Oh the “Mayor’s” Sense of Irony
Mayor Slay’s website has an interesting post tonight:
Urban-esque Planning
There are two stories in today’s newspaper that should be read together.
The first is a report that the owners of Mid-Rivers Mall in St. Charles County, built in 1987 as a suburban mall, are planning a multi-million dollar 120,000 square foot addition to revive the tired property, including “a 70,000 square foot village with the feel of an urban shopping and dining experience.”
The second is a report that Spinnaker Real Estate Partners and Pyramid Cos. have closed on the purchase of St. Louis Centre, built in 1985 and pummeled for years by suburban malls, in order to transform the former urban shopping mall into a new mix of condominiums, shops, offices, and restaurants.
It might be less expensive – and less ironic — to direct St. Peters residents with an appetite for contemporary urban living to downtown St. Louis
Perhaps the mayor’s staff can spend a little less time making fun of St. Charles County’s recent attempts at urbanism and focus some of that energy on our own development patterns?
– Steve
Let’s be nice today. Life is a beautiful thing.
Yeah right.
I am sure a lot of St. Peters residents will move downtown.
Maybe if we add more parking garages and a huge Wal-Mart.
Most of the people in St. Charles Co were from the inner or outer ring suburbs and have never experienced urbanism. It could be done but I think we should focus on preventing the big box developments. If we can urbanize our existing south city neighborhoods then that would be a much better transition compared to a loft downtown. Downtown should not recieve all of the urban development while other neighborhoods slip into suburbia.
“Lifestyle” centers are the “latest thing” in retail marketing. It’s still the same chain tenants that make up the bulk of the tenants, only the roof’s been removed and a “Disneyesque” “urban” fabric has been added to give it that old “down-home” feeling. Is it good? Better? I don’t know – they do seem to be a bit better than the typical strip shopping center. (I’m no big fan of the traditional mall, either, but I’ve been known to patronize them on a handful of days each year.)
To me, shopping is mostly done out of necessity, and I see little connection between the architecture and urban design of the place and the products they offer and where I shop or don’t. I’m conflicted – I care about good design, but I also find that, many times, I take the easy way out and head to the big box with lower prices and the big parking lot.
I guess it all boils down to the well-worn Wal·Mart argument – they come to small-town (or suburban) America and “run the local guys out of business”. Well, dammit, “We have seen the enemy and he is us.” Wal·Mart stays in business (and expanding) because it does a great job of meeting the needs of the consumer, probably a better job than the local guys do/did. If we local folks didn’t/don’t shop there, they won’t stay open (see the many failed shopping centers and, yes, urban storefronts that dot our area.) Life ain’t fair, it’s Darwinian, especially when it comes to business.
There’s a reason this crap “works” and continues to be built – it simply does a better job of separating shoppers from their hard-earned money. Legislating, designing and even building “better”, “more urban”, “higher-quality” architecture / projects does not insure success, it just incurs higher costs. The ONLY way to change this dynamic is to change the shoppers’ perceptions and mindsets, and, unfortunately, architecture and urban design have only a miniscule impact on this!
[REPLY Actually Jim, shoppers are gravitating away from indoor malls — they are in danger. This is why you see former mall stores part of the lifestyle center and current malls remaking themselves by opening up to the outside near entrances.
Typical strip centers are also taking on a different look, the long thing out in the Chesterfield flood plain uses much more upscale materials, the Wal-Mart is actually attractive and if you want to walk from store to store along the internal sidewalk they have made that feasible. Also, they parking lot is massive but it also have lots of trees. By comparison, the Chesterfield strip center is considerably better done than Loughborough Commons. I still don’t like it — it is not even remotely urban for me — but they gone a step or two beyond the minimum. – SLP]
mr duckworth,
while first generation st. peters residents may not jump on the chance move into (or back into) st. louis city, their children just might. many of us think the suburban municipality of our childhood is absolutely rediculous.
matt
i forgot to add:
many residents of st. peters are just as much a product of their time, and not just place. like many neighbors we had around us, my family made more or less the ‘transition’ from st. louis city to inner north county to outer north county to st. charles county. my father lived near gaslight square during its heyday, but as he states, many in his neighborhood drove their chevrolets the very few blocks to get there…
The blog entry makes a good point, because St. Charles County developers are now trying to “build urban” at Mid Rivers Mall, New Town, Dardenne Prairie and other places where one must use a personal vehicle to meet the demands of daily life. This development is as bad for the region as fake suburban stuff in the city like Loughborough Commons; none of it re-orients our region from autocentric planning and low-density devlopment.
If only the Mayor tried to grasp the big picture instead of throwing knives…
Matt,
Yeah I agree, its basically a migration out west from generation to generation due to decreasing property values and successful marketing. St. Louis should attract these residents but not with bad urban development as Michael Allen points out. St. Louis cannot turn suburban if we are trying to sell urban.
Wait, what are we trying to sell?
“St. Louis cannot turn suburban if we are trying to sell urban.”
douglas,
it seems that there is just an extreme lag time as it pertains to overall quality urban design in cities of the lower midwest. it’s just going to take people like us to continue to bring the pressure for urban design (politically, economically). from what i understand, most builders in the lower midwest are scared as hell to build anything remotely walkable. kansas city (where i currently live), for instance, is about a decade years behind denver in this very general aspect according to some new urban developers ive talked to.
st. louis, having been about equal to the rest of the lower midwest for a while with a destructive “modern” mentality, seems to be well situated for a sea change or even revolution in urban design with expansions of fixed rail and TOD. politics seems to be a terrible wildcard in stl, though..
“It could be done but I think we should focus on preventing the big box developments.” Yes, by all means lets prevent people from getting what they foolishly want and prevent them by law from getting it.
I’m no fan of Mid Rivers mall or StPeterO’CharlesFallon but come on. These people voted with their money and said we want treeless ugly subdivisions with particle board plastic wrapped houses. More power to’em.