Sixth County Council District Community Area Study
Blueprint for the Future
St. Louis County Department of Planning July 2000 Blueprint for the Future
City of St. Louis St. Louis County
# Study Area
Sixth District Community Area Study
Report of the Sixth County Council District Community Area Study Citizens Advisory Committee and the St. Louis County Department of Planning July 2000
Updated August 21, 2000
A Report of the Sixth District Community Area Study Citizens Advisory Committee and the St. Louis County Department of Planning
Sixth District Community Area Study 1 Sixth District Community Area Study 2 II. Purpose of the Study
The Sixth County Council District Community Area Study was undertaken at the request of the Sixth District Councilman Jeff Wagener to provide the kind of planning guidance envisioned in St. Louis County’s 1985 General Plan, which recommended the designation of areas in unincorporated St. Louis County for detailed planning analysis. The County’s General Plan (also known as the Strategic Plan), which is updated at five-year intervals by County Charter mandate, addresses a broad range of service and policy issues. More detailed land use, infrastructure and transportation guidance is provided by the more focused community area study process.
The goal of the Sixth District Community Area Study is to develop a plan for the area’s future through a step-by-step planning process that involves residents, local interest groups and other stakeholders. The plan is intended to provide guidance to the Planning Commission and County Council when they review zoning and land use proposals, to influence decisions regarding expenditures on transportation improvements and infrastructure, and to spur redevelopment of commercial and industrial areas that are aging or underutilized. In short, the goal is to develop a blueprint for preserving and building upon South County’s assets and guiding future decisions to assure continued growth and vitality.
This document is intended as a link between the General Plan and the specific considerations relevant to individual sites. It is not intended to replace the technical review by staff or consideration of the merits of proposed developments by the Planning Commission and County Council. The purpose is rather to strengthen the review process by providing guidance based on planning analysis guided by input reflecting the preferences and concerns of the local community. Many of the factors considered in this report are subject to change over time, and final decisions on site- specific development proposals require detailed engineering reports. This report, however, seeks to guide St. Louis County’s Sixth District toward development decisions and redevelopment efforts that will benefit the area in the decades to come.
The Process
The 18-month process began with the appointment of a citizens advisory committee by County Executive Buzz Westfall on recommendations by Sixth District Councilman Jeff Wagener. Members were selected from volunteers. An effort was made to include members from all parts of the study area. The twenty-one member advisory committee for the Sixth District Community Area study included two members of the Planning Commission. The advisory committee provided direct input to the Planning Department throughout the development of the report.
The Sixth District Study was conducted in two main phases. Beginning in February,
Sixth District Community Area Study 3 1999, the first six meetings constituted the first phase, which was the issue identification process. This phase began with an examination of demographic data and recent development trends and a review of the jurisdictions included in the study area. The issue identification process included a survey of committee members’ concerns, several informational presentations by staff of County Departments and other agencies that serve the area and discussions and exercises within the committee to identify and refine issues. A public forum in which the public at large was given the opportunity to validate and prioritize the issues identified by the committee and to provide additional concerns concluded the issue identification phase.
The second phase of the plan involved a systematic examination of the main issues identified in Phase I. Staff prepared and presented information on existing conditions, current policies and programs, options to consider and tentative recommendations for addressing each issue. Committee discussions and meetings with County Departments and other agencies were conducted during the process of developing goals, objectives and strategies. Additional input was provided by committee members through written comments, which were received and incorporated throughout the report-drafting process. Following committee review of the final draft, a second public forum was held in July, 2000, to inform the public and solicit public comment prior to submittal of the document to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the County Council.
As a follow-up to this study, the Citizens Advisory Committee recommended that a review committee monitor progress on implementation of the proposed strategies on a periodic basis.
Like other community area studies, this present study is a intended to provide a closer look at a specific area than is possible in a general or strategic plan for the entire County. However, it differs from previous community area studies in that the 57 square-mile area studied is much larger, and planning for redevelopment is as much of a focus as guiding new development. Much of the study area is approaching full development, and many neighborhoods and commercial areas are showing signs of age. The goal of keeping the area vital and competitive requires that we begin the planning now to upgrade infrastructure and reinvest in our area’s neighborhoods and businesses.
Geographic Focus of the Study
The area selected for study was the Sixth County Council District. The use of the Council District boundaries for study area boundaries represented a change from past practice. Earlier community area study boundaries were based on identified areas of development pressure measured primarily by zoning change and subdivision proposals received by the Department of Planning. Where development activity was strongest, there was felt to be a need for coordinated planning and guidance for the Planning Commission and County Council in making land use decisions. In the
Sixth District Community Area Study 4 present instance, the previously completed Oakville Community Area Study (1989) and Oakville Community Area Study Update (1998) had come to be regarded as valuable tools in evaluating development proposals for the area covered by those studies, namely, the portion of Oakville south of Baumgartner Road. The Sixth District Councilman sought similar guidance for the remainder of his district and also saw the need to analyze redevelopment needs in the older portions of his district.
The present study addresses all of the Sixth County Council District except the area south of Baumgartner Road, which was addressed in the earlier Oakville Study and the recent update. Demographic and background information in this report covers the entire area, but the specific land use guidance excludes that area, because the recommendations of the previous reports are still applicable.
The Sixth County Council District comprises the southeastern portion of St. Louis County generally south of Gravois Road as far west as the Gravois Road/I-270 interchange. East of Mackenzie road the study area extends north of Gravois Road and encompasses the Lakewood area including the St. Marcus Cemetery.
The largely unincorporated study area had roughly 147,000 people at the last Census (1990). While it includes five small municipalities - Bella Villa, Wilbur Park, St. George, Lakeshire and Green Park - and part of Sunset Hills, those municipalities contribute only about 8,500 persons to the total population. The nearly 140,000 Sixth District residents who live in unincorporated areas represent about 40 percent of the population of unincorporated St. Louis County.
Sixth District Community Area Study 5 N N
I-44 I-44 WILBUR PARK AFFTON BAYLESS LAKESHIRE BELLA VILLA ST. GEORGE HANCOCK GREEN PLACE PARK LINDBERGH SUNSET I- HILLS 270 I- 270
I-2 55 I-2 55
MEHLVILLE 5 5 I- 5 5 I-
Municipalities
Unincorporated School Districts Areas Map Map 1 2
N N
I-44
AFFTON
F.P.D. d. R ois av LEMAY Gr Northwest 5 F.P.D. 5 FENTON I- Lindb F.P.D. ergh I-2 I- 70 270 Northeast
I-2 55
I-25 Southwest . 5 MEHLVILLE d R
y r F.P.D. r e 5 F 5 - I y a SE 5 m 5 e - I L Southeast
Fire Protection Sixth District Districts Data Quadrants Map Map 3 4 III. Background
Jurisdictions
Municipalities, school districts, and fire protection districts that serve the Sixth County Council District are depicted on the maps on the opposite page.
Municipalities
Five small municipalities and a portion of a sixth municipality are contained within the Sixth District study area, while the vast majority of the area is unincorporated. The five municipalities and their populations based on 1990 Census figures are Bella Villa, 805; Green Park, 2,338; Lakeshire, 1,467; St. George, 1,359; and Wilbur Park, 522. Only the southeast corner of Sunset Hills, which has a total population of 7,896, is in the Sixth District. (See Map 1, Municipalities.)
School Districts
Three school districts - Bayless, Hancock Place and Mehlville - are entirely within the Sixth District and two others - Affton and Lindbergh - are partially within the Sixth District. The Mehlville School District covers by far the largest portion of the study area and served more than half of the area’s population as of the 1990 Census. The portions of the Lindbergh and Affton School Districts that are within the Sixth District represent less than half of the district in each case. Yet each of those districts serves a larger portion of the Sixth District population than the smaller Bayless and Hancock Place districts. (See Map 2, School Districts.)
Fire Protection Districts
All study area residents receive their fire protection from one of the three fire protection districts that serve the area. None of the municipalities within the Sixth District has a municipal fire department. The Lemay Fire Protection District serves the northeast section of the study area. The Affton Fire Protection District serves an area extending along both sides of Gravois Road between Union Road and Watson Road roughly from Grant Road east to the St. Louis city limits. The Mehlville Fire Protection District serves the remainder of the Sixth District and extends farther north to cover Grantwood Village and about half of the City of Sunset Hills. (See Map 3, Fire Protection Districts.)
Sixth District Community Area Study 7 Sixth County Council District Demographics
Data Quadrant Sixth District St. Louis Population NW NE SW SE Total County Total Population - 1990 Census 37,340 35,265 31,777 42,646 147,028 993,508 Change from previous Census (3,190) (3,062) 2,920 9,946 6,614 19,328 % change from previous Census -7.9% -8.0% 10.1% 30.4% 4.7% 2.0% Square miles 8.2 10.8 16.4 21.5 56.9 524.0 Persons per square mile 4,554 3,265 1,938 1,984 2,584 1,896 Percentage white 99% 98% 98% 99% 99% 84% Per capita income, 1989 $15,411 $14,297 $19,077 $17,144 $16,439 $18,625 Age cohorts Under 5 6% 6% 6% 8% 7% 7% 5-17 14% 15% 16% 22% 17% 18% 18-24 8% 9% 10% 9% 9% 9% 25-34 17% 16% 15% 16% 16% 17% 35-44 13% 13% 15% 19% 15% 16% 45-54 10% 10% 14% 12% 11% 11% 55-64 13% 12% 12% 8% 11% 10% 65+ 18% 19% 13% 8% 14% 13% Percent under 18 21% 21% 22% 29% 24% 25% Percent 65 and over 18% 19% 13% 8% 14% 13% Labor Force White Collar 66% 59% 73% 69% 67% 70% Blue Collar 23% 28% 18% 21% 22% 19% Service 12% 13% 9% 10% 11% 11% Education (highest level for persons 25 or older) Less than high school diploma 23% 31% 14% 13% 20% 18% Bachelor's degree + 18% 11% 29% 25% 21% 29%
Housing
Total Units (1990) 15,945 15,233 12,919 15,285 59,382 401,839 Increase from previous Census 581 567 2,637 4,733 8,518 43,799 % increase from previous Census 4% 4% 26% 45% 17% 12% Characteristics of Housing Units (1990) Single-family 85% 72% 67% 76% 75% 72% Multiple-family 15% 28% 33% 24% 25% 28% Occupied Year-round units Owner occupied 82% 73% 74% 80% 77% 74% Renter occupied 18% 28% 26% 20% 23% 26% Average Appraised Value (1997)$ 87,237 $ 70,781 $ 146,322 $ 130,344 $ 107,695 $ 117,296 Growth in Ave. Appr. Value 1988-97 31% 22% 48% 47% 43% 42% Year of Construction 1980-90 6% 7% 25% 36% 18% 14% 1970-79 11% 12% 29% 33% 21% 19% 1960-69 26% 28% 30% 18% 26% 24% 1950-59 33% 25% 11% 8% 20% 22% 1940-49 14% 13% 3% 2% 8% 10% 1939 or earlier 10% 15% 2% 2% 8% 11%
Compiled by St. Louis County Department of Planning. Data source: 1990 Census of Population and Housing Rev. 7/19/99 Population Data and Trends
Census and housing data show the Sixth District to be a densely populated area that has grown faster than St. Louis County as a whole in recent decades. The area as a whole is similar to St. Louis County in population characteristics with a similar age and labor force breakdown. However, there are definite differences within the study area between the older inner-ring suburban areas in the north half of the district and the newer recently developed areas in the southern half of the district.
Quadrants: The study area was divided into four quadrants by Census tract to provide a closer look at demographic and housing variations within the district. (See Map 4.) The quadrants are: Northwest:(Affton) west of I-55 and north of Lindbergh Blvd. Northeast: (Lemay/Mehlville) East of I-55 and north of I-255. Southwest: South of Lindbergh Blvd. and west of Lemay Ferry Rd. Southeast: (Oakville) South of I-255 and east of Lemay Ferry Rd.
Continuing Growth: At the last Census (1990), the Sixth County Council District had 147,028 people, one-seventh of St. Louis County=s population. The study area had grown almost 5 percent from the previous (1980) Census, while St. Louis County as a whole had grown only 2 percent. The growth was in the southern portions of the district, while areas north of Lindbergh Blvd. and I-255 lost about 8 percent of its population as the population aged and household size declined.
Population change by quadrant ranged from an 8 percent population loss in the two quadrants north of Lindbergh to a 30 percent gain in the Oakville (southeast) quadrant. The southwest quadrant had 10 percent growth.
Population Change, 1980 - 1990
12,500 9,946 10,000 6,614 7,500
5,000 2,920 2,500 Persons -3,190 -3,062 0
-2,500
-5,000 Northwest Northeast Southwest Southeast Total Quadrants
Sixth District Community Area Study 9 High Population Density: With 56.9 square miles, the study area had a population density of 2,584 persons per square mile, more than a third higher than the overall County figure of 1,896 persons per square mile.
Population density is particularly high in the northern, Ainner ring,@ portion of the study area, where lot sizes are typically smaller than in the newer outlying areas. The northwest quadrant had 4,554 persons per square mile, nearly two and a half times the county average. In the northeast quadrant, the high density in Lemay and Mehlville is somewhat diluted by substantial institutional and park acreage, but the overall population density (3,265) is still substantially above the County average. Even in the more recently developed areas south of Lindbergh and I-255 population
Population Density by Quadrant
Northwest 4,554 Northeast 3,265
Southwest 1,938
Southeast 1,984
Sixth District 2,584
St. Louis County 1,896
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Persons per square mile
density is slightly above average for the County.
Age: Overall, the study area=s age breakdown mirrors that of the whole County quite closely. But, here again, the area closer to the City of St. Louis, the suburban inner- ring, differs noticeably from the more recently developed area south of Lindbergh Boulevard and I-255. At the last Census the southeast quadrant - Oakville - had 29 percent of its population under age 18, as contrasted with only 21 percent under age 18 in the northwest - Affton - quadrant. With continued new housing construction in the Oakville area, it is likely that Oakville continues to have a larger percentage of young people.
The percentage of elderly persons (age 65 and above) is considerably above average in the quadrants north of Lindbergh, equal to the County average in the southwestern, and 5 percentage points below the County average in the southeastern quadrant.
Sixth District Community Area Study 10 Labor force: The Sixth District=s labor force breakdown is similar to that of St. Louis County with slightly fewer white collar and slightly more blue collar workers than the County as a whole. The northeastern portion of the study area - the Lemay and Mehlville areas - has the lowest white collar and the highest blue collar percentages while the southwestern portion - south of Lindbergh Blvd. and west of Lemay Ferry Road - has the highest percentage of white collar and lowest percentages of blue collar and service occupations.
Education: Twenty percent of Sixth District residents do not have a high school diploma, as compared with 18 percent for all of St. Louis County. The percentage of Sixth District residents with a college degree is 21 percent, versus 29 percent for St. Louis County. Within the study area, education levels show similar distribution to white collar workers, that is, education levels are lower than the County average in the northern portion of the study area and higher in the southern portion.
Housing Data and Trends
Growth trends: At the last Census (1990) the Sixth District had 59,382 housing units, an increase of 8,518 units or 17 percent in the previous decade. The area=s housing growth rate far exceeded St. Louis County=s 12 percent growth in housing units in the same decade. As with the County as a whole, the rate of increase in housing units was considerably higher than the population growth rate, which was 2 percent for the County and 4.7 percent for the Sixth District. Over half of the new housing units (4,733) were in the southeast quadrant of the district - generally the Oakville area south of I-255 and east of Lemay Ferry Road - where the new housing represented a 45 percent increase in the 1980's. The southwestern quadrant of the district had a 26 percent increase. Even in the northern half of the district, which had a population loss in the 1980's, the number of housing units increased 4 percent.
Unit type and tenure: In the Sixth District 75 percent of the housing units are single-family units, a higher percentage than the 72 percent for the County as a whole. An even higher percentage of units are owner-occupied (77 percent), as many of the district=s multiple-family units are condominiums.
Age of housing: Although Lemay and parts of Affton near Gravois were built up long before 1940, the Sixth District had a significant single-family building boom in the 1950's and 1960's. In the 1970's active single-family subdivision development extended into the southern half of the study area. In the 1980's and 1990's single- family construction continued to be strong as developers built homes on some of the rougher terrain in the southern part of Oakville and infill sites throughout the district.
Sixth District Community Area Study 11 Multi-family housing construction became active in the 1960's, peaked in the 1970's and continued into the 1980's, when nearly a quarter of the multi-family units were
Housing Units by Decade Built
15,000
12,500
10,000
7,500
5,000
2,500
- Pre-1940 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s
Single-family Multi-family
built. The relatively few multi-family units that have been built in the 1990's have typically been condominiums and smaller duplex or attached single-family units rather that apartment complexes.
In the Sixth District’s northeast quadrant the majority of housing was built before 1960, including 15 percent built before 1940. By contrast, over two-thirds of the housing in the southeast quadrant (Oakville area) was built since 1970.
Housing value: The average appraised value of single-family homes based on 1997 County appraised values was $107,695, somewhat lower than the countywide average of $117, 296. There was considerable variation among the four quadrants of the study area. Average values ranged from $70,781 in the northeast (Lemay/Mehlville) area to $146,322 in the southwest area south of Lindbergh Blvd. and west of Lemay Ferry Road.
Housing value trends: Changes in average housing values reflect several factors including the age of the housing, the desirability of the area where the homes are located, and the size and value of new homes being built in the area. Changes in average housing values by census tract in the ten-year period from 1988 to 1997 show the central and northern areas of the study area lagging behind the countywide average gain, which was 42 percent for that ten year period. Not surprisingly, the areas of recent new construction in the southwestern and southeastern portions of the study area had gains that exceeded the countywide average.
Sixth District Community Area Study 12 Real estate assessed value and property tax rates: The five school districts and three fire protection districts that serve the Sixth District are financed primarily through property taxes on real and personal property. St. Louis County and its municipalities have other substantial revenue sources including sales taxes and
Commercial Assessed Value and Property Tax Rates by School District 35% $5.00
30% V $3.91 $4.00 $3.62 25% $3.57 $3.38 20% $3.00 $2.68 30% 15% 29% $2.00 21% 21% 10% 18% $1.00 Commercial AV as % of total as AV Commercial 5% 10% Property tax rate per $100 A
0% $0.00 Affton Bayless Hancock Lindbergh Mehlville St. Louis Place County School Districts
Commercial Assessed Value (AV) as Percent of Total AV School Property Tax Rate (1999)
utilities taxes that are not available to school and fire districts. Any development that enhances the area=s property values increases school and fire district revenues without their having to seek rate increases.
Where property values are high, property tax rates can be kept relatively low and still generate adequate revenues for taxing districts. In some jurisdictions commercial property, which includes retail, office, warehouse and industrial uses, contributes a significant share to property tax revenues. Within the Sixth District, the percentage of assessed value contributed by commercial property in the five school districts ranges from 10 percent in Bayless to 30 percent in Lindbergh. Lindbergh=s relatively high percentage of commercial assessed value allows it to have the lowest 1999 property tax rate of the South County districts, $2.68 per $100 of assessed valuation. The other four districts have tax rates ranging from $3.38 to $3.91.
Land Use and Development Trends
The Sixth District is reaching full development after five decades of growth. The
Sixth District Community Area Study 13 land use mix is that of the Abedroom community,@ reflecting the residential character which many residents identified as a main asset of the area. Residential development occupies 56 percent of the acreage, compared with 47 percent for the County as a whole.
Commercial and industrial/utility uses occupy the same percentages of the land in the Sixth District as in the County as a whole, 5 percent and 6 percent respectively. However, the mix of uses within these categories differs from that of the County.
Sixth District St. Louis County
Va ca n t / Parks/ Agric. Vacant/ Agricultural Recreation 14% 23% 11% Residential Residential 47% Parks/ Institutional 56% Recreation 8% 13%
Industrial/ Institutional Utility 6% 6% Industrial/ Commercial Commercial Utility 5% 5% 6%
Commercial acreage is devoted primarily to retail development with relatively less office space compared to the County. The industrial/utility acreage is occupied by two principal land uses: quarrying and utilities. Public and private utility uses in the area include two Metropolitan Sewer District Plants, a St. Louis County Water Company plant, and an AmerenUE plant.
Institutional uses, which include schools, churches, hospitals and cemeteries, occupy 8 percent of the land, as compared with only 6 percent for the County as a whole. Institutional uses which occupy large amounts of acreage in the Sixth District include the Veterans Administration hospital and cemetery at Jefferson Barracks, St. Anthony=s Hospital and several more large cemeteries.
Park and recreation land uses occupy a smaller percentage (11 percent) of the acreage in the Sixth District than the countywide percentage (13 percent). The smaller percentage of park acreage is explained largely by the fact that none of the thirteen Missouri state parks in St. Louis County is located in the Sixth District. Yet, the Sixth District contains a very substantial share of St. Louis County Parks, 23 in all, the largest of which are Jefferson Barracks Park, the Kennedy Recreation Complex, Cliff Cave Park and Bee Tree Park. The ongoing development of the Grant=s Trail and the Lower Meramec Linear Park will add to the recreational acreage in the Sixth District in the next few years.
Sixth District Community Area Study 14 Vacant and agricultural land in the Sixth District has diminished rapidly in the last few decades. Now only 14 percent of the acreage, as compared to 23 percent countywide, vacant land in the Sixth District includes much acreage that is unsuitable for residential or other development. A large proportion of the remaining land classified as vacant and agricultural is in the flood plain of the Mississippi River, the Meramec River, Gravois Creek, and Mattese Creek. Additional vacant parcels have other development constraints including severe slopes and rock outcroppings. An inventory of larger vacant sites with development potential reveals that relatively few remain. Several of these are discussed in Section X, Redeveloping Vacant or Underutilized Industrial/Commercial Sites, along with a number of previously developed sites that have potential for redevelopment.
Land Use Mix and Property Tax Base – Adequate Retail Space and a Shortage of Office and Industrial Uses
Even though the Sixth District’s percentage of acreage devoted to commercial uses is the same as the countywide average, the distribution of commercial floor space among retail, office and industrial/warehouse uses varies significantly from that of the whole County.
Sixth District Commercial St. Louis County Commercial Buiding Space by Type Building Space by Type
Indust rial Retail 39% 26% Retail Indust rial 48% 48%
Office 26% Office 13%
Commercial uses in the study area are predominantly retail uses. Forty-eight (48) percent of the area’s commercial building square footage is retail space as compared with 26 percent for the County as a whole. Only 13 percent of commercial building square footage in the Sixth District is office space, as compared with 26 percent countywide. Although the study area has 14 percent of the County’s population, it has only 3 percent of the County’s office space. Because of the disproportionate share of retail versus office and industrial uses in the Sixth District, the amount of assessed value and property tax revenues contributed by commercial property is considerably below the County average. Acre for acre, office development is typically valued at about twice as much as retail development. There two main reasons for this. Office buildings often have more than one story and
Sixth District Community Area Study 15 therefore provide more building square footage per acre. In addition, office buildings are typically more expensive in construction type and architectural design and involve more interior finish. By contrast, retail uses in the Sixth District include “big box” retailers with large parking lots and a large number of automobile dealerships, which absorb large amounts of acreage with relatively small buildings and therefore have less real estate assessed value per acre.
Unquestionably, retail uses contribute sales taxes, which office uses usually do not, and also utility taxes, and thereby contribute to County revenues. However, they generate less in property taxes and thus make less contribution than office buildings to the school districts and fire districts in the area.
The small proportion of office space in the Sixth District makes the area less of a daytime destination and employment center than other parts of the County. It means that Sixth District residents must commute farther for jobs and to obtain professional or other office services. Similarly, the area’s lower proportion of industrial and warehouse space reflects a bedroom community from which residents commute to other parts of the region for jobs.
Sixth District Community Area Study 16 Note on methodology: Data from the 1990 Census are compiled from census tract data. Two of the nineteen census tracts used for this compilation - tracts 2198 and 2212.02 - extend beyond the limits of the Sixth County Council District. As a result, total numbers of persons and housing units given here are slightly greater than the numbers for the Sixth District alone. History of Sixth District
Jesuit priests were the first explorers of the Lemay area around 1700, and eventually villages were established on both sides of the River Des Peres, River of the Fathers. In 1749, Jean Baptiste D’Gamache laid out a road from River Des Peres to the Meramec River in an attempt to connect it to a village at St. Genevieve. It took forty years for the road to be built, and it was initially known as El Camino Real, The Kings Highway. By 1831 Kings Highway became a state road, and the Meramec River ferry operator name, Francois LeMais, became associated with the road. Eventually, the road adopted a version of his name, and now Lemay Ferry Road identifies the road originally designed in 1749.
St. Louis City separated from St. Louis County in 1876, and at that time, the Sixth District was rural and sparsely populated. During the first three decades of the twentieth century most of the homes and businesses in the Affton/Lemay areas were constructed. Between the 1940's and 1950's the areas near Lindbergh Boulevard were beginning to develop, and by mid 1963 South County mall was under construction. The southern and western portions of the Sixth District underwent commercial and residential development from 1970 through the 1990's. Development in these areas continues into the present.
Zoning and Subdivision Trends
The zoning and subdivision trends in the Sixth District follow demographic trends outlined in the Population and Data Trends section, that is, development gradually spread from areas closer to the city of St. Louis into the southern and more outlying areas of the district that had long remained semi-rural. St. Louis County enacted a new comprehensive zoning ordinance in 1965, and the land in the Sixth District was zoned to reasonably correspond with existing development and to meet future development needs as projected at that time. However, as development progressed over the subsequent thirty-five years, numerous changes from the original zoning were enacted. It is for this reason that it is appropriate to review past trends and existing patterns of land use and zoning to better guide future development.
A review of zoning and subdivision activity in the Sixth District since the enactment of the 1965 Zoning Ordinance reveals different patterns in the northern and southern portions of the district.
Sixth District Community Area Study 17 Much of the area north of Lindbergh Boulevard had already been developed prior to 1965. In general, the already developed residential areas have remained stable while about three-fourths of the requests for rezonings and subdivisions have been for commercial uses. Some requests involved reuse and reconfiguration of existing commercial properties and some involved expansion of businesses into areas that were previously residential. It is typical for commercial development to expand in an area subsequent to residential development and for major roads and key intersections to undergo a transition from residential to commercial uses as traffic volumes increase with the growth of the area. On highways that traverse formerly sparsely developed areas, large residential parcels are acquired for commercial development. Several areas that are still undergoing this type of transition are examined in Section XI, Providing Land Use Guidance for Subareas with Development Potential.
North of Lindbergh Boulevard, most of the single-family subdivisions found there today had already been developed by 1965. Only a few new single-family subdivisions have been built. Recent multi-family construction has been in the form of infill development adjacent to commercial development. Even in the 1990's there have been several rezonings for apartments and for attached single-family housing on small lots.
South of Lindbergh Boulevard, by contrast, a large amount of residential as well as commercial development has occurred, primarily since 1975. The southeast quadrant of the district, the Oakville area, has been an area of tremendous growth. Here half of the zoning petitions have been for residential development, and three-fourths of those have been for single-family homes. In that area construction of single-family subdivisions continues into the present, although available sites are becoming scarce.
The southwest quadrant of the district has had the largest total number of rezonings in recent years, mainly since 1975. Here commercial rezonings accounted for about two-thirds of the changes, with many of them being in the Tesson Ferry Road/St. Anthony’s Hospital area. Of the residential zoning changes that have occurred, two thirds of those were for single-family housing and one third were for multi-family housing. The latter included a mixture of apartments, condominiums and attached single-family homes along much of the Tesson Ferry Road corridor.
Environmental Features
A major ridge line crosses the study area dividing stormwater drainage between the Mississippi and Meramec rivers. The ridge line roughly follows Lindbergh Boulevard, Milburn Road, Telegraph Road, and Becker Road. Areas north and east the ridge line drain to the Mississippi River. Stormwater from land south and west of the ridge line flows into the Meramec River. Gravois Creek and Martigney Creek are the most prominent watersheds north and east of the ridge line. Mattese Creek is the most notable watershed south and west of the ridge line.
Sixth District Community Area Study 18 Substantial portions of the undeveloped land in the Sixth District are located in the flood plains of the Mississippi and Meramec rivers and area creeks. The most significant flood plain areas along the Mississippi River are located just south of the River Des Peres and north of Jefferson Barracks County Park and south of Cliff Cave County Park in the Oakville area. Large amounts of land along nearly the whole course of the Meramec River, which forms the western and southern boundaries of the study area, are located in the flood plain.
A prominent flood plain area is located along Gravois Creek, which parallels the old Missouri Pacific Railroad right-of-way and is now partially used for the Grant’s Trail. There is also notable flood plain along the River Des Peres between Gravois Creek and the Mississippi River. The most significant creek related flood plain south of Interstate 255 is the Mattese Creek flood plain. The Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way runs along the creek.
Another physical feature of note in the study area is the karst plain located in the eastern portion the Sixth District. The area of karst topography is generally located between Jefferson Barracks County Park on the north, the Mississippi River on the east, and Telegraph Road and Christopher Drive on the west. It also extends westward to an area west of Ringer Road.
Karst topography is characterized by a lack of surface drainage streams and the presence of sinkholes. Stormwater is captured by the sinkholes which direct the surface water down and through limestone bedrock. The water then flows along underground drainage to the Mississippi River. Clogged sinkholes result in water filled depressions. The sinkhole formations themselves as well as their stormwater drainage limitations impact development.
Locational Factors
An area analysis provides an understanding of how the Sixth County Council District fits into the context of the larger surrounding St. Louis area. The Sixth District is shown in relationship to the surrounding area on Map 5. Key types of information reviewed in the area analysis included the natural and manmade geographic features that shape the area and the major attractions that draw people into and out of South County.
The Sixth District is located in the southeastern most part of St. Louis County. The Mississippi River, the Meramec River, and the River Des Peres are natural features which generally form the east, south, and north boundaries, respectively, of this nearly 57 square mile area. The most significant manmade features of the area are its roads: Interstate highways 55 and 255/270, and other major roads, Lindbergh Boulevard, Gravois Road, Tesson Ferry Road, Lemay Ferry Road, and Broadway/Kingston Drive/Telegraph Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 19 Bridges across the rivers on the perimeter of the district provide vital links to the surrounding area. The Jefferson Barracks Bridge across the Mississippi River provides a connection with Illinois to the east. Bridges across the Meramec River at Interstate 55, Gravois Road, Tesson Ferry Road, Lemay Ferry Road, and Telegraph Road provide connections to Jefferson County to the south. The bridges across the River Des Peres at Gravois Road, Morganford Road, Interstate 55, Lemay Ferry Road/Alabama, and Broadway offer roadway links between St. Louis County and the City of St. Louis to the north.
Magnets
There are a number of magnets, major shopping and employment centers, which draw people from within and beyond the District. The South County Shopping Center attracts customers from Jefferson County and Illinois as well as from inside the study area. The St. Anthony’s Medical Center and associated medical offices in the Interstate 270/Tesson Ferry Road area attract employees from the District and other parts of the St. Louis metropolitan area. The patient base includes residents of the District, other parts of St. Louis County, the City of St. Louis, Jefferson County and other outlying counties.
The General American Life Insurance complex and other non-medical offices south of the Interstate 270/Tesson Ferry Road interchange provide substantial employment to the region. The Wal-Mart store at Interstate 255 and Telegraph Road is busy around the clock and has a substantial draw from Illinois.
Destinations
There are a number of significant destinations that draw residents to locations outside of the Sixth District, primarily for employment. The most prominent destinations include Downtown St. Louis, which is an employment center and a venue for sporting events and other entertainment; the Daimler-Chrysler Plant and other businesses in Fenton for employment; Crestwood Plaza, a shopping and employment destination; Clayton for employment; and the Anheuser-Busch brewery for employment. Other employment destinations of note, which are not depicted on Map 5, include Lambert St. Louis International Airport, Hazelwood, Earth City, and Westport in northwest St. Louis County, Washington University and the medical centers in the Midtown and Central West End areas of the City of St. Louis, and west St. Louis County/Chesterfield area offices.
There is also significant traffic that traverses the district from outside of it. Residents of Jefferson County and southwestern Illinois travel on Interstates 55 and 270 in the Sixth District on their way to and from places of employment to the north in the City of St. Louis and to the west and northwest in other parts of St. Louis County.
Sixth District Community Area Study 20 Map Locational Factors 5
City of I- 1 7 r 0 Clayton St. Louis Hwy 40 Downtownr
ter hes anc M Anheuser-Busch Breweryr
4 I-4
R Crestwood IVE R DE S P ER r Plaza ES
d. is R avo r Gr
Fenton y a
L w ind d
b a er . g d o
h r R ry B er F ay m I- Le 270 ÚÊ St. Anthony's ÚÊ Hospital South Walmart Illinois County Center ÚÊ I-2 GeneralÚÊ American 55 Life Insurance
R . 5 d E R 5 V y - I r I r R . e d I F N
R P n
o h s P
s p e I
T a
r S
g S
e I
l
e S
T S I ER RIV M MEC ERA M r Destinations Jefferson ÚÊ Magnets County Municipalities Major Roads 1 0 1 2 Miles Sixth District Prepared by St. Louis County Department of Planning Rivers June 2000 Map Other Planning Efforts in the Sixth District 6 O
C I
S
S R S
R A R K H C RD I M O G A L L F L P G E D N DH R ROSE HILL AVE G R D A AI E C S A G R R P
U A B N E R N D E P
D O D T R O D N O N I E P E
C N M N O B R HE D BIG A ON D SO EG S T E N I TS A A N O W R U R E D W E L G D E 30 O
W G L V R U T D I G
K O A H O H R RO E H R U CK E B I N L O N I U S E GE R ON R. R. D RM R K PACIF A IC C P G N O R IA O E 44 R E U D A C M Y D H G L E I L H A E R L S BL L V VD A E 366 H G A I V B WEB OIS E ST RD ER V R R W C N67 S RA T M SO D A O RD G D I A AT EA E RO P L W N W R V B DELE N A P D H E T A R E V R E E I # WE S R G E
61 D E B V N N D N ER E R D I RD ATSO A H W V E EAST G E D
I L D C V
A T R T I I Z R A
T O GR D R 55 M O D AN H A T N R 50 N E RY N R E O E D IV
A D K Affton-GrNavois VE 21 B A
D NRD E R C IO B D A FO L O L A RMA N A D P 30 N Y V S I D D S U N I R M L T E RD P E D Y AND PARK R A D R REAVIS BusinesR s Corri" doS r A B M IN S D R H R D W TW E D G " 270 R U RD E D D O S R D H 267 R U A S O B E G R
D N F O Y I M F Y H C E R N D Y R W T M R V R B K O E R T R L A PI rojecAt E I S T T H V E F T T ES N RD DENN E E I Y C O RD R O I D R L W S REAVIS D I
R H R AT S N R R R A M W D U S R O D LemVay R E E H T D S D R S E H C T V R
D R E R O
D YA S N T B F
I A R
D T F O R R S T A N R
I I I R Y A M S ER HILL R E WEB - O P A
A T RD 2 V IN D C G 231 V E R 7 B A K A A LVD V R S E I 0 G W S R B R W G A GREENPARK T D E D L R R E R ARLEE AVE E E N N D A R T L P R N A O S L R E D O
N H I C E E K T R IPA R AVE R N R I O W U B O U Y F I 30 T N CONCORD M R H K N R R C G S RY O E P E N R R C E T A D A N R F G F
N I H O D N D D L I R P N O S L N P I R W R N E O S N U G O
D I P L E B L L T R T L O I A B S L E D E A L E S G N Y A V R E N C R E S I U OIS T O T
G K
GRAV 21 NCORD RD Y D
H A R
D D M T E
R G H R L
E G
R R IS E Y S E E T D 270 D S G 67 H L
E R L 267 T MR N H K A A E G IS 55 61 A S T C R M C N N O D D Y RR U G O A T DD 50 SCHUE L R A SSLER R T B B V S H E S O S R T N LV TURG R E IS R E O IS D E F D D N T I V D LLE D S ON R T T R A D S PPING O SA R BAR R R T W R RACKS D O E E N GD W V E 67 NR D I N I C R R R R ES E D 61 FO E RD OUT N R R U H T RD D R E E A E R ERD B V RING
S D A B R R M D LE A 255 K
R L O T R U B D D H D C
R E H R 231 M RD J H ER R EFF IL NG D T ER
L I H KELLER R R RD SO
D D K N P E O B R P C A
R R RD A B H R A AC R O T KS L Y R B G A T L RI
I M R D E D E R E P R G BN R DLY D E H I
L O R A U R N L R R
T E R T D S
M L O R G T C
L R E D T O E Y R E I IL E R RD YEAGER L
D R F
F N RD E D
H G R A I
N R R D D V A D R
E E C
R R R R
H R
F A Y E
H U
P S R G B
T H N
L R
R R A
C I
N N U E O
E D E
F I
R M O F
K Y
N S E N YEA BAUM C
D GER GART LIF S U H NE F A S R
R N E L 67 T
M RD
E T A L S R C
L E E N O A T
D
G I V W 61 N E
U K A R
Y
B N H W A O A R M T B H O E D 21 MERAMEC T 55 N G D T L E R O M W N M E OTTOM I R B A R B L R M D A Z D E U R . C M T G U N AR B I
T E NE R H RD E SUSAN D RB R
OakHville Community E IN 231 T Area Z Study (1989) R D D
R
and UD pdate (1998) R
R
E
H
P H P O A T
R S G I E R L D E H
R T C
Legend 231
R
E
K
County Council District C D
E R
B
Major Roads CH RIST D O N PHE
R R
Rivers E
N I Municipalities F . R . R 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles IC CIF PA
ION UN Prepared by St. Louis County Department of Planning June 2000 IV. Foundations of the Planning Study
What Citizens Value About Their Community
South Countians value their community as a family-oriented bedroom community with good services. Citizens particularly value the quality school systems and good police, fire and ambulance services. Most feel that highway access, well-maintained roads and convenient access to a variety of retail and neighborhood services and churches are strong assets of the area. Also valued is the availability of doctors and medical services. Good parks and recreation facilities and adequate green space were frequently mentioned as reasons that South County is a good place to live and raise a family.
Citizens Advisory Committee members and citizens also made favorable comments during the planning process about the unincorporated status of the area. Citizens liked lower property taxes and a uniform set of standards that results from a large portion of the area being unincorporated. The area was also perceived as not being overcrowded. Maintenance of the quality of the area’s schools and support of the school districts were also priorities for committee members.
Other Planning Efforts and Programs in the Sixth District
A number of other planning efforts and programs involving parts of the Sixth District have either been completed or are currently underway. The Sixth District Community Area Study is not an isolated or unique planning endeavor. Rather, it is part of a continuing effort to plan and make concrete improvements in the Sixth District community. The following is a summary of those plans and programs; their location in the Sixth District is shown on Map 6.
St. Louis County Strategic Plan
The St. Louis County Charter calls for the establishment of a countywide plan (referred to as both the General Plan and the Strategic Plan) to be reviewed every five years. The first stage of the County’s 1999-2004 strategic planning process was initiated in 1999 with an assessment of current conditions. Through focus groups of
Sixth District Community Area Study 23 incorporated and unincorporated residents an opinion survey was developed and administered by telephone to 600 county households to gather information about citizens’ views of County services and major issues facing St. Louis County. The input of County government officials was sought to identify the County’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
The next major phase of the strategic plan process was identifying issues, strategies, and priorities. A range of issues emerged, but four issues were continually identified as being the most critical for St. Louis County over the next five years:
• Reinvestment in older communities • Transportation • St. Louis County’s role in the region • Services to unincorporated areas
Three of four of these issues (excluding St. Louis County’s regional role) have direct connection to the South County area and aspects of the Community Area Study process. The strategic plan has been adopted by the County Council. The plan identifies priority issues and strategies, many of which will impact the Sixth Council District.
Oakville Community Area Study and Update
In accordance with a key recommendation of St. Louis County’s 1985 General Plan (same as the Strategic Plan described above) areas of unincorporated St. Louis County are designated for detailed planning analysis where land development pressures are evident or are anticipated. These studies are undertaken with the purpose of providing land use guidance and guidelines which can be applied to specific zoning petitions and other planning decisions during an area’s transition to a more fully developed state.
In 1988/1989 the Oakville Community Area Study was conducted under the auspices of the St. Louis County Planning Commission for the 11.6 square mile area south of Baumgartner Road. The County Executive appointed members of a Citizens Advisory Committee which included residents of the local community, service providers, members of the development community, and members of the Planning Commission. The Citizens Advisory Committee provided direct input to the Planning Commission throughout the development of the report for the area. Following a public hearing and recommendation by the Planning Commission, the report was adopted by the County Council as part of St. Louis County’s General Plan.
After the Oakville Community Area Study had served as a planning guide for the area for nearly a decade, Sixth District Councilman Jeff Wagener requested that the original study be updated in response citizen concerns regarding the ongoing development process in the area as well as some controversial zoning proposals. The
Sixth District Community Area Study 24 resulting report was an update of land use, zoning, and demographic information as well as a confirmation and a refinement of the original study.
Both the Original Oakville Community Area Study (1989) and the Oakville Community Area Study Update (1998) have been used as valuable tools in evaluating development proposals for that area. Because the Oakville study was recently updated, the Sixth District Community Area Study does not address specific issues in that area.
Affton-Gravois Business Corridor Study
The St. Louis County Department of Planning in partnership with the St. Louis County Economic Council and the Affton Chamber of Commerce began work on a redevelopment study of the Affton-Gravois Business Corridor in 1996. The corridor is located in both the Fifth and Sixth County Council Districts. The primary goal of the study and continuing efforts in the area are to revitalize the Gravois Road commercial strip from the City of St. Louis limits to Laclede Station Road. A major accomplishment of the study was the development of a comprehensive corridor master plan with design guidelines.
The extensive revitalization effort for this commercial area has resulted in the securing of grants for sidewalk improvements and landscaping enhancements in the corridor. Additional funding has been secured for a facade improvement program that provides matching funds for business owners who make exterior building and site improvements that meet designated design guidelines. The activities that are occurring to revitalize this commercial areas can serve as a model for more detailed future planning studies and implementation programs that are recommended for other commercial corridors in the Sixth Council District.
Project Lemay and Other Lemay Community Improvements
Project Lemay was initiated by St. Louis County Government in 1995 in an effort to address major aspects of community revitalization, including housing conditions, infrastructure improvement, economic development and human services. The purpose of Project Lemay is to improve the quality of life in the Lemay community through the promotion of partnerships between government and neighborhood groups. Some of the many accomplishments of Project Lemay and related Lemay community improvements include:
• Massive community cleanups, • Development of the 30 acre Lemay Park on a site that was part of the flood buy-out area from the Great Flood of 1993, • Establishment of a St. Louis County Police substation, • An extensive asphaltic concrete street overlay program on Lemay streets,
Sixth District Community Area Study 25 • Lemay trash and recycling program in 1997, • Creation of the Lemay Housing Partnership as a non-profit, community based development organization, • Housing code enforcement and property maintenance upgrades through the County’s Neighborhood Preservation program, • Establishment of a St. Louis County Business Incubator on Lemay Ferry Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 26 V. Key Issues and Priorities
The first phase of this Community Area Study process was the identification of the key issues facing the Sixth District community. Through the first five meetings of the Citizens Advisory Committee, concerns of committee members and other citizen participants were recorded and grouped into like categories. These concerns were validated and prioritized through citizen comments received at a public forum held at the end of Phase I of the study. The key issues and the highest ranked concerns under each issue in order of priority are:
• Housing Conservation and Neighborhood Revitalization
First priority: Housing code enforcement Second priority: Lack of curbs, gutters, storm sewers and sidewalks in some neighborhoods
• Transportation
First priority: Sidewalks Second priority: Congestion on major roadways
• Commercial Revitalization
First priority: Revitalization of neighborhood commercial corridors Second priority: Upgrading of South County Center
• Redeveloping Vacant or Underutilized Industrial/Commercial Sites
First priority: Excess of vacant commercial buildings Second priority: Environmental problems hindering redevelopment of vacant sites
• Land Use Guidance
First priority: Assuring attractive development in commercial corridors
In Phase II of the study each key issue was examined, and recommendations for addressing the issues were made. The results of the issue examination process and the resulting recommendations are presented in Sections VI through XI of this study. In addition to the key issues, additional issues were raised concerning parks and recreation, stormwater and sanitary sewers, and advertising signs. These additional issues are examined in Section XII of this study.
Sixth District Community Area Study 27 Map Areas Eligible for Neighborhood Preservation Act Tax Credits 7
T C S I H F IL I L
R C M A A L P
G E G R 0.5 0 0.5 Miles D D A R Legend E N D N O T F R
R P E N D R A E G Neighborhood Preservation Act Eligibility S R O RD HEEGE M N N N O SO SO I T WAT Level 1 - Income 70% - 90% of Area Median N A R D U A W LO 30 U R G G E H D B L Level 2 - Income below 70% of AreaV Median City of SOt. Louis A R O RO H O CK E UG E H E G GE R. E RMA R. D E N Sixth County Council District D IA E R R I R L D H C R S A H U P D IL L Municipalities L O R M S BLVD C E E A L I V B H A E A R V T S Rivers WEBER T IS R W C AVO D A RD GR E R A B Major Roads V E OND E R ELET
W Wilbur R W R D E EBE D R IM E N E V N Park H A A E S G
V I Prepared by St. Louis County E H A D R D C GR IL D R I ANT 55 M Department of Planning H R RY D IVO
E A
I
June 2000 N Z E E 21 A V
N A E B
D D E L N B V R K FO A RMAN O Y A D 30 C I L P N E A S RD S U S
. D P D M RD R R R REAVIS IN R S G D I M Bella R " R O U D H V RD " D A S Y I H
R C O Villa 267 G F A K FM W M E D T E I A U ST O Lakeshire N E R D O E R B D R Y LI V A V A R R E V R E E Y F St. George R
A REAVIS T D I D L E R R I H R R I D M
C H S R R S D
U E T N
H H O O C S E R R V F D D S A E F
T B M
R A R E
R A Y IS
R C D R
T T
KS T A R N E R S E V I R G E
T 231 R
P IA
A G IN R B V EE GREENPARK A N L D P ARLEE R Y R AR D AVE K A D W R D R D A N AV E N R IPA O E L ER O R L Green Park I R H N E T B R U U NO M
C S Y I R F C RY R R I H R E R D O FE F C R D D O N A L L TO P I G N N IN W O L IL R S UR L H
S D B P E T B A E
E R
N N
R G E A O D L O I A G V T V S E E S R N I T H C L G O E N U N T I 21 K R CORD RD
D I Y R A P M D T D H E L R E R IS P S I R D S
H G 270 67 E S 267 R G
E E T M G H R S E A I L S Y I SC 61 N G T O A E R 55 N
D T L A S M K A R R C T D G 50 D T T U AV S I R E S H B B N L S I Y E V TURG R I D IS R S N E R S O M F D V D R D PINGTON R W SAP BARRACKS N D E R
RD R E E 67 R G V
D I IN R R
E L Y A R
T G L H I D M E I
L R E IS L N S 61 H C A D OR 55 R G D T D M L E R A RD O Y T 50 R T T D D I R L S H B R N L E O Y E V F O I D S R S S R R S N D E E O
D R F D
T V D R R T O W T N D
O E R R W Y
S E
H N H R
T C G E U R
67 R F A E
E E F
K Y C E 61 FO YEAG SO N R UT T D D H R R E E RD R D 67 N A
S
E L L
V D E R A W 61 S B S N M I A K
W R Y A A H T 55 M N L O E E D D M L W R H M R R E E R D. AM BOTTOM
M E C RD BA HI UM LL R G GE AR RIN TN
ER P
RD A
T
T
E R
Y S O MA R r N e E I v N i L D R G R c R e D E m L a
R r R e O Y M R D R R E RD YEAGE F D
R
D
D R R Jefferson County
R Y
S E
H H R UC VI. Conserving Our Housing and Upgrading Our Neighborhoods
Assets and Characteristics of the Area
The residential, family-oriented character of the study area with good schools and a variety of churches and convenient access to shopping and services was foremost among the assets of the Sixth District identified by citizens. Single-family neighborhoods include a wide range of ages, styles and densities of housing.
In the northern part of the study area are older, densely developed areas of moderately-priced housing such as Lemay, developed before 1930, and Affton, where most of the housing was built in the 1950's or before. A large amount of subdivision development occurred in the 1950's and 1960's in the portion of the study area north of I-270/I-255. A lesser amount of housing construction in the 1970's absorbed much of the remaining ground. Yet continuing residential development in the 1990's–some of it attached single-family development on small lots–attests to the desirability of the area. New infill subdivisions have been built in the 1990's off Weber Road, Telegraph Road at Ripa, Gravois Road, Union Road and Tesson Ferry Road among others.
In the center of the study area, in the I-270/I-255 corridor, much subdivision development had occurred by the 1960's; it continued in the 1970's and 1980's and to a lesser extent in the 1990's. Subdivision development built before 1940 is limited to a very few locations: in the area of Bauer Road off Tesson Ferry Road, Longview Drive off Lemay Ferry south of Mehl Road, and Sunset Drive off Kennerly Road.
South of Forder Road and Butler Hill Road, most of the residential development has occurred since 1970, with residential construction continuing actively throughout the 1980's and 1990's. Recent developments in the southern and southwestern portions of the study area include large homes well above the median price for St. Louis area homes.
The study area has a slightly smaller proportion of multiple-family homes than the County as a whole--less than a quarter of its total housing units. Apartment complexes, built mostly in the 1960's and 1970's, are concentrated near major roads including Lemay Ferry and Tesson Ferry Road. Recent residential development has included attached single-family or duplex units in small lot developments on infill sites both north and south of I-270/I-255.
Sixth District residents are happy with their neighborhoods and want them maintained. On-going residential development adds to the housing choices for households of various types and income levels.
Sixth District Community Area Study 29 Issues to Be Addressed
Code enforcement: The need for active enforcement of property maintenance and zoning codes has been one of the most consistently expressed concerns throughout the Sixth District Community Area Study process. Advisory committee members and citizens attending the public forum both stressed this concern and gave it high priority among the numerous issues that were raised.
Several indicators of housing quality support the need for active code enforcement.
• As of the 1990 Census sixty percent of the housing in the study area was over twenty years old, an age at which housing typically begins to require major maintenance items such as roof or furnace replacement. • As is common in older inner-ring suburbs, increases in housing value in northern portions of the Sixth District have lagged behind the average for the County in the past decade. • The County’s recent block-by-block exterior property maintenance code enforcement program has resulted in a large number of citations for code violations with greater concentrations in the older areas. Code violations tend to be most concentrated in areas where the rates of renter occupancy of single-family homes are highest.
Concerns expressed about code enforcement in the study process included the desire for prompt compliance, the desire for enforcement on commercial as well as residential properties, and concern about the quality and consistency of the inspections themselves. Comments received from committee members included both positive and negative impressions of the professionalism and helpfulness of the code inspectors.
Obstacles to code compliance, in addition to financial constraints (addressed below), include lack of experience in finding qualified contractors, obtaining bids and contracting for and inspecting work. Homeowners obtaining rehabilitation assistance through St. Louis County are provided some guidance, and a number of them have commented on the helpfulness of suggestions made by inspectors about how to correct violations. Other property owners have not received such help.
Vacant buildings which have a blighting effect on neighborhoods have been identified in the study area. These include buildings which are considered to be beyond repair as well as some that could be saved with substantial rehabilitation or minor rehabilitation. All have property maintenance violations, and some also have overgrown vegetation. In some cases, difficulties in locating owners hampers elimination of these neighborhood eyesores.
Trash and litter accumulations and derelict cars are two types of violations that persist in some neighborhoods. Because property owners in unincorporated areas are
Sixth District Community Area Study 30 responsible for contracting individually for trash collection, some neglect that responsibility or have their service discontinued for failure to pay for it. Often the result is trash accumulation on their own properties or even illegal dumping within neighborhoods.
Infrastructure needs
Curbs, gutters and storm sewers are lacking, and some streets and rights-of-way are narrower than current regulations would require in portions of the study area where residential development occurred prior to the 1940's. In subdivisions built since the adoption of St. Louis County’s first subdivision regulations in 1943 establishing standards for residential street construction, housing developers were required to provide infrastructure built to County standards. Areas where open drainage ditches and streets lacking curbs and gutters are common include Lemay, the Kingston/Telegraph Road area, the Lakeview and Gardenville areas and older portions of Affton closest to Gravois Road.
Lack of sidewalks on both residential and major streets is a concern that has been expressed throughout the study process and given a high priority. Since 1969, the County subdivision regulations included a requirement for sidewalks on residential streets. As of the 1990 Census, sixty percent of housing in the Sixth District pre- dated that requirement. In newer subdivisions such as those in the Oakville area and the southwest portion of the study area, builders were required to construct sidewalks. Major streets such as state highways and County arterial roadways have sidewalks in some locations, but in many locations they do not. Lack of sidewalks is of greatest concern on arterial and neighborhood collector streets that are used by children walking to school and in neighborhood commercial areas where good pedestrian access is desired.
Zoning violations
Violations such as operation of auto repair services on residential properties and illegal outdoor storage were rated third among the neighborhood revitalization concerns. Although limited in number, these violations constitute eyesores that detract from neighborhood appearance and discourage neighborhood reinvestment. Perhaps even more than property maintenance violations, zoning violations sometimes take months to resolve, especially if court action is required to achieve compliance.
Housing rehabilitation assistance for lower-income residents
One of the obstacles to achieving housing code compliance is the fact that many homeowners have limited incomes. They defer home maintenance because of lack of financial means to have the work done. While advocating stricter code enforcement, study participants recognize the need to provide assistance to low- and
Sixth District Community Area Study 31 moderate-income households who may be financially unable to comply with code requirements.
Commercial encroachment on residential areas
Concern about the encroachment of commercial uses on residential areas was expressed by advisory committee members and by attendees at the public forum. This issue inevitably arises where development pressures bring commercial uses to major roads that were at one time primarily residential. A balance needs to be found: while needed commercial services are appropriate on major roads and at key intersections, the uncontrolled spread of commercial uses must be prevented.
Portions of Lemay Ferry Road and Telegraph Road were identified as areas where houses are being converted to businesses or are being torn down for commercial uses. The twelve subareas analyzed in Section XI, Providing Land Use Guidance for Subareas with Development Potential, encompass the locations identified as concerns. The subarea analysis provides land use guidance aimed at establishing limits on commercial development and appropriate transitions between commercial and residential uses.
Preservation of historic buildings
St. Louis County historic preservation staff has identified a large inventory of older homes and other buildings in the study area which have historic significance. Such buildings are at risk of demolition when the tracts on which they are located are purchased for residential subdivisions or commercial development. In the absence of a local historic preservation ordinance, there is no legal mechanism to assure the preservation of such buildings. Every year some of these historic assets are lost to new development.
Goals, Objectives and Strategies
Central to citizens’ vision for the Sixth District is the preservation of the residential neighborhoods that they value highly. Preservation of neighborhood assets, conservation of and reinvestment in older housing, and incremental improvement of infrastructure systems will maintain and enhance neighborhoods.
Goal A: Improve and maintain the condition of the housing stock.
Objective 1: Assure that all neighborhoods are protected from the blighting effects of poorly maintained properties by strengthening code enforcement throughout the Sixth District.
Sixth District Community Area Study 32 Strategies
a. Maintain on-going and recently expanded code enforcement programs. St. Louis County has undertaken several housing conservation programs that have increased the level of attention to code enforcement and housing rehabilitation in the past few years.
Neighborhood Preservation: The Property Maintenance Code adopted by the St. Louis County Council in 1992 gave the Public Works Department a much improved tool for regulating property maintenance conditions. In addition to enlarging the code inspection staff, the County streamlined code enforcement procedures, minimized the time periods allowed for correction of deficiencies, and accelerated the court proceedings for housing violations in municipal court. Beginning in June of 1998, the Public Works Department has conducted a block-by-block code enforcement effort in unincorporated County, and cited thousands of Property Maintenance Code and Zoning Ordinance violations. The Department subsequently adopted a “worst house on the block” approach, increased the number of visits to areas with frequent and recurring violations and created a top 100 list of problem properties that they are attempting to correct or eliminate.
Nuisance program: A St. Louis County ordinance passed in March, 2000, allows the County Public Works Department to abate nuisances in unincorporated County and bill the property owner for the cost of the abatement with a lien on the property if, upon notice, the property owner does not abate the nuisance within seven days. Nuisances subject to this procedure include overgrown weeds, rubbish and trash, any flammable material, junked appliances and vehicles, and other health hazards. Required notice is by certified mail or publication. The notification procedure has been recently amended to allow officials to proceed more quickly by merely posting a notice on the property to begin enforcement.
Property Conservation Districts: The County’s Property Conservation District program was authorized by ordinance in 1992 and provides a mechanism for the designation of neighborhoods for extra code enforcement through the requirement of an occupancy permit whenever a change of occupancy occurs. In order for an occupancy permit to be issued, the housing unit must pass an interior and exterior code inspection. A Property Conservation District may be designated by the County Council in response to a petition from owners of ten percent of the properties in the proposed district. A required public hearing provides an opportunity for residents to express their opinions on the proposed designation. This mechanism is currently available to Sixth District neighborhoods and can be implemented for a specific neighborhood.
Sixth District Community Area Study 33 HOME Program: St. Louis County uses funding from the federal Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME) to assist projects for substantial rehabilitation of housing for lower-income households. During 1999 assistance was provided for the substantial rehabilitation of 177 multi-family units on Kingston just west of Jefferson Barracks Park. The County is also providing HOME funds to the Lemay Housing Partnership for the rehabilitation of single- family homes for resale to income-eligible households. The program began in 1999.
b. Institute a residential re-occupancy permit program for all of unincorporated St. Louis County. Expand the re-occupancy permit requirement from designated Property Conservation Districts to all of unincorporated St. Louis County. The desire for active code enforcement in all neighborhoods was expressed by committee members and many citizens who participated in the Sixth District planning process and was among the highest priority items considered at the Sixth District public forum. The occupancy permit requirement for all of unincorporated St. Louis County received substantial support in the Sixth District Community Area Study Citizens Advisory Committee. It is also a recommended strategy for encouraging reinvestment in older communities in the St. Louis County Strategic Plan, 2000-2004. (St. Louis County Department of Planning, July, 2000).
The imposition of an occupancy permit requirement in all of unincorporated County would require enactment of an ordinance by the County Council. This mechanism would assure interior as well as exterior code enforcement when properties have a change of occupancy and thus positively affect property values. It would address the problem of inferior maintenance of rental properties, which sometimes have frequent changes of occupancy without correction of code violations. Although the occupancy permit requirement would not prohibit “as-is” sales, it would prohibit re-occupancy without code compliance. The County’s Property Maintenance Code does not mandate replacement over repair. The code is geared toward proper maintenance and attention to life safety issues.
The re-occupancy permit requirement for all of unincorporated St. Louis County received substantial support in the Sixth District Community Area Study Citizens Advisory Committee, provided that:
1.) County inspectors are adequately trained and required to successfully complete re-certification every three years to assure uniformity and consistency of property maintenance code enforcement. 2.) The re-occupancy permit program includes an appeals process, and any notice of violation shall include a clearly readable statement notifying the owner of the right to an appeal. The
Sixth District Community Area Study 34 program should allow a reasonable time for correction of violations. 3.) Property owners who have been cited for significant violation should be advised of the various financial assistance programs available to them.
c. Explore options used in other jurisdictions to modify building codes to facilitate the rehabilitation of older structures. Rehabilitation building subcodes designed to better accommodate older buildings have been adopted in other jurisdictions, notably the State of New Jersey. Varying levels of conformance with new construction standards are triggered by different levels of reinvestment in or different degrees of alteration of older buildings. Typically a rehabilitation subcode allows exceptions to certain requirements that would make a rehabilitation project cost prohibitive. Such exceptions are designed to facilitate the rehabilitation of older buildings without compromising minimum safety standards. For example, a building that is to be retrofitted with a sprinkler system might not be required to conform to minimum window area requirements. Creation of a rehabilitation building subcode would require consideration by the St. Louis County Building Commission and adoption by the County Council.
Objective 2: Make a visible impact on neighborhood conditions by concentrating resources in areas of greatest need.
Strategies
a. Target specific neighborhoods for coordinated code enforcement, housing rehabilitation and street and sidewalk improvement projects to maximize the impact of expenditures. Coordinate activities of County departments that can provide resources and expertise for concentrated neighborhood revitalization. Focus a variety of efforts in specific neighborhoods for periods of several (perhaps three or four) years. Several elements could be combined to increase the effectiveness of this strategy:
• Targeted code enforcement could address exterior code violations on properties that may not be subject to occupancy permit inspections for many years, even if such a requirement were in effect, because of long- term continuous occupancy. • Housing rehabilitation assistance could be provided on a priority basis to income eligible households in the targeted neighborhoods. • Street and sidewalk improvement projects funded with Community Development Block Grant or Department of Highways funding, if coordinated with housing programs, could provide maximum neighborhood impact.
Sixth District Community Area Study 35 b. Coordinate neighborhood revitalization projects with programs of other governmental and private entities. Criteria for selection of initial targeted areas should include eligibility for resources from other programs, in particular, eligibility of the neighborhood for Neighborhood Preservation Act tax credits and selection by St. Louis 2004 as “Sustainable Neighborhoods.” Focusing on neighborhoods where these other programs are being implemented will maximize the visible improvement of the neighborhood.
• Target neighborhoods for code enforcement and housing rehabilitation assistance where Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds are programmed for infrastructure improvements. Giving priority to CDBG eligible areas assures that activities are concentrated in low- and moderate-income areas, i.e., areas of greatest need. • Organize inter-departmental project teams within County government to coordinate neighborhood revitalization planning and implementation, which could include special code enforcement efforts, infrastructure improvements, neighborhood clean-up programs, economic development, health and community policing efforts. • Involve residents in setting priorities for neighborhoods and organizing revitalization programs. • Work with neighborhood groups to develop mechanisms for group contracting for home repair services. • Pursue grant funding for neighborhood revitalization activities.
c. Focus code enforcement on problem properties. Concentrate code enforcement on buildings that have the greatest number of visible code violations. Devote efforts to the “problem houses” in each neighborhood rather than homes that have lesser violations (e.g., peeling paint) that the property owner is likely to address voluntarily.
d. Create Neighborhood Preservation Officer positions in County Government. Implement the recommendation of a previous study to create three new positions in County government of Neighborhood Preservation Officers (one of whom would be assigned to South County) to facilitate property maintenance code compliance by monitoring housing cases in the County municipal court and making referrals to housing rehabilitation assistance programs.
e. Seek a mechanism to address vacant derelict properties. Develop procedures for elimination of the persistent blighting effect of vacant derelict buildings through demolition or rehabilitation. Two possible implementation options are:
Housing Receivership Act implementation: Initiate implementation of the Housing Receivership Act, which allows for the transfer of properties to a not-
Sixth District Community Area Study 36 for-profit receiver. The receiver could rehabilitate the structure, place liens on the property and rent out the building. If the property is not reclaimed within two years, clear title could be obtained through court proceedings and the property could be sold.
Land Reutilization Authority: The creation of a land reutilization authority in St. Louis County could facilitate the acquisition and disposal of tax-delinquent properties not sold at sheriff’s sales.
Goal B: Address infrastructure deficiencies on residential streets.
Objective 1: Provide sidewalks in areas of heaviest pedestrian traffic with highest priority given to pedestrian routes to schools.
Strategies
a. Inventory existing sidewalks, their condition and priority locations for additional sidewalks as part of neighborhood and commercial district planning, and work with the County Highway Department to seek federal or other funding to address deficiencies.
b. Develop a sidewalk plan for all of unincorporated St. Louis County incorporating priorities already established by the Department of Highways as well as public input so that planned improvements can be coordinated with other neighborhood revitalization activities. Such a plan should address needs for sidewalk construction on arterial streets and local streets and establish criteria for prioritizing sidewalk projects on both types of streets. Possible funding sources should be identified. Requirements for matching funds under certain grant programs make planning and coordination particularly valuable.
The plan should include explanation of existing programs, including the following:
The St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic has an on-going program to address sidewalk needs on St. Louis County’s arterial road system. Arterial roads are major roads such as Weber, Union, Reavis Barracks, Forder, Butler Hill and Baumgartner Roads, among others, in the study area. Priority for sidewalk construction is given to locations close to schools or other facilities that attract pedestrian traffic, where gaps exist on streets that has some sidewalks, and where safety problems exist. Availability of sufficient right-of- way and appropriate grades to assure safety on the sidewalk are additional
Sixth District Community Area Study 37 considerations in prioritizing sidewalks. Prioritization criteria, scheduled improvements and future goals for sidewalk improvements should be included in the plan.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds are a possible source of funding for sidewalk and other street infrastructure improvements. Neighborhood infrastructure projects that benefit low- and moderate-income persons are eligible activities under the federal CDBG program administered by St. Louis County. Lemay Charting for Change is currently working with the Office of Community Development on a street/sidewalk project (curbs, gutters, storm sewers, sidewalks)on Horn Avenue (Broadway to Lemay Ferry), a route leading to Hancock Place High School.
The federal Transportation Enhancement Program is a competitive grant program that can be used for certain improvements including sidewalks on state highways (Tesson Ferry Road, Lemay Ferry Road, and Broadway/Kingston/ Telegraph). The County Highway Department is working on an application for sidewalks on two roadways--Broadway (River Des Peres to Hoffmeister) and Kingston--totaling $134,000 including $40,200 in CDBG match.
c. Encourage citizens and citizen groups to communicate sidewalk needs and priorities to the St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic.
Objective 2: Coordinate road maintenance activities such as asphalt overlay on residential streets with targeted reinvestment in neighborhoods.
The Project Lemay street overlay program, now almost complete, involves the asphalt overlay of 14.54 miles of streets in Lemay between 1995 and 2000 at an estimated total cost of $537,500. Asphalt overlay, considered a street maintenance activity (versus reconstruction), is designed to last 10 years and indefinitely with a 5-7 year cycle of surface seal. A large portion of the streets in the Lemay area were improved under this program. Coordination of future such programs with other neighborhood reinvestment will maximize the combined impact of the improvements.
Promote citizen involvement in and understanding of decisions regarding asphalt overlay and maintenance projects versus the much more costly and necessarily more limited street reconstruction projects. In certain neighborhoods local streets were constructed prior to the establishment of County subdivision standards and accepted for County maintenance in spite of their being substandard. Reconstruction of such streets would amount to special projects for which grants or other funding would need to be found.
Sixth District Community Area Study 38 Objective 3: Coordinate planning of major capital improvements on residential streets to compliment other neighborhood reinvestment activities, recognizing that funding constraints dictate careful prioritization.
Installation of curbs, gutters and storm sewers on residential streets where they are lacking amounts to a major capital improvement that requires re-engineering, regrading and major reconstruction of the street with such typical added expenses as acquisition of additional right-of-way, disturbance of existing utilities and rebuilding of driveway entrances.
Strategies
a. Support neighborhood infrastructure projects that are underway and build upon experiences with these projects. The proposed reconstruction of Horn Avenue discussed above is one such activity which is proposed to combine Community Development Block Grant and Highway Department funds.
b. Explore the alternative funding mechanisms to address additional neighborhood infrastructure needs. A capital improvements bond issue, because it would require countywide vote, would need to be designed to appeal to residents throughout the County. The community improvement district (CID) was authorized by 1998 state legislation, which created this special benefit district to allow a group of property owners to assess themselves for community improvements and services. A CID is created by the governing body (County Council) in response to a petition of 50 percent of the property owners. An appointed or elected board administers the district. For a tax levy to be enacted, there must be a vote within the district.
Objective 4: Involve a broadly representative citizen group in planning for neighborhood infrastructure improvements and in selecting and prioritizing projects for inclusion in a capital improvements bond issue.
Goal C: Maintain active enforcement of zoning ordinance violations.
Objective 1: Encourage citizen input and continue to respond to citizens and citizen groups that identify persistent zoning violation problems.
Strategy
Continue pro-active code enforcement begun by the St. Louis County Department of Public Works in 1998. As with Property Maintenance
Sixth District Community Area Study 39 violations, continue to process zoning violations promptly and refer them for court action under streamlined procedures if necessary.
Objective 2: Proceed with Perrin Junkyard cleanup. Community Development Block Grant funds have been committed, and the St. Louis County Economic Council is coordinating environmental studies and property acquisition efforts to eliminate the Perrin junkyard, which has long been an eyesore in the Lemay area. After acquisition and clean-up, it will be developed as a neighborhood park.
Objective 3: Explore stricter enforcement mechanisms to address the goal of eliminating derelict vehicles from neighborhoods.
Goal D: Provide incentives to neighborhood reinvestment.
Objective: Promote Missouri’s Neighborhood Preservation Tax Credits: Neighborhoods eligible for this new program are older neighborhoods where housing code enforcement violations have been concentrated and Community Development Block Grant expenditures have been targeted. Beginning in January, 2000, this program authorizes state tax credits to encourage rehabilitation or new construction of owner-occupied housing in moderate-income neighborhoods. The credits will be available on a first come, first served basis.
In Level 1 Neighborhoods--census block groups with median incomes between 70% and 90% of median household income for the metropolitan area--$8 million in tax credits per year are authorized. For rehabilitation, 25% tax credits are available on a minimum expenditure of $10,000. For new construction: 15% tax credits are available for replacement of a home which is 40 or more years old. The maximum credit is $25,000 per house in a 10-year period.
In Level 2 Neighborhoods (distressed communities)–census block groups with median incomes below 70% of metropolitan area median income--$8 million in tax credits per year are authorized. For rehabilitation, 25% tax credits are available on a minimum expenditure of $5,000. For substantial rehabilitation, 35% tax credits are available on a minimum expenditure of 50% of base value of the property on homes that are 50 or more years old with a maximum $70,000 per unit or $3 million per project over 10 years. For new construction 15% tax credits are available on replacement of homes that are 40 or more years old or on land that has been vacant for two or more years or where a housing unit has been condemned by local government. The maximum credit is $40,000 per house in a 10-year period.
Sixth District Community Area Study 40 Goal E: Provide resources to assist income-eligible homeowners who need assistance to comply with the property maintenance code.
Objective: Provide direct rehabilitation assistance to income-eligible households.
Strategies
a. Continue and promote St. Louis County’s Home Improvement program and related activities under the Community Development Block Grant Program, which provide several types of assistance with housing rehabilitation and correction of code violation to income-eligible households (households with incomes below 80 percent of the area median household income).
Information regarding housing rehabilitation assistance available to income- eligible homeowners through St. Louis County’s Community Development programs is provided by County inspection staff when they cite properties for code violations. Assistance is available for correction of exterior violations cited by code inspectors as well as for exterior and interior rehabilitation to code standards under the Home Improvement Program, which the County has operated for two decades. Money is also available for emergency repairs, lead abatement and accessibility modifications to accommodate persons with disabilities.
The County’s assistance programs are available to income-eligible households throughout unincorporated County. However, as part of coordinated efforts to assist the Lemay neighborhood following the flood of 1993, approximately $250,000 of the Community Development Block Grant allocation was targeted specifically for correction of property maintenance violations in Lemay.
b. Continue and expand housing rehabilitation activities under the federal HOME Program. St. Louis County’s use of federal funding from the Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME) (described above under Goal 1) represents a significant investment in substantial rehabilitation of housing for income-eligible households in the Sixth District. The Lemay Housing Partnership is a participant in that program.
c. Target housing rehabilitation funds to areas where other programs are underway. Maximize the impact of rehabilitation assistance by targeting programs to selected neighborhoods where code enforcement, infrastructure improvements and resources from the Sustainable Neighborhoods and Neighborhood Preservation Act tax credits will be concentrated.
Sixth District Community Area Study 41 d. Appoint Neighborhood Preservation Officers. Implement the recommendation of an earlier study to fill these positions in order to facilitate referrals to home improvement assistance programs. These officers could also assist with contractor selection. Coordination of contracting for certain repairs among several homeowners could be used to save on repair costs.
Goal F: Encourage the preservation of houses and other buildings with historic and architectural significance.
Objective 1: Support the adoption of a historic preservation ordinance for unincorporated St. Louis County so that there will be a mechanism to protect historic structures. Without such an ordinance, there is no mechanism to prevent the demolition of structures that are identified as having historical significance.
Objective 2: Encourage the use of the Landmark Preservation Area zoning procedure to protect structures of historic value in the area. This special zoning procedure contained in the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance provides a mechanism for allowing additional uses beyond those permitted by the governing zoning district in order to facilitate a viable reuse of a structure with historic or architectural value.
Objective 3: Encourage the implementation of the Policy Statement of the St. Louis County Historic Building Commission.
The Commission has adopted the following policies related to historic structures:
1. Encourage active, economic use (not for museums except for the most significant buildings whose historic character may be damaged by continued active use).
2. Encourage use for original purpose where possible.
3. Encourage adaptive reuse where continuation of original use not possible.
4. Encourage sensitive integration of historic buildings into new development.
5. Encourage adoption of Local Historic Preservation Ordinances.
Sixth District Community Area Study 42 VII. Improving Transportation and Managing Congestion
The safe and efficient movement of traffic is a key factor in measuring the quality of life in a modern, urban community. Thus, improving transportation infrastructure in the Sixth District and managing traffic congestion on area roadways was one of the principal issues identified through this Community Area Study process. Top specific concerns include the need for sidewalks, traffic congestion problems that relate to needed intersection and signalization improvements, the need for new roadways to relieve traffic congestion, and public transportation related issues.
Assets and Characteristics of the Area
The most significant transportation related asset of South County is the two interstate highways which bisect the area. Interstate 55 traverses the area in a generally north/south direction providing connections to the City of St. Louis to the north and Jefferson County to the south. Interstate 270/255 crosses the area in a generally east/west direction allowing motorists to travel to other parts of St. Louis County to the west and north and Illinois to the east. Both interstates are in generally good physical shape, having undergone substantial upgrades and renovations including a significantly improved Interstate 55 and 270/255 interchange in recent years. Their condition allows safe and efficient access to adjoining jurisdictions as well other intermediate points within the Sixth Council District.
A major transportation related weakness is the lack of an identifiable cross county route. There is no direct uninhibited roadway that permits access from South County to points in central St. Louis County such as employment centers in Clayton, Brentwood, and Maplewood. The lack of connection to Interstate 170 also deters more efficient access from South County to Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and employers both around the airport and in other areas north of Clayton. The absence of a more direct transportation connection to areas north of South County is a deterrent to the development of desirable employment centers such as office complexes in the study area. Such uses would produce important property tax revenues for school and fire districts in the Sixth Council District.
A closely related problem is traffic congestion. Without a direct roadway connection to mid-county destinations to the north there are obvious points of traffic congestion on the limited routes that provide access to central St. Louis County. In addition, there are corridors within the Sixth District area such as Lindbergh Boulevard and Telegraph Road where significant traffic congestion occurs. This study also identifies other key intersections where physical and/or signalization improvements are necessary to improve the flow of traffic in the South County area.
Sixth District Community Area Study 43 Map State Highways and County Arterial Roads 8
4 City of St. Louis I-4
P d. Blv end ig B B d. on R P Wats
44 366 50 We 61 ber Rd. P
.
d 55 67 B
R
a 21 y e le d3.0 i s z s is R R vo n d Gra e . 270 k 267
c
. a d R M y rr e . F
d n
R o
s y s . n
R a e d e o T 231 w t a R v d g L i in n s a n d o i b i B
e o
p n
r r g a
p h U r . r B a d a
S R c ry k n er s to F s I ay R g K -2 m d in e 7 e . K n 0 L R n E e V r I l R y 270 I R 50 267 P P d I 61 . . 55 S
d S M 67 I R S a P t S tis h I p M R a d r . 61 g le 67 e T F or de r R 255I-2 d. 5 Bu 231 5 tle r Hill Rd. P
. d R
y r 5 r e 5 F - n I o s 61 s e T 67 B c au 21 55 erame mg M Rd. ar Bottom tne r R d.
IVER C R AME MER
231 . d R h p ra g Jefferson le e T County
State Maintained Roads N St. Louis County Arterial Roads Future MetroLink Route P Proposed Park and Ride Lot 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles Municipalities Prepared by St. Louis County Sixth District Department of Planning Rivers June 2000 Hierarchy of Roads
Responsibility for the maintenance and improvement of the various roads in the Sixth District fall under the jurisdiction of different entities. Certain roads are given priority over others based upon traffic volumes and the function they serve. Road improvements are determined by the funds available to the responsible jurisdictions. Roads within the Sixth District are the responsibility of the agencies as described below (see Map 8).
State Routes: The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) exercises control over many of the major roads in the Sixth Council District. These are:
• Interstate 55 • Interstate 270/255 • Broadway-Kingston Drive-Telegraph Road (Route 231) • Gravois Road (Route 30) • Lemay Ferry Road (Routes 61, 67, 267) • Lindbergh Boulevard (Routes 50, 61, 67) • Tesson Ferry Road (Route 21)
With the exception of Interstate 270/255 and Lindbergh Boulevard, which are east/west routes, all of the other State roadways are north/south routes that connect St. Louis County to the City of St. Louis to the north and Jefferson County to the south. Maintenance and improvements to the interstate highways are the top priority of MoDOT. Thus, the needs of non-interstate State routes have difficulty competing for already limited funds.
County Routes: St. Louis County through its Department of Highways and Traffic is responsible for Arterial Road System (ARS) routes and County Road System (CRS) streets. The ARS routes are major roads in unincorporated and municipal areas which carry significant volumes of traffic and provide a link between State routes and local streets. There are approximately twenty-four centerline miles of ARS roads in the Sixth Council District. These roads include:
• Baumgartner/New Baumgartner Road • Bayless Road • Butler Hill Road • Forder Road • Kennerly Road • Mattis Road • Mackenzie Road • Meramec Bottom Road • Reavis Barracks Road • Sappington Road • Union Road • Weber Road
Sixth District Community Area Study 47 As shown on Map 8, not all portions of the above noted routes are on the Arterial Road System.
Most other roads in unincorporated parts of the Sixth Council District are on the County Road System (CRS). Collector roads and public local subdivision streets comprise most of the 413 centerline miles on the CRS.
Municipal Roads and other streets: Roads that are located within incorporated areas that are not on the County Arterial Road System are under the jurisdiction of and maintained by the municipality in which they are located. There are also a limited number of private streets both in unincorporated and incorporated areas that are maintained solely by the property owners along those routes. A small number of paper streets are routes designated on some maps where the right-of-way is platted, but the street has never been built.
Programmed Road Improvements
The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) and the St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic each have a number of road improvements planned or underway in the Sixth Council District. Major programmed road improvements including a brief description, the responsible agency, and the anticipated year of completion are listed in Table 1. The location of these improvements are shown on Map 9.
TABLE 1 - Major Programmed Road Improvements*
Roadway Improvement Responsible Agency Year of Completion Forder Road Widen to 3 lanes from County Dept. of 2003 Ringer to Telegraph Rd. Highways and Traffic Kennerly Road Widen to 5 lanes from County Dept. of Completed Sappington Rd. to Tesson Highways and Traffic Ferry Road Lemay Ferry Construct new bridge over MoDOT 2004 Rd. bridge over Meramec River Meramec River Meramec Widen to 3 lanes from County Dept. of 2000 Bottom Road Lemay Ferry Rd. to I-55 Highways and Traffic Sappington Widen to 3 lanes from Lind- County Dept. of 2007 Road bergh Blvd. to Kennerly Rd. Highways and Traffic
*Road improvements in the Oakville area generally south of Baumgartner Road are not included in this document. They are described in detail in the 1998 Oakville Community Areas Study Update.
Sixth District Community Area Study 48 Concerns Which Impact Area Transportation
The following transportation concerns were identified during the Community Area Study process.
Sidewalks
The need for additional sidewalks to improve pedestrian access in the Sixth Council District was identified as a major objective based on Advisory Committee and citizen concerns. The installation and maintenance of sidewalks are subject to different policies and programs depending whether the roads are under the jurisdiction of the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) or the St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic.
MoDOT Policy:
• The previous MoDOT policy was to allow sidewalks to be built within State rights-of-way in urban areas after a permit was obtained from that agency. Another party, such as a developer, property owner, or St. Louis County, would be made responsible for sidewalk construction and maintenance.
• Encouraged with the federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), MoDOT’s policy regarding sidewalks and bicycle facilities is in a state of transition and has evolved since October, 1999. The agency now reports that it will build and maintain sidewalks and bicycle facilities within State rights- of-way but will try to partner with another entity for construction and maintenance responsibility.
• MoDOT’s policy states that consideration should be given to the construction of sidewalks and bicycle facilities along State roads in any of the following situations: 1. If the local jurisdiction has adopted a pedestrian/bicycle policy or facilities plan or otherwise requested such facilities. 2. When pedestrian/bicycle traffic generators are near MoDOT transportation projects. (These generators include neighborhoods, employment centers, shopping centers, schools, parks, etc.) 3. When there is evidence of pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic and the local community supports the incorporation of facilities. 4. Where the route provides access across a natural or man-made barrier, i.e., bridges over rivers, roadways or railroads or under access-controlled facilities or roadways. 5. If there is public support through local planning organizations for these facilities.
Sixth District Community Area Study 49 County Policy and Programs:
• The installation of sidewalks is included as part of any new capital improvement project along arterial roads from 1996 forward. • The County builds new sidewalks and installs infill segments on existing arterial roadways in areas of heavy pedestrian traffic such as along roads adjacent to and near schools. • Since 1969, the County Subdivision Ordinance has required the construction of sidewalks on newly platted lots. Most older residential subdivisions constructed before that time do not have sidewalks. Generally, the County does not build sidewalks along local residential streets; it is the responsibility of individual homeowners or subdivision homeowners associations to provide these improvements.
Certain roads where sidewalks would be desirable were identified during this study process. These locations are: • Broadway (add segments missing and upgrade parts in poor condition), • Butler Hill Road (especially on the north side of the road), • Lemay Ferry Road (Mt. Olive Road to St. Louis City Limits), • Lemay Ferry Road (Will Avenue to Lindbergh Boulevard), • Lindbergh Boulevard, • Will Avenue.
Curbs and Gutters on Local Streets
A concern closely related to sidewalks, the need for curbs and gutters on local streets, is discussed in Section VI, Conserving Our Housing and Revitalizing Our Neighborhoods.
Traffic Congestion Concerns, Intersection and Signalization Improvement Needs, and Road Condition Concerns
Various concerns regarding traffic congestion, road reconstruction and repair, and intersection and signalization improvement needs were identified during this study process. The various road concerns, grouped by transportation corridor where possible, are presented in Table 2. Information concerning possible solutions is presented when available. The concerns listed are numbered and keyed to Map 9.
Sixth District Community Area Study 50 TABLE 2 - Road Improvement Issues
Roadway/Concern Responsible Possible Solutions/Comments Agency 1. Lindbergh Boulevard MoDOT A.- E. See discussion in A. Traffic congestion from Section VIII, Revitalizing Our Tesson Ferry Rd. to I-255 Regional Commercial B. Traffic congestion at Lemay Corridor. Ferry Road intersection C. Traffic congestion at Union F. A major road repair and Road intersection resurfacing project is planned for D. Dangerous turns to/from Lindbergh from Tesson Ferry to Crescent Drive Lemay Ferry and south on Lemay E. Access from southbound I- Ferry to Mattis Road 55 to I-270/255 is confusing (to be completed in 2002). F. Road reconstruction/major repair needed from Baptist G. Intersection improvement Church to St. Johns Church planned with dual left turn lanes Rd. from Lindbergh Blvd. to Tesson G. Traffic congestion at Ferry Rd. (to be completed in Tesson Ferry intersection 2001). H. Hazardous intersection alignment at Concord Village Avenue 2. Telegraph Road MoDOT A. Closed loop signal system to be A. Traffic congestion from activated by MoDOT in 2001 to Christopher Dr. to I-255; synchronize lights between school drop-offs at St. Sappington Barracks and Becker Francis of Assisi contribute Roads. MoDOT has met with to AM peak hour school to discuss solutions. congestion B. MoDOT reports that traffic counts B. Traffic signals requested at do not warrant signals; proximity to Tanzberger Drive and signals at Baumgartner Road and at England Town Roads Gebhardt Drive/Telegraph Plaza Shopping Center would impede traffic flow on Telegraph Road. Note that while Tanzberger Drive serves only 20 homes and is located between the two noted signalized intersections, there are over 530 homes served by England Town Rd. on both sides of Telegraph Rd.
Sixth District Community Area Study 51 3. Tesson Ferry Road, I-270 to MoDOT MoDOT reports that a dual left turn Mattis Rd.- traffic congestion lane from Tesson Ferry Rd. to Mattis Road could ease congestion. Improvement cannot be made until widening occurs on Mattis Road (a County maintained road). 4. Gravois Road MoDOT B. MoDOT reports that Gravois and A. Right turn lane needed for Mackenzie intersection requires east-bound Gravois to upgrade; synchronizing lights at south-bound Tesson Ferry Gravois and Weber Rd. under Rd. present conditions would only B. Mackenzie Road signals at increase congestion at Gravois and Gravois and Weber Road Mackenzie Rd. need timing adjustment 5. Reavis Barracks Road A. County Intersections are under control of two A. Signal at Union Road needs Dept. of agencies; close proximity of inter- timing adjustment Highways sections is biggest problem. Any future B. Traffic congestion at & Traffic improvement should coordinate with intersection with Interstate B. MoDOT park-and-ride lot improvements and 55; electric signal timing Southside MetroLink route right-of- results in backups on west- way needs north of this interchange. bound Reavis Barracks 6. Telegraph Road and Lemay MoDOT Limited Lemay Post Office parking and Ferry Road - significant traffic stacking capacity as well as alignment congestion at intersection of curb cuts creates problem. Solution would require right-of-way acquisition in closely developed area. 7. Butler Spur Road and Tesson County Dept. MoDOT has agreed to make Ferry Road - left turn from of Highways improvement at this intersection Butler Spur is difficult and & Traffic because it affects traffic movement on longer right turn lane on Butler Tesson Ferry Road (to be completed in Spur is needed 2001). 8. South Broadway at Hancock MoDOT MoDOT reports that a equal split cost Elementary School - electric program between school district and signal requested MoDOT is available; stone walls along frontage of property cause sight distance problem. 9. Lemay Ferry Road and Mehl MoDOT MoDOT has completed signalization Road - poor traffic signal improvements, lane additions, and timing contributes to frequent access adjustments to address this accidents problem.
Sixth District Community Area Study 52 Map Road Improvement Issues 9
E. N S G G O L M ENDA T E N LE E G A I R IN M V
P L O RD R H L A Y P U C N B
O A A K O
L H I S
T
C
.
P
. A
S
D D
S T
R S R H IL D C R L I F I
M C R A L A P
G E ROSE HILL R G AVE D R A D N E IG T D A S CR D R
A R O
R P P E F
B D P R N E H A N I E N RD D C S G G U D R T O O EN B O RD HEE M C BIG GE N ON N TS ATSO N O
W I A D RD N N W LO U A 30 U R G G HB E D D O V R
O L O A O U O H G ROCK E H E W UN ION G K E GERM R R. R. AN E I IA PACIFIC D D K
E R 44 R E D L R I
C H
A H R S IL L R D L U P
E R S B O M LVD
Y E C A E I
E B L 366 H V E
G A R A T V S WEBER T
RD R W 67 S IS D C VO E A A RA R P O RD G B P L E N D A O D I V R ON ATS N E D W R G WILBUR A ELET V T E R O
R W D N D WE R E BER D 61 E N M V RD I A WATSON E N AST PAE RK H A E
V S G E I E
A H V R D R D G D C A
D RANT IL R 55 I TT H M RO 50 R RY D IVO
A
E N I VE 21 A A E Z BELLA B
D L D E E N B R D V D D E FO A R RM N Y D I K AN L L E A IO E 30 C IN P N S
A S D RD SP U
M B D R R E AND PARK D IN N R VILLA R REAVIS O G S G R
T H D M A R " U D R W H D 270 R S RD "
O I C H B O 267 Y K N F Y D FM A T R LAKESHIRE W E S M IS D E T T A D E E ST. R O W U R R N B D O A L E V R IV V E Y E A R D R R E RD F GEORGE Y DENNY T T RD S R
T E W REAVIS A O T D D I R L N R R I SO E R ' D W T R M A H I W H D C R S R
R S E D U T
H N H O
C O D R R S E F R V D D S A F E B M T AR E
IS
R R
AC T
R K Y E
I - S D R 27 R
0 T A ILL R WEBER H T N V E E R S G I R N RD 231 B T O S LV I D P S O A A I G T V N R A B I E A R E GREENPARK G V N W A PA L D R R ARLEE R K D AVE
Y
A
D W
R D D A T R R PA AVE S N RI O E E O L N I R W L R HE N B E GREEN RT U O 30 U N CONCORD M K Y E S C R R N Y R C H R I R E R D N O F FE F I E D RD O C R L PARK A L P L N Sappington Rd. I Y N
D O N W N TO R T ING IL O RL L G S U widening S D B N H
I E B T P P E A P R R A E G A N to 3 lanes A V G D S N
H O S E L R
T O T I E S C L N G O U N E N T I OIS 21 CORD K
GRAV RD
D R Y A
T M D SUNSET H D E L R E R IS S R KennerlyR Rd. D S D H 270 E HILLS 67 R G
widening 267 G E
TH E M R
E G A T IS S L N H CO 61 G
R A T D 55 Y
to 5 lanes T E N O M L A A K R L T RD D C T 50 G D A SCHUESSLER IS T U V D H R E L B B
E LV ST H O I URG N Y S D IS
W R O D S R S
R R Y N S E O E F D V T D R
EN D
1 LL
T R 4 A O TON
1 W APPING R S BARRACKS D T N D O E R W N E R R D E 67 E R V
G D I N R I R C R E F S N 61 O OU T R TH R D D RD E R E RD R R E U RD A B ER E RING D V R A
S B M A K D 255 O R C R ER H TL D U B
D L R D R H
E 231 M RD J EFF HI R ERS LL D ON R BA GE Forder Rd. RRA RIN CKS KELLER RD BR KO IDG D CH ES P R D widening A RD R T T R T E E B
R to 3 lanes O
S R O
N H L Y R A P P L D M I I A B R LE N O
H R T U D G T T R R L E G
E R L
R
R D R E E
L R L
D O E R Y R D T R R RD YEAGER L N E L F RD I A A H D V M E R E Y D
G R R D D
A R D
R R C
E R
H F I F
I
C
A P N R
R
U S Y E
H H B C R
T U G L F R I
R A E M
E E F
K Y BAU N MGA C O YEAGER RTNER LIFF I N N U O S S D 67 E N RD TANZBE T A RGER
R C N
D A R
S ' V E W
L E
H
N
L T A
R E R
E O M
L W 61 N E
T G
U A S
B H ENGLAND TOWN N I K
W W' R Y
A D B A OT H 21 TO 55 M N MERAMEC E E M W RD R M L D. ER AM TOM EC BOT RD BA D U R N
M O G T A Meramec Bottom Rd. R G
T N I N
E L
R R
U
B
widening to 3 lanes Z
T
N
I
E
H RD
New bridge over SUSAN ER D Meramec River B R
H E IN T Z 231
R D D Legend R D R W' Electric signal requested
R
E
H H P P O
A T R S G I E L R D E H
T R Congested intersections/ C sites of difficult turns 231 N R
E D K R C E Stretches of traffic congestion B
C HRIS TOP
HER
D
R
Pavement repair needed E
N
I F 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles
. R Suggested new roadway . R
Improvements programmed IFIC C PA
ION UN Prepared by St. Louis County by MoDOT or St. Louis County Department of Planning June 2000 Need for New Roadways to Relieve Traffic Congestion
The need for new roadways to relieve traffic congestion was identified as a possible solution to this problem during the course of this study. The options for new roadway locations are limited for a variety of reasons. Existing development patterns often preclude the establishment of a new route. Topography and flood plain considerations also act as deterrents. The costs associated with a new right-of-way are often prohibitive. The expansion of existing roadways to accommodate additional traffic is often opposed by residents living along or in the vicinity of the route. Despite these limitations some options do exist.
Roadway to Connect Tesson Ferry Road and Interstate 55:
As an alternative to previous proposals to widen Butler Hill Road, the construction of a new roadway in the Meramec Bottom Road vicinity was suggested as a means of providing an additional connection between Tesson Ferry Road and Interstate 55. While some older substandard segments of Meramec Bottom Road already exist, this right-of-way is mostly located in the flood plain. Any potential route north of the current roadway would encounter other obstacles such as established residential subdivisions and the Kennedy Recreation Complex.
If such an improvement could be made, it would serve as a natural extension to the recent widening of Meramec Bottom Road to three lanes between Interstate 55 and Lemay Ferry Road. This improvement also included a realignment with Baumgartner Road at Lemay Ferry Road.
Improved East-West Access South of Baumgartner Road:
Prospects for providing any new major east-west access south of Baumgartner Road are limited at best. While the ongoing widening of Telegraph Road from the Meramec River Bridge to Christopher Drive to five lanes should have a positive effect on traffic flow in the Oakville area, it does not address the east-west access issue. A partial solution may come from the proposed widening of Baumgartner Road from two to three lanes from Lemay Ferry Road to Fireleaf Drive. This proposed improvement was identified in the Oakville Community Area Study Update.
Another issue raised in the Oakville Community Area Study Update was the need for additional east-west roads connecting Telegraph Road and Becker Road. Such connections and extensions of local and collector streets have been considered when plans for new development were submitted. However, these connections have not been made due to strong citizen opposition to these proposals.
Sixth District Community Area Study 54 Butler Hill Road Widening:
Proposals to widen Butler Hill Road have been strongly opposed by residents along or in the vicinity of the roadway. This study recommends that the primarily residential character of development along the roadway be respected and that Butler Hill Road not be widened.
Major Transportation Investment Analysis:
The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council has recently completed a Major Transportation Investment Analysis (MTIA) study for the Southside Study Area in both St. Louis City and County to plan for future long-range roadway and public transit improvements. The study has made recommendations for future transportation projects, none of which are funded. Roadway widening or Transportation System Management improvements which consist of signal, intersection, and access control improvements such as medians were suggested on major arterial roadways as a means of addressing traffic congestion. These improvements are proposed on all or parts of the following roadway corridors: Broadway/Kingston Drive/Telegraph Road, Gravois Road and Tesson Ferry Road, Lemay Ferry Road, and Baumgartner Road. While some portions of the proposals have merit, other aspects such as raised medians which could block access to businesses along the roadways will require further scrutiny to determine the desirability of these improvements.
Based upon further consideration that took into account public comment and the negative implications for adjoining residential areas, the MTIA study does not recommend previously considered roadway widening improvements to Butler Hill Road and Yaeger Road. Thus, the MTIA study recommendations are consistent with the recommendations of this Community Area Study concerning Butler Hill Road. While improvements to Yaeger Road were not discussed as part of this Community Area Study, the MTIA improvement option that was considered and rejected would have had detrimental impacts on residences along that roadway and would have placed additional traffic pressures on Butler Hill Road with the connection between the two roadways that was being considered.
Interstate 170 South Extension - Alternatives:
The construction of an expressway extension of Interstate 170 south of its terminus at Interstate 64/U.S. Highway 40 has been strongly opposed by communities in the path of the proposed roadway. Despite this opposition, the fact remains that improved vehicular access from South County to Central County is both necessary and desirable for economic and environmental reasons.
The St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic has commissioned a study to evaluate the needs of the St. Louis County Arterial Road System in South St. Louis County if Interstate 170 is not extended southward to Interstate 55. The Community Area Study endorses this study as a means of identifying acceptable
Sixth District Community Area Study 55 alternatives if an Interstate 170 South Extension cannot be built. Alternatives could include the addition of lanes, grade separations, realignments and relocations, extensions of existing arterial roadways, and the construction of new arterial roadways.
Public Transportation
MetroLink:
The proposed route for Segment 2 of the Cross County MetroLink extension from Shrewsbury to Butler Hill Road is shown on Map 8. The possible route shown is conceptual in nature. Additional studies as well as an extensive planning and public participation process are required before a definite route can be selected. In addition, funding for this route has not been secured. It is anticipated that the Segment 2 route will be the next leg of MetroLink constructed after the system is extended to Shrewsbury.
Major Transportation Investment Analysis:
The Major Transportation Investment Analysis (MTIA) study sponsored by the East- West Gateway Coordinating Council for the Southside Study Area has made a recommendation for either a future long range light rail transit route or bus rapid transit route from the City of St. Louis into St. Louis County. After entering St. Louis County, the light rail route would travel along Interstate 55 before connecting with the cross-county Segment 2 line in Green Park. The bus rapid transit route would simply utilize the existing Interstate 55 highway in St. Louis County. It is anticipated that the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council will select either the light rail or the bus rapid transit alternative at a future meeting. Any use of the Grant’s Trail right-of-way for a transit route should be discouraged, since there would be negative impacts on the operation of the Grant’s Trail, an important recreation asset of the area.
Bus Transfer Stations:
The Bi-State Development Agency has some funds available for the establishment and operation of bus transfer stations. An improved bus transfer station will be located on the South County Shopping Center property in conjunction with upgrades planned for the shopping center.
Roadway Beautification
Roadway beautification efforts along certain prominent roadways would have positive image building benefits. Lemay Ferry Road from Will Avenue to Lindbergh Boulevard and the Lindbergh Boulevard corridor, which serves as the “main street” of South County, are two roads most often suggested for roadway beautification efforts. The Broadway Corridor and the Lemay Ferry Road Corridor from Mt. Olive
Sixth District Community Area Study 56 Road to the St. Louis City Limits are also candidates for such an upgrade. Any programs for landscaping, lighting, sidewalk, and signage improvements should be closely coordinated with commercial revitalization studies for those areas. These improvements are discussed in more detail in Section VIII, Revitalizing Our Regional Commercial Corridor, and Section IX, Revitalizing Our Neighborhood Commercial Corridors.
Other roadway beautification efforts along the interstate highways could be pursued. Methods of preserving scenic vistas along roadways could be explored.
Maintenance of Park and Ride Lots
The condition of the park-and-ride lot at Interstate 55 and Reavis Barracks Road has been identified as a concern by this study. While the lot serves a functional purpose, it is virtually unpaved, does not have any landscaping, and presents an unsightly appearance. The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) reports that funds are not available for the upgrade and maintenance of the facility beyond what is presently provided. However, future funding through the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council for upgrading this location should be pursued by MoDOT. The agency has been successful in obtaining funds for improving park-and-ride lots at other locations in the region.
Roadway Funding, Planning, and Development Policies
Many roads in the Sixth Council District are under the jurisdiction of the Missouri Department of Transportation. Important improvements on non-interstate roads are given lower priority because of limited funding sources. One solution might be County assumption of jurisdiction of certain State routes. Appropriate funding mechanisms would need to be established to facilitate such a transfer. The issue of road proprietorship is discussed in greater detail in Section VIII, Revitalizing Our Regional Commercial Corridor.
The St. Louis County’s Highway System Plan, completed in 1986, details long-range road improvements for roadways under both State and County jurisdiction. While many of the recommendations of the plan remain valid, changing conditions warrant a restudy. Thus, the St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic is currently updating the plan, which is expected to be available in 2000.
Large numbers of independent curb cuts impede traffic flow and reduce vehicular safety. It has been suggested that a policy could be established through County Council resolution to limit curb cuts and encourage cross access and consolidation of development on designated roadways. These standards should apply to converted uses as well as newly developed properties. Coordination with the Missouri Department of Transportation is essential to assure the successful implementation of this policy since many of the affected roadways would be State routes.
Sixth District Community Area Study 57 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Finding ways to improve vehicular transportation and manage traffic congestion is a key component of citizens’ vision for the Sixth District. Closely related is the need to make non-vehicular transportation alternatives, such as public transportation and sidewalks, more accessible to all who desire to use them.
Goal A: Promote the safe and efficient movement of vehicular traffic between locations within and outside of the Study Area.
Objective 1: Reduce traffic congestion.
Strategies:
a. Address concerns regarding Lindbergh Boulevard traffic congestion from Tesson Ferry Road to Interstate 255 by: • Improving the Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road intersection with additional turn lanes. • Upgrading the Lindbergh Boulevard/Union Road intersection with additional turn lanes. • Improving the Lindbergh Boulevard/Tesson Ferry Road intersection with additional turn lanes. • Initiating a electric traffic signal synchronization study after the above intersection improvements are completed. • Initiating a study to determine the impact of closing the median break on Lindbergh Boulevard at Crescent Drive. Alternate access to affected businesses would be a key consideration.
b. Address concerns regarding traffic congestion on Telegraph Road from Christopher Drive to Interstate 255 through activation of the closed loop electric traffic signal system being installed by the Missouri Department of Transportation.
Objective 2: Make major improvements and/or reconstruct roadways with prominent deficiencies.
Strategy:
Complete the major road repair and resurfacing project planned by the Missouri Department of Transportation for Lindbergh Boulevard from Tesson Ferry Road to Lemay Ferry Road and south on Lemay Ferry Road to Mattis Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 58 Objective 3: Explore alternative routes to improve traffic flow.
Strategies:
a. Support the study of possible alternatives for providing improved north- south cross-county access from South County to Clayton and Lambert St. Louis International Airport.
b. Explore alternative routes to relieve east-west traffic congestion between Tesson Ferry Road and Interstate 55 south of Interstate 270.
Objective 4: Support planning for future roadway improvements in the study area.
Strategies:
a. Study the feasibility of transferring major non-interstate routes from State to County control in order to facilitate improvement of routes which are of secondary importance to the State but primary importance to traffic circulation within the County. A key component of the study would be the identification of necessary funding sources and implications. The issue of divided roadway proprietorship impacts commercial revitalization efforts along state-controlled roads. Specific concerns include road improvements and maintenance, sidewalk requirements and policies, control of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and control of curb cuts.
b. Support the ongoing update of the St. Louis County Highway System Plan which identifies long range road improvements.
Objective 5: Improve traffic flow by promoting sound development policies.
Strategy:
Establish a policy for designated State and County maintained roadways through County Council Resolution to limit curb cuts and encourage cross access and consolidation of development. These standards should apply to converted uses as well as new development.
Goal B: Promote the use of non-automobile transportation alternatives.
Objective 1: Enhance the opportunities for use of public transportation.
Sixth District Community Area Study 59 Strategy:
Encourage the construction of Segment 2 of the Cross County MetroLink extension to South County from Shrewsbury on the best alignment. Efforts should be made to ensure that any negative effects on adjoining residential properties are properly mitigated.
Objective 2: Improve pedestrian access with sidewalks on arterial and collector roads.
Strategy:
Undertake a comprehensive sidewalk study to identify locations where sidewalks are needed on both State and County arterial and collector roads. Give priority to approaches to schools, churches, parks, concentrations of apartments and transit dependent persons, bus stops and future MetroLink stops. The provision of sidewalks along significant commercial corridors would also be an important part of an overall program to enhance the appearance of these roadways and to make access to businesses more accessible to pedestrians.
The study would include a prioritized list of roads where sidewalks should be installed. As part of the prioritizing process, the plan would assess impediments such as topography that would make the ready installation of sidewalks difficult without an accompanying major road improvement. The study should identify possible funding sources. It would be conducted by the St. Louis County Department of Planning in conjunction with a citizens advisory group.
Goal C: Enhance appearance of the study area through roadway beautification efforts.
Objective 1: Encourage the planting of flowers along Interstate highways and other major roadways. Coordinate with MoDOT, which would allow such a program but not fund it.
Strategies:
a. Encourage voluntary efforts with donations from local businesses.
b. Use other local efforts such as “U. City in Bloom” and the City of St. Louis’ “Operation Brightside” for models.
Sixth District Community Area Study 60 Objective 2: Preserve scenic vistas along roadways.
Strategy:
Develop a mechanism to preserve the undeveloped status of difficult to develop properties that have scenic merit. Explore the possibility of offering property tax relief for a designated period of years or other incentives for scenic preservation through the Zoning Ordinance or other mechanisms.
Objective 3: Improve the appearance of the park-and-ride lot at I-55 and Reavis Barracks Road.
Strategy:
Explore options for possible funding through the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council and Missouri Department of Transportation.
Sixth District Community Area Study 61 Lindbergh Boulevard Regional Commercial Corridor Map 10 D
R Y R R E F REAVIS D E R H IR
C H S R S R E D U T N H O C R R S D D S E
T B
R A R RA
R C
T KS
S
I T
P IA
A G IN R B V EE GREENPARK A NP L RD A RK D R
R D E RN R N L E IO L TH N E R U U NO M S C Y H ERR R O F D O N L L O I T N N NG W O LI I S UR LL S D B E T South Lindbergh Blvd. B E
E R A
A G V S E T C H O N 21 CORD RD Lemay Ferry Rd.
AY
M D T D H E R E R L IS S R D 270 67 267 T E HE G IS L SC 61 Y O A R 55 E
D T L
M K A R T D 50 C T T U IS H BL B Y E V R I D S N R S O D V
TO SAPPING D R
E 67 G IN C R E F N 61 O T D R H R R D E RD ER RD
E R RINGE D V R A S B M Legend N A Municipalities
L Land Use D D
R H R E Single Family M RD H Duplex/Townhome R IL D L R GE RIN Multi-Family
Commercial P
D A RD R
T Industrial/Utility
T E
R Institution
H S
P
Y O R A Recreation A M N I E R L N
D G
G R R
D Common Ground E E
L L R R
O Y E
Park T R D R R E RD YEAGER F Vacant & AgricultuRrDe D
R D
D R R 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 Miles
N
R
R
U Y S E
B
H R Prepared by St. Louis County
C G
L U R I
F A E
E M F Department of Planning Y B YEAGER June 2000 AUMGARTNER
D 67 N
N R RD
A E H VIII. Revitalizing Our Regional Commercial Corridor
The need to revitalize the Lindbergh Boulevard regional commercial corridor of the Sixth County Council District was one of the principal issues identified throughout the Community Area Study process. A key component of this issue is the concern raised regarding the present condition and future prospects for the South County Shopping Center and other businesses in the corridor which are located at the heart of the district. Closely related are transportation based concerns which are magnified because of the crossroads location of the corridor. Dealing with these issues is of critical importance to the long term economic viability and quality of life available in South County.
Assets and Characteristics of the Area
Lindbergh Boulevard serves as the primary commercial corridor in the area. For the purposes of this study, the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor includes Lindbergh Boulevard from the Baptist Church Road commercial node to Interstate 255. Also included is commercial development along Baptist Church Road south of Lindbergh Boulevard and Concord Village Avenue from its intersections with Tesson Ferry Road both north and south of Lindbergh Boulevard. In addition, commercial development along Lemay Ferry Road south of Will Avenue to Interstate 255 is also part of the corridor.
While many of the issues discussed relate to the corridor as a whole, certain issues more specifically relate to two particular segments of the corridor: Lindbergh Boulevard from the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way east to Interstate 255 and Lindbergh Boulevard from the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way west to the Baptist Church Road commercial node. The Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor is shown on Map 10.
The Setting
Lindbergh Boulevard is the “main street” of South County: • It is the primary non-interstate east-west road in the Sixth District. • Substantial commercial land uses, many of which attract customers from beyond the study area, are situated along most of the roadway.
South County Center is the “downtown” of South County: • It is the largest retail commercial land use in the Sixth District. • It is located at the geographic center of South County. • It is situated near the Interstate 55 and 270/255 interchange.
Sixth District Community Area Study 63 The Eastern Segment: Lindbergh Boulevard from Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way to Interstate 255, including Lemay Ferry Road:
The typical structure along this portion of the corridor was constructed about twenty to thirty years ago, but there are also numerous new structures scattered throughout this segment. The typical building found in this area is a strip retail center or single- use one-story commercial structure. These structures are usually located toward the rear of the site and offer ample parking in front of the buildings. The services offered in this portion of the corridor are regional in nature and appeal to vehicular traffic. Although the area contains several apartment and condominium developments, pedestrian access to these sites is limited. Commercial services offered in this area tend to be regional services rather than neighborhood services attracting pedestrian traffic. The typical commercial services offered in this area are retail and restaurant, some auto repair services, and new car dealerships.
The most prominent commercial land use in this portion of the corridor is the South County Center. It is a regional center for the entire South County area. The commercial impact of the mall is reflected in the types of businesses located along Lindbergh Blvd and Lemay Ferry Road. South County Shopping Center may not be the sole reason for the large number of car dealerships and large volume retail sites being located on these roads, but the mall’s drawing power is undoubtedly part of the reason why businesses chose to locate in this area. The mall attracts customers from South St. Louis City, St. Louis County, eastern Illinois, Jefferson County and beyond.
The Western Segment: Lindbergh Boulevard from Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way to the Baptist Church Road commercial node, including Baptist Church Road and Concord Village Avenue:
Most of the development in this portion of the corridor has taken place within the past twenty to thirty years. Although there are some smaller commercial developments in this area, the majority of the commercial developments are on larger sites. Retail services in this area are mainly located in shopping centers such as Ronnie’s Plaza, Target, Southfield Plaza, South Oaks Plaza, Concord Plaza, and Plaza 21. Outside of these shopping plazas some commercial uses can be found in clusters of older businesses, especially in the Concord Village Avenue/Tesson Ferry Road area. The other major type of commercial development in this area consists of large sites devoted to new car sales. The structures along this portion of the corridor are typically one-story commercial buildings with ample parking in front of the buildings.
Uses in this portion of the corridor are oriented to vehicular traffic. While some of the uses provide neighborhood type of services, such as grocery, bakery, barber shop, dry cleaner, there is little pedestrian traffic in this area. The size and types of business located in this area also reflect the regional type of services provided in the overall Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor.
Sixth District Community Area Study 64 Threats to the Lindbergh Commercial Corridor’s Competitive Position in the Region
Traffic Congestion/Transportation Infrastructure Deficiencies
Transportation infrastructure deficiencies, which result in severe traffic congestion in the vicinity of South County Center, is a key contributor to a perceived decline in the economic vitality of the shopping center and other commercial land uses in the area. The most pronounced point of traffic congestion is the Lemay Ferry Road/Lindbergh Boulevard intersection. In addition, substantial traffic congestion occurs in both directions along the entire portion of Lindbergh Boulevard from Tesson Ferry Road eastward to Interstate 255. The problem is particularly acute during peak traffic hours and peak shopping days and hours. Numerous independent curb cuts for individual businesses contribute to traffic congestion in the area.
Medians along Lindbergh Boulevard in the vicinity of South County Center help prevent traffic congestion and safety issues from being worse. However, at locations where there are median breaks, such as at the Crescent Drive intersection with Lindbergh Boulevard, traffic movement is difficult at best and hazardous at worst. This nonsignalized intersection impedes traffic flow because of its close proximity to both Interstate 55 and Union Road. Left turns onto and out of Crescent Drive are extremely difficult and dangerous at most times.
Age of South County Shopping Center
Construction on the original portion of the South County Shopping Center, including its first two anchor stores, began in 1963. A major addition, including a third anchor store, dates from 1979. The age of South County Center is manifested by its dated outward appearance. Other problems that detract from the regional competitiveness of the center include poor internal traffic circulation, parking problems, and perceived lack of “upscale” stores and merchandise.
Independent commercial land uses situated at the perimeter of the shopping center along Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road contribute to local traffic congestion. They also inhibit some solutions to internal shopping center traffic circulation and parking related problems. The perimeter uses, as well as the topographic setting of the main shopping center structures below the grade of Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road, limit the visibility of South County Center. The condition of these adjoining properties can also detract from the image of the shopping center. There is a vacant, boarded-up former service station at the southeast corner of Lindbergh Boulevard and Union Road and a unoccupied former auto parts and accessories store at the southwest corner of Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 65 Interwoven Land Use and Transportation Problems
Land use and transportation problems are interrelated and contribute to a perceived general decline in the corridor area. In order to avoid the traffic congestion associated with the shopping center area and seek a wider variety of desirable merchandise as well as more appealing and varied mix of stores, the mall’s most likely patrons will often bypass South County Center and travel the extra distance to Crestwood Plaza or the St. Louis Galleria.
The proximity of interstate highways and an interchange are generally viewed as locational strengths for a regional shopping center. However, the lack of direct access between the interstate highways and South County Center results in traffic congestion on the principal roads serving the shopping center, Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road.
The location of the Interstate 255 exit onto Lindbergh Boulevard some distance east of Lemay Ferry Road and the mix of commercial uses between the exit and the South County Center create traffic congestion on this segment of Lindbergh Boulevard. Westbound traffic exiting the interstate highway uses Lindbergh Boulevard as an extended exit ramp. Vehicles cannot travel north or south on any through public roadway until reaching the congested Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road intersection. In between, through traffic conflicts with vehicles of customers of commercial land uses along Lindbergh Boulevard adding to the congestion in this area. The congestion experienced along this segment of Lindbergh Boulevard impedes the flow of traffic of South County Center customers coming from the east.
Visual Appearance of Corridor
The image of the Lindbergh commercial corridor is mixed. With the varying types of buildings of different ages, architectural styles, and setbacks there is a definite sense that this is a drive-through commercial area without a definable image. The most notable deficiencies of the corridor are: • Clutter: characterized by prominent utility poles and overhead wires and an overabundance of large, tall, competing freestanding signs. • A mixture of uncoordinated building facades and setbacks • Lack of landscaping • No definable pedestrian area
The problem of a cluttered appearance and lack of landscaping is not as pronounced along the Lindbergh commercial corridor as in the older Broadway and northern Lemay Ferry Commercial corridors discussed in Section IX, Revitalizing Our Neighborhood Commercial Corridors. The sites here are generally larger and the buildings are set back with more open space from the road. However, with some exceptions such as newer retail centers and other uses, the above noted problems are apparent along the entire corridor. For example, older large garish signs are
Sixth District Community Area Study 66 intermixed with more tasteful lower profile monument signs. Clusters of older buildings which are in need of facade improvements and/or rehabilitation can be found, especially in the Concord Village Avenue area. Vacant commercial buildings are interspersed along the corridor at prominent locations.
Road Proprietorship
A problem that is common to the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor and the Broadway and northern Lemay Ferry Road corridors discussed in Section IX, Revitalizing Our Neighborhood Commercial Corridors is that the roads are for the most part maintained by the State of Missouri. St. Louis County controls land use and seeks to facilitate redevelopment but has no formal role in road related issues.
In the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor the principal roads, Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road are under the control of the State. Only smaller segments of Baptist Church Road and Concord Village Avenue are maintained by St. Louis County.
The type of traffic that a road is designed to carry affects the type of business activity along that road. The roads in the study area’s regional and neighborhood commercial corridors vary in width from Lindbergh Boulevard, a partially divided roadway with multiple lanes and a center turn lane with no parking, to Broadway, a narrower two and four lane road with on-street parallel parking. A wider high speed road such as Lindbergh Boulevard attracts large high-visibility commercial developments which attract regional customers. Smaller businesses are more adaptable to narrower slower speed roads such as Broadway. The slower traffic affords potential customers the opportunity to notice smaller scale neighborhood commercial development which is generally characterized by lower visibility. The State control of the roads necessitates their involvement in any proposed changes by business owners or the County, because no significant change to these areas can take place without road improvements.
Lack of control of the roads also impedes the County’s ability to regulate the spacing and number of vehicular curb cuts. The lack of curb cut regulation allows sites to develop independently, each with their own entrance and exit. In addition, each separate site typically has its own freestanding sign, often competing for visibility with signs on adjoining properties. The result is an increase in overall visual clutter on a commercial corridor.
A prime example of how roadway jurisdiction impacts traffic flow and road improvements can be found in the heart of the Sixth District. The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) controls almost all of the roads providing access to South County Center as well as key intersections in its vicinity. The only exception is Union Road, which is under the jurisdiction of St. Louis County. Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road, which provide direct access to the
Sixth District Community Area Study 67 shopping center, and electric signals at Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road, Union Road, and Cordes Drive and at Lemay Ferry Road and South County Center Way are all controlled by MoDOT.
The intersection of Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road is one of the busiest within the Sixth District. The severe road congestion at and near this intersection not only impedes access to South County Center but also negatively affects other businesses in the area which have become more difficult to reach.
The fact that these key roads and other major roads that are commercial corridors in the Sixth District are State roads complicates the efforts of the County and business owners to revitalize these areas. Compounding the jurisdictional issue is the fact that maintenance and upgrades to interstate highways are the highest priority of the State agency. Thus, it is difficult to secure monies for improvements from already limited funding sources for roads they perceive as secondary priority rights-of-way within the State highway system. Yet these non-interstate roads are key to the area’s commercial districts.
Pedestrian Walkways
The principal roads in the Lindbergh commercial corridor, Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road, can be described as roads containing large shoulders wide enough to park a car, but without in most instances, a definable walking area. Some sites along the corridor contain sidewalks outside of the State road right-of-way, but these sidewalks have frequent interruptions. While the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) policy previously allowed sidewalks along State rights-of- way in urban areas with a permit from the agency, MoDOT did not build or maintain sidewalks along roads under its jurisdiction. In accordance with recent policy changes, MoDOT will consider installation of pedestrian and bicycle facilities where localities request them, where there is evidence of community support and planning for them and where MoDOT projects are close to pedestrian and bicycle traffic generators such as shopping centers, schools, parks and employment centers.
Commercial Land Use Mix within the Sixth District
Although the Lindbergh Blvd./Lemay Ferry Road corridor is centrally located at the intersection of major roadways and serves as a retail “downtown” for South County, the business district differs from many downtowns in that it has limited office development.
The Sixth District contains about 14 percent of the County’s population and approximately 11 percent of the County’s land area. However, the amount of office space, by square foot, equals only 3 percent of the County’s total. New office space could be a financial asset to the Sixth District as a source of additional real estate
Sixth District Community Area Study 68 tax revenue for local school and fire districts as well as providing opportunities for future professional jobs.
In order to highlight the tax revenue advantage of office space, the Department of Planning compared the appraised value, per acre, of selected retail and office sites in the Sixth District and other parts of the County. This comparison indicates that the appraised value of office sites, per acre, is twice the value of retail sites. The greater appraised value of office development would be significant to taxing districts, particularly the school and fire districts, which rely upon real estate tax revenue as a major source of income.
Besides the tax advantages, office space could provide future professional, technical, and administrative support jobs in the Sixth District. These job sectors could be an important source of future employment opportunities in this area. Providing a Sixth District location for these types of jobs has a number of other advantages: The work force would be diversified with higher paying jobs that are closer to home. Access to more local jobs would require less commuting time and distance. Traffic congestion and air pollution could be reduced. New businesses that serve the office employment centers could be attracted to the area. Existing businesses would have additional customers.
Although the percentage of total acreage devoted to commercial businesses in the Sixth District (5 percent) equals the County percentage, the breakdown by type of commercial development - retail, office, and industrial/warehouse is very different. In the Sixth District forty-eight percent of the commercial building square footage is retail compared to twenty-six percent Countywide. While convenient retail commercial businesses are essential to provide needed goods and services to an area, some concerns exist over commercial vacancies in the Sixth District while new retail commercial development is being built. While some commercial properties have undergone a successful transformation to other commercial uses, others have remained vacant for a considerable time.
Goals, Objectives and Strategies
Retaining South County’s downtown, the South County Shopping Center, as a regionally competitive commercial center and revitalizing its main street, the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor, is key to the economic viability of the Sixth District.
Additional studies will be a necessary part of many of the strategies suggested for tackling the issue of Revitalizing Our Regional Commercial Corridor. While more specific implementation strategies and tools will be identified as part of those studies, certain general guidelines are offered for consideration as means of implementing the strategies identified.
Sixth District Community Area Study 69 There are three principal players that will be involved in implementing the strategies recommended to deal with this issue. The State controls most of the roads in this commercial corridor. The County controls the zoning and accompanying development standards. The County is also the most appropriate coordinating entity for funding mechanisms for improvements other than roadways. Business owners control their own properties. These three groups must work together and form partnerships to promote the revitalization of the Lindbergh commercial corridor. A fourth group, citizens, who are the primary customers of businesses and users of roads in the area, have a more limited role because of the business nature of the corridor. However limited, that role is still important, having begun with participation in this Community Area Study process in identifying concerns and continuing as participants in further studies and advisory committees.
Goal A: Improve traffic flow into, out of, and around the eastern segment of the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor.
Objective 1: Give top priority to addressing traffic congestion on roads serving the South County Shopping Center and other major retail businesses in this corridor.
Funding tools that could be used to make both public and private infrastructure improvements involving the South County Shopping Center and other businesses include the Community Development District Act (CID) and the Transportation Development District (TDD). Funds for transportation related improvements in the area can be derived from Traffic Generation Assessment contributions from developers and business owners as well as more traditional funding sources used by the State and St. Louis County. All business owners should provide a proportionate share of privately generated funds for road improvements in this area.
While participants in the study process expressed strong reservations about the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) as a means of generating funds for privately owned business improvements, consideration should be given the use of TIF revenues for the large amount of road improvements needed in this area. If Tax Increment Financing is considered, the inclusion of the broader commercial area that would benefit from the substantial road improvements that are needed is recommended. While no one funding source will address the substantial infrastructure needs in the area, a variety of funding sources will be required to make improvements that will not only benefit businesses and their customers but the motoring public as well. Additional information regarding funding tools is provided in Section XIII, Implementation Tools.
Strategies:
Sixth District Community Area Study 70 a. Make long overdue improvements to the Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road intersection with additional turn lanes to reduce traffic congestion. Planning and implementation of such improvements should be undertaken without further delay. This strategy is the number one transportation related recommendation of this study.
b. Upgrade the Lindbergh Boulevard/Union Road intersection with additional turn lanes to reduce traffic congestion. Planning and implementation should begin during or immediately after the upgrade of the Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road intersection.
Objective 2: Find ways to provide improved access to and from South County Shopping Center via the interstate highway system and abutting roadways.
Strategies:
a. Provide one or two continuous right turn lanes from the Interstate 55 exit onto eastbound Lindbergh Boulevard along the entire property frontage to Union Road. A portion of a right turn lane presently exists at the interstate exit onto Lindbergh Boulevard, but then ends; a right turn only lane to Union Road commences east of Crescent Drive. This improvement is suggested to ease traffic flow and improve access for customers of the South County Shopping Center as well as other businesses west of Union Road.
b. Initiate a study to determine the feasibility of providing more direct access from the interstate highways to the South County Shopping Center. One option could be a ramp from the original Lemay Ferry Road exit (north of Forder Road) from Interstate 255 over the interstate highway into the south end of the South County Shopping Center. This improvement would extend to and connect with Union Road and would be a public roadway. Construction of this roadway should be coordinated with the building of the MetroLink line in this area.
Objective 3: Relieve internal South County Shopping Center traffic and circulation problems.
Strategies:
a. Support efforts by South County Shopping Center to improve internal traffic and circulation through the site plan review process.
b. Coordinate internal traffic and circulation upgrades with efforts to improve access on roads serving the South County Shopping Center. Goal B: Enhance the economic viability of the eastern segment of the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor.
Sixth District Community Area Study 71 Objective 1: Upgrade the image of the South County Shopping Center, and other businesses in the corridor, enhancing the area’s attractiveness as a desirable destination and maintaining it as a regionally competitive shopping area.
Strategies:
a. Encourage and support the updating of the South County Shopping Center facade. Such external as well as internal improvements have been proposed by the shopping center owner.
b. If no viable successor use is found for the vacant building formerly occupied by a service station at the southeast corner of Lindbergh Boulevard and Union Road encourage removal of the building and incorporation of the property into the shopping center site. The building removal would enhance the overall appearance and visibility of the shopping center.
c. Encourage the incorporation of various outlots along the perimeter of the South County Shopping Center into the center’s site. Uses that detract from the visibility and image of the shopping center should be moved to another location within the shopping center site or relocated within the corridor. The additional land acquired could be used to expand parking and enhance landscaping for the center. As these uses are currently configured, access is limited to right turns in and out due to the medians on both Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road.
d. Establish a citizens/business advisory committee to encourage building updates and improvements as well as beautification efforts in the eastern segment of the Lindbergh Boulevard corridor. The group could also help identify and support funding mechanisms for public improvements in the area.
Objective 2: Encourage a more diversified mix of commercial land uses in the eastern segment of the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor to enhance the area as a desirable business location and bolster the tax base of local school and fire districts.
Strategies:
a. Encourage the development of office uses at appropriate locations, particularly on larger parcels and sites of vacant retail businesses in the eastern segment of the Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor. Prominent possible sites include the southern end of the South County Shopping Center, the area west of Union Road and east of Interstate 55, and the area east of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way and west of
Sixth District Community Area Study 72 Interstate 55. This latter area could also be appropriate for coordinated retail development emphasizing larger users. A traffic impact study will be required to determine the appropriate scale of development.
b. Undertake a comprehensive study to identify potential office sites in the Sixth District. Increasing the amount of office space in the Sixth District would begin by identifying sites for office development. While this study has begun that process, a logical follow-up project would be a more comprehensive study to identify sites which are zoned for office use or have the potential to be zoned for office use. Some of the characteristics of newly identified sites could include:
• second tier sites which are located behind existing retail development but have good road access, and • sites with topographical limitations not suitable for retail, but adequate for office development.
Once sites are identified, the St. Louis County Economic Council should develop ongoing promotional programs to promote development of the sites identified in the study.
Goal C: Enhance the image of the entire Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor from the Baptist Church Road commercial node to Interstate 255, including Baptist Church Road and Concord Village Avenue south to Tesson Ferry Road and Lemay Ferry Road south of Will Avenue.
Objective 1: Improve the visual appearance and attain a definable image for the corridor.
Strategies:
a. Develop a long-range plan for the visual enhancement of the entire Lindbergh Boulevard corridor, including Baptist Church Road, Concord Village Avenue, and Lemay Ferry Road south of Will Avenue. Key goals of the plan could include:
• Mitigating visual clutter from utility poles and the over-use of free- standing signs. Incentives could be developed to encourage conversions to monument type signs. • Promoting a more compatible mix of building facade types and setbacks. • Increasing and improving landscaping. • Improving pedestrian access and use with additional sidewalks and other pedestrian areas.
Sixth District Community Area Study 73 Federal Highway Enhancement Highway funds could be used as source of money to implement these improvements. Efforts should be coordinated with the City of Green Park’s plans for Lindbergh Boulevard where feasible.
b. Organize the business community to coordinate promotional efforts, undertake beautification projects, and consider the establishment of a Community Improvement District (CID) to finance improvements.
A CID allows a business organization to impose taxes or special assessments, install and maintain improvements, acquire vacant or blighted property, and develop promotional programs for the area. Once in place and a CID is created, a business organization could:
• Initiate promotional efforts to create a new image • Replace existing signs with a new signage system that gives the area more character • Facilitate utility pole movement to the rear of the sites or underground • Establish beautification projects
St. Louis County should promote the establishment of a business organization for the corridor. An important role of the organization would be the development of a master plan for improvements to the corridor and use of funding generated by the CID. Another key role of the business organization would be to participate in efforts to identify future road improvements, including pedestrian needs.
c. Special attention should be given to older buildings and the hazardous alignment at the Lindbergh Boulevard/Concord Village Road intersection.
Goal D: Address split roadway jurisdiction issues and promote roadway planning.
Objective 1: Address the problem of divided road proprietorship which impedes the realization of commercial revitalization goals as well as inhibits sound planning practice for new development.
Strategy
Develop a coordinated set of policies to address road issues that are integrally related to the revitalization of commercial business districts along state-controlled roads. This endeavor should involve the State, St. Louis County, and the business community. Concerns related to state- controlled roads that are vital to commercial revitalization include road
Sixth District Community Area Study 74 improvements and maintenance, sidewalk requirements and policies, control of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and control of curb cuts.
Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road Commercial Area
As an acknowledgment of the critical nature of the Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road commercial area, which includes the South County Shopping Center as its most prominent use, a series of suggested transportation and land use solutions have been developed for the area. Suggested solutions that are already presented in more detail in the Goals, Objectives, and Strategies above are indicated by an asterisk (*).
Suggested solutions1 are categorized into three general time frames: • Improvements Underway or Ready to Begin • Short Term Improvements • Long Range Concepts Certain suggested solutions could be implemented in an earlier phase if feasible and/or are determined to be desirable more immediate improvements.
Both transportation and land use related suggested solutions are presented in the following descriptions and are keyed to accompanying maps. Transportation solutions are numbered; land use solutions are lettered.
1 Suggested solutions offered are the result of this Community Area Study process. Except for actual improvements noted as “underway or ready to begin” on page 74, suggested transportation related solutions should not be attributed to the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) or the St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic. These suggested solutions have not been endorsed or proposed by either of these two agencies nor have engineering studies been undertaken. In particular, suggested solutions which are presented as long-range concepts on page 78 will require further study by parties responsible for their implementation.
Sixth District Community Area Study 75 Regional Commercial Corridor Improvements
Underway or Ready to Begin (See Map 11)
Activity on these corridor improvements either has commenced or is scheduled to begin in 2000.
South County Center has an approved site plan that provides for 1. eliminating a point of congestion by closing one access point which currently allows right turns from the center to Union Road just south of Lindbergh Boulevard. 2. reducing traffic conflicts on Lindbergh Boulevard by closing an access point which currently allows right turns from the center to Lindbergh Boulevard just west of the main entrance opposite Cordes Drive. A. expanding the shopping center with a new Sears store as a fourth anchor. B. installing new freestanding business signs to replace three older signs identifying the shopping center. (completed)
3. The new Home Depot store entrance/exit on Lindbergh Boulevard has been substantially upgraded. Improvements include the addition of an electric signal, a break in the existing median to allow left turns in and out of the site, and a left turn lane for eastbound traffic on Lindbergh Boulevard. Traffic exiting the commercial use is now allowed to gain immediate access to the existing ramp used to enter eastbound Interstate 255 from Lindbergh Boulevard. (completed)
4. Lane markings and signage on eastbound Interstate 270/255 will be clarified by MoDOT. The current lane markings for eastbound motorists wishing to use either the newer Lemay Ferry Road exit at Forder Road or the older Lemay Ferry Road exit north of Forder Road are confusing.
Sixth District Community Area Study 76 Regional Commercial Corridor Improvements Map
Underway or Ready to Begin 11 A D N O
A R
M L R P S O . N E E C Y N D R . L I W T O L R D T A . R H V O . T S U M L K O R . N O . S A T I F F C H R L . E R R S D D O C R D A A L Y P L A B . A P E N G E A R L A R D . R L . A T D T Y A . H T E D U M G V R V D N M R S R A U K S P E R E Y E A N P . D R R R
D . C D D
R
K . R C . M L O W E R I L S L G O E U D M T R H . S E . T R D O D N E R L R N N . A O E N L D E S L O A O C U D P I T A H R E L P . R N O A I C C R T E .
E H IR. . C I D T C R G R N Y H . A S V M L L T . A I L E A I ONE L R R R EL E M D L D P R. NE I N E O N N R L O D . E O A R R T N I
U T - . N C H . R . Q E N E E S E TH IR R S L U A S T E U R . SO L D E E G P P A N N S R P I N SC A S E G H I W LN U . R O R R . B K E T R E H O Green H A T G D T F N R O I D E U W R B O N . S D I N I L D P
O O
Park W E D
E S A W
L X A O N R
L N O
E L B L D I R D .
M A N O R W . L BELLEWOOD O A DR. R N O . D D R D D R
5 . R N 5 A VI A CT N SAPPINGTON S A P O D L P I N G T O N R H S Y A . D E
B R D . L
A D R L H R R C R D O R A M R C U C I . H K T C S D C H 'S R H W N . F Y H O . T . O R J D S D . T E S R R D
. R E 5 . T . D . 0 N R R .
R , R O F U D T T O 6 S D W 1 E V R O O O T E & P D S T T 6 A E 7 N T D A EL A P G S C L
D L L . H R L D A I A R E F C E O D E K T . B R S T A O Mini L E H . R M O N S U E L Y A T I T N P H
N O . D H R E R O R O Holiday D . L U N R O D V Ware- S R I D S E . N Inn L O L N N house . M . A A A K LKER I D EST. R R R. D A O
P
M C D M N L A E D A O O C T . . D R Z E R M . A D T R T H A V E R L E I G H C H T A Rest. Rhodes . W
N vac O Furn. 7 r K I 6 R N 2
A e T U l P t E y 50 V B Bank L A . n a I R t I R 267 C . R i D . . a e T T
D W Best O Y N . R O E W c R C R D Y O C H D S ss D E r A a D R . t . N r R R I i C Buy T A D e L V a s S l N u E . R a E c C T C U A A r IN e T L i - S
E N R E D G v E L C I R L N G r
A s D B a T E y R M . G S L C o R H E E B D KFC D T T N R E 1 O C South County B S L C E V R D C 61 . 55 Plaza E VE RG RE EN L G N. Big K . o D 2 e R . U D . d R S e . O k Car H e Y W ff r R A B R Y i 's . c E Dealer e / F 5 0 , 6 67 1 & v H 6 South County 7 SO N U E T H U O C I O ss N U N N E Home T Y V U C v D EN Center A R T ER P Depot KW Y Y. McD. A M E L Rest.
A D B W O Y R A T 4 5 . H W 5 R N E T L N E O D C R Y f K . T f 3 N i C U c O A C M e H H T O
. a U O x D S Car R D Dealer R .
I - 2 5 5
E
T A S T
E S N R I I N T E R E S T A T E P T 2 5 5 N 7 6 I & 1 6
. Y W H
. S . U E G
D F I O R
R D E . H L R R
T D
U
O N S O T 7 6 Legend N Y & 61 L 1 . N 6 N L . R . D Municipalities Y W E M L L H E L IN H I FO L V RD A E . V D D W . E S . U V E Land UL se . A U E B I T V R A D H R . C E
Single Fa. mily B D R . R M E R R Y R D . E D F H L Duplex/Townhome Y Y M A E E L L . F N L O L Multi-FA amR ily T D V D 67 O L E . O R R EH L O B D M C W G R S S H L A R IN L L O N E I L V I K I S D E Commercial S K H I R . N E G R B O . L F A C R T D A B . B Industrial/Utility D L A A N . A I L A R I N B . R D R B N E E C Institution M L V R T E O R L O H . I O R N W G R Y Y L E S V O Recreation A I L R I E T K J W E V A C R K D H R E S T E R E E
R E
D . D CB ommon Ground . P R D R . A . T B A N N I N G C T . I . O R Park CA N D D L M A R Y A L A N C T . E W A Vacant and Agriculture H E D G D E T R E E L N . R X .
D . R R .
D
L . S U M M I T A V E . . I T T N A H C L R . . F G 500 0 500T Feet O R R R D I D D Y L E L R N H I L V I N A O E W . N S F
S O R
G L F L D T I
V L
L T
R
H I E I M R E H I E W E
N R K
D C H G
. E R TPrepared by St. Louis County E N . D O E R . A L K R D T R A S
R C I D Z K . G A DepA artment of Planning E C E N O .
M . T R M N G
. I R
U . . S D R P C D A W S E
W D A E A O O L H I O V B T V R JuneR 2000 T F L U G A
E D N K C O T O G R R
S S . E A L . E R
A D S D G
L N
A R E F D . O O
K O
I F R N R
L R D D A D E E N R
C D . . F A I R V I E W L N . K D R C I W R T N E . G R F
A N D O E
P G O R A K F K R D I R D R R .
A Regional Commercial Corridor Improvements
Short Term Improvements (See Map 12)
These improvements should ideally be completed within a two to five year time period. Study and planning for certain critical items should begin immediately to meet this time schedule.
Transportation
1. * Initiate Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road intersection improvement planning and implementation.
1a. Affiliated with the Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road intersection upgrade is the need to extend the right turn lane along existing businesses on the west side of Lemay Ferry Road south of the intersection with Lindbergh Boulevard. This improvement would complement the existing right turn lane along Lemay Ferry road leading into the South County Shopping Center at South County Center Way.
2. * Initiate Lindbergh Boulevard/Union Road intersection improvement planning and implementation.
3. * Provide one or two continuous right turn lanes from the Interstate 55 exit onto eastbound Lindbergh Boulevard along the entire property frontage to Union Road.
4. A right turn only lane is suggested on eastbound Lindbergh Boulevard along the South County Shopping Center frontage from the current short right turn lane east of Union Road to the Cordes Drive entrance to the shopping center. While grades from the road to the shopping center are a consideration, this improvement could ease access into the center as well as improve traffic flow along a congested Lindbergh Boulevard.
5. MoDOT should investigate lane markings and signage improvements along southbound Interstate 55 for motorists exiting at Lindbergh Boulevard or turning onto Interstate 270/255. The current lane markings and signage can be confusing
Land Use
A. * The study strongly encourages and supports an update of the South County Shopping Center facade. Future plans for the shopping center should also strive to address poor internal circulation on the site.
B. * Remove the now vacant building on the property formerly occupied by a service station at the southeast corner of Lindbergh Blvd. and Union Road if no viable successor use is found.
Sixth District Community Area Study 78 Regional Commercial Corridor Improvements Map Short-Term Improvements 12
Green Park
5
3 2 B 4
A South County Center 1A 1
Legend N Municipalities Land Use Single Family Duplex/Townhome Multi-Family Commercial Industrial/Utility Institution Recreation Common Ground Park Vacant and Agriculture
500 0 500 Feet
Prepared by St. Louis County Department of Planning June 2000 Regional Commercial Corridor Improvements
Long-Range Concepts (See Map 13)
The long range concepts suggested by this study are projected to commence in five to ten or more years. The suggested solutions are a vision generated by this Community Area Study process. None of these concepts has been solidified. It is hoped that they will stimulate thinking and eventual action to address the long range transportation and land use challenges facing this area. Suggestions for alternative solutions are welcome.
Transportation
1. The proposed route for Segment 2 of the Cross County MetroLink extension from Shrewsbury to Butler Hill Road as it would affect the Lindbergh Boulevard/Lemay Ferry Road Transportation Corridor is shown. It should be noted that the possible route shown is conceptual in nature. Additional studies as well as an extensive planning and public participation process is required before a definite route is selected. A dashed area at the southwest corner of the South County Shopping Center property depicts a conceptual location of a park and ride lot for MetroLink to accommodate the light rail station anticipated at this location. MetroLink plans should also take into account the need for bus transfer facilities on the site.
2. * A ramp from the Lemay Ferry Road exit (north of Forder Road) from Interstate 255 over the interstate highway into the south end of the South County Shopping Center property is suggested.
3. The existing signalized intersection of Lemay Ferry Road and South County Center Way could be upgraded. The feasibility of a grade separated intersection should be studied if warranted by traffic counts. Drivers exiting the South County Shopping Center presently have access to both north and southbound Lemay Ferry Road and westbound Interstate 255 after crossing Lemay Ferry Road.
4. A possible roadway paralleling I-255 could be constructed from the Lemay Ferry Road/South County Center Way intersection to provide direct access to eastbound I- 255 for traffic exiting the shopping center and on Lemay Ferry Road. The roadway would connect to the existing ramp to the interstate highway from Lindbergh Boulevard.
5. Lindbergh Boulevard at Crescent Drive improvements could include limiting access to and from Crescent Drive to right turns by closing the break in the median along Lindbergh Boulevard at this location. This action would eliminate a very hazardous condition. Additional improvements could include closing all curb cuts along the south side of Lindbergh Boulevard between Interstate 55 and Union Road; all businesses would then be accessed from Crescent Drive. An alternative would be to close Crescent Drive’s access to Lindbergh Boulevard completely. All eastbound traffic would then be required to travel to Union Road to gain access to the land uses west of Union Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 80 6. If Crescent Drive’s access to Lindbergh Boulevard were eliminated, provision would have to be made for access to the properties which do not have curb cuts on Lindbergh Boulevard. Arrangements would have to made to accommodate the access needs of the land use mix in this area at the time of the improvement.
7. The existing signalized intersection of Lindbergh Boulevard with St. John’s Church Road to the north and Elm Park Road to the south could be upgraded. Such an improvement should be done in conjunction with improved access from Lindbergh Boulevard to the properties to the south where land use changes could allow the construction of a main access road through the property currently occupied by the mini-storage warehouses and paralleling the western limits of this area. The suggested road is shown terminated at the southern end of the area. No access is proposed across the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way to Von Talge Road because of the residential nature of the uses along that roadway.
8. A possible roadway connection is shown from the proposed Union Road extension over Interstate 55 to the suggested roadway on the property west of the interstate highway that is now served by Elm Park Road. Any roadway and bridge construction should be coordinated with the building of the MetroLink line in this area.
9. A possible roadway connection is encouraged between Lindbergh Business Court, which is accessed from Lindbergh Boulevard via St. John’s Church Road, and Lin Valle Drive, which connects with Green Park Road. Since these roads are within the limits of Green Park, any such improvement would be the City’s responsibility.
Land Use
A. Multi-story offices with restaurants on the lower level as well as garage parking facilities are suggested on the southern portion of the South County Shopping Center property. Garage parking would be necessary to replace surface parking lost by construction of the office and restaurant uses as well as to accommodate MetroLink users who could park and ride at the light rail station on the shopping center site. A weather protected skywalk could be constructed from the office/restaurant/parking/and MetroLink station to the South County Shopping Center retail mall so that all users could have easy pedestrian access between all facilities.
B. * Properties with independent uses along Lindbergh Boulevard and Lemay Ferry Road in the southwest quadrant formed by these two roadways could be eliminated and the property integrated into the South County Shopping Center site in order to enhance the overall appearance and visibility of the shopping center.
Sixth District Community Area Study 81 C. Consolidation of properties and redevelopment with more substantial office uses could be considered in the area bounded by Lindbergh Boulevard, Union Road and Interstate 55. Inclusion of the existing apartment complex property will have to be evaluated at such time that redevelopment takes place. Existing retail uses such as Circuit City and Toys R Us could remain if it is determined that these continue to be viable uses at this location. Newer offices and a hospice facility exist in the southwest corner of the area. Construction of a weather protected skywalk across Union Road could be considered to link new office uses and the South County Shopping Center.
D. The development of office uses on the southern two-thirds and restaurants and motels on the northern one-third of the area west of Interstate 55, east of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way, and south of Lindbergh Boulevard should be considered. Motels and restaurants would not only provide support services for new office uses in the area but would also take advantage of the interstate highway locational characteristics of this area. Existing motels and restaurants might continue along with newer uses if they are still economically viable. An additional MetroLink stop to serve the new office uses could be considered. This area could also be appropriate for coordinated retail development of larger users. A traffic impact study will be required to determine the appropriate scale of development and whether sufficient access would be available at this location.
In considering the Short Term Improvements and especially the Long Range Concepts presented the following considerations should be kept in mind:
• Many of the suggested solutions are complex and will require the coordination of many affected parties. • Traffic studies will need to be conducted to test suggested solutions to determine increases in traffic generating and handling capacity. • Project costs have not been determined; costs versus benefits will have to be weighed. Funding sources will have to be determined and secured.
Sixth District Community Area Study 82 Regional Commercial Corridor Improvements Map Long-Range Concepts 13 E L K . N R E I A R N P R P P G C L IN A T E R I . H K N IL N T R L E A LN E C D . C E R R D R G A D A B R . E - . R .
R R L Y I H P C S U S R B E R B O A R . D Y Y P M U L R H E C R A E T T . D R C . R P H E E T B L O W R N A Y R . E D R R S E I F E L D R C R A B N H R H O B . M R T L O O S A S I B K C F M D H M D E A R L S R C . O . W . S R R G D B O D L R O
V 5 L D R U 5 . A T . D R H T E N . T A . O M W T L S Y A N R . R E E D K T M R B Y N M D R O I I P T D B S F A .
T C A D
R N O A M L R
O P S . N E E C N D Y R . L T I W O L R D T A . . R H V S R O T S D . U M K L K O R . N O . S A T I F F C A H R L . E R O S D D C R A L L Y A . E B E N P E A R R R L R D . L S E
T E . A T
T Y A . H V R T
D U G M G V D V M S E R N R A U K P E A R E R Y E . A N P D R R R C R D .
K COUWELS DR. C M L O W E R
S G O E U D M T R H . S E . T R N 9D O D E R L R N N . A O E N L D E S L O A O C U D P I T A R H L E . R N A I C R T E . C L I E H . . D N IR C I T C R G R N H CONCORD OAKS DR. A Y . S M L C V L T . A I E A I
T L ONE L R R R ELM E . DR L D P . NE I N E O N N O R L D . E O R . A R T N I T
C U . . N
R H R E N E Q H . S E IR L T S U U A D T S E G R SO R E E S P A N N R P I N SC A D S E G H I W L 1 . N R U O R R . B K E T R E H O H A T S Green G T F D N R O D U I K E W R D B O N . A D S I O N I O L D P O
O W O E
Park W S D E S
A A R L X H O
O L N C
C E B N D O R . C
M A N O R W . BELLEWOOD DR. O O R D D D R
5 . R 5 V A C O N C O R D R D . IC N TO D SAPPINGTON S A P P I N G T O N R Y H S A . DR E D B . L
A D R L H R R C R D O R A M R C U C I . H K T
C S D C H 'S R H W N . F Y O H . T . O R J D S D . . T E R
R S R D D
. R 5 E . . D . T 0 N R R .
R , R
. O F U D T T O D N 6 S W 1 E V R O L O O T E & P D S T T
6 A E E 7 N T A EL A G 7 D P . S C L D L . H R R L . D A I
A F
R D R E C E O
E D E K T T . B R T T A O H D L E . R N E S L Y R T I P N A . D H R O D O RRYFIEL N N D BE . L U R O V
O I D I S S D E E K L N
L R L E O L N N K A I . M C .
I L A F W A AL K I W KER
R R R D EST. Y R. D A R O E P
R M D
E K C M N
B L C
E A D A I O
W O C T 29K530801 .
.
. D R E R T Z E R M . A D T R T H A V E R L E I G H C T D .
S U N N Y V I E W . R N D O 5 7 K I 6 R N 2 A T U P E B L A . W I R R
. R D E . . T I D W N . Y V O E W R R Y O C H A S H S D N W I C K D D R . E AN N R . I C R TA D L S N E . R E D C T A
T R A IN T E H . -L E S
E N D R G C E E E
G . v L M O R N I G T L N
A D B
T E R M . G S L R H E E D D T N R E O C B F I E L D B R O O K T E R . S L C E V D R D
C R . .
E V ER G R EE N L N. D R . . D 6 R . U D . R S .
H Y W R South County Y R . E F 5 0 , 6 D 8 1 Center & H 6 2 7 70 S O N U E V T B O H U O C I O N U N N E N T Y V U T C EN A A T N T A L G E ER L V OM E A D O W S C T . P G KW Y Y E . A M E L
M E A D O W A S D R Y . A 5 . W 5 R N E T L N . E C D Y 3 K R T N C U O A C H H T O
. U O D S R D
E G D R . L
A
T I - 2 5 5 4 E
T
S A
N S W T
O E
O S V N D R I I 2 N T E E R S T A A T E
P T E 2 5 5 N 7
M 6 I & 1 6
. Y W H G E M E A D O W S C T . I D
R E . H G S
T D .
I U U R
O E H
S G
T D T U F I O H O R
R Legend E
S D E H I R
T S
S U
O
S
7 Future MetroLink Route 6 & 1 6 N
. . R Y D W E M A H M ML unicipalities N N E IL O O N H V R T O . L R T T A E . G G W D C . V D D IN E V . N R S . U E S O . A L I N N E B I E A U K T V S M R A
LandH Use R N D D C
R . E E
. . B K
R M R R Y E Single Family D E R D . F H L Y Y M A E E L L . Duplex/Townhome L F N O L R A D D T V O L E . O R R EH L O B D M C W G R S S N H A R L L Multi-FaI mily E L O N I L V I K I S K D E S H I R . N R E G O B F L A C T T Commercial H B . B
E L A A I A I S L R I N D S B . R B N . E C M Industrial/Utility L R T E O R L H . O O R N I W G R Y Y V L O E I L R I E T Institution K V W E C R D H R E S T E R E
D R . D B . R R . Recreation . B A N N I N G C T . . T C R A N D H D E Common Ground L I M A R Y A L A N C T . E W S A S H E D R D . D G E T R E E L N . R X . Park . R R D
D . Vacant and Agriculture S U M M I T A V E . . T N H L . . F G O T R R R D I D D Y L E L R N H I L V I N A O E W .
S F N O S R
G L F L D T I
V L
L T
I H E I
R E M H E 500 0 500 Feet W E
R K D C H . R E T
N . O D E . A L R
D K T R A S
R I C D Z K
. G A A
E C E N O .
M . T R M N G
. I
R U . . S 7 D R P C D A W S W E D 6 A E A O O
H I L O V
B T V PR repared by St. Louis County R T F L & U G A C
E D N K O T R O G R S S . A L E .
1 E R
A D S D 6 G L
N R A
E D
Depa. rtment of Planning O O K
I F
N R
L R D A D E . N
C D . Y R . F A I R V I E W L N . K D I W W N June 2000 R G R E H A N D O E
P A K G R F K D I R
. R F A S O P
R R E .
D
N E U E K O F
. O R E
T C
. R . T S G E D T C R E D D Map Neighborhood Commercial Corridors 14
Legend Municipalities Land Use Single Family City of Duplex/Townhome Multi-Family St. Louis Commercial Industrial/Utility Bella Institution Villa Recreation Common Ground Park Vacant and Agriculture N
500 0 500 Feet B ay Prepared by St. Louis County le ss R Department of Planning iv May 2000 er D es P er es
Ho ffm ei st er ay dw oa Br Lemay Ferry Road d a o R y rr e F T e y y l tr a e en m g G e r L a p h Broadway
R
d
.
Park Lawn Cemetery Ripa
n to s g in K
Jefferson Barracks County Park IX. Revitalizing Our Neighborhood Commercial Corridors
Assets and Characteristics of Neighborhood Commercial Corridors
Neighborhood commercial corridors provide valuable services to the residential neighborhoods of the Sixth District and supplement the offerings of the larger regional commercial corridor. Local businesses that meet daily and weekly shopping needs are neighborhood amenities that South County residents value. Such neighborhood services can be found at several locations in the Sixth District, nearly all of them along state highways. In the southern portion of the district, Telegraph Road, Lemay Ferry Road and Tesson Ferry Road all have businesses that serve neighborhood and community needs. The regional Lindbergh Boulevard commercial corridor discussed in Section VIII contains local services along with more regional types of businesses. Commercial land uses along Gravois Road and Telegraph Road north of I-255 also serve local commercial service needs.
Three commercial corridors in the older portions of the district are integral parts of the neighborhoods they serve. The need to keep these business areas thriving and attractive is recognized as important to their neighborhoods and to the economic vitality of the whole area. The Gravois corridor in the Affton area has been the focus of a planning and redevelopment effort over the past few years. The other two neighborhood corridors are addressed here.
Broadway from Ripa Avenue to the St. Louis City Limits
This corridor is located in an older part of the Sixth District and most of the commercial structures were built over sixty years ago. A typical building in this area is a store front style structure built adjacent to the sidewalk. What parking exists is adjacent to the structures on vacant lots or on-street parking. The building setbacks in this corridor are consistent, but many of the buildings have had facade changes which deprive the area of a consistent architectural character. Services offered in this area are neighborhood types of services, laundromats, beauty shops, etc. However, there are a disproportionate number of auto repair and auto service businesses located in this corridor.
Lemay Ferry Road from St. Louis City Limits to Park Lawn Cemetery
Development in this corridor is a little more diversified than along Broadway. Most of the structures were built about fifty years ago and, as in the Broadway corridor, most of the commercial development is the storefront style structure. However, this area contains more residential buildings, and the building setback profile is more inconsistent than along Broadway. The area between Telegraph Road and Park Lawn Cemetery contains newer structures with ample off street parking. There are some newer structures between Telegraph Road and the St. Louis City Limits, but in general, most of the buildings are older and located adjacent to the sidewalk with limited off-street parking. Like the Broadway Corridor, this area offers neighborhood
Sixth District Community Area Study 85 services and also has a disproportionate number of auto sales and auto service businesses.
Streetscape in the Broadway commercial corridor.
General Issues Which Impact Neighborhood Commercial Development in the Sixth District
Although the previously described corridors were developed at different times, there are five common issues that have a profound influence upon their future development.
Zoning Issues
Zoning requirements designed for new development tend to impede redevelopment of older areas. Commercial areas built prior to the enactment of current zoning ordinance do not always conform to current lot size, lot coverage, setback and parking requirements and are not readily adapted to such requirements.
The predominant zoning categories in these two corridors are C-2 Shopping District and C-8 Planned Commercial District. The newer developments in these corridors tend to be located in the C-8 District, and these sites have few zoning ordinance issues which would inhibit future development.
The C-2 District, which is the predominant district in the Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road Corridors, contains some restrictions which are not compatible with older commercial developments. As previously discussed, the typical building in these older corridors is built on the sidewalk, the buildings cover 50 percent to 75 percent
Sixth District Community Area Study 86 of the lot area, and the sites contain little or no on-site parking. Many of the commercial sites in this area, especially vehicle repair and service related facilities, were built prior to the adoption of the current zoning ordinance in 1965, and these uses are classified as non-conforming uses. The non-conforming use status means that a site which is vacant for more than six months or a site which is substantially damaged cannot be reoccupied without being brought into compliance with current zoning regulations. Typical older store front buildings fail to comply with the current C-2 District regulations in the following respects:
• Buildings must be set back fifteen feet from the road right-of-way. • Buildings must not cover more than 25 percent of the lot area. • Lot area must be a minimum of 12,000 square feet. • Required parking must be on the same lot as the building, and the parking area must be fifteen feet from the road right-of-way. • Buildings may not be over two stories tall.
Under normal circumstances, market demand would dictate the types of businesses located in an area. Newer businesses would be allowed to move into an area like Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road to replace businesses which are in overabundance, such as auto service facilities. However, the normal turnover in these areas is inhibited by the non-conforming status of these businesses, because a new type of business moving into this area would have to comply with the existing zoning ordinance requirements. These requirements are easily met in regional commercial corridors such as the Lindbergh Boulevard Corridor, but they impede the redevelopment of sites in the Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road Corridors. Most of the older structures fail to meet the on-site parking and other requirements mentioned above; therefore, the landowner tends to sell to another owner who wants to offer the same type of business. This perpetuates the existence of older services, regardless of local economic demand, and limits the newer types of commercial development, such as office space or higher demand neighborhood services, from locating in the area. The high number of non-conforming uses in this area has stifled growth and renewal in these corridors.
Poorly defined parking areas cause vehicular and pedestrian conflicts and detract from appearance.
Sixth District Community Area Study 87 Aesthetic Issues
Small lot sizes, lack of open space, and two story structures adjacent to the roads are the main reasons for the lack of “curb appeal” in these two corridors. The perception of clutter is heightened by the mixture of facades and building conditions in these areas. The overabundance of auto service facilities containing numerous cars in various stages of repair adds to the visual clutter of the area. The major sources of clutter in these corridors are:
• utility poles, • freestanding signs, • on-street parking in irregular patterns, including on sidewalks, • parking exposed to the road with little or no landscaping, • sites with little or no landscaping, • inconsistent setbacks from the road, • inconsistent facades and architectural designs, and • single family homes interspersed among commercial structures.
Road Proprietorship
Broadway and Lemay Ferry Roads are maintained by the State of Missouri, and St. Louis County has no role in the road related issues. Road improvements and maintenance are critical to the future of a commercial corridor. State maintained roads in the study area vary in width from Lindbergh Boulevard, a large divided road, to Broadway, a smaller two- and four-lane road. A divided road attracts bigger, high- visibility commercial developments which attract regional customers. Smaller businesses typically found along the Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road corridors can survive on a road with slower traffic, because slower traffic affords potential customers the opportunity to notice low visibility neighborhood commercial development on smaller lots. State control of the roads necessitates state involvement in any proposed changes by business owners or the County, and no long-term redevelopment of these two corridors can take place without road improvements.
Lack of control of the roads also impedes the County’s ability to regulate the spacing and number of vehicular entrances or curb-cuts. The lack of curb-cut regulation allows sites to develop independently, and each site typically has a freestanding sign which increases visual clutter. The State also regulations the placement of sidewalks within their right-of-way, if there is ample space. However, if the state were to widen Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road in these corridors, the rights-of-way would not be wide enough to allow for widening of the road without removing the sidewalks.
Sixth District Community Area Study 88 Pedestrian Walkways
Sidewalks are an important concern in the Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road Corridors because adjacent homeowners walk to and from commercial establishments along these roadways. The condition of sidewalks on these roads varies from good to poor. In some places sidewalks have been damaged or are obstructed at times by parked cars.
Environmental Issues
Environmental contamination is not a major problem in the Sixth District, but its existence could impede development of specific sites. The sites most likely to contain contamination are old service stations and commercial structures once used for vehicle repair and service. Most of the cost necessary to clean up sites is borne by the owners of the sites, but in some circumstances Missouri Department of Natural Resources insurance funds are available.
Goals, Objectives and Strategies
In order for redevelopment to take place, three groups need to work together and form partnerships to promote development in the Sixth District. St. Louis County needs to be involved, because they control the zoning and funding tools. The State of Missouri shares an interest in these areas, because they control the roads. The business owners control the condition of the structures in these corridors. Revitalization can best be achieved through the following goals, objectives and strategies:
Goal A: Facilitate the revitalization of older neighborhood commercial areas in the Sixth District in order to enhance the area’s image, economic viability and tax base. First priority should be given to the Broadway corridor because of its central location within the Lemay community and its relative consistency of building types and uses. Second priority should be given to the Lemay Ferry Road corridor north of the Park Lawn Cemetery.
Objective 1: Stimulate reinvestment in the Broadway and Lemay Ferry Road business districts, emphasizing the reuse of older buildings.
Strategies:
a. Revise the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance to remove major hindrances to reuse of buildings in older commercial areas that were developed prior to the adoption of the current zoning regulations. The following specific revisions should be studied and considered:
Sixth District Community Area Study 89 1) In areas where existing structures are situated adjacent to the sidewalk, allow reuse of those structures and encourage similar setbacks for new construction in order to maintain the character of the area.
2) Establish a mechanism for architectural review to facilitate the coordination of facade styles, building heights and building setbacks.
3) Provide for different maximum lot coverage and minimum lot area requirements than those mandated by current zoning regulations or provide a variance process to accommodate older buildings and new construction within older commercial areas.
4) Modify the parking requirements for older commercial areas to allow such solutions as shared off-site parking areas or reduction of required parking for neighborhood businesses likely to attract pedestrian customers.
5) Establish landscaping standards to buffer parking areas from roadways.
b. Require shared access between new or redeveloped sites.
Objective 2: Facilitate the development of business district organizations to promote planning for corridor improvements, seek funding and conduct promotional activities.
Strategies:
a. Concentrate on forming a Broadway business district organization. A key activity of the organization could be to initiate an in-depth study of the commercial corridor with goals of improving pedestrian access, controlling curb cuts, creating shared off-street parking, eliminating sign clutter, and enhancing building appearance and landscaping. The study should also determine the scope of road improvements appropriate for the corridor.
b. Facilitate change by assisting non-profit business organizations in obtaining funds for redevelopment projects through the use of the Community Improvement Act or other appropriate funding sources. The following are improvement priorities:
• Beautification and landscaping projects, • Increasing the amount of off-street parking available, • Assisting in facade improvements to provide a unified character to an area, • Reducing clutter by moving utility poles and creating a less intrusive signage policy.
Sixth District Community Area Study 90 Goal B: Address split roadway jurisdiction issues and promote roadway planning.
Objective: Address the problem of divided road proprietorship which impedes the realization of commercial revitalization goals as well as inhibits sound planning practice for new development.
Strategy
Develop a road master plan to address road issues that are integrally related to revitalization of commercial business districts along state-controlled roads. Concerns related to state-controlled roads that are vital to commercial revitalization include road improvements and maintenance, sidewalk requirements and policies, control of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and control of curb-cuts. The object of the road master plan would be to find mutually agreeable means to meet the present and future needs of the State, the County and the business owners.
Goal C: Remediate environmentally contaminated sites within these corridors to foster development of the area.
Strategy
Develop a partnership between the not-for-profit business organizations and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources to clean up contaminated sites. All appropriate funding sources should be used to achieve decontamination at the earliest appropriate date.
Sixth District Community Area Study 91 Map Vacant and Underutilized Sites Location Map 15
30
City of St. Louis d Roa vois Gra
W eb 55 er Rd. . d R
21 e 30 i z Stuppp Brothers y a n w e Bridge and Iron Works d k a
Reavis c ro a 267 Ruprecht B Park M Dr. Quarry M R t. e O a liv Defense vi e s Ba Mapping rr ac ks R Reavis Barracks/ d. Grant's Trail 231 Green Park Rivers Commerce South Lind Center ber gh B Budrovich lvd.
d. R ry er F Elm ay em Park 50 267 L Road 55 61 67 r . South County e d v Center R i
R h p i p Illinois a
r p g i e s 61 l s e i 67 T s s i
M
F 255 or de r R d. 231
Koch P ot tle Hospital R d.
Yaeger Rd. N
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
Prepared by St. Louis County Department of Planning June 2000 X. Redeveloping Vacant or Underutilized Industrial/Commercial Sites
Assets and Characteristics of the Area
As the Sixth District approaches full development, the location of new economic enterprises will increasingly involve reuse and redevelopment of underutilized sites on which previous uses are no longer viable. This section inventories the larger vacant or underutilized sites in the study area and identifies strengths and constraints of these sites.
The older inner-county communities of Lemay and Affton were developed several decades ago, and the industries in these areas are in older buildings with outdated infrastructures. Also, the types of industrial facilities on some of the sites studied: i.e., cement plants, bridge and iron foundry, lead processing plant, and a rock quarry are older industries no longer in high demand. The combination of older structures and lower economic viability makes many of the sites prime locations for redevelopment or revitalization. The likelihood of these sites redeveloping is increased by their location near an abundant labor force, and their proximity to transportation facilities, river, rail and interstate highway systems.
The Department of Planning used a computer program to locate commercially or industrially zoned vacant land in the Sixth District. The result of this computer search was the location of vacant industrial/commercial sites scattered throughout the Sixth District. These sites ranged in size from five to 145 acres, and subsequent review of these sites indicated that the development potential varied greatly among sites. The fact that these sites are scattered reduces the possibility of property assemblage for a major industrial plant, but these sites would be appropriate for medium to small size industrial or office developments. In addition to the scattered locations, almost all of the sites have constraints which could impede development and make the task of finding developers more difficult. Limitations which many of the sites have in common are:
• Location entirely or partially in the flood plain, • Inadequate street connections to the interstate highways, • The need for buffering to make sites compatible with surrounding residential areas, • Older outdated buildings and infrastructure.
Three general conclusions can be drawn from a site-by-site review of vacant or underutilized industrial sites. First, there are a limited number of sites available for development in the Sixth District. Second, the sites have as many constraints as they have strengths. Third, these sites will develop slowly, because each site needs a developer who values its strengths over its weaknesses.
The focus of this study is on sites that were previously used for industrial or commercial uses but are now vacant or underutilized as a result of relocation or
Sixth District Community Area Study 93 downsizing of the former use. Large vacant or underutilized tracts of land in urbanized areas, like Affton and Lemay, represent opportunities for future economic development. Also included are a few sites which have never been developed or have a marginal use as compared to the surrounding development.
The location of these sites in the study area provides advantages in terms of accessibility by roads, railroads or river and proximity to developed areas with potentially available labor force or customer bases.
In addition to the larger vacant industrial sites mentioned above there are smaller vacant and underutilized sites located in commercial areas throughout the Sixth District. Some of these sites are in older retail centers which have a difficult time attracting or keeping retail establishments. In some cases, the old anchor stores have relocated to a newer or larger retail center, and in other cases, the center has fallen into disrepair and can no longer attract customers. These retail strips may have diminished value to some potential retail shop keepers, but their location and access make them a prime spot for office development.
Other vacant commercial or industrial sites which have redevelopment potential may involve environmental clean-up prior to reuse. Examples would be the several vacant gasoline service stations scattered throughout the study area or older commercial buildings that may contain asbestos. These sites also represent opportunities which may require assistance to facilitate redevelopment.
General Issues
Some vacant commercial sites are not being utilized due to their diminished value as retail sites. These same sites are potentially viable if used for office space. The Sixth District contains about 14 percent of the County’s population and approximately 11 percent of the County’s land area. However, the amount of office space, by square foot, equals only 3 percent of the County’s total. Office space is a financial asset to the Sixth District as a source of real estate tax revenue and sites for future professional jobs. In order to highlight the tax revenue advantage of office space, the Department of Planning staff compared the appraised value, per acre, of selected retail and office sites in the Sixth District and other parts of the County. This comparison indicated that office sites are appraised at twice the value per acre of retail sites. A two to one change of appraised value would be significant to taxing districts, such as the school and fire districts, which rely upon real estate tax revenue as a major source of income.
Besides the tax advantages of office space, it provides space for future professional, technical and administrative support jobs in the Sixth District. These job sectors could be key sources of future employment in this area. Providing a Sixth District location for these types of jobs is critical to keeping the work force diversified and continuing to attract both residents and new commercial developments. Many existing retail sites contain vacant space which could be used for office space with
Sixth District Community Area Study 94 minor facade changes. Using these underutilized retail spaces would provide additional office space to the Sixth District, and provide income to commercial centers which have a difficult time attracting retail clients.
Economic Shift
In many ways, the Sixth District reflects the national movement from an industrial economy to a technology-based economy. Many of the industrial sites mentioned in this section of the report reflect the decline of older industrial sites. Sites which are prime for office development have the following characteristics:
• Second tier sites which are located behind existing retail development but have good road access, • Sites with topographical limitations not suitable for retail, but adequate for office development, • Vacant parcels in commercial areas suitable for office development, • Under-utilized or vacant retail space which could be converted to office space.
Industrial and commercial sites have always been important to the community. When these sites contained functioning industries, they provided jobs and tax revenue, attracted home buyers, and provided adjacent commercial areas with customers. These sites are now a concern to members of the community because they are unattractive and no longer provide value to the area. During the study process the following concerns were expressed:
• There is a need for the Chamber of Commerce to sell the assets of the study area. • Clean-up is needed, and that which cannot be upgraded should be torn down. • The County should provide assistance with environmental problems that arise in the redevelopment of vacant commercial buildings. • More commercial office space is needed – not so much retail, except in well planned large-scale developments.
Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Goal A: Find economically productive uses for the relatively few remaining vacant sites and for underutilized industrial or commercial sites.
Objective 1: Promote redevelopment of sites with projects that have the best potential to generate new jobs, provide needed services to the area, and increase the tax base of the community.
Sixth District Community Area Study 95 Objective 2: Diversify commercial activities and land uses and expand employment and tax base within the Sixth District by facilitating the development of office space.
Strategies:
a. Explore opportunities for office development in vacant or underutilized retail buildings and shopping centers such as the Franview Plaza Shopping Center or the former HQ site on Lindbergh Boulevard.
b. Identify sites in commercial corridors with topographic constraints or limited visibility from major roads that might be more conducive to an office setting rather than retail business.
Objective 3: Use appropriate funding tools listed in Section XIII, Implementation Tools, to expedite the development of sites and achieve the goals of this report.
Objective 4: Encourage development which is best suited to the community and is compatible with surrounding land uses.
Strategies:
a. Promote efficient reuse of sites in a manner that provides appropriate buffers between existing land uses and the new development.
b. Revitalize unattractive or poorly maintained sites with developments that enhance the appearance and value of the property.
c. Remediate environmental problems that hinder redevelopment of sites and/or pose a hazard to adjacent properties.
Objective 5: Foster the redevelopment of smaller scattered sites, such as closed gas stations, where vacant buildings present a negative image of the community.
Strategies:
a. Utilize existing brownfields programs to remove unused vacant structures and remediate environmental problems on the property.
b. Explore legal remedies to remove unused vacant structures.
c. Initiate a study that would develop a program to facilitate the removal of certain uses, such as service stations, that are left vacant and not reused within a certain period of time.
Sixth District Community Area Study 96 Analysis of Specific Sites (See Map 15 for locations.)
Site 1: Stupp Brothers Bridge and Iron Works (Map 16)
This 39.6 acre site is located on Weber Road, just south of Interstate 55. Older vacant industrial buildings, once used as a bridge and iron foundry, are located on this site. There are some newer building on the site as well as 3.6 vacant acres adjacent to Weber Road. The current zoning on the site, M-1 Industrial Zoning District, allows for light industrial uses, office space, manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, and warehouse facilities.
The strengths of this site are its location on Weber Road near I-55, and the fact that part of the site is vacant and could be developed immediately. Also, some of the single-family properties adjacent to the site are zoned for light industrial uses and could be consolidated with the Stupp Brothers site to create a much larger site with frontage on I-55.
The constraints of the site are that the Weber Road and the I-55 interchange needs upgrading to accommodate increased traffic volume. Also, removal of the dated industrial structure and infrastructure could be expensive. A small part of the site is located in a 100-year flood plain. At present this site lacks adequate buffers from the adjacent single-family homes.
Recommendations:
1. Promote consolidation of the 39.6 acre Stupp Brothers site with adjacent parcels to accommodate a planned mixed use commercial office/office warehouse development.
2. Develop a road improvement plan for this new development which addresses the need for an improved I-55/Weber Road interchange and appropriate improvements to Weber Road to accommodate increased traffic.
3. Use of a planned industrial or commercial district is encouraged as a mechanism to assure adequate landscaping and buffering to adjacent land owners, to minimize the impact of lighting and signage on adjacent properties, and to provide an optimal land use mix on the site.
Site 2: Elm Park Road (Map 16)
This 35 acre site is located at the intersection of I-55 and I-270 at Elm Park Road. The current zoning on the site, M-1 Industrial Zoning District, allows for light industrial uses, office space, manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, and warehouse facilities.
Sixth District Community Area Study 97 Site 1: Stupp Brothers Bridge and Iron Works Map B 16 LE H R L G E A I V R D D E E LB R D PA N U A R R IM K A G E C V T E W
D R R O D D A F R D VE N R City of St. Louis A G R O D E S M B AVE E R N T IB A N . C2 E A N I R S T R O T A E P N S R7 N V H R Y E IO E A IL N E U L R C A M3 M G R5 C E R T M R5 W A A E E VE D R " E F B D " E O N R L " N L W - A H V " O E HUM S 55E Y D W MIN
H G B E N D
IP IR L U E A P D " R V O Y F W O AN " A R FF W A TI IL G S L E S IN U I E N E E V E Z V A V M1 A E R
T D D A G
FPR5 H R DR Ameren ID
G R
I M1 B
N Stupp Brothers U.E. R 55 D - R5 i R I Bridge & Iron Co. FPM1 v
e
r
R5 D
TY CT e
FPR5 s S E E E AJ S E P M T FPM1 S V E A e H C N U R5 N r RR e A P E RV T DE A s PE LI K E R T S V T E T A R RFPC8 L LE L A ID A K FPR5 A G IN C IE BR E C8 E R O B L D A N P A D E A E LL W O
R C O G A A N H T S A S A B T S N Y A IN N D A D E A A I V L E M
R S V A L S A A U E D S C A V R O I T B A DG E R D Legend C E T O FA H FPC2 R D R N E C V BELLA VILLA N IS N V S A Zoning District A C IE A A R L W H - D A L R A T I L L D
N - R R5 Land UseT V D A N N A
S N U A RD D S A L A V R5 L E L E I O L L R K A C FPC8 I Single Family E IN V A B G E Y W M TR N E U N C2 E Duplex/Townhome E V C8 U L I A CO L S A D C8 IE S B OL A Multi-Family Commercial Industrial/Utility Institution Recreation Common Ground Park Site 2: Elm Park Road Vacant & Agriculture D D D R H DR M A SAPP IN I LL TC 200 0 200 400D FeeHt G R . F
D O T T EST
R R R S O D R S ' R D
D D
N N
A H H L C TR N O R R Prepared by St. Louis CountyO J E O M1 U D T T N W R H R N Department of Planning O F U D D C O A O
E P R S A B C D D ES L June 2000 L
E
A G L T E R
L H R E B
I D
A V R F L IC T A A D L D R3 LE D O P TO C I R R N S R
I K
A K C8 S C8 D N N R R L N
O K O
A N
E O A
E
D
R L V R K M
L
A R M1 C8 M R6 A O C C
P I M1 A D D I N
W O O D A R C D L T R7 R E HAVE M ZER M L 5 AT
E IEW I T DR G C H C8 5 C4 T R - D BLAIRW O I AN O R4 I H D TA
WICK T C8
N L E I
D L N R Elm T R - C8
E N S R E R D E E D 5 R S C2 Park 5 E R MON T G R3 - R O L I IN C C D A BE Road R . G D T D H
R N N D I E R E FIELDB ROOK TER C V E E S S R T O E U G A R T R T H E M1 C S - I R C D DR B O L C3 South O C B C4 N LV C8 W T D A.ADWORTH DR C8 N Y County . O A.LITTLE ROCK RD I RD . R O T B.PROVENCE DR A D B.ARROW TREE DR N D L Y S Center C R C.VANTAGE DR & C R C3 R C3 E C.HILLMONT CT C F N D.VUECREST LN T Y R S A D.STONE WOOD CT P . O M E.LEMAY MANO K Y U E W C T L T H E.ROCKSPUR CT Y N N G T F.ADWORTH V E U Y D O C . R C A N G.TARAVUE C T CC8R E . S S M2 H E T N U L G O K S C L R I - A D 27 C8 A 0/ H 25 O 5 D A The strengths of this site are its present zoning, which allows for immediate development for all M-1 uses including office space, the high visibility location at the intersection of I-55 and I-270, the fact that the site is about 50 percent vacant, and its proximity to South County Mall.
The constraints of the site are the location of electrical transmission lines and towers along the western edge of the property, the limited access to Lindbergh Boulevard which would need to be upgraded to accommodate high volume users, and the undersized sanitary sewers which may need upgrading.
Recommendations:
1. Promote commercial development on this site, emphasizing office, which could benefit from the visibility of the site from the interstate highways. This area could also be adapted for a coordinated retail development emphasizing larger users.
2. A traffic impact study will be required to determine the scale of development on the site.
3. Encourage development on this site which improves the signalized access at Lindbergh Boulevard and provides adequate buffering to residential property owners west of the site.
Site 3: Defense Mapping (Map 17)
This 40 acre site, with 22 acres in St. Louis County and 18 acres in St. Louis City, is located on Broadway adjacent to the Rivers South Site. The site contains four older buildings which were once used by the Department of Defense, and parts of the site are in the 100-year flood plain. The present zoning, M-2 Industrial Zoning District, allows the site to be used for such heavy industrial uses as manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, business school, warehouse facilities, and a truck terminal.
The strengths of the site are its location on the River Des Peres adjacent to the Rivers South Site, and the fact that it could be combined and developed with the recreational uses proposed on the Rivers South site. Another advantage of this site is that the present zoning would allow immediate heavy industrial use. Also, the present owner, the U.S. Department of Defense, may revert the land to the local governments. This would allow St. Louis City and County to coordinate the development of the site.
The major constraints of this site are that it is in a flood plain area and any alteration or demolition/reuse of buildings on the site would require the new structures to conform to current flood plain regulations. Some of the buildings and infrastructure were previously damaged by the 1993 flood, and the general condition of the buildings and the infrastructure is not known.
Sixth District Community Area Study 99 Site 3: Defense Mapping Map Site 4: Rivers South 17 A V Y E Y A
R W D A A O R B T A I L V IL E E City of St. Louis M TR5 H C A K W A AY V S E E E S R P E H N O C R H E N D IE
V R S D A N A H E V A A R W W VFPR5 E A E iv IS LL e S ER 1 r A 3 R5 V 2 D E C2 . A Y e V W E s A H V E E T P A T e A S r VE e
Y FR M2 s R AN Defense A K FPM2
T E
I C8
A L A V I V E E M R7 C2 Mapping AY A C8W V AD E O BR MSD E MV3 G A O E T FPR5 A Z R5 CV2 E CENT H O F VE MANN AVE F M r E WRIGHT IS e T E v R i VE A R E.CARTWRIGHT AVE V A E i p AVE C8 p i C8 s FPM2 s E. VELMA AVE i s s FPM2 i
E
V E M
A l M1 AVE HOLDEN V
A a Y M2
A c i . CW 2 Rivers
D o
AVE m A LORETTA
O C e
R FPNU
h South
B
AVE R5 C
FELTON
R
E
I V
A C8
A D
N
I AVE ARLEE A
N AVE
R
I
L
R
P E R5 E
P
O
V J PS FPC8 AVE C2 A
PERRIN FPC8 Legend CT. Zoning District
E Land Use C2 AVE V A FPC8 Single Family Y A Duplex/Townhome W M3
D E I E
A Multi-Family V R
O
N Sisters of A E
R
N R5 Commercial
I
B L Notre Dame Industrial/Utility
N
R7 I L FPM2 Institution
P
O ELLEN AVE Recreation
J Common Ground AVE NU MSD Park Vacant & Agriculture
TEDDYR6 AVE 200 0 200 400 Feet
Prepared by St. Louis County N GARK Department of Planning June 2000
Jefferson BarracY kBRsAND
B
G D
A R FPPS
D CoNunty Park B O R RTH Recommendations:
1. Develop the site for recreational uses in a manner that is compatible with the future development of the adjacent Rivers South site.
2. Improve the appearance of the site with landscaping and signage and lighting that is compatible with adjacent properties.
3. All new structures need to comply with F.E.M.A. flood plain regulations.
Site 4: Rivers South (Map 17)
This 79.6 acre site, (currently 50.6 aces are zoned M-2 Industrial District and 29 acres are zoned C-8 Planned Commercial District) is located at the terminus of Hoffmeister Avenue, adjacent to the Mississippi River. The site was formerly used as a lead processing plant. A significant portion of the site is in the 100-year flood plain. The M-2 Industrial District zoning allows that portion of the site to be used for such heavy industrial uses as manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, business school, warehouse facilities, and a truck terminal. However, industrial development is not feasible in the flood plain under current regulations. The portion of the site zoned C-8 Planned Commercial District allows a casino and accessory uses. However, no casino has been approved for the site by the Missouri Gaming Commission.
The strengths of this site are its location along the Mississippi River and the River Des Peres, and its obvious recreational potential. The site is owned by the St. Louis County Port Authority, and Empowerment Zone funds are available for environmental remediation, demolition of existing structure and grading of the site. The biggest constraint on development of the site is its location within the 100 flood plain, which makes most industrial, commercial or residential development unfeasible. A change in zoning would be required for recreational uses. An additional constraint is the single access point from Hoffmeister Avenue, which involves crossing a railroad track to reach the site.
Recommendations:
1. Promote recreational/tourism development, such as a RV park and nature center, which will be a catalyst for attracting additional private sector reinvestment in the area. Any development should be sensitive to the wetland and flood plain characteristics of the site.
2. Encourage development which would help stabilize this inner suburban portion of the County by reusing an abandoned industrial site.
3. New uses should provide linkage to the existing parks in the area and to the St. Louis Regional Greenway System.
Sixth District Community Area Study 101 4. If a casino is authorized on the site by the Missouri Gaming Commission, a transportation study should be prepared to determine ways of enhancing access from major roads in the area.
The approach to the Rivers South site crosses the adjacent Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way.
Site 5: Reavis Barracks/Grants Trail Site (Map 18)
This 34.5 acre site is located on the north side of Reavis Barracks Road adjacent to Grant’s Trail. The M-1 Industrial District zoning on portions of the site, allows for light industrial uses, office space, manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, and warehouse facilities. Other portions zoned C-8 Planned Commercial District were the subject of recent rezonings and specific uses are specified for each site.
The strengths of the site are its location adjacent to Grant’s Trail and proximity to an I-55 interchange. The constraints are that most of the vacant property is in the 100- year flood plain and is currently being used for outdoor storage, which is visually unattractive. In addition, the site is composed of numerous parcels with different owners. Diversity of ownership may foster incremental zoning changes, impeding efforts to achieve a more attractive unified development.
Recommendations:
1. Promote consolidation of parcels and developments which enhance Grant’s Trail and provide new recreational uses to the area.
2. Encourage removal of open storage or screening of such uses from Grant’s Trail to make area visually appealing for future recreational uses.
Sixth District Community Area Study 102 Site 5: Reavis Barracks/Grant's Trail Map Site 6: Budrovich 18 AV H E FPNU G NU F R6 C2
RD R D H e R av T is T B E ar N ra R E c U V ks B A C R IA I d M1 F . R I O C S L N G Reavis BaA rracks/ E P D E R U Y S C8 A A N N Grant's Trail G E E M H H E D V R P A A L L R A O N R G L Y E O D A P B T
D P V A C
R P IS R E Y
A N C8 K D A
L M
H R E E FPM1 D N L B IA A C D R R C2 D R E R L R S D I T R5 B AC Y GR K S DR EENPARK il S FLPR5 T ra AW C T FPR4 N D K R R t's RD R N D n R4 A CARNATIO ra P M D EL G FPC3 R H O DR IN N C W IR O B O FPR4 R4 D D D DR R BU RE R6 D E Y NU LA N C3 R N A L LN C8 R
D P E D C F
R E
P M1 P R4 P A R4 R5 FPM1 Y A C3 M LE N R A D FPR4 V DR A JO NU C8 FPC8 M R D A D R R Y C A N C8 D R N A D A C R E L O N D R R D C8 D LeWgend O B ZoninYg District R K A IN D K C R4
E RA Land Use R R B FPR4 D E R Budrovich R Single Family T D U R S I B FPR6 O Duplex/Townhome N R6 N A C A Multi-Family E A R4 B R L N M FPC8 O E ComE mercial B X D C2 B IndR ustrial/Utility U A D O R IGnstitution R R Y E O B
C8 W S F R O RecreatioLn E R6 O R E N C4 B CommoTn Ground N I TF A Park O M R R D D Vacant &ID Agriculture R D D FPR4 L R D F 200 0 R 200 400 Feet R AIN R E R D A D E USTI V C R B W IS O R PYrepared by St. Louis County NR DR D C O DeLpI artment of Planning FF D EJune 2000 AR Y R E C8 DING A L Y I C B B R D R N T E D R R D M A D E T R R W B O Y L N Y Y E W E E D Site 6: Budrovich Site (Map 18)
This 4.8 acre site is located on the west side of Lemay Ferry Road just north of Buckley Road. The site is zoned C-2 Shopping District and C-8 Planned Commercial District. The site contains a few structures, but most of the site is vacant. This site has commercial development potential with good access and visibility.
Recommendations
As part of the larger Lemay Ferry Road corridor, this site’s strengths, constraints and possible future uses are found in Section XI, Providing Land Use Guidance for Subareas with Development Potential.
Site 7: Reavis Park Drive (Map 19)
This 11.7 acre site is located at the terminus of Reavis Park Dr. just south of Reavis Road adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. The current zoning on the site, M-1 Industrial District, allows for light industrial uses, office space, manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, and warehouse facilities.
The strengths of the site are that it is vacant and could be developed immediately with any M-1 District permitted uses, including office space. In addition, the railroad right-of-way adjacent to the site, may be used for the Segment 2 Cross-County MetroLink extension from Shrewsbury to Butler Hill Road. A major constraint is that electrical transmission lines and towers traverse the site from north to south. Any proposed uses would need to be buffered from adjacent single family homes. Finally, the site would not be appropriate for a high traffic use because of its very limited road access. The only access other than by residential streets would require extending a cul-de-sac serving industrial properties off Reavis Road.
Recommendations:
1. Promote uses on the site which would be compatible with homes adjacent to this site.
2. Appropriate uses include low traffic volume light industrial or warehouse uses.
Site 8: Green Park Commercial Center (Map 19)
This 145 acre site is in the City of Green Park and is located on Green Park Road just west of I-55. The current zoning is Planned Light Industrial which allows for light industrial uses such as, office space, manufacturing, fabrication and assembly facilities, warehouse facilities, open recreational uses, research laboratories, data processing centers, and retail sales. The site formerly contained a cement plant, but
Sixth District Community Area Study 104 Site 7: Reavis Park Drive Map Site 8: Green Park Commerce Center 19
A R C D PA D K R T NCHO D R
E DR S R C D
I O
D E E L EIGH EMO
C N F
E
K
I R S
R I N R Z E N C8 E L C
A O CANT N B
E
P S
E O ONA M S O K S LEM E T S D I I
E O M1 L REGAL C Legend
O V J R T R F I V A A E AR WA F G D M ER Zoning District -
E
U
HOPPY A R R
H
D E R L R R3 A N L Land S Use LEN DR J DORISAN N CT Single Family A R I L R A D Duplex/TownhomAeD I O M N K O E BONTON D T . Multi-Family N D R R4 A KOERBER D R FORD LN LN Commercial SOUT R Y R CAN CT R TO Industrial/Utility E F C Institution N N RIDGLEY LN A EUCALYPTUS L DR O S
N N Recreation S A
MYRA R S L O
N E D
T T CommonL Ground S CT N R E BARLOW O SEQUOIA Park D B B C T T R R - R3 M1 C D L O
L I R4 Vacant & Agriculture L AR S EO- R3 LN D K W D A L A T WOLFF R R A D H VISTA C W X O
H R
K I O Y O
T E F 200 0 200 400 Feet ReW avis O T C H O E R F M N
A V E O B B T I Y D I A K A
S A D
L L L
W D A N
M A G
Park Dr. E ST P
L E N A E
DR O E O LI M A T S S N C Z N D M Prepared by St. Louis County N O H H K AL A U
N M L L A H OR Department of PlanL ning T G A S A M . R4 N Saxon CONTINENTAL June 2000 CR R L W I N RE EE DG AVIS B
K E Manor Y . D SO A
CK R G IND PHINE T B S M1 CT RA LN R
DR C N N T A M T Apts. R L O A D E N B R A C L L D B R 0 S CARRIAGE K A W N E LN L E CROSSING YAFFBUR P Y A FF
T TO K R6A LN S D E FORE R. N PLACE DR N
L
V E
IE C Z S W R SO E N A TAG D OP P H T H
R C C T L L
I A T E N D N I R. G A E S D I L
M I A MXD A L N M D F P O LN A P E
R P C H N V R P Z I D E A R O R4 Y EE E I
M H N JACKHURST R K T N J B LN
S A H E M E O L BER
I A S F M P N S F KW D D H R R E E Y. . . T . L R C M1 A DR O CO Y RNW V N E C
O D R
H
R
FPMXD D
H R4 I D R R L
C M L
D C C D O R R S RY
R R6 A
D N O
L
A H C S DR V
G N
N C FPM1 I L I S I
I E O D T
E
E E
V
D
L C I G U R A
F Z
R ra E n J t FPR4 D ' E F s L A N Tra Y
E
i B l R E Clydesdale G L
J
R L K
C A
A C L T L A County M DE FPR6 HY U M DR M Park PARK
A. N. BUNKER HILL DR B. S. BUNKER HILL DR FLOOD PLAIN C. ECHO RIDGE DR D. VIA VFEPNEMT1O DR M1 E. MANSARD DR 5 5 R6 F. MANSARD DR - GREEN PARK I G. BURNETT WALK H. EIFFEL DR
R U D Green Park N TE R R Commerce Center A C DR
B U C K D L R E FLOOD PLAIN Y R D B FPM1 R U ID G G E R PA E GR RK R E PI E PA K N NE E EN H C G N RE I T AR HI P G D LL AR EN P D K S A R RK FPC2 LL N L DR S GREEN PARK O O A U RD N W TH I E TO M S W 5 A U F 5 C6 S C A A NE I- C RM H C S R D D R L the old buildings have been removed, and quarried portions of the site are being filled for use as building sites.
The strengths of the site are the variety of lot sizes, and the fact that zoning is in place for immediate use. The main constraint of the site is limited access via a narrow road crossing the flood plain. A new bridge across Gravois Creek is planned to better connect the site to Green Park Road. However, there will still be no direct access to major roads suitable for high volume traffic users on the site.
Recommendations:
1. Support industrial development which conforms with the City of Green Park regulations.
2. The amount of heavy truck traffic generated by any proposed development and the impact on roads in the immediate area should be carefully evaluated.
Site 9: Ruprecht Quarry (Map 20)
This 50 acre site is located on Mount Olive Road west of Lemay Ferry Road. The site is zoned NU Non-Urban District and requires a minimum lot size of 3 acres for residential development. The southern and western 11 acres of this site contain an active quarry, but the remainder of the site contains a large depression where most of the stone has been removed. Surrounding uses are residences on the north and west, a cemetery on the south and an industrially zoned office use to the east.
The strengths of the site are that it has substantial acreage and is located adjacent to an office facility which is zoned M-1 Industrial District.
The site has several serious constraints. Most of the interior of the site has been quarried and consists of a large depression. It is currently zoned for non-urban uses including residential uses and is located in a densely populated residential area. The site has poor access to the interstate highway system, and adjacent roads are narrow residential streets. The structure and infrastructure on the site are dated and obsolete.
Recommendations:
1. Support development on the site which is an asset to the area and compatible with adjacent residential homes.
2. The site may have limited use for the expansion of the adjacent office uses.
Sixth District Community Area Study 106 Map Site 9: Ruprecht Quarry 2K 0 R R D E IN B G W M E E U I V A S A D S B R K R FPM1 R N " E E A O H PS ST M R " V I NU A A A D E O H L N FPR5 M R S L FF B IE S C8 A O IR N A E R H T L D G C L E R H A A T V W V H A O E D A P O C FPC8 D E FPPS P R L P A U V FPNU R E BA Y Y E R5 H A LE U O M S
R S
N N FF E C2 L E D M R5 L V E HO A R IS R FPR5 D T N ER A H R5 O R V O G E F K B A F IL R6 R M L C R I M E R5 V E U O R I C2 E D N O S S S T O T H L NU C S IS E O B A R R IL P E D E 3. A G Z E D U E E R LE V R 1. CELTIC CT. E E R V M D O V A R A A A I R L D IE C R 2. DIEBOLD CT. R O E N AV L F V T M 2. H E L 3. MARCHI DR. R A AG R D R D O R5 N R Ruprecht I E A R5 K H X D 1. S O F R Y VE F O T M C2 R F T S E M R N U IE D U S S Quarry A A T O L
L N E R C R
T R N E A A
H D D V V
E N L O B D E E
R O L O R L
F 3. N IV D B A O N E
E E R P
R A M1 E IN T
D H G H S R D C R E P A FPR5 U A
C U W . N L G
E E A L O
R V E . E
V VE E C8 T T D R A S R Z R E O O Y M R I EL IE R C IA M N A A A A T R S A P T R VE V L D N T D E AC O C3 ID VE E V FPNU A R E Cemetery B N E A V R H T TLegend E C A L O V R IR O NU A L A E A B N J A E V U K I CE2 V T A H M 7 F E ZoningD District U E A 6 G FO E T 2 P E R G A R Y O R D E V S N E W IN A Land Use H H T V A D E RD E R NA T T E Single FamA ily A C R T L V R5 T A T R E E S T E N S DuMplex/THownhome
K A A I D M R Y
D H L D R L D L R A R R Multi-FamilyT T L D EN Commercial G Industrial/Utility Institution Recreation Common Ground Park Site 10: Koch Hospital Vacant & Agriculture
270 DR GATE F2P0N0U 0 200 400 Feet
S T I -255 V N IEW Prepared by St. Louis County N H G Department of Planning I N L I DR N E L June 2000 H FPR4 MA I- O R 2 R SE 5 C I M3 D LLE 5 S D A R P E B S ER I TR R6AA R AN N D R D I-2 U R 55 D E S AS T D ON ALD K S O ON C
H D M1 O LN J effe O rs FPNU on B W arra K c ks B A r M3 idge O RD R D NU KO CH FPM3 Y
R
O R K FPNU D Koch HLospital Site C TO UL I L A O L N H I T H I DR P HOS R6A FPNU
R R O D UE r N D R DR P e A V R T v T i RA NU V FPR6A S P R D D R i R M p A N A FPM3 p D ME i N R R D s D s RD i R R6A D D s R s D i N D
E Y R M
X M T E
U A C L
A N N E O E D S R L A LO H FPNU O M NE B D E R
N
S T M3 MAG OF V FIN P Site 10: Koch Hospital Site (Map 20)
This 89.5 acre site is located south of I-255 at Koch Road overlooking the Mississippi River. Part of the site is zoned NU Non-Urban District, which requires a minimum lot size of 3 acres for residential development, part is zoned for multi- family development with an expired multi-family development plan, and part is zoned industrial. The site once housed a hospital complex which has been removed.
A major strength of the site is direct access to and from Interstate-255 both eastbound and westbound. The site’s location overlooking the Mississippi River offers scenic vistas as well as direct river access.
Constraints include the flood plain on part of the site, the combination of adjacent industrial uses to the south and residential uses to the west, which would require appropriate transitions and buffering, and the limited alternate access to the site. Koch Road, which enters the site from the west, serves residential neighborhoods and is not adequate for commercial or industrial traffic.
The riverfront adjacent to Koch Road is one of several sites that have been under consideration for a future casino, but the site lacks proper zoning to construct a casino.
Recommendations:
1. The site has potential for recreational, institutional and multi-family residential uses.
2. If a casino is approved on this site, a transportation and development impact study needs to be prepared to make sure that future development is compatible with existing property uses.
[See also Section XI, Providing Land Use Guidance for Subareas with Development Potential, regarding this site.]
Sixth District Community Area Study 108 XI. Providing Land Use Guidance for Subareas with Development Potential
Characteristics of the Area
Areas of potential development and redevelopment in the Sixth District are clustered around three State Highways (Tesson Ferry Road, Lemay Ferry Road, and Telegraph Road). Currently, development along these three major roadways is a diverse mixture of intensities. Uses range from single-family residences to large apartment complexes and from small residential structures that have been converted into office/retail space to major retail concentrations and industrial uses. In addition to the significant difference of intensity of the development, there is also a wide range of age of the development. Older areas such as the portion of Telegraph Road north of Interstate-270 are faced with redevelopment issues, while areas farther south in the district area faced with new development and the potential for the conversion of older homes into commercial and industrial uses. While undeveloped or underdeveloped areas remain along major roads, much of the district is developed to the point that land use patterns have been established and variations from the predominant pattern would not be appropriate.
General Issues Pertaining to All Sites
A key issue addressed in this community area study is the need to provide development guidance in order to promote consistent and compatible development in the Sixth District. In particular, areas of NU Non-Urban zoning, which exist in some of the less developed areas, will be addressed. Such zoning dates from a time when large areas were semi-rural, and the wide range of options allowed in the Non- Urban district was appropriate. As the Sixth District approaches full development, more definite land use guidance is called for. Also needed in today’s more urbanized setting are specific recommendations regarding lot consolidations, provisions for pedestrian and other non-vehicular traffic, landscape buffers and adequate service provision. Noting that there is a limited amount of land remaining for development and redevelopment, the study has attempted to provide alternative uses to allow for a balance between residential, commercial and industrial development.
General Land Use Guidelines
Goal A - Residential
Residential development should be encouraged in areas where residential patterns have been established and should be buffered from high-traffic non- residential uses with transitions in density or institutional or other low-traffic uses.
Sixth District Community Area Study 109 Residential Guidelines
1. Promote appropriate transitions between residential and commercial or industrial development, e.g., higher density housing, institutions, or lower intensity commercial development.
2. Particular attention should be given to the adequacy of the building sites. Where physical limitations, such as slopes, sinkholes and rock outcrops adversely affect a site, appropriate modifications should be made. Special procedure zoning (Planned Environment Unit) should be used as a mechanism to assure the use of the most buildable areas of a site and conserve its most sensitive terrain.
3. Site design should include provisions for pedestrian and other non- vehicular traffic. Linkages between residential neighborhoods and neighborhood commercial nodes, institutional uses and public facilities are especially encouraged.
4. Future subdivisions, including minor and large-lot subdivisions, should be encouraged to include reasonable improvements which enhance traffic safety and ameliorate site hazards.
Goal B - Commercial
Enhance commercial development in the study area by encouraging planned developments that compliment existing development within established commercial corridors.
Objective: Foster a broader mix of commercial development in the Sixth District by encouraging office development at appropriate locations in established business corridors and on major roads.
• Encourage larger scale office development on larger underutilized sites, including vacant retail locations, in the Sixth District’s central commercial corridor and elsewhere near other large-scale commercial development. • Encourage the consolidation of parcels for appropriate scale office development in neighborhood/community commercial corridors.
Commercial Guidelines
1. Commercial development should have access from and be oriented toward major roadways and not extend into residential areas.
Sixth District Community Area Study 110 2. Commercial development in neighborhood and community scale commercial corridors should be oriented primarily to the needs of the surrounding residential community.
3. Encourage consolidation of parcels to achieve efficient internal circulation in commercial developments, to minimize curb cuts and the resulting congestion on abutting roads, and to improve visual appearance through coordinated layout, landscaping and architectural design. Special procedure zoning (C-8) would further enhance the ability to efficiently develop sites with adequate buffering and linkage to adjoining commercial development.
4. It is essential to provide screening or buffering to protect residential areas from potentially adverse impacts of commercial uses such as excessive noise, glare from lights and unscreened views of commercial structures. Such screening and buffering is especially important where the depth of the commercial parcel is limited. An alternative approach is to situate land uses in a sequence which provides a transition of land uses as a buffer; for example, higher residential density uses can be placed between lower residential density uses and commercial development.
5. Plan for and incorporate pedestrian and bicycle routes in commercial districts and include sidewalks, even on state roads, especially in neighborhood-scale commercial districts.
Goal C - Industrial
Industrial development should be located in areas where it will not adversely affect surrounding residential development, i.e. on larger sites which have direct access to state highways or County arterial roads and are separated from residential uses.
Industrial Guidelines
1. The assembly of small parcels should be encouraged. This would allow for efficient internal circulation on larger sites and eliminate the need for unnecessary curb cuts and offer the opportunity to enhance landscaping and architectural continuity.
2. Use of the Planned Industrial Zoning District (M-3) would provide review and control of development to assure adequate buffering and screening for other less intensive uses as well as appropriate linkage to adjoining commercial or industrial development.
Sixth District Community Area Study 111 Map Subarea Location Map 21
Sixth County Council District
WILBUR PARK 55
21
BELLA VILLA 267 LAKESHIRE ST. GEORGE 1 231 2 GREEN PARK SUNSET HILLS 3
21
270 50 267 55 61 11 67 4 61 67
255 7 8
9 5
12 6 61
67
21 55 10
231
Subareas 1 Tesson Ferry and Musick Roads 2 I-55 and Terminus of Spokane Road 3 Lemay Ferry Rd. North of Will
4 Telegraph Road North of I-255 231 5 South of Jefferson Barracks Bridge 6 Telegraph Rd. South of I-255 7 Lemay Ferry Rd., I-255 to Butler Hill N 8 Butler Hill Road and I-55 9 Lemay Ferry Rd. South of Butler Hill 10 Meramec Bottom and New Baumgartner Roads 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles 11 Tesson Ferry Rd. South of I-270 12 Tesson Ferry Rd. South Prepared by St. Louis County Department of Planning June 2000 SUBAREA 1: Tesson Ferry and Musick Roads (Map 22)
Boundary Description: Parcels that front along Tesshire Road and the west side of Tesson Ferry Road north of Musick Road, south of the intersection of Tesshire Road and Tesson Ferry Road.
Existing Development: The existing buildings were built predominately in the 1940’s and 1950’s. Several of the residences have been converted to commercial uses including a chiropractic office and a contractor’s office. Vacant and/or deteriorating buildings exist along the northern portion of Tesshire Road. Residential structures on the west side of Tesshire Road north of Musick Road are in excellent condition. In the northern part of the subarea are a Hill Behan Lumber Company and a school bus storage site.
Adjoining Uses: The City of Green Park abuts the area along the eastern boundary of Tesson Ferry Road. Multiple family residences in the City of Lakeshire abut the northern boundary of the area. Single family residences abut the northeast boundary across Tesson Ferry Road. Directly west of the subarea are single family homes zoned R-4 Residence District. Additionally, the Grant’s Trail crosses this subarea.
Physical Features: There is an extensive amount of flood plain on the eastern portion of the subarea along Tesson Ferry Road. This greatly restricts the amount of developable space due to building restrictions in the flood plain. The small creek flowing under Musick Road parallel to Tesson Ferry Road is also a major obstacle to development. Additionally, significant slopes exist along the rear of eastern parcels along Tesshire Road and Musick Road. This grade differential presents potential constraints for their redevelopment.
Existing Zoning: Currently this subarea has numerous zoning districts within its boundaries including R-4/FPR-4 Residence District, C-2 Shopping District, C-3/FPC-3 Shopping District, C-8/FPC-8 Planned Commercial District, M-1/FPM-1 Industrial District and M-3/FPM-3 Planned Industrial District.
Zoning History: With the adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance this area was zoned a mixture of M-1/FPM-1 Industrial District (northern portion of the area) and R-4/FPR-4 Residence District. Since that time there have been several rezonings to bring existing uses into compliance with the zoning ordinance in addition to the introduction of commercial districts in the area.
Sixth District Community Area Study 113 Map Subarea 1: Tesson Ferry and Musick Roads 22
S T O N E E L L I L S E
B U F F D R . T I M O N
D R . . City of R D D D R R . Lake. shire R I M
S G Q R U P A U N I T T T S R I N F E G O T R O E N S T L N . D R . W R I . O L . S L R D R C . O A D D M N M R M . O D N E R A W O L F F D
D N D D O R E D . W H R R E . S
O S
D
L U
A
L R T E
I L E
M K S I OD R I S L U K R4 M O N N I A C D M R K R K E D R
. A E
R P K .
. R D E D . R . R E D G A L L MXD I . T V C L Y R N A A E
F P F F L O R M1 T I I N D A I F K F T A C D R N Y
. A L
FPR4 B S T O R E . F C T E vac. G A . FPC3 L R L MXD D I . MXD V E R S . R4 D Q D R Y C2 FPM1 U A S D N Z A P A A J T O S
R 1 F A S . 2 F E E I P U N R R4 T I L M1 P I H L A H E S I T R C A S . E E N E Y Y T B R O W R U R M1 FPR4 FPC8 N O C S A H M . C T
G P FPC8 K N I W E Y P . T M A A K T C8 S R D . R4 FPC8 vac. D . Y R R F E O N S S E T vac. D L O C8 . D R Land Use
Y Tesson Ferry Rd. DR R Single Family R4 . R S E G F I N O K Duplex/Townhome O R G B R E Multi-Family E N Commercial P A R K City of Industrial/Utility C R T E . Institution P I Green Park N N Recreation O U S S J S O E L Common Ground T A .
R T C Park
E L N I Vacant & Agriculture . R A M N L I S A 200 0 200 Feet S . L D T E R V S I N R U . G H R U L E N L D H Prepared by St. Louis County . L R I I E N Department of Planning H T G G D T D U February 1999 R E A R . . H L R P I N H G U E G E L D A R R Land Use Characteristics: In this subarea a clear land use pattern has never developed. Industrial and commercial uses characterize the properties fronting on Tesson Ferry Road. The existence of several auto repair and service facilities on Tesshire Road conflicts with the residential uses at the south end and the recreational uses along Gravois Creek.
Recommendations:
1. Existing residences on the west side of Tesshire should remain residentially zoned unless a unified redevelopment of all or most of the subarea could be achieved. 2. Piecemeal rezoning should be discouraged. 3. Proposed development plans should include the consolidation of lots and coordinated planning. 4. Planned districts should be utilized to insure the adequate buffering of remaining residences. 5. Architectural review should be encouraged due to the site’s location adjacent to the park and Grant’s trail. 6. Flood plain portions of the subarea would ultimately be more suitable for recreational uses if existing uses were discontinued. Additional recreational uses associated with Grant’s Trail would also be appropriate. 7. A unified redevelopment of all or most of the subarea would seem to have potential for improving on the existing mix of uses. It was the consensus of the Citizens Advisory Committee that the area badly needs improvement and a comprehensive commercial development should be encouraged. Low intensity commercial uses or possibly an office development would be suitable if a number of substantial constraints could be addressed. These include: • the large flood plain area in the center of the subarea including much of the Tesson Ferry Road frontage, • limited visibility for any development caused by the small creek running along Tesson Ferry Road, which would necessitate setting the development back a considerable distance from Tesson Ferry Road, • the severe grade differential between the Tesson Ferry Road frontage and the western edge of the subarea, • the need to buffer residential uses to the west, and • access limitations which would be difficult to overcome. Currently, access from the north is via the unsignalized Tesshire Road/Tesson Ferry Road “Y” intersection. Access from the south is from Musick Road a very short distance from Tesson Ferry Road, where a signalized intersection is not feasible. Direct access onto Tesson Ferry Road is obstructed by the creek and the flood plain and would probably need to be opposite Tiffany Square Parkway to meet state Department of Transportation requirements. If this new access is provided, the above- noted “Y” intersection should be either closed or restricted to southbound access only.
Sixth District Community Area Study 115 Map Subarea 2: I-55 and Terminus of Spokane Rd. 23
V . I L L A R I D G E C T .
T S O P H I N E . C L N . N
L
T
E
S
S . O N . N C L A N RR Y A F F B U R I Y L N . L C AGE CROSSING PLACE
. R DR. B
N A E . R L
E D H R E K R
G A . L C
I N A E E K E L S V
S L
L C Y
T A F H R
D S F A S O N N T A G A R . L N . E M N M E
J
B A
M D
H L M
M T R I I L
N
A .
N E . D E
H Z L
R E M I
F D
M
P
A
U
H .
S
R J A C K H U R S T
D L N .
D
R H E B Y . E R L I E E D R . L
L
A
V C C H A M B L I N D R . O N D C O R R
J COR
D NWEL
O . L E
C N D H F R .
N I L F
O L
R
C
L E
S Y
C H . MC CORRY DR. M R C C T O G RR D Y D R
. .
. I
S
D R Single-family
N E
D
A E
H L D . V
C
R
F R R homes under
A I
A F
G R6 D D
E
E
S E
I
L I
V
B
J construction Z
A
R 5
E
A L
N 5
R R4
M I C E
E T K Y U L L . C A E . J L FPR4 A L . T D . R4 U D R A R M P A R K M d H Y D E T R S R E R5 e T N n I N O a I k N U
o X p O B
S . R D
D R .
. X T O U R P S B E D M1 W L E O D R FPM1 E T
F
F
U
L G U B R6 M E G G
K R E
A r E N
L a P n A R t K 's
T r H E a N i Z l d L E 5 a R -5 o I R U N n I O io N T City of n E R U R A C C O E A Green Park C D H R E R4 L . L
A
B S U U
N
C R K B I
U S
L C E J E K A
C Y L I E N Y T O
. R . I D D R R G D E Land Use P C W A T A R . Y K Single Family H I K L R FPR4 L D . A O Duplex/Townhome R P N I . M N R A E C Multi-FD amily K T C D R E . R A R . . P G R R CommercialD D N E . E R G Industrial/Utility
Y . A R WInstitution D E L S E U S E A RecreUation T C O U N R A A H CommC on Ground C Park S C M H I R A L E S L T A
O Vacant & Agriculture G
5 L 5 N T E T A S R 200 0 200 400 Feet E M D M D R T I A .
C
N O D
L R O . N C Y T Prepared by St. Louis County . Department of Planning
. R February 1999 D O R D A P . A B G A R A R D R T D H E T N S S E . SUBAREA 2: I-55 and the Terminus of Spokane Road (Map 23)
Boundary Description: The subarea is adjacent to I-55 to the east, Grant’s Trail to the west. To the north are existing multiple family residences and single family attached units under construction.
Existing Development: This subarea is currently occupied by a single-family residence and several other accessory structures. Two advertising signs are also located on the site adjacent to I-55.
Adjoining Uses: Abutting the site to the east is Interstate 55, to the west of the site is Grant’s Trail. To the north of the site are a mixture of existing single family homes, duplexes and attached single family homes under construction in a mixture of R-4 and R-6 Residence Districts.
Physical Features: A significant grade exists rising from the southern most point to the northern boundary. The western third of the site is located in the flood plain.
Existing Zoning: The site is zoned M-1/FPM-1 Industrial District.
Zoning History: The site has never been the subject of a rezoning request.
Land Use Characteristics: The 40+ acre site remains undeveloped. Areas to the north have developed with a mixture of attached and detached single-family residences in the R-4 and R-6 Residence Districts. Access to the site is very poor. Any alternative means of ingress/egress other than Spokane Road should be reviewed. Possibilities include extensions of stub streets or a connection off Mackenzie Road.
Recommendations:
1. Although the property is zoned M-1/FPM-1 Industrial District, residential development would be more appropriate than industrial uses, because adjacent parcels have been developed with housing, and access for non-residential uses is very poor. Park or passive recreational uses could also be considered. 2. Any proposed residential development should use a planned district procedure. 3. Proposed densities should be consistent with the surrounding developments. 4. Pedestrian access should be provided to Grant’s Trail if the site is developed for homes or a park. 5. A portion of the site could be used for a future Southside MetroLink route that would connect with Segment 2 of the Cross-County MetroLink extension.
Sixth District Community Area Study 117 Map Subarea 3: Lemay Ferry Rd. North of Will 24
U V B A C IA I . F Y R I L d M1 O C L E L A R A L N G E A P L e D K E U n O R M a P M U A k S R AL N G o N D U E S H C8 V H p O P I L A A S N C N R R O O L E O U R D Y A P X N D P V A B O U R P IS R E B S N FPM1 D A L K S H C8 R E W D N EE B IA R5 T A FPC8 C D R R D R E R L R S D I C2 T B G AC FPR5 Y U GREEN K S M DR PARK S LA R6 DR R5 W N D K R GR R FPRR4D R ENPARK D R4 A E CARNATION P M H E D EN L R d Z E H O DR a L N C IN N o U ER E W R N IR O T IO G B O En N DR E D FPC3 R V D DR UD R4 R A R B A RE C D E R6 Y E LA N R L N DR N A L R D P E D C F
C T R E C8
O AH P P
A Q P C U A C3 R HE IT M1 D L Z R4 J L Y A A A C M IN E TO FPR5 L B R U SU N C N A D K R V LE R4IS DR A Y E JO C T W D R R M R A D C8 A D Y D R R Y L C A L D N E R R D D C8 N AC A E Y S R A U E R FPC8 L O T D N W DO R E U N D S R U A A A W C FPR4 O C H B Y C R K A V IN D K C I A A M E R I A R4 R R A L E S T B FPR4 E R R T D U R S Budrovich B I O N N FPR6 C8 A A Site R6 E B R L N O E E C2 X D B R U A R G R Y E O F W S O L O E R FPC4 R6 R B T R E N D HALL I E C4 A M H R T N N SHORES D ID I C L R D E R DR Y D K FA R R A R IN R E D RUS D A R6MA TIC V W IS R E YC D L DR D L R S IF E S F R E DA E C R R R A O DI K NG A E H R Y C8 I C E S A R DR R N T D R M D L R D V E R H L R E B T A N F FPR4 O L Y Y L E N H Y Y W Y A E E M E E M K D L L E L E L C R B R K K A A M D C W C G E E U C8 U E U S W B B S T B D A D O W O I S N R R R A D DR W R C J LanH d Use T O A H L A A N D HOL N A E B Y - Single FamilyN T D C2 A R " C N Duplex/Townhome "H A G T O RAIL J E E CT V
A Multi-Family CA - S JE
MELO ARD LN F F T G NS D E F
A.ASSUMPTION DR E O Commercial ER B
O D E
N S
D W T O L
L L O K N N O A B.ANNUNCIATION DR D DR W EE Industrial/Utility IA EK CT R N
RE C N C O C.CORONATION DR R R NO O M Institution MA P D.VISITATION DR SOUT AN A HSIDE M D CL RecreaRtion E.PORTUGAL DR R AY K K P E CoOmO mon GC round E L T D F.LOURDES DR WOO D R R WARD R C D Park T WI DR DR G R C L Vacant & AgricultuE re T L G
E
E
C R R B HI- R N N LA R L O ES R D C N O T L K LN 400 0 R 400 Feet O E O D S
E T V C R IL M M W LE E DR A D A GRAD RED S H D IENT WIN N Y GAN A R G U Prepared by St. Louis County R O DR B A C W N T D Department of PlanDning D R O A N R A R March 2000
C D L R O D R R E E D S E R W G R ND A HI N L D A Y DR D C A D E B R S R R N O B D SUBAREA 3: Lemay Ferry Road North of Will Avenue (Map 24)
Boundary Description: Parcels on the east and west side of Lemay Ferry Road between Will and Green Park Road.
Existing Development: The existing development in this subarea ranges from single family residences to big box commercial development. Buckley Road provides a natural boundary between the two distinctly different intensities of development. To the north of Buckley Road are large intense uses on large lots. To the south of Buckley Road are smaller commercial and residential uses on smaller lots including a church, bowling alley and medical offices. In terms of the age of the structures in this subarea, the existing residences were primarily developed between 1950 and 1980. However, the commercial development was primarily developed in the 1980’s.
Adjoining Uses: Abutting the subarea to the north, east and west are residential developments predominately in the R-4/FPR-4 Residence District zoning. To the south of the subarea along Lemay Ferry Road are additional commercial strip centers and Mehlville High School.
Physical Features: While the majority of the subarea is developed, there are several parcels that are either vacant or have redevelopment potential. Specifically, the Budrovich site has some topographical constraints in that the highest points of the site are along Lemay Ferry Road and the site slopes down to the west, towards the residential development. The vacant parcel north of the Grandpa’s Discount Store/ Value City Store has recently been improved by MSD and is now more viable for development. This parcel is already commercially zoned and authorizes all permitted C-3 Shopping District uses excluding advertising signs. One concern regarding the redevelopment of lots currently in single family use along the east side of Lemay Ferry south of Buckley Road is the depth of the lots and the ability to adequately buffer the residences to the east.
Existing Zoning: The subarea is a mixture of numerous zoning districts including R-4/FPR-4, R- 6/FPR-6, R-6A/FPR-6A Residence Districts, C-2, C-4 and C-8 Commercial Districts.
Zoning History: The subarea was primarily zoned R-4/FPR-4 Residence District with a small section of C-4 Highway Service District with the adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance. Since that time large parcels north of Buckley Road have been rezoned to a mixture of C-8 Planned Commercial District, for the development of big box retail, and R-6 Residence District for the development
Sixth District Community Area Study 119 of apartments and condominiums. At the intersection of Lemay Ferry Road and Reavis Barracks Road there have been several rezonings to authorize retail uses on small lots including a cleaners, bank and auto service (Jiffy Lube). To the south of Buckley Road on the west side of Lemay Ferry Road there have been rezoning requests to authorize apartments in addition to an auto service facility. On the east side of Lemay Ferry, past rezoning petitions include a medical office and retail center. The medical facility has been built. However, the retail center has never been developed. Additionally, a Special Business Permit has been approved authorizing the reuse of an existing single family residence as a dental office.
Land Use Characteristics: As indicated before, two separate intensities of development exist along this stretch of Lemay Ferry Road. To the north of Buckley Road large big box developments dominate the development pattern. However, south of Buckley Road there is a mixture of institutional uses, commercial and residential developments.
Recommendations:
1. Community scale office and retail would be appropriate in the location of the Budrovich and Grandpa’s/ Value City location including the vacant parcel to the north. 2. Proposed commercial development should utilize the Planned District zonings. This would allow for controls over buffering to adjacent residentially zoned properties, limiting the number of curb cuts and should promote the use of monument style signs. 3. New development on individual small lots should be discouraged in favor of consolidated development with fewer driveway access points onto Lemay Ferry Road. 4. The piecemeal rezoning of properties should be discouraged. 5. Although citizens have expressed opposition to additional encroachment into residential areas, single family residences facing roads that have become major commercial corridors have limited viability for long-term residential use. Of the eleven remaining residential properties fronting on Lemay Ferry Road north of Mehlville High School four have already been rezoned for commercial use. More realistic approaches include limitations of commercial uses to properties fronting on Lemay Ferry Road and adequate buffering from adjoining residential uses.
SUBAREA 4: Telegraph Road North of Interstate 255 (Map 25)
Boundary Description: Properties along Telegraph Road north of I-255 to just north of Reavis Barracks Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 120 Map Subarea 4: Telegraph Road North of I-255 25 W K T E E S A A S W VE C D S TA D O O W O I G M S N R R R E A L 1 A D N DR R L N 3 W T J H 2 T O A E E . H C V L T Y A N D R N D A N A EN E O W - D LL C8 T R D H T R W S D R A - N N V I C O R6 D T J A IN W A R A N E E T U T H L D R D L R C2 R T
S E - S J I E G A R RD LN F S D A S R
G NS D E FE R BE R DR E
E O R B O BELLS- E L
O D E L N S T C
D W O L H S L O K N L H O E A N S E WORTH DR KW E IA W S EE CT R N TE
R C N O R C O R R R T R E D
O O M H D A T N R AN V M N P E IA Y MA A L L P A C R D A A P D L R R N A W R AY K E D K D P O E O O C C B E L T D D T C7 R R E D R T R D R T D C Y T J A WI DR E VE DR G R E JE G FF
A E E B R R N N A A S A.O'HARA ST L L R D C N C2 O L R N R O A E
O D S C B.TUCKAHOE ST K D T C W R S
A D R RED S H C.POPLAR FOREST W N Y ING R A AN A R G S U R D D.SHADWELL ST DR B A IS R N R L D D D D D O A R N E.ELK HILL ST R O L Y O R C E E R B E R W G G N F.ALBEMARLE ST ND A R N D HI N L E E C A E K D C N E LA
R N DR S L D D N
N E
T L L S D A R C8 R PA E U SC H N D R6 B
O A R F U I B C S P R H - U L IL S N D E L I T ID D D T E R N M E N A L A IA D E C R O T W T I V C L C A L E A A F E L R H T A T N O E D C
P R R S A U S M N H T E A Y D G L L S L R RM
C N V A H Y T E A L N H N T R S P R L V R E IA L O
D W O O N T D - O W
S B L D E O D UE N E R A R L R O D LL R A R M D T VE D R E G T S D R YL R C HALSEY VA O Y SP N R5 RI V W NG E D C8 PS S R R R O H Y K P R N P A A R R D N D A F G N R - N F U I C2 W E U L L ES R6 G N L S PS O TE L A A E B R L A C E O M T V D E E D R
S L L
DR T O VILLE C2 N S R
RD E A W
R T
E D M CKS UE A G L LER D SHERIDAN ID RD R SU L B M M IE P M I F LA ER G R C - D R E L
IN IS RD N G S
I R W A
R D EL Y L A M D A R C
K T L R6 E N D C8 E S O R R D EL -T R N T E LI N C G ALP E Land Use IN E G R ID L R Single Family IN E D DG R R I D D BR Duplex/Townhome Multi-Family NU RD Commercial Industrial/Utility Institution
L C8 E RecreaAtion
CommonV Ground E N W O O Park O D Vacant & AR griculture
T H I N 400 0 400 Feet -25 FPNU 5 J EF FE E RS K R O N N T D H Prepared by St. Louis County C E B Department of Planning KIN BRI SW March 2000 DGE O VI OD C8 EW S OUTH MA RT FPNU I - 2 IG 70 GATE NEY LN NU D R4 R4
R S R4 Existing Development: A wide array of uses exists in this subarea. The southernmost parcels of the subarea contain a Wal-Mart and a Sears hardware store, which are recently developed regional commercial facilities. However, other than Franview Plaza at the intersection of Telegraph Road and Sappington Barracks Road, there are no other large commercial developments in this subarea. Further north many small commercial uses exist on small lots; uses include offices, a pawn shop, barbers and a bank. Many of the structures in this area were built prior to 1940, with only a few built within the last decade.
Adjoining Uses: To the east and southeast of the area are the Jefferson Barracks Cemetery and Sylvan Springs County Park. Between the park and Telegraph Road are residential areas. To the north and west of the subarea are a significant number of residential units.
Physical Features: While there is no flood plain zoning in this subarea, significant stormwater issues do exist. There are inadequate detention ponds, stormwater drainage problems and localized flooding in the area. Additionally, there are pressures for the redevelopment of residences along Telegraph Road. However, lot depths vary in this area and potential redevelopment sites abut residences to the rear of the sites. Limited lot depth restricts the size of possible development as well as the land area necessary for adequate buffering between uses.
Existing Zoning: With the significant array of uses, multiple zoning districts exist in this subarea. The C-2 Shopping District and C-8 Planned Commercial District represent all of the commercial zoning in the area. The residential areas are zoned R-4, R-5, R-6 Residence District.
Zoning History In 1965 with the adoption of the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance three residential districts R-4, R-5, R-6 Residence Districts along with the C-2 Shopping District and C-4 Highway Service Commercial Shopping District were established in the area. Since that time there have been a significant number of rezoning requests which have resulted in the rezoning of residential property to commercial districts, specifically the C-8 Planned Commercial District. Recent developments have included the Telegraph Crossing Shopping Center at Telegraph Road and I-255, small office buildings and several auto service facilities.
Land Use Characteristics: Two separate land use patterns have developed in this area. To the south along Telegraph Road and I-255 is a regional shopping area (Telegraph Crossing) including a Wal-Mart, Sears Hardware and other retail stores. North of Telegraph Crossing Shopping Center is piecemeal development of small office
Sixth District Community Area Study 122 and retail uses intermixed with older residential uses. The one exception to this is Franview Plaza. While it was developed in the 1960’s and 70’s, the Plaza does represent a coordinated development effort. However, at present, it is largely unoccupied.
Recommendations: 1. Encourage the redevelopment/reuse of Franview Plaza for office development. 2. Retain existing residential uses along the east side of Telegraph Road between Franview Plaza and Sherman Avenue. 3. Promote the extension of the Jefferson Barracks Cemetery, specifically to include properties at its entrance along Sheridan Road. 4. Commercial proposals should utilize Planned District zoning and include the consolidation of lots, limiting the number of curb cuts and buffering any adjacent residentially zoned properties. 5. Architectural review should be encouraged. 6. Commercial development along Sappington Barracks should be oriented towards Telegraph Road and not develop beyond a depth equivalent to that of surrounding commercial properties.
SUBAREA 5: South of Jefferson Barracks Bridge (Map 26)
Boundary Description: The Mississippi River to the east, I-255 to the north, existing residential development to the west and the Bussen’s Quarry southern Boundary to the south.
Existing Development: There is currently a wide array of uses in this subarea. The largest of these is the Bussen Quarry and underground storage facility. Several businesses have their offices/storage at this site including Kuna Foods, Inplant Office Inc., and Universal Flavors. Additionally, CF Industries operates a large plant facility at this location. Also, several single family residences and an Elks lodge are located along the western boundary of the site.
Adjoining Uses: The Mississippi River abuts the site to the east, Interstate 255 abuts the site to the north and single family residences in the R-4 and R-3 Residence Districts abut the site to the west and south, respectively.
Physical Features: Due to the subarea’s location adjacent to the river there are some flood plain issues. In addition, ongoing quarrying operations have created extensive holes on the site. However, the remainder of the site is fairly flat and has a significant amount of vegetation. It should be noted that this site has a full service interchange with I-255 and has existing ports along the Mississippi River.
Sixth District Community Area Study 123 Map Subarea 5: South of Jefferson Barracks Bridge I 26 NS WO OD W S OUTH FPNU I - 270 DR GA R4 LN R4 NU TE
S R4 T I -255 DR V N IEW H G I N I D LN E R L H R4 R ON A M D O AR R SE C I FPR4 D LLE G S DR A A R6AA E R P B S E R I RT I-2 A R RA 5 T ND FPR6AA 5 L R N D I-2 I U R 55 S D E I S AS E T D U ON X ALD K S O DR ON C FH PM1 E D O LN L N O M1 L E FPNU L W E DR I K B A
RG O U RD R O D
DR M3 B E K R O L CH E L Y I H R E C C O S H R Koch Hospital Site FPNU E K D R L C D A R TO UL I L A R O L
M H D N FPM3
I NU T R H I NU
ST B DR P S O
. OS U H D
R. R
DR. G N FPNU A R R M OU D EN D R DR P A V E T RE R T R V T A FPR6A S P RR4 F D D E RE R B E R6A R O M A R N A D ME E R ND R D R R D D DR D
N D T E Y R A X E P M T L U A C
A N N R E P E O E O O S D S C H T R L T T MA LO K O NE R L B V E D Y D I E R R N
E S T W MAG OFF V IN P M3 D DR NU R
A D R R F GA R A F I D U
L
B R D R DR E R R r O R C E A e K F VE V v IE i W H A T R IL E ES L i W N IC O p TH R K C R D p i D R s s O i
W A I D M3 s S L R D ES R FPM3 G s W i N IC
A K
L D R M CT ORTH SW C DR T
N Y L ARR U Q Land Use RI DGE RD Single Family NU
E Duplex/Townhome R
L
E
E
B
E
O T Multi-Family
S D N E RD S Commercial S U B Industrial/Utility
EMPLINE Institution
C E
T L
C Recreation R I
RIC C N H DR C L Common Ground IF F C C A LI V F M3
N F Park RD E T C N O A C TO T V N N E H
D Vacant & Agriculture O
S
R R S
A K D HAL YA C R R S O N A D D M S R2 I O S R 400 0 400 Feet
R .
T C R ROCK E V
O
T A . P C S R S B R T LU O O CLIFF O HARB R C P FF C T RD Prepared by St. Louis County A CHATP H ORT C DR Department of Planning T S March 2000 C T R3 N U - P IER E H R D PORT L E I O
R
P O
D
E E W CIR N NGL T A S DI ND SH A Existing Zoning: The area has several zoning districts sprinkled across it. The quarry site is zoned a mixture of M-3 Planned Industrial District and NU Non-Urban District. Additional M-3 District Zoning is located along the river where CF Industries is located. There is a small area of R-6AA Zoning in the northwest corner of the subarea, which is developed by Gateway Accessible Housing. Several expired Planned Environment Units (P.E.U.’s) for residential development also exist within the site. Each of these would require an additional public hearing before any new development could occur. A Conditional Use Permit authorizes the Elks Lodge, which is located within the subarea’s boundaries.
Zoning History: With the adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance, this subarea was zoned predominately NU/FPNU District with smaller areas of R-3 and R-4 Residence District to the west. Several requests for industrial zoning in addition to several requests for Planned Environmental Units have been granted. However, other than the most recent Gateway Accessible Housing request, none of the others were ever developed.
Land Use Characteristics: The existing industrial uses adjacent to the Mississippi River and specifically the quarry operations dominate the land use pattern. Until recently the Koch Hospital was located on the northern portion of the site.
Recommendations:
1. Promote port and river access uses. 2. Provide an appropriate transition between any new uses and existing residential uses along western boundary of the subarea. 3. The subarea’s location overlooking the river and its direct access to an interstate highway make the site suitable for office or institutional uses, provided there be adequate transition to residential uses to the west. 4. Active or passive recreational uses could also take advantage of the topography and river overlook location.
SUBAREA 6: Telegraph Road South of Interstate 255 (Map 27)
Boundary Description: Properties on the east and west side of Telegraph Road, north of Baumgartner Road and south of I-255.
Existing Development: A wide array of uses exists in the area including several churches, multiple large commercial centers, and single family residences. The majority of the commercial structures in this area have been built fairly recently (since the 1970’s) with the remaining single family residences built prior to the 1950’s.
Sixth District Community Area Study 125 Map Subarea 6: Telegraph Rd. South of I-255 27 C L T AR R VI E RINGE EW G Y
T D R D O R R L O I A I N D V U D G I Y V Q E E G G A R FO A R B R D E Y D T E V D E R R I L R I H E A -2 FPNU PL S Z G 5 N N C 5 A E RO H W N N R L IN E T D K N S T E D H R C R E E C D B IR R R FA KIN O IR BR SW N IDG O W AQ E V O IC UA C8 IEW D H D K F S R A Y MA L I R I L R - G R T FPNU L IL I I 270 W D G O R H O G H D D NE L O R Y N NU R E D R4 R4 D O D L W D R E S IC N T R4 K C T I-2 F A O T DR S VIE V I N W R H D A SA V T D D C G
E L D I E L N F L R L E I D E R
R O N E L I Y D H R E BA D M R CK E H Y R ON A M K D A R O R RS R3 R E FPR4 C D IL R D LE D G S D D M E R R C A A . T E R P
S BE O L N R I RT
S A A R S DR U O R AN
I G T N D N H M L R D G L I U R I D S D A N R Y E I S AS Y P E E T T N E U DO G L N C A N D A X AL T L R S L DS G O A DR ON L D V U E N E D P S C2 D R H G L FO E D O N
R O I L N D N O
DR D I FPC2 R E X R L E Y R Y W S H L O E D R P R C2 T I K
A R B R A S R
D G D M A R FPRG 4 R K A G O N . A U I R R E S D R O K L R A D M
O T S FIR SHF P E A C2 Y D E T - A R
T C C B R E R T K R D M R O D L C D L L D H IG E L Y H CT I T H R R E C OW DR R C O D D. FR C S H I H K S IN R E O O U N R C D IE U LO D A U I A R A D R TO LO
A F K M N H G D R
K E D H R
S A R
F D S R6 E A B S M . P D IRONDA A E R
I LE H A P ST R S. O R L R
S D G O U
C G E D W D D R6A R K E R
R IN E . Y G N
R K P DR. T R3 N N E O A C L RO R M UE L O N D I D D R R C A R D E O RE R A K L F R IN E C8 T A V N S DR G S RR4 F S E R DR D B EE R O M C8 R A
W N A D ME O BLOOMFIELD E R ND R
D L DR T R G C
BER D DR
P D
D A R N R D
R E Y K ARD T DR LL A X T E STA R P M E U L D A C L A N N DR A G R E P E B O E O O D T N S D S U C H T E C A R L T T MA LO N G K O NE I F R L V B P L E R D Y D R I E R O D R N D N W C S ORT EX R O E V A W CH T MAG OF AT E FIN
D DR NU
F R I V D E ICTRO R L A N D AR DR AG R NI D
R D DR
T R RD YEAGER RD. E C8 E R K R R
C O E
I A C F V 1
H K E
2 V T R
R I
D E
N
D W D R R L D Y H A T W IL E D CRESTLI E H NE L
L S 1 I W N 2 O I M
R C T C TH D KLand Use DR T R R Y C D V
P W D
D R H S Single Family I R
O H E
Y
K
T
W A R W C D R I I
S L L R U E Duplex/Townhome
O E
R S G
B W
F W E
D W D N D N I
T T N C
E
O L A A K
S A
A E
L L Multi-Family
A D
R T
R R D T
G
B
S T
A C
M
T TH U OR R LANG SW Commercial S WHITSHIRE C STONE H A DR T DR H FORDHAM DR C COPPERGATE Industrial/Utility SQUARE T R R6 DR Institution C D
T
T NEWBRIDGE
E SO C UTHFIELD N C L CT G Recreation
F D
I U A Q
R
E
K K B TRAIL L DR
E Common Ground C WALD C
E WIC R
I K I V R IDG A E RD
R A
D
I D W W SE SOUTHFIELD R
L
F
D D
E Park
G L D CT L R I
A D
A A
F
E E R
H R
W W L
W S C8
T CROSSING T VE acant & Agriculture DR E
U V B G IN E N CT P
O O N T
DFORD I O
S S D
S S N S N D N R 400 0 E 400 Feet
R4 O H RD S
R S RD O E R7 U M3 J C V B C CL D IF A H E F DRIVE A L C
E O A G R3 D K S
B E E S DEL OAK CHALET R R B C8 HE - MPLIN Prepared by St. Louis County D O DR E O C E D MANOR - L N T L Department of Planning T Y K H ER K I D CHESS- I S R S N C E C R R L A A C2 March 2000 CT R H IL M R R2 I O H R A MOUNT F RICH R C F L EN D C O GL E T D DR DR L R T C D IF R T F E C S C L A I T C V F M3
BRIARWOOD N F R3 T RD E B BRIARWOOD T C R N O A U C
C T ESTATES NTO T V E N E K TERRACE WINCA H
D L O
S
S R A R Adjoining Uses: To the north of the site is I-255. Adjacent to the subarea to the east and west are residences predominately built during the 1960’s and 1970’s. To the south of Baumgartner Road are additional commercial developments located within the boundaries of the Oakville Community Area Study.
Physical Features: Two major issues exist in this subarea. Some sites have flood plain restrictions that would need to be addressed during any redevelopment or new development. More important is the limited depth of the lots along Telegraph Road. The lack of significant lot depth constricts the potential size of development and potentially hinders a coordinated design pattern.
Existing Zoning A mixture of commercial and residential zoning districts are in the area. The majority of the area is commercially zoned with numerous small offices and retail centers. However, there are three large commercial centers, Missouri Plaza, Telegraph Center South and Oakville Shopping Center. The predominant commercial zoning district for the area is C-8 Planned Commercial District.
Zoning History: In 1965 subarea 6 was primarily zoned R-2, R-3 and R-4 Residence Districts, with C-2 zoning at the intersection of Forder and Telegraph Roads and C-6 and C-2 Districts at the intersection of Baumgartner Road and Telegraph Road. Since that time there have been an extensive number of commercial rezonings in the area authorizing small and large retail centers and office uses.
Land Use Characteristics: This area can be characterized as a commercial corridor with a mixture of large commercial developments with community services (Oakville Shopping Center) and small office developments (the Vogel Building). Additionally, there are numerous churches and remaining single-family residences. Residences that front on Telegraph Road will be under pressure for sale for commercial use. Given the predominant pattern of commercial use fronting on this major five-lane state highway, conversion to commercial uses would be appropriate, assuming adequate development controls.
Recommendations:
1. Promote the development of office space in the subarea. 2. Monument style signs should be used in preference to pole signs. 3. Promote façade improvements for older commercial developments. 4. Utilize the commercial guidelines as established for the Oakville Community Area Study, including the consolidation of lots, limits on the number of curb cuts, and the use of cross access between adjacent sites.
Sixth District Community Area Study 127 Subarea 7: Lemay Ferry Rd., I-255 to Butler Hill Map T
E 28 O B L R E R E S
N H R N A E D E E O N D C GE 5 R S D C A H 5 E R MON T G - R O M L P I IN C C L G D A AT BE E R S . G T B D 5 T HE UR D H IS R R3 N S Y N R CO I E FIELDB 5 D Y RD ROOK TER C L E S E Land Use - S O E T I E U N N T A R TH L H T C E S IS - R SingS le Family I C D DR B O I - L 270 O C B N LV C8 T CW8 T D N Duplex/Townhome . C Y N O R A.LITTLE ROCK RD I . O D R O T A D N B.ARROW TREE DR L Y Y C D S A C R Y MC ulti-Family I- R R A TU 2 E J S 7 C.HILLMONT CT C F V 0 N C3 Y K R O T S A I R3 R O NG CommercD ial M N D.STONE WOOD CT P . M B T K Y U E I D W C T L L R C W A T H I D T L E.ROCKSPUR CT Y N N O N S G T D E U Y Industrial/Utility R D O C . R C A N C T C R E . R3 S Institution CS 8 H LN E M2 T N U L G O K S C L Recreation L R O A N A D H C G O S T P D U I CR ommoL nM Ground A O A N FPR3 C DR O A INTE S B R V STATE
C R
Park E T D
N
I
R6A P Vacant & Agriculture C4 D R O O E B R6 W E M G E A S O S O D T G N I S I
R4 D NCREST R W C R I K D W H O N R F NU T D O D O DR R3 H R D GEMINI U A D 400 DR 0 400 800 Feet T D A
O E A E E E
U A R
E R
S M G L D SWISS
O M1 M D P
S I C E I S
R
L WALK R
H
W E D LO O NG T C O N F M U L
O B R C8 PreDpared by St. Louis County S A A.BARCELOS DR N D S C8 L DR N G T O R R6 IS
. Department of Planning N RIDGE . I N B.CASA BRAZILIA DR
L
W
D T
R M1 S R
S
A Y
C MR arch 2000 M2 D E C.CHATEAU DE VILLE DR
DR K D N MA N CT C
S
M O E
R D R
L A A K
O C L RD SK L R M
Y O O O L RIDGE D E I R3 S D.CORUMBA WALK H N B H
W S
O V I A L D K N R
T O GI O N E.JAMUNDA WALK E S B O
W L B L B IL M L W E A E E
M O C S DR H I F.FOREST DE VILLE DR
G T M1 SUNH T R T N ILL U O R. 5 I D E - L FPR2 R K R G.KINSLAR DR O S
L R R
Y E R B H.KOPWOOD DR
R L O L Y
R2 R T MATTIS N A Y C A E G OR A.KINGBOLT BLVD M R2 K A F C N A V H D C8 Y L I E B.SUNBOLT BLVD R2 A E EST - W MARYA ER M BANNING LAN D RD 5 E CT R T C.KINGBOLT CIRCLE D DR M1 L HEDGE- H W 5 CT IG A - L X D.SUNHAVEN DR . D I R TREE LN E.MERSEY BEND DR W R PATSON E D R D SUMMIT O T AVE R L F.HAYMARKET CI
L O
V C I C8 E D R L A
S
N G R P K
D C6 O
I N
I L A G.TAVISTOCK CIR A D T HILV R D A
T F
N D R
A H R E ID
K
T K . R
E G G
A M WELFORD E H.HUMBER CIR R A R N R R2 FPC8 L L TO L D N O D L I T DR FPC6 E
V FPC6 DR R H C TH T T TARLTON U C R6 O R E Y S D M K KING A R R2 FPR6 L
M F A AN
D R W DR P E R E W
T O FPR3 T N
C
R C FPR2 L P
C8 O A K FAIRVIEW LN G E FPR6A A
FPR2 S T R4
A.CLAYRIDGE DR R R S S
F E
E R D E
R6A B E K UR B.BRANDY RD A D C E A G U E PINE E
V
L
D Y P
M I I
A D C.TANQUERAY LN & CT DR D I
R P W CHRIS Y O TOBLE N EAD A K M R
E DR A D.DAIQUIRI LN A D D R
C O
T T M Y F
L E.GALLIANO DR E
A C K A R2 K R
N D E W D R4 R SUNRISE LN R I
C8 A R D
I D
L K A E R
O P R C
A E
Church I O K M
R C
B K J E R ER L ID KARINGTON E H R R3 CT
E
M E
I L
R
M
E L
R C N R K
D
H
H E U P C D L
L CT
E L A G
O E P A
L
EILEEN ANN T DR M D D B C I I BRAM
A N
E R
5 H E I
H PARK 5 - E C V T R6 I BERRY F U RAIL G R CT
D SS O v. v. S L BRA CT D
D KAT R R R6 HLEEN ANN DES RINGER D K D OWN R C L G O K M R F . E R A A BARBAGALLO DR D N U A R C S R E D R T E W
T G N E E E
R C - N L R7 A I L L
T L
D L A T N R D
I I L D
L W L R C
A R R
E T O
B
E
RD G R L E O N G A N D A I C R
N C2 R E O D
L
G N
E K R D
L I I UT D A R
B R R M A H
A P
L R T HIL C
C8 B U T E U WI CK NOT G HAM R O T IN E S 5 STATES Y 5
- DR
I R6 D
P P
R A
R A
T T
D E T S K T L
I E L E E 7 N A
T R 6 L R R G
& R A A D S R6 D S D S
1 T N O W O 6 S C R7 O
N N Y E R N R V W E I O H E . S C .S S E K R T U A ROYAL O T R2 B S D S DR E ROUNDTABLE CT R O D O R2 N C T C8 R O W I D C2 S C S R R N T T FPR2 H R O O L
L I E Y L E E D R CAM ELOT ESTATES CT T A L L S M C C8 R T I L R2 I S A L N L A C H A F L
G L I Y P S I R P E R E R2 N H L FE R R LA E D Y R4 D A C2 ALWAY E M REG DR E R6A T NLAUKE VIEW L U D V
R C N R Q U R P I O T D N C N
G R R W PARK CIR Y OW D
E E A I
R ESTATES DR
L V C8 SAGE DR H FPR2 T
D O S RINGER RD. R R3 H CT FRPDR4 YEAGER D R2 N BEND I D
W W N
R A M YAEGER R U R
Y CROSSING
D T
HOWARD M T L
R U
N CT W U
A CT A R R I N D D S D E SCENIC CIRCLE U R R M C S F D M A CT E S R6AA R A
L Y P 3 T I D A -
L D IN R R A N R B M R R W O O
A R D O LL Y E T O FA A SUBAREA 7: Lemay Ferry Road from Interstate 255 to Butler Hill Road (Map 28)
Boundary Description: Parcels along Lemay Ferry Road between I-255 and. Butler Hill Road and parcels extending west to I-55 and east to Mehl Road and the railroad tracks.
Existing Development: The existing development in this subarea includes both single family residences ranging from 25 to over 60 years old and newer big box commercial development. The Burlington Northern Railroad line provides a natural boundary between the two different intensities of development. North of the railroad line is a mixture of single family residences and large commercial centers in addition to several large recreational uses (a bowling alley and a miniature golf center). South of the railroad tracks is a mixture of residential uses at different intensities and several small commercial/office uses with frontages on Lemay Ferry Road.
Adjoining Uses Abutting the subarea to the north and south are additional commercial areas. To the west across I-55 and to the east are single family residences and institutional uses.
Physical Features: While the majority of the subarea is developed, the existence of significant slopes and extensive amounts of flood plain in the area restricts the amount of further development and/or redevelopment of underutilized parcels. Specifically, parcels directly south of the railroad tracks are occupied by a nursery and several residences on large parcels. However, because this area is located in the flood plain, the development of this property is somewhat restricted. Also, there are several vacant parcels at the northwest corner of Butler Hill Road and Lemay Ferry Road. This area’s development is hampered by the existence of significant slopes.
Existing Zoning: Currently this subarea has numerous zoning districts within its boundaries including R-2, R-4, R-6, R-6A, and R-7 Residence Districts, C-2 and C-8 Commercial Districts and the M-1 Industrial District.
Zoning History: In 1965, with the adoption of the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance, the area to the north of the Burlington Northern Railroad was zoned M-1 Industrial District and R-4 Residence District. South of the tracks the R-2/FPR-2 Residence District was introduced along with a small section of C-2 Shopping District and R-6 Residence District at the northwest corner of Butler Hill Road and Lemay Ferry Road. Since that time large parcels around the intersection of Mehl Road and Lemay Ferry Road have been rezoned C-8 Planned Commercial
Sixth District Community Area Study 129 District for the development of big box retail centers. Additional small rezonings have occurred on the west side of Lemay Ferry Road north of the Burlington Northern railroad, authorizing recreational uses in the C-8 Planned Commercial District. South of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks there have been numerous residential rezonings along with several requests for small offices and a funeral home.
Land Use Characteristics: The pattern of development on this very uneven topography is quite mixed. As indicated before, two separate intensities of development exist along this stretch of Lemay Ferry Road. To the north of the Burlington Northern railroad large big box developments dominate the development pattern. However, south of the railroad there is a mixture of institutional uses, commercial and residential developments.
Recommendations: 1. Future commercial development in this section of Lemay Ferry Road should be encouraged to occur in a consistent and coordinated pattern. Continuous “strip commercial development” should be discouraged. Uncoordinated piece-meal development should be discouraged. 2. Commercial development should be oriented primarily to the needs of the surrounding residential community. It should not result in excessive volumes of traffic or peak flows on Lemay Ferry Road. The number of curb cuts should be minimized. 3. The assembly of small parcels should be encouraged. This would allow efficient internal circulation on larger sites and eliminate the need for unnecessary curb cuts as well as offer the opportunity to enhance landscaping and architectural continuity. Special Procedure zoning (C-8) would further enhance the ability to efficiently develop sites with adequate buffering and linkage to adjoining commercial development. 4. Any redevelopment of properties along Forder Road east of Kinswood Lane should be limited to residential uses at densities compatible with adjacent development or institutional uses permitted in residential districts.
SUBAREA 8: Butler Hill Road and Interstate 55 (Map 29)
Boundary Description: The southernmost boundary of this subarea is Butler Hill Road with I-55 to the east and Kerth Road to the west. The northern boundary is south of Kerth Manor Drive and the South Side Assembly of God Church.
Existing Development: Single-family residences on large lots are located along the frontage of Kerth Road. A new development of single family attached units is under construction along the western boundary of the subarea. A large shopping center is located at the corner of I-55 and Butler Hill. To the west of that is a church.
Sixth District Community Area Study 130 Map Subarea 8: Butler Hill Road and I-55
A . 29 M T A R R2 E L N A M B . S E D N A L A E L S H A R C D R . T
Land Use . D . FPR2 R . R D
Single Family . R
. L
S D H L P A T S O N R Duplex/Townhome A O R D .
L N A N T
E C . K A D
Multi-Family G . N R
R A T I N D A A T R O L J I T O L N I T T Commercial L D R F
. I BR UN S V W T E L F O R D D R . IndusO trial/Utility N B R U N S T OFPR3 Institution N T A R L T O N
. Recreation D R D R Common Ground . R E V Park O N W O T R O H FPR3 C W T Vacant & Agriculture N R FPR2 E E K C . E D T N V
N T E
N C 200 0 200 40I 0 Feet E N FPR2 D R T
W R U . D R R A . . P L B R A U N G A T E R . D
T D R S . Prepared by St. Louis County E V
R Department of Planning A K H E . R MarchN 2000 R3 T L H
W M E A I N V O D R R R A O D M F R2 R G . N I 5 R 5 A S W RT 3 A F B R R Church Church R V E Y I D N E E W E C R E T A D I S R C T A T . K A L T E O T ( N S P R V C E T T . T C . N T R . I P D . L . L v. . )
P R3 B
R
A E N D R6 Y
D . R . . D v. v. R
D . R R D H v. R6 H T T L A R N D E E A U C8 RK T R A C E C T . R2 E C L A Y R I D G E R D E Single-
. K C A family
R C T A under R R I A G constr. E Church R7
B U T L E R H I L L
B
U
T BUTLER HILL RD. .
S L
R
R O E
D
O U R
N T
H H D R I . G L L R2 E N C N T . L
E C8 C8 L E
R3 S G .
K R T
R 5 D .
A D Z R 5 . O I- . N L B R C O O . K
T R U . O S N P D O L D C A T J P O . T K . 5 O R O 5 R D R6 B . L P N E M L O G R O Z A K N R IN G D A LE
.
N
L
C
R S E E T A S T S 7 T E 6 S BUT LE I & R HI D LL 1 E E 6 T R2 A . T C8 Y S R6A W H C2 R E
T . . L N S D N I . . R . U LN C8 CHE RRY VIEW . D R
Y R R
E R F
C2 E G
Y N CR R2 A E A S I TSID M R E E M E O L E R Y D R2 L Adjoining Uses: North of the site are single-family residences in the R-3 Residence District and the South Side Assembly of God Church. Interstate 55 abuts the site to the east, and to the west and south are single family residences in the R-2 District.
Physical Features: The only physical restriction to the redevelopment or development of the vacant portion of the subarea is the restricted road access. Kerth Road is only two lanes with minimal shoulders, and access through existing commercial development is poor.
Existing Zoning: Currently there are only five zoning districts in this subarea. The C-8 Planned Commercial district dominates the site with a large portion of the area. Surrounding the commercial development are four residence districts: R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-6 Residence District.
Zoning History: With the adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance this area was entirely zoned R-2 Residence District. Since that time there have been several rezoning requests for subdivisions in the R-3, R-4 and R-6 Residence Districts and one for commercial development. The only residential development ever built is the most recently approved Planned Environment Unit authorizing single family attached units located off Butler Hill Road. Two older P.E.U.’s have expired.
Land Use Characteristics: The commercial development in this subarea is oriented toward the I-55 intersection on the east. The church provides a transition to the residential uses to the west. The remaining portion of the site has remained residential in character as have properties on Kerth Road and west of there on Butler Hill Road all the way to Butler Spur Road.
Recommendations:
1. Commercial development should not extend west along Butler Hill Road beyond the existing bank building or encroach upon residential development along Kerth Road. 2. Should additional commercial development be proposed east of the existing Schnucks Center, it should utilize the planned district procedure and have internal circulation coordinated with the existing development without an additional access point off Butler Hill or Kerth Road. 3. Proposed residential development should include the consolidation of lots, provide one coordinated plan addressing access issues and utilize the planned district procedure. 4. Adequate buffering between commercial and residential uses should be included in the conditions for planned districts in this subarea.
Sixth District Community Area Study 132 SUBAREA 9: Lemay Ferry Road South of Butler Hill Road (Map 30)
Boundary Description: Parcels between Lemay Ferry Road and I-55 and those fronting on Lemay Ferry Road from Butler Hill Road to south of Lemay Woods Drive.
Existing Development: While there is a mixture of commercial and residential developments in this area, the commercial development is predominately concentrated at the intersections of Lemay Ferry Road and Butler Hill Road and Lemay Ferry Road and Old Lemay Ferry Road. The remaining developments are residences in a mixture of residential zoning districts.
Adjoining Uses: Abutting the subarea to the north is a mixture of commercial and residential uses. To the west across I-55 and to the east are single family residences and institutional uses predominately in the R-2 District. To the south along Lemay Ferry Road and New Baumgartner Road/Relocated Meramec Bottom Road is an area of extensive industrial development.
Physical Features: While there is significant development in the northern portion of the subarea, large vacant or developable parcels exist in the southern portion. However, the parcels are all located off Hawkins Road and Old Lemay Ferry Road, both of which offer poor road access to Lemay Ferry Road. Additionally, topographically these two areas are very hilly. Further south along Lemay Ferry Road parcels that front on Lemay Ferry also have steep grades along the road frontage, which present significant constraints to development.
Existing Zoning: Within this subarea are several residential zoning districts - NU, R-2, R-6, and R-6A Residence Districts - and two commercial districts, C-2 and C-8 Commercial Districts. The vacant parcels along the south side of Butler Hill Road are zoned C-8 Planned Commercial District and authorize an additional hotel, two restaurants and an office. Behind the existing hotel is a vacant parcel that has previously been rezoned for an apartment complex.
Zoning History: With the adoption of the 1965 Zoning Ordinance, the subarea was primarily zoned R-2 Residence District with two sections of C-2 Shopping District located at the southwest corner of Butler Hill Road and Lemay Ferry and the intersection of Old Lemay Ferry and Lemay Ferry Road. Since that time there have been rezonings for commercial development concentrated around the intersection of Butler Hill Road and Lemay Ferry Road and along the frontage of Lemay Ferry Road. Additionally, there have been several residential rezonings to authorize apartment complexes and single family subdivisions utilizing the planned district procedure.
Sixth District Community Area Study 133 Subarea 9: Lemay Ferry Rd. South of Butler Hill Map E C D 30 A T E C P R C R3 L F.BACARD3I LN v. EILEEN AN I D C B A R K G.KAHLUA LN 5 H 5 LanEd Use - E C L T R6 I T O F S E H.DRAMBUIE LN A Single Fam. ily C N G C A N D I.TURLEY MILL RD v. Y LAN L R Duplex/TDRoEwnhomeR B AU T J.O'BANNON RD D R6 K H v. R T K D Multi-Family K.SUGAR GROVCE 8RD C O R R M TR E R2 R E ACE D BARBAGALLO Commercial G L.METAXA LN A
K A I
Industrial/Utility R M.PASSPORT LN E
R
- L R7 A
T L D R T N
I Institution I L A L
A C R
B PL Recreation BUTLER HILL RD E C2 G A Common Ground R BUTLER HILL RD. ER O UTL N Park B
R
D R2 D H R Vacant & Agriculture C8 C8 M R3 NOT G HAM OR 5 T IN EST NIN N D G- 5 AL OP LN - E U I R6 D 200 0 200C 400 600 Feet R S N L T O
N R T L D R K E D A P S TA O D L E T J O 7 L ES 6 L T R Prepared bRy St. Louis County R A A B G R6 & D O 1 D T DepartmMent of Planning E Z 6 W S D O L R7 R R ARK Y N E March 2000 A R N W A S H O D CEDARSTONE DR . NG E S S C N I T . S E T L A U R T T O A C T T S S B S
E B UTL E CRICKET D S DR E R ER ROUNDTABLE CT O O
F L GLEN CT O R2 HIL C N R L C8 R R6A W D C2 SI E R T S C L O HE N T L RR S E YV R CAMELOT ESTATES IEW I HERITAGE C8 M D I A N E C E WOODS RY G R E
E R F N AY C2 GALWAY C L RE REST B M DR SIDE R2 LE
R C K R I O T O R2 N
O G R D Y L E B A
R ESTATES DR E O L
D C8 T I C S Y D E RINGER RD. R L
L R R2 A LN R4 I BEND V C D IDE D D NS R R R IRO T D R R
E R
Y R2 S D T W T HOWARD E E R L D S R I EY N N D E O C H R N R N R L U D C E S S O N R3 UT Y H U F V A S
S CT IE S
W H H R6AA
W W C
A L
Y C Y
D U R U
P T F M3
I F PV R3 A 5 T R L
N N R S D M
A
ID 5 R E E T
- U A
S I B L R3 C
E L
R
A I L 5 I
C A 5 C M
F - I L A
I N N E R2 E M
E W NU ND R2 A A Y G W D
D F N I A E C I T R K V R R E E
S O E IN Y R K S R R C H P LN W D T I A R E E RO H CHAT- MTRE E NA E GU LE F NE C F FORD O RS D HUNTE C R N CT L LEY D VAL S R D C O C T O R4 A T W V D S C NU H P R O T H E T F UNTING E TON W C L Y ID A U R M V E B E ALLEY T L DR A N H C8 L C R3 CT W P T 0 IN 0 O C D N U B CI A R R N O T R6A N L O D G D K Y C T O R P R D E 7 IN A A A K O E M N N 6 C N D B O T O E N N & R C8 R NU B O M 1 B A S 6 R D S E N I 0 B K T D 0 I
R O R C E R6 W B G A R O D RK
EE RR 3 W N R ITE G B H O RO W D VE CT N A R E N E E E M T N M G L P A
C P L
Y TR . N L N M N S Y G T R N W F O D W A U O C R H D F S D D Land Use Characteristics: The existence of significant slopes on Hawkins Road, Old Lemay Ferry Road and the southern portion of Lemay Ferry Road and poor road access has resulted in residential development on large lots in these areas. However, commercial development has occurred in two locations. A commercial node is located at the intersections of Butler Hill Road and Lemay Ferry Road and Lemay Ferry Road and Old Lemay Ferry Road.
Recommendations:
1. Future development/redevelopment within this subarea should result in a variety of land uses which address local demands for services, residential alternatives, and amenities. Although commercial development is a reasonable focus for some of this future activity, it should not overwhelm other appropriate development options. 2. Special Procedure zoning should be emphasized throughout the subarea. The objective should be to aid in forming compatible mixtures of commercial, residential, and other necessary land uses while enhancing site design. 3. The need for a park-and-ride lot at the terminus of the proposed Segment 2 Cross County MetroLink extension should be recognized.
Site A Property east of the Holiday Inn has been approved for C-8 Planned Commercial District to include a five-story hotel, a bank, three restaurants, a convenience store and a two-story office building. Property south of the Holiday Inn is part of an expired P.E.U. for multi-family development. Access for the multi-family housing would be coordinated with access for the existing multi-family development fronting on Lemay Ferry Road. In accordance with the ordinance governing the Planned Commercial District along Butler Hill Road, an additional access road to the approved multi-family site has been provided from Butler Hill Road through the undeveloped commercial property.
Because the property south of the Holiday Inn is adjacent to Interstate 55 and now has access from Butler Hill Road, this site now has potential for an office or low intensity commercial use. Such a development would have visibility from Interstate 55. However, the indirect access from Butler Hill Road would be a limiting factor for high traffic generating uses.
Sites B and C Parcels along the east and west side of Hawkins Road and the west side of Old Lemay Ferry Road are occupied with single-family residences on large tracts. If future residential development should occur in these areas, the use of the Planned District procedure (P.E.U) is recommended to address the physical constraints such as slope and poor soil stability in the area. As in adjacent developments, the clustering of lots and the preservation of land with the roughest topography in open space common ground would assure the best street design and management of stormwater runoff.
Sixth District Community Area Study 135
u u
e e
y eui y
v
h h i i
q
q
P h h
s
s h
x x
e e
f f
e e y
y
h h
h h i
wxsxh wxsxh
g h
h v
p h v y y 2
2
2 v
g s
i
h 2 x
h h e s
i i i s y v i x v i s y e s i u i
v v u x
w x y q
e e r i x e s
y h x
q s s w y y y
y e
e
e e
h
QI y f
e pP g
q q u s
e
x
w i
i w w P
Q x
y
e
e
r
p
s
v
h h g
wp
e e
v e v
v g v
f f
E E
i
2 2 i v
e e
h
h x i
p q p
x
x
x
s
e s
i i
h
h x
s
x i x
eu2gs
e
y
veui2si h i pP x pQ i g q
2h i h
s
sx
h h
y g
f h i x 2 2 2 q w e
pP w
h e
g
e pQ ie f x h x R pP pR e x
r x
wQ
g
x
v v
v v h h
s s
r
r h
i i s s r r y y y r
r sq y
h h h
x i e
x yvh
e
i gev vex2g
v i pwQ
vx v
y x w
x h x
pP pwQ
y
h
v x pP
g
g e
wrh2PHHH
x
i s i
q y
i i
g
g
e
e h
v v q g
e e
h I x
g x
r r
g
v
2 v
g g
2 2
y
e x
i i Te
v
i i
q e e
s x
h i
x
e
y y
heprtment2of2lnning
p
y
ingle2pmily huplexGownhome wultiEpmily gommeril sndustrilG tility snstitution eretion gommon2qround rk nt282egriulture y
v v
h g h
h h
e e
SHH H SHH IHHH peet h h
e e
s s g
i i
h h pgV repred2y2tF2vouis2gounty2
hyi
w w
e e
pI
h
g h
E
i x x
fyyu h
x
v
i
wiehy s px s g y
e Q
eqi h
y
vnd2 se
y h h
pQ
i i
w
w w xi
r y w shhi x
g I
f
r
yyu
y
x
g i
g
2
x
f y u
v
i
i
w x
y
E
w
y P y
x
f
i h
v
s
h wwivx
h
s
r
u i
pQ x
H
h
g
y
i
v g
v v g
r y
s
f fyyuyxi f
y iegi2h
h
x
y v
v x i x
h
q g
h v e
siv g e
evp i
i i y
i
i w
y i
x
i h
x g v g x
p
y i P
h i P v f pP
pP
x e hy v
v e
e i gsgvi
v v g w
s
s g r r
y
y
h
i
g
e q
p
px
x s
i h
g s p I x E x
e
e v
q
u h
v v
i
x g
i f
y f
y
y f
gixsg
g gysxq i
eiqi x
g s
h
h h i i q q i i e e
s x h F 2 h g pwI
g x
i s wqxi
g e s f
g h r x
y q
P
x x
h s h
e y i g iQ
i g x f i
v i
i h w v w q
Q e 2
y i q s i i e h pwI
y p h i s
s r
q
p
i
i f
h
h v sh x
R x y
i w
h i e x
g ri pwI
p e
p g
y g
v
v
s
w g x
x h
i x
vx s y
q g
y h u pwI
2g e ii g egegse g f vx g x 2h h y y q pwI
x h e 2 x
w wI
q e y px
x
i i
x i i h s
s
x
v x
i
s s 2
i
e
e v i x
r
v
i
q i
e
e i x
x
i
r u
y
v q
i
y
h
v f P
w
h pwI
r H
w H
e h
e
e
v sxqi2hF e q
pwI q f
y w
e
v
y
i Te e
e
w r
w f
e 2
y i
g h
v
h
s v h e
u i y v
y x y
h x
f
sxqi
y h h
p H
x H
i x
fixh h
v v 2
2
h Q
sxqi s
x
v
f
h v
i
xg pwI i
h x gV
s
T
y
i
u
gP y
g y
f x
g
x
pyh x i
x
f s e p greE gV
si
r
P
h Q 2
i
pwI
u
e
g
s g
g
i i
TU TU
2 2
8 8
p p
I2 I2 T T 2 2
Tee
e e
h h tihwih h
2
2 gV
gV v
v w w
s
F
F
v
u
i
w
i
e
r r p i i
i 2 2
F
p F
2 2 2 h e F F
2
v v
e g
w x
i i
v
v
gV H
tefferson2gounty
h h wQ
g e u v v s v
2 h v
y y
h
p
g x yyh r
P
riseqi i i
p p
h Q P
p
r g
s
g
e
e gV
w w e
h
i i
v
gV v
x
e
h
i
i
h
g
x x
x
s
g h e
i
x y
pwI i s h x
2 f g y
i
h
i v w g
e
i
s
h
e i x i 2 f
w R 2 w h
2 x
i x g
s
h
x
r x
x
x v i
s s
f
g h u u
v
y
i
h i
e g
2
f
q
i y i x
s
sh i
P
e x e
e
r pwI g
r r
Q
w
e
v e
i f
e h v
h i
x w pwI
vx
v
x h
p y
i i e
v x 2 u q pR
y
x F h v h g 2 x g
i x
e x i x
i
y
x y i
x
i s
h v
i q
s i
s i q e
sESS y
h y x
y
f f i q h x
v h
x i
i g
e S
S e
v x S S i
2 2
E
E x
2 2
g
2 i
s i s i i
g y i
r y h h q
h i
s e
i
w w
R q
i i F
h
s
x
x
x
i Q
v x v e
y y
y y
h i
s wI r h e
i g e
e i w
x w
g g g 2
w
i I i
i e h
p
2
u
w
h w
s x
y
P s
u e e g
y
e
i
x r
f
x x
R
i i
h
s y v v
2
v
g w w
r w
2
x h
e i p
e 2
u
x
i g s r
h u y
g
s g e e p
i h r
r
e
p i h
e f y h e 2
F
p x Q
pwI
x i
i i
s v
e
x
y fFqi2hyi2v hFrsxsxq2he2v
eFqipsivh2 gFqi2reix2 i h q h
x y 2 e 2 h i
i s
h h
2
r 2
q
x e x
s
s u
pgR u
g
u
e pR e r i r pwI i wI 2 i
g pgR pgR
f x f i
i
px h
h i i
q x
i w h
h v 2
x u
s s e
e q
2 r gQ
f
h F
h
g x
s
g 2
y
e y
gR gR g w
v h s s i e r v x i
I w
r r
wI h
y
i i h u u
x
e x s
i h v x
q x
gV pwI
2 h i
i h
u p
y y
g y
x g x s
v sESS
f
h pgV
g
x
S S
x
S S 2 2
E E
pwI
2 v 2
s
y s
i y x
e
f h g
h 2
Q
v
u s x v s i
p v g g
e r e
w
i
s y
v g x i
e
w v g
x
i
v f v h w
y rsvvshqi
s w
i I s 2 e
e w s w
e
v u
P
g
w
i
i
h
s h u
s e gV
2
s 2
r x r
e
s v w
g
v v
i 2 i u e sv u f r iFwyxsxq2hyi2g pFhyi2reix2v qFwyxsxq2psivh2v
i P s
e P q
x pP ure2IHX22werme2fottom2nd2xew2fumgrtner2ods
x x x s g si u e
x
w P h
e x v
p 2
ty i e SUBAREA 10: Meramec Bottom and New Baumgartner Roads (Map 31)
Boundary Description: This subarea is bounded by the Meramec River on the south, the Fred Weber Quarry on the east, developed subdivisions north of Old Baumgartner Road on the north and I-55 on the west.
Existing Development: This subarea is very diverse in the types and intensity of existing uses. Single family residences dominate the development pattern along Hawkins Road north of Meramec Bottom Road. There is additional residential development along the eastern portion of New Baumgartner Road, mostly dating from the 1960’s and before. One newer (1990’s) house is located at the eastern end of that residential grouping. However, a significant amount of industrial and commercial development has occurred along the north and south sides of New Baumgartner Road west of Baumgartner Industrial Drive. This includes a Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District facility, a St. Louis County Water plant and several large industrial uses. Additional commercial uses are located at the intersection of Meramec Bottom Road and I-55.
Adjoining Uses: Abutting the subarea to the east are the Fred Weber Quarry facilities. To the south is the Meramec River, with single family residences to the north and I-55 to the west.
Physical Features: In this subarea there is an extensive amount of flood plain. This greatly restricts the amount of developable space due to building restrictions in the flood plain. Additionally, significant slopes exist along the north side of parcels along Old Baumgartner Road. This grade differential presents potential constraints for their redevelopment.
Existing Zoning: Currently this subarea has numerous zoning districts within its boundaries including; R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 Residence Districts, M-1 and M-3 Industrial District’s and C-3, C-4 and C-8 Commercial Districts. NU, Non-Urban and FPNU, Flood Plain Non-Urban zoning are scattered throughout the subarea. The NU, Non-Urban District, while allowing residential uses on lots of three acres or more, also allows a wide variety of other permitted and conditional uses. These include farming, advertising signs, quarrying, lumber storage, plant mulching, retail plant nurseries and sewage treatment facilities.
Zoning History: With adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance this area was zoned a mixture of NU/FPNU Non-Urban District, M-1/FPM-1 Industrial District and C-4/FPC-4 Commercial District. Since that time there have been numerous rezonings authorizing residential subdivisions in addition to
Sixth District Community Area Study 137 commercial uses, with non-residential uses dominating the area east of Lemay Ferry Road.
Land Use Characteristics: In this subarea a clear land use pattern has never developed except along Hawkins Road north of Meramec Bottom Road, where residential development characterizes the development pattern. However, the remainder of the subarea has a mixture of uses. Specifically, while the eastern portion of New Baumgartner Road is zoned NU/FPNU District there is industrial zoning and/or development to the east and west which is encroaching upon this remaining residential area.
Recommendations:
A portion of this subarea abuts the Lower Meramec Linear Park. Any proposed development should adhere to the plan for that park.
Site A. The majority of these parcels along the western side of Hawkins Road have been consolidated, and recent rezoning requests have been heard by the Planning Commission for R-4 Residence District zoning with a Planned Environment Unit (P.E.U.). Assuming these proposals are approved, this site will no longer be available for development.
Site B. The adjacent land uses and the close proximity to the interstate highway make the parcels at the southeast corner of I-55 and Meramec Bottom Road suitable for commercial or industrial uses. Planned district procedures should be used to insure a coordinated design and protect any remaining undeveloped parcels.
Site C. This site consists of approximately 14 acres on four parcels at the northeast corner of Meramec Bottom Road and Hawkins Road. Although three of the parcels are occupied with residences, they have M-1/FPM-1 Industrial District zoning dating from the adoption of the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance in 1965. The development pattern extending down Hawkins Road from the north is residential, while the development in the Meramec Bottom Road corridor is predominantly industrial. Across Meramec Bottom Road is a St. Louis County Water Company plant with water processing facilities located close to the road. As a result, this is a transitional site.
The current M-1 Industrial zoning permits a variety of uses including manufacturing, offices, and contractors’ storage yards. Several of the uses that require conditional use permits in M-1 zoning would be undesirable at this location, for example, towed vehicle storage or vehicle repair facilities. To achieve an appropriate transition to the residential uses to the north, office uses with adequate buffering would be preferable. Alternately, an institutional use
Sixth District Community Area Study 138 allowed in residential zoning districts such as a church or day care center would be appropriate along the Meramec Bottom Road frontage, possibly in combination with residential uses on the northern portion of the site. If future development includes residential development, its primary access should be off Hawkins Road with a connection through the stub street to the north.
Site D. These large parcels at the northwest corner of Lemay Ferry Road and relocated Meramec Bottom Road have a mixture of zonings and significant topographical constraints. While portions of the site are in the flood plain, there is a significant slope on the northern portion of the area. Since much of the site is currently zoned M-1/FPM-1, a wide range of uses including offices and warehouses is already permitted. For the portion that is zoned NU/FPNU Non- Urban District a transitional residential development would be appropriate, utilizing the Planned District to insure a coordinated design and adequate buffering.
Site E. The residences on the north and south sides of New Baumgartner Road are sandwiched between industrial uses on either side. Based on these surrounding developments, uses permitted in the M-1 Industrial district are appropriate.
While properties on both sides of New Baumgartner Road have redevelopment constraints based on flood plain issues, those on the south side also have very limited buildable area because lots are narrow and only the portions closest to the road are above the flood plain. In addition, because of the location of these parcels in the Meramec River corridor, heavy industrial and outdoor storage uses that destroy the scenic values of the river should not be allowed. Reuse of existing structures for office is the most likely alternative to continued residential use. Another alternative would be the consolidation of lots for small office development. However, any such development should use the M-3 Planned Industrial District so that appropriate conditions could be included to prevent the use of flood plain portions of the lots for outdoor storage or other uses that would be incompatible with future possible extension of the Meramec Linear Park or a riverside trail through these properties.
New residential development, although allowed in the Non-Urban zoning district, is not compatible with the predominant industrial and quarry uses, which involve noise and heavy truck traffic.
Site F. Since only the north side of Old Baumgartner Road has developable frontage and there is significant grade differential along the south side of the road, residential development is appropriate on Site F providing that lots are consolidated to allow for a coordinated design pattern utilizing the planned district procedure. Development densities should follow those of established subdivisions in the area.
Sixth District Community Area Study 139 Map Subarea 11: Tesson Ferry Rd. South of I-270 E 3O 2 A . L U O S N C DOR T ORY EN- O GREG S T R E SHIR H G E DR W TT D L R G I U E E C S HAUS F C8 R K A CT L R M D KENNERLY T Y D C RR6 D R E N FPR2E R T L R F R6A O N Y
K O C QUAIL RUN R S N A D FPR6 I - S E C E 2 E G 70 T H R E A FPR6A R D A B K A R DA BRE DAVANA ID R Y R
Y R E R D P A D T DR C D DR I- R E FPC8 2 E K R G LN 7 R O D I R 0 K N L D T N EN L LL WINTER E E E CY A E S B F E N W S U R6 R PL R LS T S T D FPR2 D A S S C8 D . ULTRA R E GERALD DR W
W A R2 Y R2A DR Sunset Hills N ULTR C4 I
D T R E D S C4 R E N R E C N L R A M A O D H L O P T FPR3 C M S G L A N R2 T P T R6 I E T H S T N IS U R R S O E W H T T N R L O R G W D R E D U E O O R O B C D T G W U H R N D A A L P 's C8 C6 R6 D M E S O I y T O LS B A W M n O R E A o S A - R L K R l R2 ID R R D D O - h D D I O t a E R R it K B B n D IR Y N p C8 R KE E E A s Y N B . U R E t o A O L K T D A E S H E D C D H U S L E R S E N A T T S C R N R C L - FI Y EL C D R C6 P T D Y L R NR E D D R E EO R S R S H R2 S F T E EN G R N OT N BO R L DS M A D LS E L R OE DR D E T LITTA R D D N R R R2 T O L E D A N W O R N L N L E D E L E V E I Y O LPIN N O AL H O R W D T R S E S D E N O S LN O A M A O K C8 CH R U H P N T L D T P N H A I D K O U Y E A R A O H H E D R O S M N D R A W E E D E L R N E N O T T C L F R B S W R A O O D H D W R E O E R T O T C N O O H D C O S U E T W T A K M O C O D A O R W O N S R A H L B O K O R1 Y D C B P E E R R E R2 N IA R T R R E E O D F K S D R E IL
R1 TAMMY KAY M V P H F F E R R R D DR U ES
H
R T
S
F C N A D CANTERBURY B S D R I
R A E O P R L N L L A S S EL Y K C D TEALB D P
H I S L E DEE F IL F T R E R I FARMS DR H IE Y N S T N L - G C6 D M R T D
C C DR E R3 D T CIR R4 F C R D S R1A A R T -
R RD N W N H A R1 R R6 L G D E N I F O E CANTERBURY B H O T CID 8 Y O R C O B W N T U F D X O L R3 L X R D A D L E N D A T N R L D O R E L T AUE F STONE H B EW T IL I E L V S C D M R R2 A R T R E C E H C I H V R T
Y D O F L D R R JI L W V H D O A B D FM PR3 IE T R R W D LL O A R B W RAIN HI A X S
U O F W E O D A IN
O L H A C8 H A E L
CT R Y E D C R T D D C R C6 M T T H IR C AC B A E R1 BU U M B BURTIDLTLER S T A N LEERS SPPUU PUR L R R RR E E R F S C8 P U R R D D D R R M General American E A E C T E A T IB L E R3 H R P S DR R1A T ILL A E E O N N R C O O S L LE T A.CEDAR PLAZA PKWY F D T T S U Y S E B RO S O DA E B N R P U R B.VISTA CREEK LN N M R C B R
E T A B V C8 U R
L Y E L I
T V C.TERRACE VIEW CT L E ARE V R O A L K L D N O E R W D.SCENIC RIDGE DR R R O D D L R
A
R C C RIDG LN D E LN E.DUESSEL D T R Land Use R1 S D R A R B E D F.VILLAGE COURTWAY LN E NG N D R O TI R V T T Single FE amily R C R1 G.COURT OF CEDARS HE C R B A R6 R O G H
A R C S A W H.ED LOU DR C F T S N E T A T . I
C R DupleD x/Townhome V
N E C R S L A I.GREEN CEDAR WAY V S A T A M A
K L V R
R2 A N O R I - T J.VILLAGE ROYALE DR I RE3
O E G Multi-FamL ily A W B T R L U E E E L T L T L T M R D B E E U A D R ComE mR ercial L B H U N T E B S R D A C G E T P ID G C C L R N N T TI L C2 Industrial/Utility IT E N R3 R A R2 W BS CT B A D R1 L S L M L T K A R E A
B Institution E
K O R L
T I S
T A
C N C . Y ReRcreation N D F E Y L R A RAI O LA T R NDR L R R N B EA E U E S H F A S B S T
R H A S S CommR on Ground T V
N S A C O D A D P A R PL A O R O L B Y R Y E T S K TRAC F S L N L T E E N E G N E L - S R C E K D T E Park H E
R T E ET N K A AS D NAN T R H L
B O E
R D C8 Y
L Vacant & Agriculture
D R L D O R I W R A - PL D N Y R E E T DR N B L S E G T G S S O S A G LF L4LA00R 0 A 400 80R0 Feet BU A D D T C O R R F A A N I I G V
T D D E C D G N L
R R S D FO E E C O P O E N O
D L E R D BID N T O R R P T D M N O M R3 N R D O O E T O D R RN B E Z I F E C W A NG L H R M D -
O G Prepared Fby St. Louis ACLounty OP
R E ER E U
T G R D N C R R A B R S P N E
A C D L R T L T G DOepartment of Planning O E CA M L L T N TA L O D R2 - O C T ES K N S A O K March 2000 T O K AT J B K M E O
U C8 B S S M A - E C S R R6A E T COUNTRY I R C D E N B
R CK R O M
D O
C C O R R I W D O T R J A R R
T D R T TER. DR C D I
R D D N
E T A R G LN L IF P E L M T D T L M ING H L O A O N I R T ARK T C L P N E O T N C R D R R I S
D L O D A SUBAREA 11: Tesson Ferry Road South of Interstate 270 (Map 32)
Boundary Description: Parcels on Tesson Ferry Road between I-270 and Cedar Plaza Parkway as well as the parcels along a portion of Schuessler Road, East Lane and Sunset Drive.
Existing Development: Tesson Ferry Road in this area is predominately developed with commercial office uses (General American) and institutional uses (St. Anthony’s Hospital). Large shopping plazas and additional commercial development front on Tesson Ferry Road. Most of these are new enough to have been developed since the adoption of the St. Louis County’s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances with adequate setbacks and landscaping. There are pockets of residential development located off Kennerly Road, Schuessler Road and East Lane. Older residential uses on large parcels along Tesson Ferry Road can be expected to be subject to development pressure. A vacant 80-acre site on Kennerly Road, which has been petitioned for development with 189 single family homes, is one of the largest undeveloped sites in the study area.
Adjoining Uses: While this area is commercially developed, it is surrounded by areas that are completely residentially developed in the R-3 Residence District to the east and the R-1 Residence District to the west. The City of Sunset Hills is located to the northwest of the site.
Physical Features: While there are several areas with large lots (along Schuessler Road and East Lane), these areas do have some development constraints. Along Schuessler Road the topography is very hilly and the area has poor road access. Currently poor road access is also a problem for properties along East Lane; on the east side of Tesson Ferry Road just south of Butler Hill Road the sole means of access to more than a dozen older homes on large lots is a narrow private drive off Tesson Ferry Road.
Existing Zoning: Currently this subarea is zoned and developed with the R-2 Residence District and the C-8 Planned Commercial District, the C-6 Office and Research District and the C-4 Highway Service Commercial. The two largest developments in that area, General American and St. Anthony’s Hospital, are both zoned C-8 Planned Commercial District. In addition to these three districts there are also several smaller apartment complexes zoned R-6 and R-4 Residence Districts.
Zoning History: With the adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance the areas surrounding Tesson Ferry Road were primarily zoned R-2 and R-3 Residence Districts. A small section of C-2 Shopping District zoning was located on the east side of Tesson Ferry Road at the intersection of Tesson Ferry Road and
Sixth District Community Area Study 141 East Lane. Additionally a small section of R-6 zoning was located at the northwest corner of Tesson Ferry Road and Kennerly Road.
Land Use Characteristics: As indicated under the existing zoning, there are two large scale office and institutional developments in this area. Surrounding each of these are associated offices and other retail services. As a result of this development, this areas of Tesson Ferry Road has become a commercial corridor.
Recommendations:
1. Future development/redevelopment within this subarea should result in a variety of land uses which provide services to the two major employers as well as to surrounding neighborhoods. Although opportunities for commercial development exist in this area, such development should be limited to parcels fronting on or directly accessible to Tesson Ferry Road. 2. Special Procedure zoning should be emphasized throughout the subarea. The objective should be to aid in forming compatible mixtures of commercial, residential, and other necessary land uses while enhancing site design. 3. Based upon the surrounding residential development and surrounding residential streets the 80-acre vacant parcel at Kennerly and Sappington Roads should be developed with low- to medium-density residential uses or low- intensity institutional or recreational uses. 4. If future commercial development should occur at the northeast and southeast corners of Tesson Ferry Road and Butler Spur Road, special procedure zoning should be utilized in order to provide an adequate buffer and setback from adjacent residential developments. Additionally, any commercial development should all be orientated towards Tesson Ferry Road. 5. Any proposed development or redevelopment of residential lots along East Lane, Tesson Ferry Road, Schuessler Road or Kennerly Road should utilize the planned district procedure. The planned district will provide for a coordinated design and attempt to solve several of the access and topography issues.
SUBAREA 12: Tesson Ferry Road South (Map 33)
Boundary Description: The southernmost boundary of this subarea is Meramec Bottom Road. The eastern boundary is Suson Park to the north and properties west of Wells Road to the south. Butler Hill Road is the boundary to the north with the Meramec River valley being the boundary to the west.
Existing Development: Single-family residences on large lots dominate the development in this subarea. Additionally, there are several apartment complexes, a school, and a small commercial node located on the east side of Tesson Ferry Road north of Hageman Road.
Sixth District Community Area Study 142 Subarea 12: Tesson Ferry Rd. South Map
D 33
NU R C R LN D IDGE E.DUESSEL D T LN R1 S R A B F.VILLAGE COURTWAY LN E R1 R R1A R1 G.COURT OF CEDARS R6 C
H.ED LOU DR T
FPR1A N Land Use L I.GREEN CEDAR WAY K J.VILLAGE ROYALE DR R2 A O Single FamilyFPR1 R E L T R U I B Duplex/Townhome V NU E E R G E R PINE ID G R IN N W T L C2 IT E Multi-Family R O R R2 A IV B O L S E D R1 T R F FO L O R E F E K Commercial O R S R E T E S S R1T T Y
T R Industrial/Utility RAIL OD R WO E NU F S R H N N Institution D A U D LS E Y R O Y E F S L N N E G N S R N D I H E E R E T Recreation P ET N K A AS D NAN T R
P B
R D C8
L NU
D C Common GCRYround R ST R KELLER I
R AL P
ARK D DR A Y T ParkS GH R E HI T W E S E G O S O T S G L CI L D F R L A DR A R F
I I G T D C D N Vacant & Agriculture I D G L R R FO E E O H E C O IDD L E S B N T T P R M RD N R E O
DR E N E N F B E R L H
400 0 C4O00 800 Feet N O O R E
T G R R R
S
K K P
A C D
U E G E E C AT M LL LO S N A C FPR2 R2 - NO O K K B K
R L UM C8 B D S - E R6A C L T COUNTRY I
E R C D K R
R2 R R C
D O O I
C C R R T R J A
T D
T TER. DR C
Prepared by St. Louis County R T RN E CO LN DNeUpartment oAf Planning LL M ARK H I T P N March 2000 R R I D L D ER. C8 T T BRO T C O R D R I D K R1A C T D E
E O O B E
R P A N
U A R2 Y E W P HEDGE N WO ER D S O SUMM L E A N I D A E C T I L H E D C V W S N R C T R L I C8 C R U E IR F C T D G E M C Y A 21 E M G L E U B R E Y TI TR H S U W AI M ER TL H S L BU M D E L D TL R R IL S ER H G O ID E L NU P R E L R2 O D
I S R U C W S N T FPR2 T E SE R T W T ES EN E E LL D S TR S OA M R2 O R P N AC KS
M A E A
RC TE A MB U A M
T E LN S R S L B
FPR2 C N R T D E
LL NU N VIEW
I O R H B S P
E U
L
NU C S D
R4 A
E R R C C2 L R PL R C
P A D E A E K L S D M B P A E HILL R O L C DA O N CE NE I Y A N SE W R M A HA O D D AR C AY Y E S A D R E R CE R2 L G A N C8 C C L A T H C D R KING H SU A D N S S R O E L O N S R L O T L D R2 I N ME CT V B L ALL D H E ISS EY R E A- L F JO DR R O A
Y C P G L E B
R T L O O T G R Y A L N R E R6A C T F - D T D C SAN SIMEON DR BAL T T R D ES C E S S U O S ES N R C B T PR BA
H W O Y
R O IN C LM D H Y
PI O I C L T O
E E A D E C C
S RRE C K IG S
E S G K H S
N T NU T
T A W E AY E C N T CT O T K KA C R
C C PARQ U E G A DR R O L RL 3 M R4 I
N E A N N R A R C C N U P L I LLE L F N W C AY I R
A E T T TTE R E N MINN C C R5 E O K L R V T I C A R N I I A FPNU R M C P N H
A A L O C D L R S H T N
S A A O E S E G P FLPPR S U T C I E T A S C M D PS Y NU T n NNU N A o Church U i G O t C s A O c e NU FR PNU u N B FPR3 r m t C R3 ROSSING o s DR n H o R3 F c PS R3 S r D e FPPS d D NU n UE S SS PS U TU EL SP DE PA RI FPPS R L RK O G P H N DR AK VT P AG CT OI E H H N M W O T A A E N FPNU L G O
L
H E O O A M R3
D W G S A
U C E
N ST T M D U S
R D
D O A E
R N L R N N R P D S O IE IN N T N E F A FW PR3 A C Y R2 T FP SU NU SO C PV N T T D R R O A R NU K D S
R S D C L S T L U E S . O W N E D W L N R O S R O R2 K E D S R3 D A S TL O C L N C E E BBO T FPR2B OTTT W TOO S MM D R DD O R. N O O W NU S MERAMEC U S N SO SU PS
C
E
N
T FPR3 R
A
A R V
E D
R L
D R E
D S T S S K E A R
E A W P
R E FPPS Z L O H FPNU Adjoining Uses: To the east across Wells Road is the South County Recreation Complex. To the north are large apartment complexes along Tesson Ferry Road and single family residences to the west off Tesson Ferry Road. Additionally, the St. Louis County Department of Parks and Recreation’s Meramec Linear Park is located just to the south and west of the subarea.
Physical Features: While there is flood plain zoning in this subarea, the greatest constraints regarding development and/or redevelopment in this area are the significant slopes and poor road access to these areas.
Existing Zoning: Currently this subarea has numerous zoning districts within its boundaries including the NU/FPNU Non-Urban District, R-2/FPR-2, R-3/FPR-3, R- 4/FPR-4 and R-5 Residence Districts and the C-2 and C-8 Commercial District’s.
Zoning History: With the adoption of the 1965 St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance this area was zoned a mixture of NU/FPNU Non-Urban District and R-2/FPR-2 Residence District. Since that time there have been numerous rezonings for subdivisions in the R-3 and R-4 Residence Districts and several for commercial development.
Land Use Characteristics: In this subarea a residential land use pattern has developed. Based upon the extensive amounts of flood plain and the significant topographical constraints, there are very few sites which would be favorable for commercial development.
Recommendations:
• Review alternate connection routes from Meramec Bottom Road to Tesson Ferry Road. • A portion of this subarea abuts the Meramec Linear Park. Any proposed developments should adhere to the recommendations of the Meramec Linear Park.
Site A The intersection of Tesson Ferry Road and Wells Road has been the subject of several rezoning requests. Most recently in 1997 the Planning Commission recommended approved of commercial zoning authorizing a service station and an additional commercial building. Subsequently the County Council denied this request. Based upon previous Planning Commission actions it is clear that commercial zoning is appropriate at this location but that the intensity of any future commercial development needs to be restricted. In addition, the County
Sixth District Community Area Study 144 Department of Highways and Traffic has indicated that the Wells Road and Tesson Ferry Road intersection will need to be redesigned as a “T” type intersection located southeast of its present location.
Site B Parcels located to the south of Butler Hill Road west of Hageman Road are occupied with single family residences on large lots. Development constraints in the area include the poor road access and the topography of the site. Based upon the surrounding uses (residential), low intensity residential development would be appropriate in this area. If future development should occur in this area, there should be a consolidation of lots providing for a coordinated design pattern utilizing the planned district procedure. Development densities should follow those of established subdivisions in the area.
Site C Parcels located on the east and west side of Tesson Ferry Road around the intersection of Tesson Ferry Road and Hageman Road are currently vacant or occupied with residential structures. However, as with other properties in the area, significant grade differences exist on these properties. Recently several parcels in this area were the subject of P.C. 87/88-98 TNG Investments and have been rezoned R-4 with an accompanying Planned Environment Unit. If future residential development should occur in this area, there should be a consolidation of lots providing for a coordinated design pattern utilizing the planned district procedure. Development densities should follow those of established subdivisions in the area.
Site D The area along the western side of Tesson Ferry Road in the southern corner of the subarea is currently being developed with a church along Tesson Ferry Road with an attached single family subdivision located behind the church. If future residential redevelopment of the remaining lots should occur there should be a consolidation of these lots providing a coordinated design pattern utilizing the planned district procedure. Development densities should follow those of established subdivisions in the area. Topography and access problems make non-residential development inappropriate.
Site E Parcels located between Meramec Bottom Road and Tesson Ferry Road present several different development constraints. The southern most portion of the site is in the flood plain, while the northern portion has significant grade and road access constraints. If further residential development occurs in this area the planned district procedure should be utilized to accommodate the specific development constraints. Additionally, Hageman Pointe Drive should be connected to any similar residential development. Plans should also take into consideration the Meramec Linear Park Plan.
Sixth District Community Area Study 145 Site F Parcels along the east side of Hageman Drive north of Meramec Bottom Road and south of Studer Lane are occupied with single family residences. The redevelopment of this area has several constraints including the poor road access and the varying topography. If further development of this area should occur, the planned district procedure should be utilized in order to accommodate the irregular topography and attempt to address access issues. Additionally numerous parcels should be consolidated to insure that piecemeal development does not occur in the area. Development densities should follow those of established subdivisions in the area.
Sixth District Community Area Study 146 XII. Additional Issues
Parks and Recreation
Assets and Characteristics
The St. Louis County Department of Parks and Recreation serves St. Louis County residents by providing parks, recreational facilities and recreational programs. St. Louis County Parks are designated as regional parks, metropolitan parks and neighborhood parks based on the size of park and types of facilities and the size of the area served by that park. The larger parks are countywide assets that serve residents of the County’s municipalities as well as its unincorporated areas. St. Louis County’s neighborhood parks provide green space, playgrounds and other facilities such as picnic areas and ballfields to serve residential neighborhoods in unincorporated St. Louis county.
The supply of park and recreation facilities within the Sixth District study area compares favorably with that of other parts of St. Louis County. While the percentage of total park and green space acreage is slightly less than that of the County as a whole, the main reason for the difference is the absence of Missouri State parks within the district. Of the thirteen State parks in St. Louis County, five of which exceed one thousand acres in size, none is in the Sixth District. However, the study area does have a large share of St. Louis County parks. Of the County’s 72 park sites, 22 park sites (30 percent) totaling 2,133 acres are in the Sixth District. These parks range in size from tiny Gravois Creek Park to Jefferson Barracks Park with 425 acres. Seven large parks that exceed 100 acres are located in the study area. These include Cliff Cave Park, Clydesdale Park and the Kennedy Recreation Complex, which offer many amenities ranging from picnic areas to a recreation center and golf course. Additional active recreation facilities are currently provided at Bee Tree Park, Black Forest Park, Bohrer Park, Ohlendorf Park, R-9 Senior Center and Sylvan Springs Park. Activities include ball fields, playground equipment, tennis courts and fishing ponds. The locations of St. Louis County Parks in the Sixth District are shown on Map 34.
The Grant’s Trail is a major recreational asset in the Sixth District. It has recently received national recognition as a Community Millennium Trail. The trail is paved for four miles; it will eventually be extended to eight miles.
Recent Expansion. Expansion of St. Louis County Parks and Recreation Facilities in the study area is an ongoing process, as evidenced by several recent enhancements. Six of the park sites in the Sixth District have been added within the last ten years, and others have been expanded. Lemay Park, a product of the buyout resulting from the flood of 1993, officially opened in 1996. The park is located along the River Des Peres south of Broadway and offers large areas for active recreational activities. The development of the Lower Meramec Linear Park in partnership with private entities and the expansion of Grant’s Trail are ongoing projects that will add recreational opportunities in the study area. Currently, park development projects are on going
Sixth District Community Area Study 147 at Suson Park, the Kennedy Recreation Center, and Bee Tree Park.
Issues To Be Addressed
During open house and committee meetings community desires were expressed for additional active recreational facilities including an additional pool complex and community center. The Department of Parks and Recreation is aware of these desires and is also aware of the aging facilities in the Sixth District. However, the issue of aging facilities is a countywide problem. County parks in north and west county are also becoming outdated and in need of repair. In the Sixth District as well as countywide both the issue of funding and the difficulty of finding and acquiring property to build new facilities are ever increasing problems. As the county approaches full development, there are fewer large vacant parcels available, and the cost of property is increasing.
A related constraint on the development of active recreational facilities is the designation of Cliff Cave Park as a Heritage Park, which restricts the development for recreational facilities to no more than five percent of the total park land. Therefore, alternative sites have had to be investigated for additional active recreational facilities.
Another key issue that was raised during public meetings is the continued implementation and support of the Lower Meramec River Linear Park Master Plan. The Lower Meramec Linear Park is intended as a partnership between public and private entities and is being implemented through partnerships with various groups and property owners. The County Water Company, MSD, several quarries, Jefferson County, the City of Arnold, the Missouri Department of Transportation, and owners of private recreational facilities are all participating in the implementation. The committee supports extension of the linear park eastward along the Meramec River.
Recommendations
1. All development in each planning subarea that abuts the Lower Meramec River Linear Park should adhere to the requirements of the Lower Meramec Linear Park Master Plan.
2. Continuation of Grant’s Trail along Gravois Creek, maintenance of the existing trail, and protection of the trail from the encroachment of incompatible land uses should be strongly supported.
3. Development of private recreational facilities or other land uses that complement the Grant’s Trail, the Lower Meramec Linear Park or Mississippi River access areas should be strongly encouraged.
4. Efforts by St. Louis County to obtain additional funding for the development and modernization of park facilities should be strongly supported.
Sixth District Community Area Study 148 Map St. Louis County Parks in the Sixth District 34
N
55
21 AFFTON COMMUNITY CENTER LEMAY OHLENDORF
CLYDESDALE GRAVOIS 231 CREEK BLACK UNION FOREST ROAD JEFFERSON BARRACKS 21 BOHRER
270 50 267 55 61 67 R-9 COMMUNITY CENTER SYLVAN 61 SPRINGS ROBERT 67 WINTER
255 231
BUTLER SUSON HILL WAYNE C. KENNEDY FORMAN
61 67 CLASSE 21 55 CLIFF CAVE
LOWER MERAMEC VER C RI AME MER
231
R
E
V I
R
I
P
P I
S
S I
S
S I 231 M
ALBRECHT EARL WIDMAN
BEE TREE
Prepared by St. Louis County Department of Planning Research and Statistics Division July 2000 Stormwater and Sanitary Sewers
The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District (MSD) reviews and maintains sanitary sewers across St. Louis County as well as in the City of St. Louis. However, MSD maintains stormwater sewer lines only within its original boundary and not within areas subsequently annexed by the district in 1977. In the Sixth District the area within the original MSD boundary is roughly the area north of I-255/I-270. MSD is responsible for and receives revenues for stormwater control in this area. Within the annexed area of the Sixth District no revenues are collected to do stormwater control work. The 24-cent charge that residents pay for stormwater covers only MSD’s cost of reviewing and inspecting new development projects for proper stormwater drainage.
While funding for improvements is limited, there are significant sanitary sewer improvements planned for the Sixth District with projected costs of approximately $120,000,000. The majority of this money will be spent on planning and construction of the Lower Meramec treatment plan, which is to be located off Telegraph Road on the Meramec River. Additional work planned in the Sixth District for the fiscal 2000-2001 year includes sanitary relief sewer work at Bayless and Reed Roads, sanitary relief work along Mattese Creek and interceptor sanitary relief work at Towne South Road.
The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District has developed several priorities which would enable MSD to provide additional services including stormwater control work outside of the original boundary. These include:
1. Changing the MSD charter to allow the issuance of districtwide revenue bonds and to reduce the majority required for approval of bonds. 2. Implementing an impervious charge by which all MSD customers would pay a charge based on the amount of their property that is paved or otherwise impervious. Such a charge, if passed by the voters, would allow MSD to take responsibility for such things as maintaining residential detention basins in the annexed area. At present, such maintenance is the responsibility of subdivision trustees and commercial property owners. Commercial property owners would get a credit against the impervious charge if they adequately maintained their own detention basins.
Recommendation
The proposed changes to the MSD charter and the implementation of the proposed impervious charge should be supported so that MSD will be able to take over responsibility for stormwater facilities including subdivision detention basins within the Sixth District.
Sixth District Community Area Study 150 Billboards and Advertising Signs
During public meetings concern was expressed about the proliferation of billboards or advertising signs in the Sixth District. The St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance defines an advertising sign as, “A sign intended to attract general public interest concerning a commercial enterprise, product, service, or other activity not conducted, sold, or offered on the same premises upon which the sign is erected.” (St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance, Section 1003.020-7.) Currently, advertising signs are permitted uses in the M-1 Industrial District, M-2 Industrial District, the C-2 and C-3 Shopping Districts, C-4 Highway Service Commercial District, C-7 General Extensive Commercial District and all planned districts if they are designated as a permitted use by ordinance. They are also allowed by Conditional Use Permit in the NU Non-Urban zoning district. The St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance permits advertising signs up to 800 square feet in size and no more than 35 feet above the elevation of the adjacent street. Additional requirements are that signs must be no closer than 100 feet to any other advertising sign or building nor within 50 feet of any PS Park and Scenic zoning district or residentially zoned property. Missouri Department of Transportation requirements mandate a 500-foot separation between advertising signs on the same side of a road.
If the ground is zoned properly, advertising signs are permitted along any roadway. However, they are usually found along interstate highways or state roads that are four lanes or wider such as Telegraph Road, Lemay Ferry Road, Tesson Ferry Road, Gravois Road and Lindbergh Boulevard. Based upon a visual inspection, older advertising signs are located predominately in older commercial areas on roads such as Telegraph Road and Lemay Ferry Road north of I-270. Newer signs are concentrated along Interstates 55 and 270/255. Very few requests for new advertising signs have been filed in recent years, since most of the locations where advertising signs are permitted already have signs built on them.
A proposition submitted by initiative petition to make state billboard regulations more restrictive will appear on the November, 2000, ballot. Its passage would reaffirm local governments’ authority to regulate billboards.
Recommendations
1. Noting that the continued proliferation of advertising signs/billboards was a concern of the residents of the Sixth District, the continued study of this issue is recommended. Possible solutions include the amendment of the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance to remove advertising signs as permitted uses in the C-2 and C-3 Shopping District zoning categories or to make advertising signs conditional uses rather than permitted uses in these districts.
2. Further study of the possibility of the amortization of existing signs is also recommended. One possibility is the eventual elimination of all advertising signs on non-interstate roads. Spacing requirements on interstate highways could be increased.
Sixth District Community Area Study 151 Sixth District Community Area Study 152 XIII.Implementation Tools
The following is a list of redevelopment mechanisms available for use in St. Louis County.
Program Eminent Tax Public Domain Abatement Vote Required
Land Clearance for Redevelopment Yes Only in No Authority Law, Sections 99.300-99.7151 constitutional charter cities Provides for a Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) to assemble land for redevelopment, and provides up to ten years of tax abatement to the owners of redeveloped property. A five- member board appointed by the County Executive governs the LCRA.
Urban Redevelopment Corporations Law, Yes Yes2 No Sections 353.010-353.190
Provides for the creation by private parties of an Urban Redevelopment Corporation to assemble blighted land for redevelopment and to secure up to twenty-five years of tax abatement to the owners of redeveloped property.
1 All references are to the Revised Statutes of Missouri (1994).
2 In the 2000 legislative session, the Missouri Legislature approved legislation providing for tax abatement in unincorporated St. Louis County. Governor Carnahan signed the legislation on July 10, 2000, making Chapter 353 tax abatement available in unincorporated St. Louis County.
Sixth District Community Area Study 153 Program Eminent Tax Public Domain Abatement Vote Required Real Property Tax Increment Allocation Yes No No Redevelopment (TIF), Sections 99.800- 99.865)
Provides for payments in lieu of certain taxes (PILOTS) and economic activity taxes (EATS) derived from a redevelopment area to be set aside to pay certain costs of such redevelopment. Typically, bonds are issued to pay such costs, secured by the stream of such PILOTS and EATS. The PILOTS are an amount equal to the increase (increment) in taxes resulting from such development. The EATS are increases in sales and utility taxes which are used to retire debt.
Industrial Development Projects - Bonds, No Yes No3 Section 100.010-100.200.
Provides for the issuance of bonds by the County to provide funds for the purchase, construction, extension and improvement of warehouses, distribution facilities, research and development facilities, office industries and service facilities that provide interstate commerce. Also, because the County is authorized to own facility and/or equipment so financed and lease same to the private operator, taxes may not be assessed against such property
3 The County is authorized to issue general obligation, as well as revenue bonds under this Act. The issuance of general obligation bonds would require a public vote.
Sixth District Community Area Study 154 Program Eminent Tax Public Domain Abatement Vote Required Industrial Development Corporations, No No No Sections 349.010-349.105
Provides for an industrial development authority to issue bonds to raise funds for the purchase, construction, extension and improvement of plants, buildings and facilities primarily for commercial and industrial purposes. Such bonds are typically secured by collateral provided by the project operators.
Transportation Development Districts, No No Yes, or by Sections 238.200-238.275 order of the Circuit Court Provides for the issuance of bonds to pay for transportation improvements in a specific area that levies a special sales tax for debt retirement. A district may be created by a majority of the registered voters residing in the proposed district or by order of the Circuit Court.
Community Improvement District Act, No No Yes Sections 67.1401-67.1571
Provides for the establishment of a Community Improvement District (CID), which can be either a political subdivision or a nonprofit agency. As a political subdivision, it can levy taxes; as a nonprofit, it can levy special assessments. CIDs may acquire and redevelop blighted property, sell/lease real estate, construct improvements and spend money for marketing and promoting business districts. Projects may include streetlights, sidewalks, sewers, benches and other beautification/revitalization efforts.
Sixth District Community Area Study 155 Program Eminent Tax Public Domain Abatement Vote Required Neighborhood Improvement District No No Yes (NID), Sections 67.453-67.475
Provides for the creation of a Neighborhood Improvement District by a favorable vote of the owners of two-thirds of the property or four-sevenths of the registered voters in a proposed district. The County may then sell bonds for improvements, which are repaid using special assessments levied against the property owners within the District. Eligible public projects include property assembly, street and sidewalk improvements, retaining walls, off-street parking, other infrastructure and public safety improvements.
Neighborhood Assistance Act, Sections No No No 32.100-32.125
Provides tax credits to certain private entities that make contributions to neighborhoods for physical revitalization, economic development, job training or education for individuals, community services or crime prevention. The Department of Economic Development must approve the tax credits.
Rebuilding Communities and No No No Neighborhood Preservation Act, Sections 135.475-135.487
Provides state tax credits for the reimbursement of eligible costs of rehabilitation and construction of residences in certain areas.
Sixth District Community Area Study 156 Program Eminent Tax Public Domain Abatement Vote Required Abandoned Property, Redevelopment No No No Projects (Brownfield Tax Credits), Sections 447.700-447.718
Provides state tax credits and other financial incentives for the reimbursement of eligible remediation costs for redevelopment of commercial or industrial sites owned by a government agency that have been abandoned for at least three years due to contamination by hazardous substances.
Sixth District Community Area Study 157