Enough With The IKEA Rumors

Having worked in real estate I learned not to spend the sales commission until after the deal was closed. Blogging is similar.

On Sunday nextSTL.com got many St. Louis IKEA fans excited:

Several WhoLou sources are alleging that highly-coveted Swedish-based furniture chain Ikea intends to develop their first St. Louis store close to the campus of St. Louis University. The 300,000 sq. ft. store will allegedly be built near the Laclede Gas and Salvation Army Adult Rehabilitation Center complexes on Forest Park Ave. between Sarah Street and Vandeventer Ave.

While IKEA does have some inner-city locations, most are in suburban sprawl. IKEA contributes to sprawl.

The next day the Post-Dispatch had a story saying the rumor was untrue:

Responding to the nextstl.com post, [Ikea spokesman] Roth said Monday: “We still have not committed to a time frame, let alone a specific site.” The chain has not listed St. Louis among the cities where it plans to open a store. “Nothing has changed,” Roth said. “We continue to evaluate opportunities in the market,” he said. (stltoday.com)

Online many were excited when they saw the original rumor, repeated on KMOV, Fox2, KPLR, but disappointed when IKEA officials said no deal to build a St. Louis store.

I have no doubt that local commercial real estate brokers are talking to every big retail chain to try to lure them to various sites. These retailers might even show some initial interest in one site or another. But until something is signed I feel it’s too premature to report.

— Steve Patterson

The Future of the Brick & Mortar Retail Store

Many of us think of a big chain store first when we need to purchase something but the retail landscape is changing as many big chains face financial difficulty:

Retail is an industry in decline—but only for traditional retailers. For companies that have become successful doing something else, opening a chain of stores can bring millions of new customers and the profits that go with them. This paradox of the retail marketplace is evident in some of the biggest names at the mall. Traditional retailers such as Best Buy, J.C. Penney, Sears, and Kmart are struggling to reverse losses, turn themselves around and give shoppers new reasons to think they’re relevant. The recently announced merger of Office Max and Office Depot is just the latest example of a retail glut that has already sunk Borders, CompUSA, Circuit City, and many others. Yet Apple, a technology company and newcomer to the retail scene, operates a network of more than 200 U.S. stores that have created a new paradigm for brick-and-mortar success. Microsoft, a software company, runs about 60 U.S. stores, with plans to open more. Even Google, an information company, is rumored to have retail ambitions. (US News)

Even giants like Walmart are doing good to get 5% growth:

That sluggish curve is clearly one reason the Arkansas-based company has started devoting so much time and attention to its Silicon Valley operations. Headquartered just south of San Francisco, Walmart.com is heavily recruiting tech talent. And in some ways its investment is starting to pay off. The company’s wide-ranging experiments in “clicks-and-mortar” retail have put it at the forefront of merging online, offline and mobile commerce. (Wired)

Are retail stores doomed as more of us shop online? Thankfully, no.

Just because more people shop online, though, doesn’t mean they’ll stop shopping at stores completely. Indeed, for most retail sectors, a physical store can serve a fundamentally different function, giving consumers the ability to see, taste and touch the products in a way that is impossible online. The challenge for retailers in the future, industry analysts say, will be to figure out a way to play up the strengths of the bricks-and-mortar store while incorporating new technology into the experience. (The Street)

The changing retail landscape does mean everyone involved in city development needs to rethink what “retail” means. For many the word conjures up images of 2-3 massive big box (50,000-200,000sf) stores connected by numerous small (5,000-15,000sf) stores.  Those who think of this when they hear retail don’t understand how I can advocate for street-level retail in commercial districts. How will it fit? Parking?

They fail to realize retail doesn’t even need a box. The point is “retail” comes in all shapes & sizes, it’s ridiculous to try to put all retail into the same box. We also can’t fool ourselves into thinking people will ever buy stuff the way they did decades ago. Downtown will never again be the retail center of the region.

— Steve Patterson

St. Louis Population May Drop Below 300K In 2020 Census

We’re still seven years away from the 2020 census but it’s already on my mind. Last month I attended at I attended a lunch where the two speakers talked about Detroit and St. Louis. From the invite:

Detroit’s New Plan for Urban Regeneration and What It Means for St. Louis

Speakers:

Alan Mallach, senior fellow of the National Housing Institute, is the author of many works on housing and planning, including Bringing Buildings Back and Building a Better Urban Future: New Directions for Housing Policies in Weak Market Cities. He served as director of housing and economic development for Trenton, N.J. from 1990 to 1999. He is also a fellow at the Center for Community Progress and the Brookings Institution.

John Gallagher is a veteran journalist and author whose latest book, Reimagining Detroit: Opportunities for Redefining an American City, was named by The Huffington Post as among the best social and political books of 2010. He joined the Detroit Free Press in 1987 to cover urban and economic redevelopment efforts in Detroit and Michigan, a post which he still holds. His other books include Great Architecture of Michigan and, as co-author, AIA Detroit: The American Institute of Architects Guide to Detroit Architecture.

One of the two said Detroit has accepted that it has shrunk and it is likely to shrink more in the 2020 census, that St. Louis is also likely to lose population again — possibly falling below 300,000. The fact is this may well happen.

Still, others love to dump on St. Louis. For example, a recent opinion piece in the Kansas City Star titled Kansas City is rising as St. Louis keeps falling:

• In 1950, St. Louis was the eighth largest U.S. city, with 857,000 people. But by 2010, St. Louis had lost a stunning 538,000 people and plummeted to the 58th largest city, with only 319,000 residents.

• In 1980, St. Louis was still Missouri’s largest city, barely ahead of Kansas City. But by 2010, Kansas City’s population of 460,000 was 44 percent larger than St. Louis’. 

In response friend Matthew Mourning posted on Facebook:

The 1940 city limits of KC were a 58 square mile box of the Missouri River (N), State Line Rd. (W), Blue River (E), and 79th Street (S). (St. Louis is, and has been since the 1876 divorce, 62 square miles, while present day Kansas City tops out at 315 sq. mi. after a series of annexations).

Those 1940 KC city limits had a population of 400,178. In 2010, the population of the same approximate area was *184,803*. That’s a drop of ~215,000, or nearly 55%. St. Louis’s core loss was around 62% since 1940. – Matthew Mourning via Facebook

The point is to look at what’s happening in the core, not including ring after ring of low-density sprawl. Our fixed city limits is the regional core whereas cities like Kansas City and Oklahoma City were able to annex as population fled their core.

Kansas City is denser than Oklahoma City, but that’s not saying much. St. Louis, Detroit, & Cleveland being denser than the acclaimed Portland OR is huge. But numbers themselves can be deceiving, Portland has very dense central neighborhoods. It’s very walkable & cyclist friendly.

In the 2010 census our tracks that had investment in becoming more urban (downtown, near north & south) saw increases in population, while north & south St. Louis continued to lose population. Wake up St. Louis, we need to make the entire City of St. Louis urban/walkable/bikeable. Not in a half-ass way either, the whole deal with transit, strong pedestrian plan, modern zoning.

Auto-centric monstrosities like Loughborough Commons can’t keep happening if we expect to stop the loss of population. But I don’t see any willingness or leadership to prioritize urbanizing more than a few pieces here and there, fragmented in true St. Louis fashion.

If we stay on our current course I wouldn’t be surprised if we drop below 300,000 when the 2020 census comes out in 2021.

Poll: What is Your Preferred Route For Streetcar Line West Out of Downtown St. Louis?

Plans were presented to the public last week to built a 7-mile modern streetcar line in St. Louis that would:

• Circulate in the downtown central business district.
• Head west on Olive/Lindell past Midtown to the Central West End.
• A north-south segment would connect at 14th Street & Olive, initially going north Florissant Rd to St. Louis Ave. and south to the Civic Center MetroBus Center/MetroLink light rail.
• Open in 2016/17.

Metro is part of the planning process and this would become part of our transit system. But I know some of you still question the effectiveness of the streetcar over the bus. To be fair, here is a skeptical view that I happen to agree with.

Streetcars that replace bus lines are not a mobility improvement. If you replace a bus with a streetcar on the same route, and make no other improvements, nobody will be able to get anywhere any faster than they could before. This makes streetcars quite different from most of the other transit investments being discussed today.

Where a streetcar is faster or more reliable than the bus route it replaced, this is because other improvements were made at the same time — improvements that could just as well have been made for the bus route. These improvements may have been politically packaged as part of the streetcar project, but they were logically independent, so their benefits are not really benefits of the streetcar as compared to the bus. (source – highly recommended)

He’s right that streetscape improvements are just as important as the mode of transit, but funding realities mean a complete makeover of 7 miles for a bus isn’t very likely. Even if it was, a streetcar is a better choice for other reasons:

Streetcar vs. Bus

Buses are excellent local and regional public transportation options, but they will do little to spur redevelopment and economic investment in Downtown LA. This is due to the inherent flexibility of bus service, as routes change regularly to accommodate varying needs; in addition, buses contribute to nerve-racking pedestrian experiences due to heavy street-level emissions and noise pollution that discourages active use of sidewalks. Streetcars do the exact opposite. They provide developers and business owners certainty that the routes will not change, and are considered preferable to buses by residents, visitors, and employees as they offer more amenities, highly reliable routes and timetables, and enhanced urban experiences.

Buses and streetcars do, however, work together to connect access points within regional transportation networks. For example, sidewalks can be designed to specifically accommodate both vehicle configurations; in return, a transit stop effectively doubles its value within a regional transportation network. (LA Streetcar)

And…

While it’s true that streetcars require a much larger initial capital investment than buses, that capital cost is offset by significant operational savings year to year. In the long term, streetcars are more affordable as long as they are used on high ridership routes.

Streetcars have higher passenger capacity than buses (even bendy ones), which means that if there are lots of riders on your route, you can move them with fewer vehicles. Fewer vehicles means more efficient use of fuel and fewer (unionized, pensioned) drivers to pay.

Streetcar vehicles themselves are much more sturdy than buses, and last many decades longer. While buses must generally be retired and replacements purchased about every 10 years, streetcars typically last 40 years or more. For example, Philadelphia’s SEPTA transit system is still using streetcar vehicles built in 1947. (Washington Post — recommended)

Even in Portland the value of streetcars have been debated, critics questioning claims of Mayor Hales:

So that brings us to the ruling. Hales said “streetcars carry more people than buses … you attract more riders who don’t ride transit now, and actually the operating costs are not any greater than the bus.” Whether these arguments make a persuasive case for the necessity and usefulness of a streetcar system is, of course, up for debate. The statement itself remains factual. While, there’s some missing context, it’s nothing significant. We rate this claim True. (PolitiFact Oregon)

For a detailed look at operating costs of streetcars vs bus click here. Labor tends to be a big factor why streetcars are cheaper to operate.

For the poll this week I want you to vote on your preferred route. I’ve included “don’t build” as an option as well as my idea of Olive to Vandeventer to Delmar: described here.

The poll also has the two options from the study (p17):

My views on a St. Louis streetcar are evolving, more on Wednesday March 20. The poll is in the right sidebar (mobile users need to switch to the desktop layout)

— Steve Patterson

Parking Space Half Into Public Sidewalk

In August 2011 I addressed part of the parking issue at Vito’s on Lindell (see Where is Vito’s Disabled Parking?). Last week I had dinner at Vito’s, going in I spotted another problem with how their parking lot is designed. 

This car is parked in what appears to be a legitimate parking space in their lot. The problem is the space isn’t even long enough for a smart fourtwo so any car parked in the space sticks out into the public sidewalk.

The city has minimum requirements for the size of parking spaces, and the sidewalk can’t be counted toward the minimum.  Vito’s needs to redesign their parking lot to provide a disabled space and to eliminate this space that extends over the sidewalk.

— Steve Patterson