The other day I noticed the next to the Edward Jones Dome that one traffic lane of the one-way south Broadway has been blocked off. The road is too wide so I don’t miss the lane, but I didn’t think it could possibly get any more hostile to pedestrians — but it did.
– Steve Patterson
Last week NFL owners approved Stan Kroenke’s bid to increase his ownership in the St. Louis Rams from 40% to 100%. The sale is not strictly about sports.
Speculation and rumors about the future of the Rams is swirling after Stan Kroenke was allowed to buy St. Louis’ football franchise.
Will they demand a new stadium? Will they threaten to leave town? Nothing is for sure, but Rams fans are crossing their fingers, getting out their rabbit’s feet and eating Lucky Charms: anything to swerve things in St. Louis’ favor. (Full Story: KMOV)
In the next couple of years decisions will be made that may profoundly change the area between St. Louis’ convention center (aka America’s Center) and the nearby Lumiere Hotel & Casino. In 2012 the process starts to bring the Edward Jones Dome into the top quarter of NFL facilities by 2015. If we don’t get the dome into the top quarter, the Rams are free to leave the dome for another facility.
Another facility might be elsewhere in the region or perhaps, back in Los Angeles. The message to us is clear, pony up some serious money to improve the dome or find the dome without a tenant. The third, but unlikely possibility, is the Rams stay put through the end of the 2025 lease without upgrades to get the dome into the top quarter. From the same KMOV story:
There probably won’t be a lot of new, taxpayer funded initiatives to lure the Rams away from St. Louis, but Kroenke is a developer. There has been speculation that he could push for a new stadium. That stadium could be in St. Louis county, near Earth City or even Illinois.
Sports economist Patrick Rishe said moving the stadium out of the city is not likely.
“I don’t think St. Louisans want to go to the suburbs to watch professional sports,” Rishe said. “I think we’re accustomed to watching it downtown, so I don’t think that’s an option. Geographically that’s an option, but logistically I don’t think it will be a reality.”
Rishe is right — if you are talking baseball.
The poll this week asks what you think Kroenke’s purchase of the rest of the team means for the City/Region, the Rams and the dome. City to River wants to replace the elevated lanes you see above that divide Laclede’s Landing (right) from the city to the left.
– Steve Patterson
When building a new surface parking lot in the City of St. Louis you are required to have separation between the parking area and the adjacent public sidewalk. A fence, landscaping or even a simple concrete curb would have prevented the drive of the above car from pulling so far forward that I couldn’t pass on the sidewalk.
– Steve Patterson
In 2008 the Downtown Children’s Center moved to a new location, leaving behind their fenced/gated playground area within Lucas Park. Later that year downtown residents began to clean up the fenced space to use it as a place to let their dogs run off-leash.
The problem was the playground didn’t meet the city’s standards for a dog run — the fence was too short, there was no double gate entry and no access to water. The dog run would need to be rebuilt. When Lucas Park was designed it was symmetrical in both directions. With the east end fenced it was no longer symmetrical on the main library across Locust to the south. That, and the fact residents would be without any dog run during reconstruction, let me to suggest at a charrette in November 2008 that a new dog run be built in a different location, removing the old fencing once the new run was open.
In April of this year the new dog run opened. Nearly six months later, the old playground improvised as a temporary dog run is still in use. City officials said they had no plans to remove the old fencing.
Viewing the park as four areas around a fifth center section there is even less open park space than before! The old playground fencing needs to be removed with the east section of the park. This would, unfortunately, force residents to pay the fees to use the new dog run.
– Steve Patterson
The City+Arch+River competition has me thinking more and more about the future of St. Louis without the poorly placed highway slicing through downtown. I’m so thankful the planned downtown highway loop at 22nd Street never got built, but we still have to address the one that did get built.
If you are at the Old Courthouse and you want to get to the Arch the crossing of Memorial Drive and the highway lanes in a ditch are not that bad. But that is only one spot along a 1.4 mile stretch of highway City to River wants to replace with a boulevard.
Four out of five competition finalists mention highway removal in their narratives, noting a boulevard was not included into their designs because of the October 2015 deadline. The 50th anniversary of the Gateway Arch is Wednesday October 28, 2015.  So the question of timing is important.
There are several possible times to rip up the old depressed & elevated highway lanes.
Spring 2014:
Tearing out the highway in the Spring of 2014 makes a lot of sense. When the new I-70 bridge is built the interchange could be designed to transition from interstate to boulevard. Work on the connection to Tucker will be done along with the new bridge. The removal of the old I-70 lanes could be phased — part before the anniversary celebration and part after. For example, the elevated section and section at grade up to Cass could be done by the 10/2015 deadline and used with the existing depressed section. Or the reverse. Either way the opening of the new I-70 bridge is the perfect timing to go right into removing the old I-70.
Fall 2015:
This option waits until after the 50th anniversary celebration on October 28, 2015. Like the year before, everyone will be gathered together — this would be a great time to break ground on a new boulevard.
Either way, the traffic study needs to get started immediately. Various people and organizations have already agreed to fund the necessary traffic study but they were waiting to see what happened with the competition. I’d have started it months ago, but they were concerned the teams might be against highway removal. Well we know now they are not against removal. Why wait for the final selection, get the consultants busy figuring out how to best manage the flow of cars once the new I-70 bridge opens.
The poll is in the upper right hand corner. Please vote and add any additional thoughts you may have in the comments below.
– Steve Patterson