. I agree, BRT (like the KC MAX line) would attract more riders along Grand; it’s the transfer point that is the challenge. IF the changes had included raising Metrolink up to Grand (or lowering Grand down to grade), then yes, it would be(come) less scary. But just adding a fancy plaza and better cameras isn’t going to change that gut fear factor much. Compare transit access between the Fox and the new Peabody/old Kiel Auditorium – there’s no comparison, and could likely affect the success of both venues.
I don’t believe there is much you can do to the Grand Metro stop to improve most people’s impressions of it. The problem is intrinsic in its location. It is designed to fail/feel unsafe/be unsafe. If the initial line had followed forest Park Parkway (I know: that’s the past), just a difference of half a mile, we would be having a completely different conversation.
Density and connections. Â Fill those parking lots. Â This may sound bizzare, but the open space created by vacant land and surface parking feels UNsafe to me, as opposed to density of architecture and pedestrians.
Density and connections. Fill those parking lots. This may sound bizzare, but the open space created by vacant land and surface parking feels UNsafe to me, as opposed to density of architecture and pedestrians.
Most of the folks coming to Powell and the Fox will NEVER take public transit. Â If the parking is gone, they will stop attending. Â A large number come from West County and go elsewhere to dine before/after the show, and we will never have a transit system that works for them. Â
Yes, Grand Center has a lot of surface lots, but on nights when all the venues have events, the lots and the on-street parking fill up. Â If the number of lots is reduced, parking garages will be necessary. Â And I’ve not seen anything that would lead me to believe that Grand Center Inc. will be able to get over their control issues long enough to actually work WITH others to make that happen.
A few thoughts: Transit is central to any solution. The whole area is a
planning disaster, not
just Grand Center. There is a failure to establish
overall strategic goals. I have mentioned many times the City of  London Unitary Development plan which consists
of strategic goals for development in the City of London. I think it is a good
model for St. Louis.
The Aldermen can see the goals, the public can read the goals, the mayor can
read the strategic goals, everyone understands what it to be accomplished (by
law, the London Plan is to be modified every 10 years).
Instead SLU students are herded around like cattle, thing is, pastures are a
more inviting environment than what the students and other pedestrians
experience.
It is hard to know where to start. The fountain at Grand and Lindell
symbolizes the problem. It is a fountain that few, if any people stop at. Â The failure to connect public space to public
use is why so many of these projects fail. This brings us back to transit.
Successful transit encompasses many aspects of urban life, ease of use and
convenience being the main ones. Strategic goals are generated by the needs of
society. Transit and Grand Center should be natural partners.
Technical questions such as frequency become important. From a design
standpoint the running of the express bus (say yellow for identity purposes). Imagine
it runs every 10 minutes with 5 or 6 stops, Grand Center, North to the Water
Tower, around the circle, South to Metro link , on to the Tower Grove Park
area, maybe a stop again at Bates, then turn around at the Loughborough shopping
center.
Having transit and other goals influence the designs to be debated,
including the Del Taco question mentioned in a previous post. These overlay stops
become dispersal centers. The design of the transit system should be a major
topic of discussion in any redevelopment plan, especially in urban St. Louis,and especially along Grand Avenue.
Now we have a new Grand bridge and new street modification program on South
Grand that may, or may not be useful in a comprehensive transit plan. (Not to
mention the many central planter and dividers that have been installed on South
Grand).
At the corner of Grand and Lindell, across from the fountain is an undefined
sculptural park. From a design standpoint if another fountain to match the one
across the street is built with a mass transit stop behind it, it may begin to
gather the true purpose of the property (a major intersection to bring people
together, not a suburban, fenced off, sculpture park)
(On the Northeast corner of Grand and Lindell,, the now sculpture park, I
remember what I think a Woolworths on the corner, with a dance studio a few floors
up where you could see the dancers from Grand, somebody help me out, is that
right?)
Once a transit center is established and a decision made, in turn it begins
to target which vacant parking lots are a priority to redevelop.
With all of the vacant land in Grand Center right now, it is time to
determine a transit center. Transit is not the whole question to be sure, there
are many facets of redevelopment. Coordinating these other facets of planning
help determine success of the project and of transit. Right now planning is
whatever the developer wants, they get. It based on a failure to establish a
larger vision of what planning in St. Louis means to its citizens and to the future. This failure is in a large part responsible for the decline of St. Louis.
Â
A few thoughts: Transit is central to any solution. The whole area is a
planning disaster, not
just Grand Center. There is a failure to establish
overall strategic goals. I have mentioned many times the City of London Unitary Development plan which consists
of strategic goals for development in the City of London. I think it is a good
model for St. Louis.
The Aldermen can see the goals, the public can read the goals, the mayor can
read the strategic goals, everyone understands what it to be accomplished (by
law, the London Plan is to be modified every 10 years).
Instead SLU students are herded around like cattle, thing is, pastures are a
more inviting environment than what the students and other pedestrians
experience.
It is hard to know where to start. The fountain at Grand and Lindell
symbolizes the problem. It is a fountain that few, if any people stop at. The failure to connect public space to public
use is why so many of these projects fail. This brings us back to transit.
Successful transit encompasses many aspects of urban life, ease of use and
convenience being the main ones. Strategic goals are generated by the needs of
society. Transit and Grand Center should be natural partners.
Technical questions such as frequency become important. From a design
standpoint the running of the express bus (say yellow for identity purposes). Imagine
it runs every 10 minutes with 5 or 6 stops, Grand Center, North to the Water
Tower, around the circle, South to Metro link , on to the Tower Grove Park
area, maybe a stop again at Bates, then turn around at the Loughborough shopping
center.
Having transit and other goals influence the designs to be debated,
including the Del Taco question mentioned in a previous post. These overlay stops
become dispersal centers. The design of the transit system should be a major
topic of discussion in any redevelopment plan, especially in urban St. Louis,and especially along Grand Avenue.
Now we have a new Grand bridge and new street modification program on South
Grand that may, or may not be useful in a comprehensive transit plan. (Not to
mention the many central planter and dividers that have been installed on South
Grand).
At the corner of Grand and Lindell, across from the fountain is an undefined
sculptural park. From a design standpoint if another fountain to match the one
across the street is built with a mass transit stop behind it, it may begin to
gather the true purpose of the property (a major intersection to bring people
together, not a suburban, fenced off, sculpture park)
(On the Northeast corner of Grand and Lindell,, the now sculpture park, I
remember what I think a Woolworths on the corner, with a dance studio a few floors
up where you could see the dancers from Grand, somebody help me out, is that
right?)
Once a transit center is established and a decision made, in turn it begins
to target which vacant parking lots are a priority to redevelop.
With all of the vacant land in Grand Center right now, it is time to
determine a transit center. Transit is not the whole question to be sure, there
are many facets of redevelopment. Coordinating these other facets of planning
help determine success of the project and of transit. Right now planning is
whatever the developer wants, they get. It based on a failure to establish a
larger vision of what planning in St. Louis means to its citizens and to the future. This failure is in a large part responsible for the decline of St. Louis.
The Woolworth’s was in the building that currently houses Big Brothers/Big Sisters, one block to the north. Grand and Lindell had what I believe was called the Marine building, which housed the former location of Vito’s and several other small businesses. One of them, a viable Chinese fast-food joint, was forced to close when its lease was terminated.
Doing a limited street diet without embracing the rebuilt Grand Ave viaduct/bus stop/Grand Metrolink station let alone greater Grand Ave is pointless in my opinion. Why encourage traffic onto Grand and then annoy everybody by reducing the capacity two or three blocks from their destination.Â
First, The Forest Parkway cut under Grand Ave needs to be filled in and return the FP/Grand Ave street intersection back in place. Which would be in line with what Forest Parkway is west of Grand all the way to Euclid Ave!! Of course, this is one part of the puzzle that requires leadership from Slay.Â
Second, why not do streetcar study for greater Grand Ave? Its a shame in my opinion that the Loop will soon get a trolley and Metro has not pursued any thought beyond a Grand BRT talking point nor has the city pushed for a street car line anywhere in the city that expands metrolinks reach on a much more modest scale. It might be too late with Grand Ave viaduct already designed and under construction, but always pictured Grand Ave streetcar line from S. Grand/Towers Grove Park, past SLU medical/Cardinals Childern hospital, metrolink station, SLU campus, Grand Center, and N. Grand being a great transit asset for both Metro and the city.Â
Third, As far as parking, worry about gettin the Metropolitan building developed as well as the othe emptry buildings filled first!!. I understand Grand was confident that development proposals currently in the works were going to happen. Hope So! Next tackle infill, a building here and there. Then the value of land will drive the parking to go vertical and more expensive. Two things that make tranist a more desireable option for patrons. Hopefully the folks with Grand Center will be smarter about siting a parking garage better then SLU when that day comes.
Finally, I think Gmichaud is right on a lot of his comments and specifically SLU’s approach to the area by highlighting the corner of Grand and Lindell.  I believe  McCormick Baron at one point proposed a great development for this corner. Instead, it was dropped and never heard from again. Assumed that Biondi couldn’t handle a cornerstone development that screamed urban, modernism, density and host of other things that literally and figuratively overshadowed SLU. Could be wrong, but SLU needs to embrace more then their fence for mid-town to truly turn the corner and something of a much much bigger scale then a small botique hotel for the immediate area!
Doing a limited street diet without embracing the rebuilt Grand Ave viaduct/bus stop/Grand Metrolink station let alone greater Grand Ave is pointless in my opinion. Why encourage traffic onto Grand and then annoy everybody by reducing the capacity two or three blocks from their destination.
First, The Forest Parkway cut under Grand Ave needs to be filled in and return the FP/Grand Ave street intersection back in place. Which would be in line with what Forest Parkway is west of Grand all the way to Euclid Ave!! Of course, this is one part of the puzzle that requires leadership from Slay.
Second, why not do streetcar study for greater Grand Ave? Its a shame in my opinion that the Loop will soon get a trolley and Metro has not pursued any thought beyond a Grand BRT talking point nor has the city pushed for a street car line anywhere in the city that expands metrolinks reach on a much more modest scale. It might be too late with Grand Ave viaduct already designed and under construction, but always pictured Grand Ave streetcar line from S. Grand/Towers Grove Park, past SLU medical/Cardinals Childern hospital, metrolink station, SLU campus, Grand Center, and N. Grand being a great transit asset for both Metro and the city.
Third, As far as parking, worry about gettin the Metropolitan building developed as well as the othe emptry buildings filled first!!. I understand Grand was confident that development proposals currently in the works were going to happen. Hope So! Next tackle infill, a building here and there. Then the value of land will drive the parking to go vertical and more expensive. Two things that make tranist a more desireable option for patrons. Hopefully the folks with Grand Center will be smarter about siting a parking garage better then SLU when that day comes.
Finally, I think Gmichaud is right on a lot of his comments and specifically SLU’s approach to the area by highlighting the corner of Grand and Lindell. I believe McCormick Baron at one point proposed a great development for this corner. Instead, it was dropped and never heard from again. Assumed that Biondi couldn’t handle a cornerstone development that screamed urban, modernism, density and host of other things that literally and figuratively overshadowed SLU. Could be wrong, but SLU needs to embrace more then their fence for mid-town to truly turn the corner and something of a much much bigger scale then a small botique hotel for the immediate area!
I know you’re the perpetual optimist, but I see the Grand MetroLink station as THE biggest impediment to getting most arts patrons to even consider using public transit. Those that can use the 70 bus without transferring may consider using public transit to attend a show, but 95%+ of the potential Metrolink riders simply aren’t comfortable / don’t feel safe either walking to or waiting for a train at 9, 10 or 11 at night, down below the Grand viaduct, and that’s the bulk of transit serving Grand Center!
In case you haven’t seen it, the old viaduct and the old MetroLink station no longer exist — both are just memories. Let’s use the reconstruction of both to start with a new attitude and let the past stay in the past. If the #70 Grand had the sleek buses that I’ve ridden on KC’s MAX line with info at stops to tell you how many minutes until the next bus then arts patrons would indeed use transit. No reason to believe we are so different from persons in Kansas City.
I’m well aware of the changes and I’m certainly willing to see if they improve things. But, as much as you may want to deny it, perception is reality. The memories of elevators that reek of urine and a light rail platform with nothing much around for blocks (“eyes on the street”) was, is and will continue to be intimidating, especially at night. I agree, BRT (like the KC MAX line) would attract more riders along Grand; it’s the transfer point that is the challenge. IF the changes had included raising Metrolink up to Grand (or lowering Grand down to grade), then yes, it would be(come) less scary. But just adding a fancy plaza and better cameras isn’t going to change that gut fear factor much. Compare transit access between the Fox and the new Peabody/old Kiel Auditorium – there’s no comparison, and could likely affect the success of both venues.
The Woolworth’s was in the building that currently houses Big Brothers/Big Sisters, one block to the north. Grand and Lindell had what I believe was called the Marine building, which housed the former location of Vito’s and several other small businesses. One of them, a viable Chinese fast-food joint, was forced to close when its lease was terminated.
I don’t believe there is much you can do to the Grand Metro stop to improve most people’s impressions of it.  The problem is intrinsic in its location. It is designed to fail/feel unsafe/be unsafe. If the initial line had followed forest Park Parkway (I know: that’s the past), just a difference of half a mile, we would be having a completely different conversation.Â
It is clear that transit improvements along Grand should be reflected in the
physical development of the city. What is transit going to look like along
Grand in 10 or 20 years? Is reducing auto usage by 50% in the city and along
Grand by the year 2020 a good strategic
goal?
There are many possible strategic goals. In the area West of Grand along
Grandel are proposed single family homes (7) called Art Houses. In the dense
neighborhood of Grand, with interest in building community and walkability,
would apartments or condos be a better solution instead? Strategic goals can
descend to the building type, thus 4 or 5 story row houses, with storefronts on
the first floor and parking behind would be a preferable building type to a
setback apartment house with parking in front along the street.
Strategic goals help the community achieve consistency in their outlook.
Instead, look at the Art Houses, Del Taco and the new Grand Bridge, they all
function as separate, unrelated entities, separate, unrelated development,
government and private, that may or may not be beneficial to the area and the
city as a whole.
A strategic planning document similar to the City of London Unitary Development
Plan is a possible solution.
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Environment_and_planning/Planning/Planning_policy/udp.htm,
It eliminates aldermanic privilege. The Unitary Development Plan sets forth
strategic goals so that every resident, politician and developer understand
what is to be accomplished. (Updated every ten years) (And sure the alderman
should be kept informed)
That is what is lacking right now in St. Louis: a similar document that
guides development and keeps the citizens informed. The surprise is that this
gap is hurting developers and development from McKee to Yackey while making it
more difficult to attract new thinking and activity.
Â
It is clear that transit improvements along Grand should be reflected in the
physical development of the city. What is transit going to look like along
Grand in 10 or 20 years? Is reducing auto usage by 50% in the city and along
Grand by the year 2020 a good strategic
goal?
There are many possible strategic goals. In the area West of Grand along
Grandel are proposed single family homes (7) called Art Houses. In the dense
neighborhood of Grand, with interest in building community and walkability,
would apartments or condos be a better solution instead? Strategic goals can
descend to the building type, thus 4 or 5 story row houses, with storefronts on
the first floor and parking behind would be a preferable building type to a
setback apartment house with parking in front along the street.
Strategic goals help the community achieve consistency in their outlook.
Instead, look at the Art Houses, Del Taco and the new Grand Bridge, they all
function as separate, unrelated entities, separate, unrelated development,
government and private, that may or may not be beneficial to the area and the
city as a whole.
A strategic planning document similar to the City of London Unitary Development
Plan is a possible solution.
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Environment_and_planning/Planning/Planning_policy/udp.htm,
It eliminates aldermanic privilege. The Unitary Development Plan sets forth
strategic goals so that every resident, politician and developer understand
what is to be accomplished. (Updated every ten years) (And sure the alderman
should be kept informed)
That is what is lacking right now in St. Louis: a similar document that
guides development and keeps the citizens informed. The surprise is that this
gap is hurting developers and development from McKee to Yackey while making it
more difficult to attract new thinking and activity.
The Stastny Plan is likely to meet the fate of the many plans that have come
before it. The problem is not that Grand Center needs to become a community; it
is the City of St. Louis that needs to become a community.
There is no central, unifying philosophy governing planning in the City. It
is every developer for them self, (private or public), so ultimately the Stasny
Plan will only fit by chance. It is a design system where every developer meets
their needs and ignores public need. The powerful and artistic possibilities of
connection and community become a missed opportunity both economically and socially.
For example there should be a consensus that St. Louis University students
deserve a good walking environment. That environment might run from the
hospital on South Grand to the Veterans hospital on North Grand. This walking
environment, by extension should include biking and transit, perfect for
students and supportive of the urban image of SLU.
By all rights you could take all of Grand Ave and create the emphasis of a
walking environment its full length. It is amazing, but much of the walking
infrastructure is still in place South of Highway 44, near SLU hospital just
mentioned above.
If this was done then the recently built (last several years) SLU high rise on
the corner of Chouteau and Manchester might have taken a different building form
to support foot traffic along Grand. In the same way the new bridge might of included
lining up the exit and entrance to Hwy 40 in an attempt to simplify road
entrances near the University and dorms along this consensus walkway. Eliminating
new and old curb cuts, like at the gas station on Forest Park Blvd and Grand, or
the Del Taco would come under consideration.
The City of London Unitary Development Plan handles these questions through
the use of strategic goals. So declaring Grand Avenue a walking street generates
design solutions that are connected for common goals or a community.
The beauty of the City of London Plan is that it is amendable to citizens creating a
similar plan online, especially if the power structure does not act. Â Things are too serious to wait. Otherwise the
Stastny Plan will be another Plan in the city of fragments.
Â
The Stastny Plan is likely to meet the fate of the many plans that have come
before it. The problem is not that Grand Center needs to become a community; it
is the City of St. Louis that needs to become a community.
There is no central, unifying philosophy governing planning in the City. It
is every developer for them self, (private or public), so ultimately the Stasny
Plan will only fit by chance. It is a design system where every developer meets
their needs and ignores public need. The powerful and artistic possibilities of
connection and community become a missed opportunity both economically and socially.
For example there should be a consensus that St. Louis University students
deserve a good walking environment. That environment might run from the
hospital on South Grand to the Veterans hospital on North Grand. This walking
environment, by extension should include biking and transit, perfect for
students and supportive of the urban image of SLU.
By all rights you could take all of Grand Ave and create the emphasis of a
walking environment its full length. It is amazing, but much of the walking
infrastructure is still in place South of Highway 44, near SLU hospital just
mentioned above.
If this was done then the recently built (last several years) SLU high rise on
the corner of Chouteau and Manchester might have taken a different building form
to support foot traffic along Grand. In the same way the new bridge might of included
lining up the exit and entrance to Hwy 40 in an attempt to simplify road
entrances near the University and dorms along this consensus walkway. Eliminating
new and old curb cuts, like at the gas station on Forest Park Blvd and Grand, or
the Del Taco would come under consideration.
The City of London Unitary Development Plan handles these questions through
the use of strategic goals. So declaring Grand Avenue a walking street generates
design solutions that are connected for common goals or a community.
The beauty of the City of London Plan is that it is amendable to citizens creating a
similar plan online, especially if the power structure does not act. Things are too serious to wait. Otherwise the
Stastny Plan will be another Plan in the city of fragments.
Basically agree, but the challenge is/will be getting local St. Louisians to embrace better ideas from somewhere else. Like any other city, there’s a whole bunch of inertia here, along with wanting to believe that local people inherently know what’s best for their local challenges. It really boils down to leadership, both at the top and from the bottom. Until more people demand better, become involved and quit accepting mediocrity, inertia will keep us headed down the road of scattershot redevelopment.
You are right in demanding better ideas. The whole area is operating on a fragmented thought process that contributes nothing to the city.
I’ll put is this way, Del Taco was voted to be demolished by the Board of Aldermen, where are the published plans of what is to replace it? Did the press, printed, radio and TV not even bother to ask that question? How corrupt is the local media? A stupid 3rd year journalism student would ask that question, what do you have to replace it?
Public money is involved in a big way, it is time everyone is held accountable. If the replacement for Del Taco is a junk plan, then citizens should know.
Of course our masters in the press and government know better than us peons. Why bother to inform us. They prefer a feudal society.
Basically agree, but the challenge is/will be getting local St. Louisians to embrace better ideas from somewhere else. Like any other city, there’s a whole bunch of inertia here, along with wanting to believe that local people inherently know what’s best for their local challenges. It really boils down to leadership, both at the top and from the bottom. Until more people demand better, become involved and quit accepting mediocrity, inertia will keep us headed down the road of scattershot redevelopment.
You are right in demanding better ideas. The whole area is operating on a fragmented thought process that contributes nothing to the city.
I’ll put is this way, Del Taco was voted to be demolished by the Board of Aldermen, where are the published plans of what is to replace it? Did the press, printed, radio and TV not even bother to ask that question? How corrupt is the local media? A stupid 3rd year journalism student would ask that question, what do you have to replace it?
Public money is involved in a big way, it is time everyone is held accountable. If the replacement for Del Taco is a junk plan, then citizens should know.
Of course our masters in the press and government know better than us peons. Why bother to inform us. They prefer a feudal society.
“Drop the name Grand Center, go back to Midtown.”
Terrible idea. Midtown is vast; people don’t attend regions, they go to neighborhoods. Think of DUMBO in Brookly NYC (just 40 blocks!), LoDo in Denver (maybe 25 blocks). They are both significantly smaller than Grand Center… more like Midtown Alley. Even the Loop is half of Grand Center’s size. “Midtown” is unimaginably large by comparison, extending from maybe Jefferson to Sarah, from Page to Chouteau — hundreds of blocks with no single personality. Scale is key to a good destination brand. Grand Center is a good brand; it just needs more stuff to do and see and taste within it.
“Drop the name Grand Center, go back to Midtown.”
Terrible idea. Midtown is vast; people don’t attend regions, they go to neighborhoods. Think of DUMBO in Brookly NYC (just 40 blocks!), LoDo in Denver (maybe 25 blocks). They are both significantly smaller than Grand Center… more like Midtown Alley. Even the Loop is half of Grand Center’s size. “Midtown” is unimaginably large by comparison, extending from maybe Jefferson to Sarah, from Page to Chouteau — hundreds of blocks with no single personality. Scale is key to a good destination brand. Grand Center is a good brand; it just needs more stuff to do and see and taste within it.