The multi-level parking garage at the north end of the Gateway National Expansion Memorial site will be razed as part of the City+Arch+River work to better connect the Arch to it’s surroundings.
While I agree the structure needs to be razed, it never should have been constructed in the first place. Â More shocking is the structure is only 25 years old.
I guess I knew the garage dated to 1986 but I forgot until I saw the above plaque last week. The garage was a joint effort of the city, National Park Service and Bi-State Development (now Metro).
The garage is a major barrier between the Arch and the Eads Bridge, MetroLink and Laclede’s Landing.
But isn’t it sad that we are having to undo decisions made just 25 years ago?
Forty-five years ago today the three towers of the Mansion House complex on North 4th Street opened, representing the latest in urban planning in an era of Urban Renewal. Unfortunately, the architects didn’t read The Death and Life of Great American Cities by the late Jane Jacobs.
The buildings turn their back side to the Arch. Sure the towers have great views but sidewalk life was destroyed facing east.
A 2nd floor outdoor “promenade” level was designed as a retail area removed from the street, the vision was people could leisurely stroll between all three towers. Ended up being too removed from regular pedestrians to succeed.
But the buildings have changed and evolved over the last 45 years. One example is at the corner of 4th & Pine, the lobby for the Crowne Plaza hotel.
This modern box is not original to the complex. Â No, this corner was vastly different in 1966. Planners & architects at the time loved the notion of developments trying to incorporate everything. They knew they had destroyed blocks of authentic (but messy) urban life so they wanted to recreate it, just in an orderly fashion. So what was on this corner in 1966?
A filling station! The above Sanborn map from 1968 shows this, with a small structure at the corner. Interesting the drawing labeled Memorial Drive simply as “outer road.”
Thanks to Andrew Weil of Landmarks Association for finding & scanning this Sanborn map. Also. thanks to architects Fred Powers & Bill Bowersox of Powers Bowersox Associates, who told me of the former gas station.
The poll (& post) last week was about downtown’s newest businesses – a bike station and bike shop:
Q: Will you use the new downtown bike station & shop?
I won’t use either, but I’m glad to see they are opening 49 [32.03%]
I’ll use the bike shop, but not the bike station 24 [15.69%]
I’ll use both the station and shop 20 [13.07%]
I won’t use either 14 [9.15%]
I don’t live in St. Louis 14 [9.15%]
I might use one or both 13 [8.5%]
Other answer… 11 [7.19%]
Unsure at this time 6 [3.92%]
I’ll use the bike station, but not the bike shop 2 [1.31%]
The bike station & shop are clearly appealing to many readers, but the numbers of users is limited due to the niche nature.
Here are the eleven other answers provided by readers:
Would use it if I worked Downtown
the city sucks and steals ideas from young people
Bike lanes are a waste of good driving lanes.
I’ll drive my car and arrive to work clean and on time.
I don’t live in downtown STL anymore so I no longer need a bike to commute.
Already signed up as a member!
I no longer live in STL, but I’ll promote both to family/friends as always.
don’t use downtown
nope
I’d use it every day if I worked in the area.
Wish there were one near Barnes
The bike station had a soft opening on the 21st. Â At 10am tomorrow both the station and Urban Shark bike shop will hold their grand openings.
From a September 8, 2010 press release:
The City of St. Louis applied for a Federal Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant from the Department of Energy to specifically fund this project. These funds were designated for energy-saving projects, and had to be approved by the Department of Energy. From the grant the City received, $181,600 will cover the costs to buy the lockers, interior bike racks, and fund the operational costs of the Downtown Bike Center’s first two years. The Downtown Community Improvement District and other partners will provide additional funding.
“We are building a City that provides an attractive way of life. After World War II, the car was a symbol of freedom. For some people today, it is just the opposite,†said Mayor Slay. “We look forward to working with the Downtown St. Louis CID and Loftworks to ensure the long-term success of this public bike center and the City’s cycling initiative.â€
“This project will help cement Downtown as a walkable, livable neighborhood where you can rely on alternatives to the car,†said Maggie Campbell, Partnership President and CEO. “We are thrilled to be working with the community to realize this sustainable investment.â€
“Since vehicle emissions contribute about a third of the Greenhouse Gasses into the environment, we wanted to use these ARRA Stimulus funds to promote an alternative mode of transportation,†said Catherine Werner, the City’s Sustainability Director. “By enabling St. Louis commuters to choose cycling as an affordable and attractive option, the City is demonstrating its commitment to being a healthy and sustainable community.â€
Monday (4/25/2011) from 5pm-9pm is your chance to meet former St. Louis Cardinal Ozzie Smith and raise money to assist an organization providing needed meals & services for the homeless and at-risk persons, proceeds benefit The Bridge.
Both Ozzie’s and The Bridge are neighbors of mine, I can even see the latter from my balcony.
Six years ago today  a “malicious prosecution” lawsuit was filed against two downtown residents/property owners over their earlier lawsuits questioning the legality of the deals that ultimately led to the razing of the historic Century Building (case #22052-01373).  Marcia Behrendt & Roger Plackemeier, both friends,  remain defendants today. The plaintiffs have delayed the case numerous times over the years.
To win a suit for malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must prove four elements: (1) that the original case was terminated in favor of the plaintiff, (2) that the defendant played an active role in the original case, (3) that the defendant did not have probable cause or reasonable grounds to support the original case, and (4) that the defendant initiated or continued the initial case with an improper purpose. Each of these elements presents a challenge to the plaintiff.
I’m no lawyer but here is what I know:
The original case was dropped after demolition crews began razing the building, making a court victory a moot point.
True, they did.
Based on what I’ve seen they did have probable cause, proving otherwise seems difficult.
Like #3 their purpose seems legit. Â But that was 2003-04, a lot has happened since then.
Plaintiffs are the Missouri Development Finance Board, Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Louis and two private developer entities. So the State of Missouri and the City of St. Louis have been parties in this case for the last six years. Â Wow, I can only imagine the legal fees they, I mean we, have payed so far in this case against these two.
I consider this a SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) suit. Â A jury trial is currently scheduled to start on May 16, 2011 before judge Ohmer, but I’m not holding my breath.
AARP Livibility Index
The Livability Index scores neighborhoods and communities across the U.S. for the services and amenities that impact your life the most
Built St. Louis
historic architecture of St. Louis, Missouri – mourning the losses, celebrating the survivors.
Geo St. Louis
a guide to geospatial data about the City of St. Louis