Support for the City to River concept growing rapidly

The groundbreaking for the main span of the new bridge over the Mississippi River was canceled last week because federal officials were unable to get out of Washington D.C. to make the event.  But the contracts are set and work is starting:

The New Mississippi River Bridge is part of a group of roadway improvement projects that will connect I-70 at the I-55/64/70 interchange in East St. Louis to I-70 near Cass Avenue in Missouri. The entire project will cost a total of $670 million and is being funded through a combination of federal and state funds. The New Mississippi River Bridge project is expected to be completed in 2014.

When complete, in just four years, I-70 traffic that is currently routed between the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial (aka The Arch) and downtown St. Louis will now bypass the area to the North.

With I-70 traffic being rerouted we are given an rare opportunity to correct a past mistake.  For decades the Arch grounds have been disconnected from the rest of the city.  Many of us now share a common vision to make a better connection and  support is quickly growing:

“Today’s editorial in the St. Louis Post Dispatch calls for big thinking in aligning solutions for transportation and the decades-old challenge of eliminating the barriers between Downtown and the Arch. The Post suggests that the new Mississippi River Bridge is the key: this major public works project is expected to carry a lot of I-70 traffic, potentially making it possible to eliminate the depressed freeway and create a boulevard that would connect Downtown to the Arch. More details about this radical idea are available at www.citytoriver.org.

Before the naysayers get going, thought I would share: this is similar big thinking to what they did in downtown Fort Worth ten years ago. An elevated six-lane freeway divided the southern end of their downtown, cutting the downtown in two, and contributing to blight for more than forty years. When a freeway expansion was proposed by TXDOT in the late 1990’s, downtown leaders rallied around an alternative solution to instead tear down the elevated decks, and build a grand boulevard designed to slow traffic and revitalize the southern end of their downtown. This big idea was very controversial, and it took tremendous political capital, funding and even legal action to accomplish — but it got done, when many said it would never happen. Since the freeway was re-routed and the new Lancaster Boulevard opened there, millions of dollars have been reinvested in adjacent mixed-use properties, and most recently a new $200M convention hotel opened within a block of where the old elevated freeway stood. Similar projects have been undertaken to remove or reroute freeways adversely affecting the downtown experience in cities like San Francisco and Milwaukee; the effects are transformational. Today’s editorial calls for creative solutions and inclusion of this idea of a boulevard as a viable solution in the National Park Service’s Gateway Arch International Design Competition currently underway…..sounds reasonable and worth exploring to me. – Maggie Campbell Partnership for Downtown St. Louis President & CEO March 1, 2010″

Can’t get a much better endorsement than that! Still not convinced? Read on….

Last year MoDOT finally improved the ability to cross over the depressed highway lanes:

But the ramps and crossings don’t make the experience anymore inviting.

The experience of walking along Memorial Drive is anything but memorable, except that you may remember how drab it is.

Can it get any worse than the above? Why yes, it can.

Just rotate to look to the West and there between the buildings is Busch Stadium. The distance as the crow flies is 960 feet, less than a quarter mile walk.  Before and after the 81 home games per year fans should be walking up and down Memorial Drive and spending time on the Arch grounds.  The nearest route from Busch to the Arch grounds is along Walnut. That requires a walk of 2,570 feet to reach this same spot.  For the new accessible crossing at Market St you’d need to walk 3,250 feet. People will walk a quarter mile but not more than a half mile each way.

Hopefully you will support the effort to remove what never should have been built in the first place!  Many predicted disaster when MoDOT shut down 8 miles of I-64 for two years but we survived.  This can happen. This should happen!

Please support the City to River movement:

• website
• Twitter
• Facebook

With a competition  (FRAMING A MODERN MASTERPIECE: The City + The Arch + The River 2015 international design competition) currently underway now is the time to tell everyone you know about this idea.  Ideally we’d spend the next four years planning the work while the new bridge is being constructed.  When the new bridge opens to carry non-local I-70 traffic then work can begin on removing the old lanes as well as lots of private development on adjacent land.

– Steve Patterson

Football stadium poll #2

The post/poll two weeks ago asked where you thought the next facility for the St. Louis Rams NFL franchise should be located.  After the poll was finished it was clear to me I needed some different answers to better gauge reader sentiment.  So in a first here, I am repeating a previous poll topic with a revised question and answers.

For the purposes of this poll assume the St. Louis Rams pay 100% of the costs to build a new facility.  Most likely they will be bound to the Edward Jones Dome through 2025

– Steve Patterson

Remember the All-Star Game?

July 2009 was a great month to be in St. Louis.  Among the many events was baseball’s annual All-Star game.  I wasn’t able to attend the game but I enjoyed festivities the day before.

Despite the good times had by all I was disturbed to see one of the promotional Arches hanging out on the corner of Washington & Tucker earlier this month — nine months later.

“The project is dubbed “Arches on Parade,” and it’s a nod to baseball’s All-Star game in St. Louis on July 14. The arches will be sold later to benefit the Sports Commission’s Charitable Sports Foundation.” (Arches on Parade Around St. Louis)

I went to the St. Louis Sports Commission website to find out more information but I found nothing.  As we have a tendency to relate everything back to the 1904 World’s Fair I’m concerned this Arch may overstay it’s welcome.

– Steve Patterson

Lingering snow creates accessibility issues

Snow presents problems for most everyone but those of us who are disabled the challenges can linger long after the roads are cleared.   When using my wheelchair I typically use the sidewalk shown above to get to Washington Ave.  While the snow was long gone the pile from the adjacent parking lot remained in my way.

A few days later it had shrunk in size but I still went another way that is less safe.

I still couldn’t go around, I had to go through. The snow was soft enough finally for me to do so.

I use this side of the street because of issues on the other side.  The first issue is no ramp at the end of the sidewalk.  When this side is blocked I use the other side — riding in the street until I reach the access to that garage:

People plowing snow need to understand that sidewalks are not an acceptable place to store snow cleared from parking lots.

– Steve Patterson

Readers want to keep the Rams playing downtown

The poll last week asked about where to put a new football stadium and most readers feel a new facility should be downtown:

Q: A future facility for the STL Rams (NFL) should be located in:

1. downtown St. Louis: 72 [32.3%]
2. City of St. Louis (outside of downtown): 39 [17.5%]
3. As long as it is open air or has a retractable roof I don’t care: 29 [13%]
4. Metro East (Illinois): 27 [12.1%]
5. St. Louis County: 19 [8.5%]
6. Other answer… 17 [7.6%]
7. Unsure/don’t care: 10 [4.5%]
8. anywhere in the region is OK: 6 [2.7%]
9. Jefferson County: 3 [1.3%]
10. St. Charles County: 1 [0.4%]

From the comments on the original post I realize I should have had different choices.  “Metro East” is too vast.  One answer should have been the East side of the river with elsewhere on the East side another.  Also I should have defined “downtown” and provided a downtown-adjacent answer.   The other answers were numerous and I’ve divided them into two groups:

The first group is a mix of answers:

• Somewhere in the City, open air / retractable roof
• north city
• Franklin County
• Los Angeles
• Mars
• privately funded…like the patriots

The question was about where, not how funded.  The second group all had a common theme:

• keep refurbishing the current facility
• They should use the same facility they have now. It’s the “green” thing to do.
• Don’t move.
• exactly where it already is

So we have the keep it in place view.  I believe somehow we will get past the 2015 deadline. Either the team waives the requirement to stay in the top 25% or the CVC finds the money to upgrade the facility.  But come 2025 the lease expires.  At this point the facility will be over 30 years old.  Some say rip off the roof of the current dome.  I asked some local architects about the feasibility of reworking the dome in such a way to give it another 20-30 years of life.  The responses were mixed from it can be done to it wouldn’t work.

Razing the then 30 year old dome and building new is the only viable option on the current site, in my view.  When the new Busch Stadium was built they were able to build much of the new facility next door while the team continued to use the old stadium.

But there is no next door spot available.  The window between games is nine months — not enough to raze and build a new facility on the site.  One option might be for the Rams to play home games for one season at another facility such as the University of Missouri in Columbia.  What about other locations downtown?

A facility easily consumes four city blocks.  Additional acres are needed for parking and other game day activities.  Such a facility just doesn’t fit into a Central Business District based on the enormous size.  Doesn’t matter, no site big enough is currently available.  Will a site be available by 2025?  I hope not!  I would not wish for such a hole to open up.

The site closest to downtown I can think of is the old Nooter site at 2nd & Rutger.  Development of this site may happen over the next 10 years so even it may not be available in the future. The long vacant Pruitt-Igoe site will be developed if Paul McKee’s NorthSide project works.  The potential sites are few. Rebuilding on the current site requires the team to play elsewhere for a season.  Even if the team funds a new facility without taxpayer assistance the options in the core are very limited.

– Steve Patterson