St Louis,MO talk- Is is dangerous or not as bad as perceived/Arch height restrictions etc etc...

[obvious2677]

Note: I've never criticized St Louis's large Gateway Arch park, as a monument like that should surrounded by a big park.

Two things on this point: No buildings in St. Louis are allowed to be taller than the Arch (630 feet at 465 elevation). This has lead to huge amounts of urban sprawl - and a hollowed-out core. According to the Brookings Institute, only 8 percent of St Louis residents live or work within 3 miles of the central business district. Clayton looks about as good as downtown. Side note: I hated living there.

Also, for what it's worth, the Arch name was changed a few months back - it's officially named a "Gateway Arch National Park" now.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

Note: I've never criticized St Louis's large Gateway Arch park, as a monument like that should surrounded by a big park.

Two things on this point: No buildings in St. Louis are allowed to be taller than the Arch (630 feet at 465 elevation). This has lead to huge amounts of urban sprawl - and a hollowed-out core. According to the Brookings Institute, only 8 percent of St Louis residents live or work within 3 miles of the central business district.

I don’t know that the height restrictions are why St. Louis has large amounts of sprawl. The arch is pretty tall. I think the reasons St. Louis sprawls are a little more racist.

[obvious2677]

Note: I've never criticized St Louis's large Gateway Arch park, as a monument like that should surrounded by a big park.

Two things on this point: No buildings in St. Louis are allowed to be taller than the Arch (630 feet at 465 elevation). This has lead to huge amounts of urban sprawl - and a hollowed-out core. According to the Brookings Institute, only 8 percent of St Louis residents live or work within 3 miles of the central business district.

I don’t know that the height restrictions are why St. Louis has large amounts of sprawl. The arch is pretty tall. I think the reasons St. Louis sprawls are a little more racist.

Where people reside? Sure. Agreed. Why there are an expanse of low-dwelling corporate HQ's spread throughout the suburbs? Not sure I agree.

It's a contributing reason as to why no building broke the 600-foot mark. St Louis' tallest building is only 42 stories - 41 feet shorter than FNB Tower. They never catered to bring business back to the city.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

Note: I've never criticized St Louis's large Gateway Arch park, as a monument like that should surrounded by a big park.

Two things on this point: No buildings in St. Louis are allowed to be taller than the Arch (630 feet at 465 elevation). This has lead to huge amounts of urban sprawl - and a hollowed-out core. According to the Brookings Institute, only 8 percent of St Louis residents live or work within 3 miles of the central business district.

I don’t know that the height restrictions are why St. Louis has large amounts of sprawl. The arch is pretty tall. I think the reasons St. Louis sprawls are a little more racist.

Where people reside? Sure. Agreed. Why there are an expanse of low-dwelling corporate HQ's spread throughout the suburbs? Not sure I agree.

It's a contributing reason as to why no building broke the 600-foot mark. St Louis' tallest building is only 42 stories - 41 feet shorter than FNB Tower. They never catered to bring business back to the city.

Typically if a company wants to be somewhere they’ll find a way to be there. Clayton currently commands higher office lease rates than downtown St. Louis and no height restriction (although I think there used to be) and yet there have been no really tall high skyscrapers built.

During the ‘70s, ‘80s and ‘90s a lot of companies located their headquarters where their employees were. For St. Louis that was way out in the suburbs. The racial aspect comes in in that white flight and redlining destroyed the city and there weren’t many people to hire near downtown.

[GrandpaaSmucker]

During the ‘70s, ‘80s and ‘90s a lot of companies located their headquarters where their employees were. For St. Louis that was way out in the suburbs. The racial aspect comes in in that white flight and redlining destroyed the city and there weren’t many people to hire near downtown.

How are the people that moved the bad guys when all they did was move? They did not make the people who stayed destroy and scum up the area they lived in!

[RockHarbor]

Note: I've never criticized St Louis's large Gateway Arch park, as a monument like that should surrounded by a big park.

Two things on this point: No buildings in St. Louis are allowed to be taller than the Arch (630 feet at 465 elevation). This has lead to huge amounts of urban sprawl - and a hollowed-out core. According to the Brookings Institute, only 8 percent of St Louis residents live or work within 3 miles of the central business district. Clayton looks about as good as downtown. Side note: I hated living there.

Also, for what it's worth, the Arch name was changed a few months back - it's officially named a "Gateway Arch National Park" now.

I knew about the height restriction in St Louis due to the Arch (its obvious looking at the skyline as well, with three buildings just hovering at a height just below it). I honestly have a hard time believing that restriction against super tall buildings is the ultimate cause of inner city St Louis problems. The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs. "National Park" instead of "National Monument" now, eh? Interesting. Didnt know that. I talked to an old timer today from Omaha, that remembers when 60th St was the edge of town. He also went thru the Omaha tornado of 1975. He is amazed Omaha goes to the Elkorn River Valley now. Neither of us live in Omaha anymore. Yet, anybody from Omaha, has a love for Omaha and continued interest in the town -- it seems. Once a Cornhusker, always a Cornhusker...

[obvious2677]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

[RockHarbor]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

No, its actually laughable that you"re trying to convince me, and us, that inner city St Louis is "Mayberry." My family lived in Lake St Louis for almost a decade, after being transferred from Omaha, and I lived in the St Louis area with them for awhile. Inner St Louis may have some pricey real estate, and maybe its cleaned up a bit, but it is still a dangerous inner city -- with a worse ghetto across the river. There are plenty of blocks filled with grassy big lots where row homes have all been removed, and plenty of scary corners -- especially NW of Downtown. You're not the only one who "knows St Louis" here. I actually had a cop scold me on the Illinois side when I was simply trying to get pics of the skyline & river -- he told me to get my behind back over that river pronto. Then, over the river, I had to be careful where I exited the freeway between downtown & the science museum. There was always that "edge" there in the inner city. There are definite rough areas, worse over in IL -- of course. Its definitely more dangerous and shady than Omaha. In fact, along with Detroit, St Louis is one of the top cities with that bad wrap. Thats inarguable.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

No, its actually laughable that you"re trying to convince me, and us, that inner city St Louis is "Mayberry." My family lived in Lake St Louis for almost a decade, after being transferred from Omaha, and I lived in the St Louis area with them for awhile. Inner St Louis may have some pricey real estate, and maybe its cleaned up a bit, but it is still a dangerous inner city -- with a worse ghetto across the river. There are plenty of blocks filled with grassy big lots where row homes have all been removed, and plenty of scary corners -- especially NW of Downtown. You're not the only one who "knows St Louis" here. I actually had a cop scold me on the Illinois side when I was simply trying to get pics of the skyline & river -- he told me to get my behind back over that river pronto. Then, over the river, I had to be careful where I exited the freeway between downtown & the science museum. There was always that "edge" there in the inner city. There are definite rough areas, worse over in IL -- of course. Its definitely more dangerous and shady than Omaha. In fact, along with Detroit, St Louis is one of the top cities with that bad wrap. Thats inarguable.

I think the reality is somewhere in between you guys’ posts. St. Louis probably is safer for the average joe than is perceived, but the perception surely seems to keep SOME people away (I have St. Louis area family hesitant to come down to the city outside or downtown and Soulard), the city has made remarkable improvements to quality of life in most parts, especially in the central corridor (downtown out to forest park with Delmar/Washington on the north and roughly Gravois on the south.

As someone who owns a home, walks to work, goes to graduate school, and usually goes out all between downtown and the science center, I can confidently say whatever the city was like when you lived here to make that area a no go zone, it has vastly improved.

[obvious2677]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

No, its actually laughable that you"re trying to convince me, and us, that inner city St Louis is "Mayberry." My family lived in Lake St Louis for almost a decade, after being transferred from Omaha, and I lived in the St Louis area with them for awhile. Inner St Louis may have some pricey real estate, and maybe its cleaned up a bit, but it is still a dangerous inner city -- with a worse ghetto across the river. There are plenty of blocks filled with grassy big lots where row homes have all been removed, and plenty of scary corners -- especially NW of Downtown. You're not the only one who "knows St Louis" here. I actually had a cop scold me on the Illinois side when I was simply trying to get pics of the skyline & river -- he told me to get my behind back over that river pronto. Then, over the river, I had to be careful where I exited the freeway between downtown & the science museum. There was always that "edge" there in the inner city. There are definite rough areas, worse over in IL -- of course. Its definitely more dangerous and shady than Omaha. In fact, along with Detroit, St Louis is one of the top cities with that bad wrap. Thats inarguable.

ha. I guess we either lived there a decade (or two) apart or have a different tolerance for what is "dangerous" and "scary."

I will agree, the north side is not a place for your average citizen. However, you're kidding about "between downtown and the science museum" right? I spent 95% of the time I lived there in between those spots (and the multiple times I've returned in the last two years were spent in that area) - walked to breakfast, lunch, dinner, concerts, bars, and friends houses; rode the train; and hung out there before dawn and well after dusk. For f's sake - The Grove, Wash U, SLU, St. Louis College of Pharmacy, Harris Stowe, Central West End, Union Station and the hockey arena are all in between there. The rest is industrial and multiple hospitals - oh, and the neighborhoods that I hung out in.

The industrial parts are also going to disappear. SLU is also looking to connect the three parts of their campus - https://www.slu.edu/news/img/redevelopment-area-800.jpg - the furthers south part being the Public Health Building, then north to the Med Campus and connecting on the north edge to the normal campus. Part of this broke ground last year - the SSM/SLU ambulatory clinic.

Anyways, now that we've both gotten off topic for several posts about something stupid....

[RockHarbor]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

No, its actually laughable that you"re trying to convince me, and us, that inner city St Louis is "Mayberry." My family lived in Lake St Louis for almost a decade, after being transferred from Omaha, and I lived in the St Louis area with them for awhile. Inner St Louis may have some pricey real estate, and maybe its cleaned up a bit, but it is still a dangerous inner city -- with a worse ghetto across the river. There are plenty of blocks filled with grassy big lots where row homes have all been removed, and plenty of scary corners -- especially NW of Downtown. You're not the only one who "knows St Louis" here. I actually had a cop scold me on the Illinois side when I was simply trying to get pics of the skyline & river -- he told me to get my behind back over that river pronto. Then, over the river, I had to be careful where I exited the freeway between downtown & the science museum. There was always that "edge" there in the inner city. There are definite rough areas, worse over in IL -- of course. Its definitely more dangerous and shady than Omaha. In fact, along with Detroit, St Louis is one of the top cities with that bad wrap. Thats inarguable.

ha. I guess we either lived there a decade (or two) apart or have a different tolerance for what is "dangerous" and "scary."

I will agree, the north side is not a place for your average citizen. However, you're kidding about "between downtown and the science museum" right? I spent 95% of the time I lived there in between those spots (and the multiple times I've returned in the last two years were spent in that area) - walked to breakfast, lunch, dinner, concerts, bars, and friends houses; rode the train; and hung out there before dawn and well after dusk. For f's sake - The Grove, Wash U, SLU, St. Louis College of Pharmacy, Harris Stowe, Central West End, Union Station and the hockey arena are all in between there. The rest is industrial and multiple hospitals - oh, and the neighborhoods that I hung out in.

The industrial parts are also going to disappear. SLU is also looking to connect the three parts of their campus - https://www.slu.edu/news/img/redevelopment-area-800.jpg - the furthers south part being the Public Health Building, then north to the Med Campus and connecting on the north edge to the normal campus. Part of this broke ground last year - the SSM/SLU ambulatory clinic.

Anyways, now that we've both gotten off topic for several posts about something stupid....

I'm so glad they did this new thread. I was going to ask them to. Anyways, yes...my experience was in the mid/late 90's, and I was just a "kid from the suburbs" as well. I was aware that it has cleaned up a bit with the new stadium and new casinos on the IL side. However, "inner city St Louis" does also mean that dilapidated NW section, too -- and Google Maps shows that area still has many vacant lots. Like North Omaha, I know new construction is bettering that area, though. And, yes, I know reputations can often be exaggerated & more dramatic than reality -- yet, keep in mind, this boy with a camera was obviously niave to a degree in East St Louis, to have a cop shake the seriousness of it into me. So, I still consider that inner city of St Louis more edgy than Omaha. But, I'm sure it has improved and glad to hear that. I can post some pics of St Louis here eventually...

[obvious2677]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

No, its actually laughable that you"re trying to convince me, and us, that inner city St Louis is "Mayberry." My family lived in Lake St Louis for almost a decade, after being transferred from Omaha, and I lived in the St Louis area with them for awhile. Inner St Louis may have some pricey real estate, and maybe its cleaned up a bit, but it is still a dangerous inner city -- with a worse ghetto across the river. There are plenty of blocks filled with grassy big lots where row homes have all been removed, and plenty of scary corners -- especially NW of Downtown. You're not the only one who "knows St Louis" here. I actually had a cop scold me on the Illinois side when I was simply trying to get pics of the skyline & river -- he told me to get my behind back over that river pronto. Then, over the river, I had to be careful where I exited the freeway between downtown & the science museum. There was always that "edge" there in the inner city. There are definite rough areas, worse over in IL -- of course. Its definitely more dangerous and shady than Omaha. In fact, along with Detroit, St Louis is one of the top cities with that bad wrap. Thats inarguable.

ha. I guess we either lived there a decade (or two) apart or have a different tolerance for what is "dangerous" and "scary."

I will agree, the north side is not a place for your average citizen. However, you're kidding about "between downtown and the science museum" right? I spent 95% of the time I lived there in between those spots (and the multiple times I've returned in the last two years were spent in that area) - walked to breakfast, lunch, dinner, concerts, bars, and friends houses; rode the train; and hung out there before dawn and well after dusk. For f's sake - The Grove, Wash U, SLU, St. Louis College of Pharmacy, Harris Stowe, Central West End, Union Station and the hockey arena are all in between there. The rest is industrial and multiple hospitals - oh, and the neighborhoods that I hung out in.

The industrial parts are also going to disappear. SLU is also looking to connect the three parts of their campus - https://www.slu.edu/news/img/redevelopment-area-800.jpg - the furthers south part being the Public Health Building, then north to the Med Campus and connecting on the north edge to the normal campus. Part of this broke ground last year - the SSM/SLU ambulatory clinic.

Anyways, now that we've both gotten off topic for several posts about something stupid....

I'm so glad they did this new thread. I was going to ask them to. Anyways, yes...my experience was in the mid/late 90's, and I was just a "kid from the suburbs" as well. I was aware that it has cleaned up a bit with the new stadium and new casinos on the IL side. However, "inner city St Louis" does also mean that dilapidated NW section, too -- and Google Maps shows that area still has many vacant lots. Like North Omaha, I know new construction is bettering that area, though. And, yes, I know reputations can often be exaggerated & more dramatic than reality -- yet, keep in mind, this boy with a camera was obviously niave to a degree in East St Louis, to have a cop shake the seriousness of it into me. So, I still consider that inner city of St Louis more edgy than Omaha. But, I'm sure it has improved and glad to hear that. I can post some pics of St Louis here eventually...

St. Louis, like all major cities, has changed a lot over the last 20 years. Also - Lake St. Louis isn't even close to St. Louis. That's 35 miles out - the same distance Fremont is from Omaha.

Like I said before - the 3-mile radius around the CBD is not really that dangerous (the ville is - but that's 3+ miles from downtown). The "inner city" isn't dangerous - it's diverse.

For reference, I was there from 2012-2014. The central area you've mentioned is no worse (in terms of crime) than the "arts" area north of Cass in Omaha - but has better housing, restaurants, bars, and things to do.

[RockHarbor]

The problem with that town is that it is "ghetto fabulous" in a way like Detroit is. That town has a really rough side, surrounded by white collar burgeoning suburbs.

Being someone who lived there - I disagree with this. The 3-mile radius around the central business district is relatively murder-free - the same way the Old Market in Omaha is 'relatively' murder free.
These span different time periods, but you'll get the point.
Omaha: https://ibb.co/d978QJ
St. Louis: https://ibb.co/nK8bCy

Lafayette Park has $1 million houses. Soulard has houses between $200k-$600k. The Gate, Fox Park and Benton Park are all solid neighborhoods. Even if you're further north off Washington or Olive - there are $150k lofts. It's laughable that you would consider these even close to be "ghetto" or would think that crime keeps people away from STL's core. It has nothing to do with that.

No, its actually laughable that you"re trying to convince me, and us, that inner city St Louis is "Mayberry." My family lived in Lake St Louis for almost a decade, after being transferred from Omaha, and I lived in the St Louis area with them for awhile. Inner St Louis may have some pricey real estate, and maybe its cleaned up a bit, but it is still a dangerous inner city -- with a worse ghetto across the river. There are plenty of blocks filled with grassy big lots where row homes have all been removed, and plenty of scary corners -- especially NW of Downtown. You're not the only one who "knows St Louis" here. I actually had a cop scold me on the Illinois side when I was simply trying to get pics of the skyline & river -- he told me to get my behind back over that river pronto. Then, over the river, I had to be careful where I exited the freeway between downtown & the science museum. There was always that "edge" there in the inner city. There are definite rough areas, worse over in IL -- of course. Its definitely more dangerous and shady than Omaha. In fact, along with Detroit, St Louis is one of the top cities with that bad wrap. Thats inarguable.

ha. I guess we either lived there a decade (or two) apart or have a different tolerance for what is "dangerous" and "scary."

I will agree, the north side is not a place for your average citizen. However, you're kidding about "between downtown and the science museum" right? I spent 95% of the time I lived there in between those spots (and the multiple times I've returned in the last two years were spent in that area) - walked to breakfast, lunch, dinner, concerts, bars, and friends houses; rode the train; and hung out there before dawn and well after dusk. For f's sake - The Grove, Wash U, SLU, St. Louis College of Pharmacy, Harris Stowe, Central West End, Union Station and the hockey arena are all in between there. The rest is industrial and multiple hospitals - oh, and the neighborhoods that I hung out in.

The industrial parts are also going to disappear. SLU is also looking to connect the three parts of their campus - https://www.slu.edu/news/img/redevelopment-area-800.jpg - the furthers south part being the Public Health Building, then north to the Med Campus and connecting on the north edge to the normal campus. Part of this broke ground last year - the SSM/SLU ambulatory clinic.

Anyways, now that we've both gotten off topic for several posts about something stupid....

I'm so glad they did this new thread. I was going to ask them to. Anyways, yes...my experience was in the mid/late 90's, and I was just a "kid from the suburbs" as well. I was aware that it has cleaned up a bit with the new stadium and new casinos on the IL side. However, "inner city St Louis" does also mean that dilapidated NW section, too -- and Google Maps shows that area still has many vacant lots. Like North Omaha, I know new construction is bettering that area, though. And, yes, I know reputations can often be exaggerated & more dramatic than reality -- yet, keep in mind, this boy with a camera was obviously niave to a degree in East St Louis, to have a cop shake the seriousness of it into me. So, I still consider that inner city of St Louis more edgy than Omaha. But, I'm sure it has improved and glad to hear that. I can post some pics of St Louis here eventually...

St. Louis, like all major cities, has changed a lot over the last 20 years. Also - Lake St. Louis isn't even close to St. Louis. That's 35 miles out - the same distance Fremont is from Omaha.

Like I said before - the 3-mile radius around the CBD is not really that dangerous (the ville is - but that's 3+ miles from downtown). The "inner city" isn't dangerous - it's diverse.

For reference, I was there from 2012-2014. The central area you've mentioned is no worse (in terms of crime) than the "arts" area north of Cass in Omaha - but has better housing, restaurants, bars, and things to do.

I'm glad it has changed and cleaned-up a bit since my experience living there. I figured it had --- because that's the trend with all "ghetto" areas, I think. Even North Omaha is not as shady & shadowy as it used to be. (Sometimes I wonder if the ghetto has now shifted a bit west, though.)

I truly felt nervous to ever exit between the Science Museum and Downtown in those times. If you didnt pay close attention, and passed the last downtown exit by accident (and there was even a "last exit in MO!" warning sign), then you ended up passing over the river into East SL, and you would then have to drive for awhile to get outside of East SL, to then safely exit and turn around. So, it was a real pain -- all because of that dangerous ghetto element. I wasn't used to that urgency in inner-city Omaha & Council Bluffs.

Also, to photograph that mighty Arch & skyline with the river in front (the picture that anybody who cares about the SL skyline wants) is so darn risky. With the casinos there now, it is much better. But, it is still risky. You have to exit in East SL just at the right exit to get to the casino, plus drive a little ways thru ghetto to reach it. When I was photographing the skyline at twilight in 2015, I had a spooky experience that sent me running back to the brightly-lit casino, dashing like a scared little girl. (Lol) So, that city still makes me a little nervous.

LAKE ST LOUIS: Yes, it is a good 40 miles from Downtown St Louis. It took almost an hour to get downtown -- and it was all built-up suburbs & city the whole way. The freeways are big & busy. Its a big enough city that plenty of people way out in those St Charles County suburbs hardly ever go downtown, nor are tied to downtown as much as West Omahans are tied to Downtown Omaha. In fact, my younger sibling, who was fairly young when we got transferred from Omaha, and mainly grew up in the St Louis area and graduated down there, I'm not sure if that sibling even considers St Louis as their "hometown", because the suburbs have grown far enough out, that it isnt the same as a Millard West or Elkhorn graduate considering Omaha as their "hometown." Its over twice the distance from downtown to where the suburbs fizzle out down there, then it is in Omaha -- an Omaha-to-Fremont distance as you mentioned. When suburbs grow out that far from the city core, going downtown starts to feel like a "day trip" in a way. Chicago & its relationship w/ its furthest out suburbs feels that way (although Downtown Chicago is way more alluring & attractive than Downtown St. Louis is, so I'm sure more suburbanites head downtown in Chicago than in St. Louis).


(Its kinda weird to me that my parents are from the Omaha area, a lot of my relatives and good family friends are in the Omaha area, and my older brother & I grew up entirely in Omaha, but my younger siblings dont consider Omaha their "hometown" at all, because of our transfer when they were very young. I was early college years when we moved. I have to remind myself that we dont all view Omaha with the same affections. I still want to believe Omaha is my younger siblings "hometown", too -- but it really isn't.)

[RockHarbor]

Lol.

I just talked to a long term St Louis resident a few minutes back, and we got into a personal enough convo that I was able to bring up the fact that I've been talking with another individual about the topic of inner city St Louis getting nicer & better & safer, and they said that they felt it wasn't at all. They agreed that the stretch from the Science Museum to downtown is OK, but if you just go a half mile north and cross Lindell, then it looks like some terrible war zone. They said it is still really bad -- up into Hazelwood even.

Back then, in the mid-90's, the internet was just beginning, and there was no Google Maps 3D, or any satellite aerials available online to scope anything out, where I could see where the ghetto actually was. I just had a flat, plain street map of St. Louis back then, and knew it was out there. So, I never exited the freeway in that area, and certainly didn't venture or explore too far if I accidentally did. Now, I see some of that caution was a bit maybe extreme, and some of it was certainly justified.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not a "ghetto person", and I like ghettos being cleaned up, but part of me finds that "edge" with St Louis kind of intriguing. Detroit is the most fabled, as far as a rough, concrete, dark & shady, ghetto-y major city in history goes, but St. Louis is up there, too. Memphis has a rough reputation, too, but I would say a little less than St. Louis.

...........................................................................................................................................

Finally, I found an aerial of that NW section with all the empty lots: https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnew ... 1200%2C781

Here's that inner city stretch in which you assure me I'm freaking out over nothing. I can see that now. It doesn't look all that bad. But, again, I was pointed out that just north of there, crossing Lindell, it gets really bad. http://robustwineblog.typepad.com/.a/6a ... ed1970b-pi
And: http://www.yorkhousestl.com/wp-content/ ... intro1.jpg

I love that look in St. Louis with the Arch & the Downtown buildings looming over rough areas.: https://walkoverstates.files.wordpress. ... is-013.jpg

FORBES TOP 10 Most Dangerous Cities: http://abc11.com/archive/8854740/ (St. Louis is on the list.)

Here's a neat picture of the city from the South Side. It looks charming. There's a certain look & charm to St. Louis with the brick neighborhoods, many featuring those French mansard roofs. (I notice St Louis does have those French mansard roofs seen around a lot, plus I know I read years back that "St Louis" is named after King Louis of France -- or some "King Louis" over in Europe somewhere. So, like Des Moines is, St Louis is French-influenced.) : http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3059/304 ... c941_o.jpg

I think this is the north side of St. Louis. Neat old & red brick homes. That is so "St. Louis." https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... rmat=2500w

LOVE the new Four Seasons Hotel on the Mississippi River in St Louis with the blazing streak of red through it: https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnew ... .image.jpg (That is great design for St Louis. I need to analyze why. It just works. It may because we associate St Louis with the unconventional geometry & streaking movement of silver with the Gateway Arch. I think that is at least part of how & why that works. Red is associated with St Louis for several reasons, but that streak is not always glowing red... )

[obvious2677]

Lol.

I just talked to a long term St Louis resident a few minutes back, and we got into a personal enough convo that I was able to bring up the fact that I've been talking with another individual about the topic of inner city St Louis getting nicer & better & safer, and they said that they felt it wasn't at all. They agreed that the stretch from the Science Museum to downtown is OK, but if you just go a half mile north and cross Lindell, then it looks like some terrible war zone. They said it is still really bad -- up into Hazelwood even.

Back then, in the mid-90's, the internet was just beginning, and there was no Google Maps 3D, or any satellite aerials available online to scope anything out, where I could see where the ghetto actually was. I just had a flat, plain street map of St. Louis back then, and knew it was out there. So, I never exited the freeway in that area, and certainly didn't venture or explore too far if I accidentally did. Now, I see some of that caution was a bit maybe extreme, and some of it was certainly justified.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not a "ghetto person", and I like ghettos being cleaned up, but part of me finds that "edge" with St Louis kind of intriguing. Detroit is the most fabled, as far as a rough, concrete, dark & shady, ghetto-y major city in history goes, but St. Louis is up there, too. Memphis has a rough reputation, too, but I would say a little less than St. Louis.

...........................................................................................................................................

Finally, I found an aerial of that NW section with all the empty lots: https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnew ... 1200%2C781

Here's that inner city stretch in which you assure me I'm freaking out over nothing. I can see that now. It doesn't look all that bad. But, again, I was pointed out that just north of there, crossing Lindell, it gets really bad. http://robustwineblog.typepad.com/.a/6a ... ed1970b-pi
And: http://www.yorkhousestl.com/wp-content/ ... intro1.jpg

I love that look in St. Louis with the Arch & the Downtown buildings looming over rough areas.: https://walkoverstates.files.wordpress. ... is-013.jpg

FORBES TOP 10 Most Dangerous Cities: http://abc11.com/archive/8854740/ (St. Louis is on the list.)

Here's a neat picture of the city from the South Side. It looks charming. There's a certain look & charm to St. Louis with the brick neighborhoods, many featuring those French mansard roofs. (I notice St Louis does have those French mansard roofs seen around a lot, plus I know I read years back that "St Louis" is named after King Louis of France -- or some "King Louis" over in Europe somewhere. So, like Des Moines is, St Louis is French-influenced.) : http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3059/304 ... c941_o.jpg

I think this is the north side of St. Louis. Neat old & red brick homes. That is so "St. Louis." https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... rmat=2500w

LOVE the new Four Seasons Hotel on the Mississippi River in St Louis with the blazing streak of red through it: https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnew ... .image.jpg (That is great design for St Louis. I need to analyze why. It just works. It may because we associate St Louis with the unconventional geometry & streaking movement of silver with the Gateway Arch. I think that is at least part of how & why that works. Red is associated with St Louis for several reasons, but that streak is not always glowing red... )

The last exit sign is still there. Or was when I lived there.

Few things here....
1. I parked north of Lindell for work. It's hardly a "war zone" - though I've never been to a war zone to compare. That being said - I never went north of MLK Drive - where I would say it became sketch. Things north of Lindell that you need to visit - Urban Chestnut (also, go to the one in The Grove), The Fox, the Contemporary Art Museum, The Fountain, Schlafly's taproom, and the City Museum - and I often went to the Schnucks by SLU (on Lindell) to get drinks on the way to Forest Park - you should go see live music at The Firebird (hole in the wall place, often where indie bands play), eat at Pappy's,

2. If they have lived there for a long time - like all of my coworkers when I worked there - I don't think their perceptions change, even as the city shifts. It's the same way that my parents would tell me not to go to north Omaha (realistically - north omaha is only dangerous if you're dealing drugs or in a gang). Was the entire mid-city area dangerous at one time? Yeah, probably. Has it changed enough that you can safely walk down the street without being worried about being shot? Yeah. Lindell is the north border of SLU. SLU is basically the same as Creighton. Are you worried walking down Cass Street? Maybe, if random homeless people scare you. If mid- to upper-class white girls can do it, you can too!

___

I went to Detroit for the first time last year. Took an Uber across the entire city. Guy couldn't fit my luggage in his car (ended up buckling it in the front seat) because he had massive subwoofers in his trunk. Made me laugh.

Been to Memphis and loved it - Beale Street is a blast. Food and music were excellent. I'm sure it, like all cities, has rough areas.

Those empty lots are north of the Pruitt-Igoe site (the tree section on the right top of this image) - in St. Louis Place. I agreed with you - that area is not the best. I never went that far north. This is also the area I called out as being somewhat on the edge of 2-3 miles out from downtown. There's plenty of redevelopment between that and downtown that has already taken place.

I agree that parts of St. Louis are dangerous - - why it makes that list year after year. However, the areas you're discussing aren't as bad as the codgers think they are.

[RockHarbor]

OBVOUIS2677: I would love to hear about your Detroit and Memphis experiences... I totally have learned a lot from what you have shared with me/us here. I realize now that inner St Louis truly has a real, vibrant, liveable inner city -- one I've missed. Yet, it has those more worn, shady, and dangerous areas, too. It's just a big, heftier, rougher, yet more colorful version of Omaha in every regard, basically, because it is a lot bigger. (In fact, after my family moved there, and later would visit Omaha for holidays, Omaha just felt so small to us -- back then, anyways, as Omaha really has grown. Yet, after returning from New York City once, I passed thru St Louis, and it just felt so small to me. So, its perception from your own experience...) Again, keep in mind back then there was no satellite Google Map aerials on your own cell phone, or Google Maps on your computer to zoom in on the city to check things out. I simply had a paper road map of the city back then. Not sure about streets, fumbling with a big paper map in one's car, is not a good idea for a "kid from the burbs" if they find themselves off the freeway and in a harsh ghetto they are not familar with. So, I did what I felt was right at the time. (I knew the area North-Northwest of Downtown St Louis was kinda scary, because it looks that way off I-70. Way back in 1990-ish, I got my first glimpse of St Louis driving with family/relatives from Kansas to Pennsylvania to visit other relatives. Passing through Lake St Louis and seeing the water tower, I had no idea we would later move there 5-6 year later. Anyways, they normally take the I-635 loop around St Louis, but since I was along, I asked them if we could take I-70 into the city so I could see the Arch & city. They did, but we hit a traffic jam -- making people in the vehicle grumble about our "little detour" for me. Sitting quiet & feeling shunned in the back seat, I got glimpses of the ghetto off I-70, then finally, we rounded a curve, and I could see the silvery Arch, steel bridges, and St Louis' tallest buildings -- including the tallest w/ the green gabled peaks, which was brand new. It just looked so old & rough, then downtown was a sudden picture of nicer buildings rising from it all... It left an impression on me that lasts until this day -- not a bad impression, but more a spooky & dark impression, mixed with some bright impressions, with that striking & silvery Arch & and that new gothic-y skyscraper with dark glass, and steep, spikey corner gables, and striking triangular windows -- a new building, pushing even more that spooky & dramatic feel.) As far as St Louis goes: I really appreciate all the red brick, the French mansard roofs, the silvery Arch, the steel bridges, and the old gothic feel of the city, even that spooky ghetto edge-- which is uniquely St Louis. Omaha, Des Moines, Kansas City, Memphis, Minneapolis, Detroit, or Chicago don't have that exact combo. It's St Louis. It has a "solid urban thing" goin' on. In my opinion, it is one of the best cities in the nation for medeival Tudor architecture. I took photos of many lovely Tudor residences in the area when I passed through in 2015. I have to say, though: Kansas City is more "me" probably. We were transferred there after nearly a decade in the St Louis area, and I think we all liked it better (partly because it was closer to Omaha). TITOSBURRITOBARN: After getting carried away with Obvious2677 here, I was scrolling through the thread, and I want to say that I appreciate your input on St Louis. It sounds like you're in St Louis, when I thought you were in Chicago? Anyways, you & Obvious2267 have convinced me to give inner St Louis a closer look. I'm also not alarmed about exiting the freeway between the science museum & downtown anymore.

[RockHarbor]

Here's some quick cell photos of camera photos of St Louis (so the transfer quality isnt the best). In celebration of a true jazz & blues "River City" on the Mississippi...



















I have to say I've really learned to admire the city's AT&T Building -- which normally doesnt get a lot of attention, imo. It's a nice & conventional hefty, chunky office block w/ angles & tiered ledges, and nice facades of big square windows. Part of me wishes Omaha had a skyscraper like that. Yet, even though it has that ordinary "would work in any city" quality, still, I'm not sure it is quite "Omaha" in look and style -- so maybe it is good Omaha doesn't have a building like that. I think it could have been partly inspired by that historic building nearby, which has those square windows and similar overall rectangular shape & lines. Therefore, maybe it is contextual architecture in nature.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

TITOSBURRITOBARN: After getting carried away with Obvious2677 here, I was scrolling through the thread, and I want to say that I appreciate your input on St Louis. It sounds like you're in St Louis, when I thought you were in Chicago? Anyways, you & Obvious2267 have convinced me to give inner St Louis a closer look. I'm also not alarmed about exiting the freeway between the science museum & downtown anymore.

Thanks Rock. I was in Chicago but then life happened and I moved to St. Louis a little less than a year ago (got married to a girl from the area and got into graduate school in the area). We're going to be here at least five years and reevaluate from there.

Anyway, I wanted to bring up this photo:



It overlooks the Central West End from roughly Kingshighway and Lindell Avenue. I apologize if this was brought up already, but over the past twenty years, the Washington University Medical Center has invested in a redevelopment corporation to see that the neighborhoods adjacent to their campus (which this is one, their campus is to the right out of frame in this photo) stabilize and prosper. This is one of the first neighborhoods that they worked on and has perhaps been the most successful.

In the immediate foreground you can see two parking lots, the one on the right with darker asphalt than the one on the left. The one one the left has been torn out and construction has been progressing on this 386 ft. residential tower:



Elsewhere in the neighborhood, this apartment building, the Orion, set a St. Louis record when it sold to an investor for $300,000 per unit. Note the ground-floor Whole Foods.:



Across the street is this apartment building, The Euclid, which has been completed since I moved here and includes a Shake Shack on the ground floor:



Roughly a block north, they completed this building, Citizen Park, around the same time:



Most of the neighborhood's commercial areas look like this with old stately homes in between:

[obvious2677]

TITOSBURRITOBARN: After getting carried away with Obvious2677 here, I was scrolling through the thread, and I want to say that I appreciate your input on St Louis. It sounds like you're in St Louis, when I thought you were in Chicago? Anyways, you & Obvious2267 have convinced me to give inner St Louis a closer look. I'm also not alarmed about exiting the freeway between the science museum & downtown anymore.

Thanks Rock. I was in Chicago but then life happened and I moved to St. Louis a little less than a year ago (got married to a girl from the area and got into graduate school in the area). We're going to be here at least five years and reevaluate from there.

It overlooks the Central West End from roughly Kingshighway and Lindell Avenue. I apologize if this was brought up already, but over the past twenty years, the Washington University Medical Center has invested in a redevelopment corporation to see that the neighborhoods adjacent to their campus (which this is one, their campus is to the right out of frame in this photo) stabilize and prosper. This is one of the first neighborhoods that they worked on and has perhaps been the most successful.

In the immediate foreground you can see two parking lots, the one on the right with darker asphalt than the one on the left. The one one the left has been torn out and construction has been progressing on this 386 ft. residential tower:

Elsewhere in the neighborhood, this apartment building, the Orion, set a St. Louis record when it sold to an investor for $300,000 per unit. Note the ground-floor Whole Foods.:

Across the street is this apartment building, The Euclid, which has been completed since I moved here and includes a Shake Shack on the ground floor:

Roughly a block north, they completed this building, Citizen Park, around the same time:

Most of the neighborhood's commercial areas look like this with old stately homes in between:

Hope you get out and experience everything there (my grad school education was filled with beer drinking - and if yours is the same way, there is a ton of awesome breweries [not Budweiser] there). Actually, Urban Chestnut is now for sale in Council Bluffs - which I'm ecstatic about - and Schlafly was sold in Little Rock (spent 3 months there last year).

Central West End was too fancy for me to live in - but had friends who lived there.

Speaking of downtown, I have a huge picture of the Eads Bridge in my house too - something similar to this... but from Sullivan Boulevard level

Personal opinion - this bridge is remarkable and often forgotten. Construction started two years before the Brooklyn Bridge and was completed 9 years ahead of it (completed in 7 years, Brooklyn was complete in 14).

[obvious2677]

OBVOUIS2677: I would love to hear about your Detroit and Memphis experiences...

There isn't much to share about either. I was in Detroit for 3 days - got in one day, stuck around for the day, then drove up to a cottage in Ontario near the Bruce Peninsula for a week. On the way back, I stuck around for two more days in Detroit - did some touristy things. Got a whole city tour from the people I was with... they live in Grosse Pointe, but we visited their family in Flint (yes, it's a s-hole), then toured Pontiac, Dearborn, downtown, Wayne State U, midtown, went to the Motown Museum, Ford Museum, Greenfield Village, and some other places I don't remember.
[Fun fact most people don't know - the engineering firm behind part of Flint's issue was Lockwood, Andrews & Newman - which is owned by Leo Daly. If there's a Daly employee reading - I'm not faulting anyone, just saying that LAN was part of it http://lanflintwaterlitigation.com/]

Memphis was just a weekend trip when I was in Little Rock. Went there, ate at several local places, went to a bunch of touristy things - Graceland, Beale Street, Civil Rights Museum, arts district, etc. - ate a bunch more and then went back to LR. Not to say it wasn't fun - but I didn't stick around long enough to be worried about anything.

Nothing else really to say about either of them. I feel no need to go back to either - I'll be going back to St. Louis sometime in the next year or two.

[RockHarbor]

TITOSBURRITOBARN: After getting carried away with Obvious2677 here, I was scrolling through the thread, and I want to say that I appreciate your input on St Louis. It sounds like you're in St Louis, when I thought you were in Chicago? Anyways, you & Obvious2267 have convinced me to give inner St Louis a closer look. I'm also not alarmed about exiting the freeway between the science museum & downtown anymore.

Thanks Rock. I was in Chicago but then life happened and I moved to St. Louis a little less than a year ago (got married to a girl from the area and got into graduate school in the area). We're going to be here at least five years and reevaluate from there.

Anyway, I wanted to bring up this photo:



It overlooks the Central West End from roughly Kingshighway and Lindell Avenue. I apologize if this was brought up already, but over the past twenty years, the Washington University Medical Center has invested in a redevelopment corporation to see that the neighborhoods adjacent to their campus (which this is one, their campus is to the right out of frame in this photo) stabilize and prosper. This is one of the first neighborhoods that they worked on and has perhaps been the most successful.

In the immediate foreground you can see two parking lots, the one on the right with darker asphalt than the one on the left. The one one the left has been torn out and construction has been progressing on this 386 ft. residential tower:



Elsewhere in the neighborhood, this apartment building, the Orion, set a St. Louis record when it sold to an investor for $300,000 per unit. Note the ground-floor Whole Foods.:



Across the street is this apartment building, The Euclid, which has been completed since I moved here and includes a Shake Shack on the ground floor:



Roughly a block north, they completed this building, Citizen Park, around the same time:



Most of the neighborhood's commercial areas look like this with old stately homes in between:

Wow! Those projects are gorgeous! I love St Louis style -- that you can see incorporated in the more traditional-influenced projects. Now I fully can see why you guys were taken back that I was once afraid to exit between the science museum and downtown. It does seem silly -- especially nowadays. Now, it is really getting neat & sharp in that area. Thanks for those pictures. They really capture the urban charm of St Louis. (And, thats right; You're married in St Louis now. Forgot you had mentioned that.) Thinking about it, St Louis is special in the way it is really the "King of American River Cities." Kansas City & Omaha are smaller cities on a somewhat smaller (yet very significant) river. Cincinatti & Pittsburgh are not on as significant river as the Mississippi. Memphis is, but it a smaller city than St Louis. Minneapolis is way up near the start of the Mississippi, where it hasnt built the mighty momentum yet. New Orleans is at the mouth, not within the main heartbeat of America, like St Louis is. St Louis really is the King in that dept, imo. Obvious: Thanks for the reply entries. Will share soon....

[Omaha Cowboy]

I just wanted to drop in and say-

I’ve really enjoyed reading all the posts and looking at all the pictures in this thread.. St Louis is a city that other than its airport, I really haven’t spent any time in. From the looks of it, I’m missing out..

Great posts and content guys ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

[RockHarbor]

I just wanted to drop in and say-

I’ve really enjoyed reading all the posts and looking at all the pictures in this thread.. St Louis is a city that other than its airport, I really haven’t spent any time in. From the looks of it, I’m missing out..

Great posts and content guys ...

Ciao..LiO...Peace

Glad you're enjoying it. I am, too. I'm actually appreciating St Louis more after all this discussion. I'm actually sitting here thinking of the order of American River cities. To me, it gets kinda tricky after #3. St Louis & New Orleans is kinda a tough call, as NO is near the mighty mouth of the Mississippi, and is a true jazz & blues River City. But, I still put St Louis as "King" and New Orleans as "Queen" because St Louis is truly in the heart of it all, and midway up the river. Is Memphis or Cincinatti #3? What about Pittsburgh? What about Mpls-St Paul, Louiseville, Kansas City, Omaha, St Joseph, Peoria, the Quad Cities, ect? I'm thinking how I would arrange the list.

[obvious2677]

If you have a few extra hours during your next visit..., it's totally a touristy thing - but the architecture of the Budweiser brew house is cool as heck. Take the $35 tour, get drunk in the process.



I was back there last year for a wedding - they got married was WASH U, reception at the 9th Street Abbey in Soulard. If you're into historic church architecture, both are beautiful - as is the cathedral, the Old Cathedral, Sts. Peter and Paul, Christ church cathedral, and St. Francis Xavier at SLU.

[RockHarbor]

TITOSBURRITOBARN: After getting carried away with Obvious2677 here, I was scrolling through the thread, and I want to say that I appreciate your input on St Louis. It sounds like you're in St Louis, when I thought you were in Chicago? Anyways, you & Obvious2267 have convinced me to give inner St Louis a closer look. I'm also not alarmed about exiting the freeway between the science museum & downtown anymore.

Thanks Rock. I was in Chicago but then life happened and I moved to St. Louis a little less than a year ago (got married to a girl from the area and got into graduate school in the area). We're going to be here at least five years and reevaluate from there.

It overlooks the Central West End from roughly Kingshighway and Lindell Avenue. I apologize if this was brought up already, but over the past twenty years, the Washington University Medical Center has invested in a redevelopment corporation to see that the neighborhoods adjacent to their campus (which this is one, their campus is to the right out of frame in this photo) stabilize and prosper. This is one of the first neighborhoods that they worked on and has perhaps been the most successful.

In the immediate foreground you can see two parking lots, the one on the right with darker asphalt than the one on the left. The one one the left has been torn out and construction has been progressing on this 386 ft. residential tower:

Elsewhere in the neighborhood, this apartment building, the Orion, set a St. Louis record when it sold to an investor for $300,000 per unit. Note the ground-floor Whole Foods.:

Across the street is this apartment building, The Euclid, which has been completed since I moved here and includes a Shake Shack on the ground floor:

Roughly a block north, they completed this building, Citizen Park, around the same time:

Most of the neighborhood's commercial areas look like this with old stately homes in between:

Hope you get out and experience everything there (my grad school education was filled with beer drinking - and if yours is the same way, there is a ton of awesome breweries [not Budweiser] there). Actually, Urban Chestnut is now for sale in Council Bluffs - which I'm ecstatic about - and Schlafly was sold in Little Rock (spent 3 months there last year).

Central West End was too fancy for me to live in - but had friends who lived there.

Speaking of downtown, I have a huge picture of the Eads Bridge in my house too - something similar to this... but from Sullivan Boulevard level

Personal opinion - this bridge is remarkable and often forgotten. Construction started two years before the Brooklyn Bridge and was completed 9 years ahead of it (completed in 7 years, Brooklyn was complete in 14).

I love that picture of that beautiful & old iron bridge! Great picture! I like bridges of all types -- modern ones & old ones. They really add to a city. St. Louis also has a new steel cable bridge across the wide Mississippi -- much the same style as Omaha's pedestrian bridge.

(One thing St Louis definitely could teach Omaha is the fact that maybe Omaha should be open to more bridges. The Mississippi is more mighty than the Missouri, and they have more bridges crossing between the two states.)

[RockHarbor]

OBVOUIS2677: I would love to hear about your Detroit and Memphis experiences...

There isn't much to share about either. I was in Detroit for 3 days - got in one day, stuck around for the day, then drove up to a cottage in Ontario near the Bruce Peninsula for a week. On the way back, I stuck around for two more days in Detroit - did some touristy things. Got a whole city tour from the people I was with... they live in Grosse Pointe, but we visited their family in Flint (yes, it's a s-hole), then toured Pontiac, Dearborn, downtown, Wayne State U, midtown, went to the Motown Museum, Ford Museum, Greenfield Village, and some other places I don't remember.
[Fun fact most people don't know - the engineering firm behind part of Flint's issue was Lockwood, Andrews & Newman - which is owned by Leo Daly. If there's a Daly employee reading - I'm not faulting anyone, just saying that LAN was part of it http://lanflintwaterlitigation.com/]

Memphis was just a weekend trip when I was in Little Rock. Went there, ate at several local places, went to a bunch of touristy things - Graceland, Beale Street, Civil Rights Museum, arts district, etc. - ate a bunch more and then went back to LR. Not to say it wasn't fun - but I didn't stick around long enough to be worried about anything.

Nothing else really to say about either of them. I feel no need to go back to either - I'll be going back to St. Louis sometime in the next year or two.

That's cool that you saw so many MI cities... I would like to spend more time in Detroit. It really is a big, big town. Funny, my one experience in Detroit was driving through and on up to Ontario, too -- but I was headed to Toronto instead. UBER is a good idea to take a drive through that city.

I like Memphis & Memphis style. It's such a true, gritty, worn "River City" with heart & soul -- much like St Louis, yet smaller, with its own twist. I've seen Beale St and Graceland, too. There is a certain aspect about that city, with the legendary Graceland/Elvis thing. The city is talked about in many many penned lyrics/songs. Just something about it... It was also used in Grisham's novel "The Firm." It wasn't strange for me to see a movie take place there -- it just worked for some reason. That shows the city has a real depth & substance that is unusual for a town its size, imo. (I've seen St Louis in three movies.)

You were in Little Rock? What do you think about that town? It's cute, and feels so "Hill Country Arkansas", and is kinda quiet-ish, to me... It almost feels slightly "Davy Crockett" to me, while St Louis feels more "Mark Twain." It's weird to see "DALLAS" on interstate signs there (to me) -- as it doesn't look anything close to Dallas, TX.

Living in Lincoln, one time I did a "KC, St Louis, Memphis, Little Rock, Bentonville, Springfield, Joplin, Kansas City" loop on a spring break. It was fun. I was in Joplin a year after that tornado hit. It was shocking.

[RockHarbor]

If you have a few extra hours during your next visit..., it's totally a touristy thing - but the architecture of the Budweiser brew house is cool as heck. Take the $35 tour, get drunk in the process.



I was back there last year for a wedding - they got married was WASH U, reception at the 9th Street Abbey in Soulard. If you're into historic church architecture, both are beautiful - as is the cathedral, the Old Cathedral, Sts. Peter and Paul, Christ church cathedral, and St. Francis Xavier at SLU.

Love that picture, love that architecture and embellishment! That's the Budweiser Brew House?! I would love to see that. Thanks for pointing that out to me (and other things). I never knew about that.

[RockHarbor]

I keep thinking about this. This is my attempt to sort through the top River Cities in America. After #2 or #3, it becomes kinda tricky, because you're toggling between how big the city is, how important the river is, and the location of the city on the river.

1) SAINT LOUIS
("King" in my opinion. A big city that sits central on the very important Mississippi where the important Missouri merges with it, is very American in feeling, big iron bridges, the area associated with Mark Twain. Has the strong jazz & blues aspect, and has the trademark river boats.)

2) NEW ORLEANS
("Queen" in my opinion. A tough call because it is a dynamic & very unique city that sits on the very wide Mississippi, too. It has the river boats and big iron bridges, and the strong jazz & blues aspect, too. It is the top city for jazz -- no argument there. I consider it 2nd because it is by the mouth of the Mississippi, by the ocean, has the swamps nearby, and isn't "typical classic America" as much as St. Louis is. Still, a tough call for me...)

3)CINCINATTI
(On the Ohio River, a true "River City." Has some jazz & the riverboats. Maybe Memphis should be #3, though. But, Cincinatti seems greater to me on some levels.)

4)MEMPHIS
(Hard call between Kansas City & Memphis to me. A true River City. Jazz & riverboats, ect. The front face of downtown is more connected directly with the mighty river in Memphis and has more riverboats cruising compared to KC.)

5) KANSAS CITY
(Biggest city on the Missouri River. A true River City. Jazz abounds, but less riverboat aspect, I think. Unusual with the fact that is sits up and away from the river, while still connected closely with it. Maybe Louisville should be in this slot instead. )

6) LOUISVILLE
(A true River City. Very wide point on the Ohio River. Some jazz & riverboats, and bridges.)

7) PITTSBURGH
(It doesn't quite have the qualities I associate with River Cities on the Mississippi and Missouri. Yet, it is a very big city, with a striking downtown formed by a Y-split on two rivers. The rivers are a major feature there -- it comes to mind immediately when you think of that town. (Yet, the rivers are not as significant of a river as the Mississippi or Missourr, where Omaha & St Paul are located on. So, I'm not quite sure where Pittsburgh should truly really be on this list.) ***NYC & Boston are Eastern cities that have rivers, and the Hudson is very big, but those cities have the ocean bay/harbor nearby, so it is just not the same, imo. Philadelphia is not quite the feeling of a true "River City" either, imo. These towns dont seem focused on their rivers as much, and there are bays & the ocean around. Many cities are technically on a river, or have a river -- Chicago, Miami, Dallas-FW, Denver, ect. But, that doesnt make them a true "River City." Cities like Columbus, Indianapolis, and Des Moines are River Cities, but not on important, major rivers.***)

8 ) MPLS- ST PAUL, especially ST PAUL
(St Paul feels more like a true River City than Minneapolis does to me. The river is more natural looking through St. Paul, it doesnt have the dam like Mpls, so boats can cruise on it. Minneapolis also seems too sparkly nowadays to be a true "River City", imo. That is also near the start of the Missisippi, way up north. I almost wanted to put Omaha in this slot, but Mpls-St Paul is so much bigger, so it seemed silly to put Omaha before it. But, in some ways, Omaha maybe "fits the bill" even more than St Paul, imo. Not a jazz capitol, like Omaha.)

9) OMAHA
(A true River City w/ some substance, depth & character on the Missouri, yet not necessarily having quite the deeper "heart & soul" that KC, St Louis, Memphis, and New Orleans have -- especially the mid/lower Mississippi cities. Some jazz, but not a top jazz capitol either.)

Still have to fit in Quad Cities, Sioux City, St Joseph, Peoria, Baton Rouge, Dubuque, La Cross, ect... Kinda a tough list for me....especially after the top two. I'm curious how others would formulate this list. The main point of this entry was not to get off subject, but to show how St Louis is the "King." However, there are some who may put the list 1) New Orleans 2) St Louis 3)....

[Omaha Cowboy]

RockHarbor- this study is pretty extensive, but I think you’ll find it an interesting read-

“This paper attempts to determine the location of towns self-identifying as metaphorical ‘‘River Cities’’ through quantitative methods informed by concepts of place attach-ment. Relative levels of river-oriented community attachment are measured by a frequency analysis of certain river-related terms in the names of businesses located in 213 U.S. counties adjacent to the Missouri and Mississippi rivers. Population-adjusted frequencies of the terms ‘‘river city,’’ ‘‘river cities,’’‘‘river town,’’ ‘‘big river,’’ ‘‘great river,’’ ‘‘Missouri River,’’ and‘‘Mississippi River’’ in business names are used as proxymeasures of community attachment to the river.”..

The study link-

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... uri_Rivers

Ciao..LiO...Peace

[obvious2677]

You were in Little Rock? What do you think about that town? It's cute, and feels so "Hill Country Arkansas", and is kinda quiet-ish, to me... It almost feels slightly "Davy Crockett" to me, while St Louis feels more "Mark Twain." It's weird to see "DALLAS" on interstate signs there (to me) -- as it doesn't look anything close to Dallas, TX.

Yes - for three months last year. I actually didn't like it. There was outdoors stuff to do - hiking - but the city lacks on the "entertainment" side by a long shot. Presidential library, capital and old capital are neat - but you really only need to do them once. Central High School is neat if you're into history - but it's still an active high school, so there isn't a ton of 'lingering' around or you might become a "suspicious" person... Pinnacle "Mountain" was a good hike (though not much of a real mountain). The River Market is fun. The Big Dam Bridge is alright - but the thing I struggled with was finding something to really keep my interest. I always compare things to Omaha - which might not be a fair comparison. That being said, it wasn't baseball season when I was there - and there's a baseball stadium in North Little Rock. Didn't go to any concerts (I'm not into the style of bands that typically play large arenas - go ahead and call me hipster) - but there's a large arena in North Little Rock. In my opinion, North Little Rock was gruff. Very blue collar and unless you drove out to the suburbs, there wasn't much there. When you get to the suburbs, it's Target and fast food.

That being said, the city was more of a commuter place than Omaha or St. Louis to me. All of my coworkers lived in the boonies - Conway, Maumelle, Cabot, Benton - even had one that commuted from Hot Springs. Hot Springs on the other hand, was actually fun - there was horse racing and the national park. However, it's a huge tourist destination. The city lacks a statement piece to me - something to continually draw people. Omaha has the zoo and the CWS. St. Louis has Forest Park, the Arch, and Budweiser (the city museum could be included as well).

I thought they lacked a unique food scene. Omaha has steak. St. Louis has pork ribs, (terrible) pizza, Italian food, toasted rav, Ted Drews, and gooey butter cake (also gross to me). LR is basically a mix of Tex-Mex and Creole - but does neither of them particularly well. Tex Mex is better in... shockingly, Texas. Creole is significantly better in Louisiana. LR just had nothing to hang it's hat on in my opinion. That's not to say I didn't eat good food there - the Capital Hotel downtown is architecturally beautiful and the bar food is stellar (the fine-dining option is not worth it). There's a few places off Cantrell by the river that were good - but just no statement "known for" food.
Capital Hotel: Oh, LR also has streetcars, but I was never as comfortable riding them as I was on the light rail in Seattle, or the streetcars in Dallas, New Orleans or KC.


Don't get me started on their local breweries - other than a few beers here and there that were good, their breweries are bad. If you haven't noticed, I enjoy craft beers. Omaha and St. Louis both have solid craft brewer options - Omaha with Brickway, Pint 9, Infusion, NE Brewing, Scriptown, and Lucky Bucket. St Louis has Urban Chestnut, Schlafly, 4 Hands, Alpha, and Civil Life that I liked (among many others I didn't try). Little Rock - Stone's Throw had one good one. Everything from Lost Forty was garbage. The rest were forgettable. Oh - and there are a bunch of dry counties down there - and I have no desire to live in a dry county, anywhere.

Living in Lincoln, one time I did a "KC, St Louis, Memphis, Little Rock, Bentonville, Springfield, Joplin, Kansas City" loop on a spring break. It was fun. I was in Joplin a year after that tornado hit. It was shocking.

This is how I prefer to travel.

Love that picture, love that architecture and embellishment! That's the Budweiser Brew House?! I would love to see that. Thanks for pointing that out to me (and other things). I never knew about that.

Yep - It was build in 1891. There's a lot of neat stuff on their 150+acre "campus"
The foxes - google it. They were carved after being placed on the building.


The courtyard off Pestalozzi.


The logo in brick on the building exterior.


Another part of the brew house.


The clydesdale stables


Also, if you're into production and machinery - the sheer quantity that they produce is astonishing. I am not a Bud / Bud Light drinker, but I was shocked at the amount of beer they crank out and also (though it's basically water), the quality control is impeccable.

[RockHarbor]

RockHarbor- this study is pretty extensive, but I think you’ll find it an interesting read-

“This paper attempts to determine the location of towns self-identifying as metaphorical ‘‘River Cities’’ through quantitative methods informed by concepts of place attach-ment. Relative levels of river-oriented community attachment are measured by a frequency analysis of certain river-related terms in the names of businesses located in 213 U.S. counties adjacent to the Missouri and Mississippi rivers. Population-adjusted frequencies of the terms ‘‘river city,’’ ‘‘river cities,’’‘‘river town,’’ ‘‘big river,’’ ‘‘great river,’’ ‘‘Missouri River,’’ and‘‘Mississippi River’’ in business names are used as proxymeasures of community attachment to the river.”..

The study link-

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... uri_Rivers

Ciao..LiO...Peace

Hey...thanks a lot for this! I'll definitely look into this. (This study definitely taps into dynamics I was feeling, as I was creating that list. Some cities, even though they have a river, are not "River City" in feeling in the way that cities like St Louis, New Orleans, and Cincinnati are, ect.) In fact, I was planning on Googling "Top River Cities In America", and I'm going to do this right now. Here are some results:

THE BEST RIVER TOWNS IN AMERICA: https://www.outsideonline.com/1929066/b ... ns-america (I forgot about Richmond, VA -- even though I saw Richmond for the first time in 2015. Yet, it is not founded on a major, major river. This list obviously isn't looking at things the way I do. It's throwing out the importance of the river to begin with...)

THE 10 BEST RIVER TOWNS: https://www.10best.com/awards/travel/be ... iverfront/ (You see Pittsburgh and Louisville on the list. I totally forgot about Chattanooga, TN. That's totally a river town. I've driven through it before. Very steep & hilly... I've thought about Nashville, and been there before, but the downtown is sitting up high away from the river, and the Cumberland River isn't like the Mississippi or Missouri in importance.)

Anways, those "Top Best" lists can easily be taken with a grain of salt. They are basically people voting on what cities charm them the most while traveling. Those kind of lists often feature the "underdogs" in my opinion, leaving the ones everyone knows are truly the "best" out -- giving the others a chance finally in the spotlight. Things like the importance of the river, and the history of the place, and the whole "jazz thing", are not considered necessarily. I stick with my list. (Notice the study that you, Omaha Cowboy, posted involves only the cities on the Mississippi & Missouri?! See, I'm no "dummy" here.)

[RockHarbor]

Also, if you're into production and machinery - the sheer quantity that they produce is astonishing. I am not a Bud / Bud Light drinker, but I was shocked at the amount of beer they crank out and also (though it's basically water), the quality control is impeccable.

I like your added pictures! That Budweiser house has awesome & amazing details everywhere you turn. Thanks for pointing that out to us. Between your pictures & descriptions and curious & exploring nature, I can tell you really like checking places out -- like many of us do here.

I like that picture of Downtown Little Rock. I like Little Rock's downtown. They have several nice & abrupt modern buildings, including new & sharp medium-tall ones, mixed with original & historic city. And, that beautiful capitol building like you mentioned. I remember seeing buildings that looked like the original settlement, backed by new, glass skyscrapers. I found them on Google Maps. I thought they were wood, but maybe they are brick... They look to be buildings around the Arkansas Historic Museum.

I agree about Little Rock. I liked it, but I wouldn't want to live there necessarily. It's overall too quiet. I would be totally bored. I'm not big on the "folky Arkansas/Ozark thing" for permanent year round living -- and you can feel it, even mixed with a "big city" feeling there. I think of Davy Crockett with a rifle & a coon hat on, or something... (However, the Ozarks is a great relaxing vacation, imo. I really like Branson, along with my relatives.) I was impressed with the scenery down there, though. The greenery & pine forests, with all the big hills and small mountains on the edge of the city, and the river & bridges, were very pretty. The new housing developments on the west edge of the city had such steep streets in some places. I couldn't believe the grade/slope on some.

I hear good things about Hot Springs, AR -- including from you. It looks really pretty... One time, I drove from KC down to Eureka Springs, AR for a quick, little 3-day weekend trip. It was pretty. I went to Beaver Lake.
http://www.scenicusa.net/images/AU12BeaverLakePD.jpg And: https://abinashpadhi.files.wordpress.co ... erlake.jpg

And, I drove by that widely known Thorncrown Chapel. Great little example of great architecture. https://thorncrown.com/images/connaught ... 3large.jpg

Eureka Springs is a nice town, too. Pic of Eureka Springs: https://www.eurekasprings.com/images/of ... prings.png To me, the charm & beauty & fun of Arkansas is just not found in Little Rock. It's in these smaller, more quaint places like Hot Springs and Eureka Springs, imo.

One time, a sibling and I drove from Kansas City to the huge Lake of the Ozarks in Central Missouri for the day. Great place for a summer cabin and fishing. However, boating is very dangerous on that lake. Anyways, St. Louis (and Kansas City and Memphis) is very influenced by that "lazy dog days of summer" Ozark region...

[obvious2677]

I like that picture of Downtown Little Rock. I like Little Rock's downtown. They have several nice & abrupt modern buildings, including new & sharp medium-tall ones, mixed with original & historic city. And, that beautiful capitol building like you mentioned. I remember seeing buildings that looked like the original settlement, backed by new, glass skyscrapers. I found them on Google Maps. I thought they were wood, but maybe they are brick... They look to be buildings around the Arkansas Historic Museum.

I felt less safe walking around in downtown LR than in downtown STL. Going south from downtown, the area seemed kind of shady past 7th or 8th. I could be corrected by someone who lives there, or lived there longer than I did, but just seemed a little uneasy. The River Market area and surrounding parkland was nice, but just seemed like the neighborhoods to the south were less than "kept up."

I agree about Little Rock. I liked it, but I wouldn't want to live there necessarily. It's overall too quiet. I would be totally bored. I'm not big on the "folky Arkansas/Ozark thing" for permanent year round living -- and you can feel it, even mixed with a "big city" feeling there. I think of Davy Crockett with a rifle & a coon hat on, or something...

Not to mention, you'd be required to sleep with your sister. Am I right?

One time, a sibling and I drove from Kansas City to the huge Lake of the Ozarks in Central Missouri for the day. Great place for a summer cabin and fishing. However, boating is very dangerous on that lake. Anyways, St. Louis (and Kansas City and Memphis) is very influenced by that "lazy dog days of summer" Ozark region...

That entire region is very pretty, but it's a little backwoods. There's a bunch of wineries in southern Missouri that are fun.There were also a handful of "roadside attractions" that had dangerous animals. However, I think those are all gone. That being said, STL's zoo is really good (and it being free is even better). I used to have to go to Cape Girardeaux a lot as well, and that's a beautiful area - and I believe Ste. Gen just became a national historic park - which was also a neat area.

[RockHarbor]

I like that picture of Downtown Little Rock. I like Little Rock's downtown. They have several nice & abrupt modern buildings, including new & sharp medium-tall ones, mixed with original & historic city. And, that beautiful capitol building like you mentioned. I remember seeing buildings that looked like the original settlement, backed by new, glass skyscrapers. I found them on Google Maps. I thought they were wood, but maybe they are brick... They look to be buildings around the Arkansas Historic Museum.

I felt less safe walking around in downtown LR than in downtown STL. Going south from downtown, the area seemed kind of shady past 7th or 8th. I could be corrected by someone who lives there, or lived there longer than I did, but just seemed a little uneasy. The River Market area and surrounding parkland was nice, but just seemed like the neighborhoods to the south were less than "kept up."

I agree about Little Rock. I liked it, but I wouldn't want to live there necessarily. It's overall too quiet. I would be totally bored. I'm not big on the "folky Arkansas/Ozark thing" for permanent year round living -- and you can feel it, even mixed with a "big city" feeling there. I think of Davy Crockett with a rifle & a coon hat on, or something...

Not to mention, you'd be required to sleep with your sister. Am I right?

One time, a sibling and I drove from Kansas City to the huge Lake of the Ozarks in Central Missouri for the day. Great place for a summer cabin and fishing. However, boating is very dangerous on that lake. Anyways, St. Louis (and Kansas City and Memphis) is very influenced by that "lazy dog days of summer" Ozark region...

That entire region is very pretty, but it's a little backwoods. There's a bunch of wineries in southern Missouri that are fun.There were also a handful of "roadside attractions" that had dangerous animals. However, I think those are all gone. That being said, STL's zoo is really good (and it being free is even better). I used to have to go to Cape Girardeaux a lot as well, and that's a beautiful area - and I believe Ste. Gen just became a national historic park - which was also a neat area.

"Backwoods" is a good word for that area -- yet, thats part of its charm. Thats the area of the country with the "Hillbilly" rep. I've never stopped in that Cape G. town, but been through it going from St Louis to Memphis. Any location on that Mississippi is going to be pretty, because it is such a magnificent & scenic river. Seriously, down in Memphis with the sun setting low, and the golden river very, very wide, you see how pretty of a river it is. I just found the neatest DVD video of the Mississippi, and the main guide of the show started at the mouth & delta of the Mississippi down by the Gulf. He stopped in the cities of New Orleans, Memphis, St Louis, and Minneapolis (and other minor points along the way -- ending at the headwaters at Lake Ithasca, MN). The video really captured the look, heart & soul of each city. In Minneapolis, the guide mentioned it is one of the top-rated, most beautiful cities in the nation, and as the camera focused on the city, and flew around it, Minneapolis looked soooo sparkly & shiny clean & progressive, especially after spending time in more gritty & soulful St Louis, Memphis, and New Orleans. (I didnt know this but the rushing, gently-sloped waterfall adjacent to Downtown Mpls is natural -- the only natural waterfall on the Mississippi. That rushing water helped Mpls become a flour mill city.) Anyways, the video showed how a large portion of America's rivers all lead to the Mississippi -- including the Missouri River. So, by the time it reaches New Orleans, the river is a "monster" river. I'm kinda going back & forth on St Louis or New Orleans being the "King American River City." Tough call -- as I said. The video featured many aspects of St Louis, the Arch & skyline looking big & magnificent as the 'copter flew around it, and the documentary pointed out that it is called "Baseball City USA" as the guide spent time involved with the Cardinals. It also showed 4th of July fireworks over the river at St Louis -- the scene looking so American with the Mississippi & the Arch & city. Thats why I put St Louis as #1.

[PotatoeEatsFish]

Downtown is a great example of how the 70s and 80s killed downtowns, also their airport sucks.

[RockHarbor]

Downtown is a great example of how the 70s and 80s killed downtowns, also their airport sucks.

The city of Lindbergh's airport sucks? I realize some of it is old, but there is some architectural flair and sweeping lines there -- compared to Omaha's airport. I've only been in it once or twice though. (And, I realize it "sucks" compared to Denver or Chicago's sleek airport. I pay attention to airport design a lot.) So, I'm curious why it sucks in your view... Downtown St Louis is busy & vibrant during the work day, per what Ive noticed. So, it seems similar to Omaha in that way. They dont have an Old Market area that I can think of, though, but I remember eating at a Spaghetti Works restaurant down there somewhere...

[PotatoeEatsFish]

Downtown is a great example of how the 70s and 80s killed downtowns, also their airport sucks.

The city of Lindbergh's airport sucks? I realize some of it is old, but there is some architectural flair and sweeping lines there -- compared to Omaha's airport. I've only been in it once or twice though. (And, I realize it "sucks" compared to Denver or Chicago's sleek airport. I pay attention to airport design a lot.) So, I'm curious why it sucks in your view... Downtown St Louis is busy & vibrant during the work day, per what Ive noticed. So, it seems similar to Omaha in that way. They dont have an Old Market area that I can think of, though, but I remember eating at a Spaghetti Works restaurant down there somewhere...

Every flight was delayed, idc about your building just run it properly. Downtown is all just a bunch of bland hotels and offices with no unique flair. I think the only unique feature is the arch.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

TITOSBURRITOBARN: After getting carried away with Obvious2677 here, I was scrolling through the thread, and I want to say that I appreciate your input on St Louis. It sounds like you're in St Louis, when I thought you were in Chicago? Anyways, you & Obvious2267 have convinced me to give inner St Louis a closer look. I'm also not alarmed about exiting the freeway between the science museum & downtown anymore.

Thanks Rock. I was in Chicago but then life happened and I moved to St. Louis a little less than a year ago (got married to a girl from the area and got into graduate school in the area). We're going to be here at least five years and reevaluate from there.

It overlooks the Central West End from roughly Kingshighway and Lindell Avenue. I apologize if this was brought up already, but over the past twenty years, the Washington University Medical Center has invested in a redevelopment corporation to see that the neighborhoods adjacent to their campus (which this is one, their campus is to the right out of frame in this photo) stabilize and prosper. This is one of the first neighborhoods that they worked on and has perhaps been the most successful.

In the immediate foreground you can see two parking lots, the one on the right with darker asphalt than the one on the left. The one one the left has been torn out and construction has been progressing on this 386 ft. residential tower:

Elsewhere in the neighborhood, this apartment building, the Orion, set a St. Louis record when it sold to an investor for $300,000 per unit. Note the ground-floor Whole Foods.:

Across the street is this apartment building, The Euclid, which has been completed since I moved here and includes a Shake Shack on the ground floor:

Roughly a block north, they completed this building, Citizen Park, around the same time:

Most of the neighborhood's commercial areas look like this with old stately homes in between:

Hope you get out and experience everything there (my grad school education was filled with beer drinking - and if yours is the same way, there is a ton of awesome breweries [not Budweiser] there). Actually, Urban Chestnut is now for sale in Council Bluffs - which I'm ecstatic about - and Schlafly was sold in Little Rock (spent 3 months there last year).

Central West End was too fancy for me to live in - but had friends who lived there.

We're certainly trying to experience all the city has to offer. One of my favorite things that my wife and I share in common is a desire to explore different places to their fullest. Trips we take together are rarely relaxing and lazy for this reason. I think we both tend to surprise each other with cool, sort of off-the-beaten-path stuff we find.

Anyway, we're definitely beer drinkers - I think I kinda knew she was the one when the morning after the first time I spent the night at her place, she asked if I wanted to go on a brewery tour. We tried to get to every local brewery in the Chicago area and are now doing the same in St. Louis. My favorite has definitely become Urban Chestnut (and I'm glad to hear they have made it out to Council Bluffs) and I think her's is Schlafly. I'm a sucker for breweries that have unique themes or locations, so Earthbound has become a favorite too. I dunno if they were around when you lived here, but they located in an old firehouse (I think?) on Cherokee, which they restored, and built a second level that just kinda hangs from a system of chains in the giant ceiling space.

Central West End was too fancy for my wife as well. Oddly enough though the first neighborhood we agreed to focus on finding a house in was Lafayette Square because of the awesome architecture. That was until we visited in person and found that we didn't fit the demographic of old empty nesters. After that she was leaning towards a Tower Grove South whereas I preferred The Grove/Forest Park Southeast. I ended up winning out when we found a nearly perfect house a block off Manchester.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

Downtown is a great example of how the 70s and 80s killed downtowns, also their airport sucks.

The city of Lindbergh's airport sucks? I realize some of it is old, but there is some architectural flair and sweeping lines there -- compared to Omaha's airport. I've only been in it once or twice though. (And, I realize it "sucks" compared to Denver or Chicago's sleek airport. I pay attention to airport design a lot.) So, I'm curious why it sucks in your view... Downtown St Louis is busy & vibrant during the work day, per what Ive noticed. So, it seems similar to Omaha in that way. They dont have an Old Market area that I can think of, though, but I remember eating at a Spaghetti Works restaurant down there somewhere...

I think downtown could stand to be more vibrant than it is for a city this size. Washington Ave is pretty solid and there's often people around the City Garden/Arch area but elsewhere never feels like the center of a major urban area with 3 million people. Like I never worry about rush hour down there because there isn't really one of any great significance.

I believe the area you are thinking of is Laclede's Landing, which is kind of like the Old Market in a way if the Old Market were screwed over by terrible planning decisions. They've tried so hard to make it a vibrant old town area, and it was going well for awhile, but anymore it feels a little faded. They're trying to revive it again, but we'll see how that goes. It's cut off from downtown by I-44 and confusing to get to by car. They need to bury I-44 or tear it out completely north of roughly the Eads bridge if it's really going to take off. They also need to sort out the parking situation. Literally about half the footprint of Laclede's Landing is parking.

[RockHarbor]

Downtown is a great example of how the 70s and 80s killed downtowns, also their airport sucks.

The city of Lindbergh's airport sucks? I realize some of it is old, but there is some architectural flair and sweeping lines there -- compared to Omaha's airport. I've only been in it once or twice though. (And, I realize it "sucks" compared to Denver or Chicago's sleek airport. I pay attention to airport design a lot.) So, I'm curious why it sucks in your view... Downtown St Louis is busy & vibrant during the work day, per what Ive noticed. So, it seems similar to Omaha in that way. They dont have an Old Market area that I can think of, though, but I remember eating at a Spaghetti Works restaurant down there somewhere...

I think downtown could stand to be more vibrant than it is for a city this size. Washington Ave is pretty solid and there's often people around the City Garden/Arch area but elsewhere never feels like the center of a major urban area with 3 million people. Like I never worry about rush hour down there because there isn't really one of any great significance.

I believe the area you are thinking of is Laclede's Landing, which is kind of like the Old Market in a way if the Old Market were screwed over by terrible planning decisions. They've tried so hard to make it a vibrant old town area, and it was going well for awhile, but anymore it feels a little faded. They're trying to revive it again, but we'll see how that goes. It's cut off from downtown by I-44 and confusing to get to by car. They need to bury I-44 or tear it out completely north of roughly the Eads bridge if it's really going to take off. They also need to sort out the parking situation. Literally about half the footprint of Laclede's Landing is parking.

Laclede's Landing? Oh, thats the area? I just remember eating at Spaghetti Works (or something like that) when we first moved to St Louis. We went downtown to get acquainted with our new city. I would like to see that area again. I just remember a lot of brick, brick, brick. Funny, our neighbor in Millard, who was a local weather man, showed up on the TV down there, as their family was later transferred to a St Louis station after we moved there.//////////////////I know what you mean about feeling disappointed with Downtown St Louis per its size -- especially comparing it to smaller Kansas City across the same state, which has an abrupt & taller skyline and hopping downtown. Many people have felt that. The thing about St Louis to me is that it seems to have some civic pride, but Im not sure it is quite in the way that Kansas City, Minneapolis, Seattle, Denver, ect., has it about their town. To me, the civic pride is more rooted in natives, wrapped up in the sports team franchises, the national monument of the Arch (making St Louis instantly recognizable in pictures across the country), the Mississippi River, the history -- not necessarily an impressive "sparkling skyline" they are so proud of. I dont know. Its not necessarily a pretentious, yuppie, new money, white collar, artsy-fartsy civic pride there, imo.