Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The view from one of those suburbs of St. Louis (Clayton):
I love STL. The architecture is great. And there is a great density of buildings in the 10-20 story range. That said, at street level, except for maybe a couple areas, it doesn't feel like a big city at all. In fact, notice most those pics are aerials. The street level pics are devoid of pedestrians.
Just as an aside, saying Old Louisville "single handedly" pushes it up displays quite a lack of knowledge of Louisville. The Highlands is like Old Louisville but just as dense, also with more highrises and midrises, plus movies, retail, and every restaurant imaginable. Crescent Hill, Clifton, heck even Butchertown, heart of St Matthews, and now, downtown New Albany and Jeffersonville IN are very vibrant.
New Orleans beats any city in this comparison in every category from walkability, urbanity, architecture, food, and even transit.
No, it doesn't. My post was saying how I can love a neighborhood's architecture so much that it alone can raise the city up a level for me (for architecture). I didn't talk about other neighborhoods, density, vibrancy, or any of those unrelated things that you are now going on about. Thanks again for misunderstanding/not reading my post and jumping to conclusions.
To break it down:
Cincy gets credit from me for Over the Rhine being so awesome (kind of like how Old Louisville single handedly pushes that city up), but it is much more limited after that.
I'm talking only about architecture here and mention how awesome Over the Rhine is for me and how it holds a favorite place for me for architecture. In parenthesis I mention how this is also kind of like Old Louisville for me, it being so awesome for architecture, but this is all before the comma.... What is after the comma doesn't apply to Louisville and your comments about vibrancy and such don't apply to any of it.
Last edited by Caesarstl; 06-19-2015 at 05:33 AM..
I love STL. The architecture is great. And there is a great density of buildings in the 10-20 story range. That said, at street level, except for maybe a couple areas, it doesn't feel like a big city at all. In fact, notice most those pics are aerials. The street level pics are devoid of pedestrians.
I posted 37 pics, 8 were aerials... The reason for the aerials, which are mostly of downtown, downtown west, midtown, the central west end, and onwards to clayton, was to show the scale and density of the core as a poster called St. Louis suburban. Showing this in addition to the street level housing shots where you can see the houses built up to or close to the street, no curb-cuts/driveways/etc., the density of and sometimes attached housing, etc., etc. was to in a large part address that comment for I found it to be absolutely crazy as the city has a very urban form. The poster has now confirmed though what he meant was that it seems like there's not a lot to walk to and that you have to drive (which you seem to be getting at now as well). I'll share my thoughts on that in a min, but since I already prepared a bunch before reading this, more of Mr. Cobb's awesome aerials!!!
Thanks Caesarstl! The pictures really show the great urban fabric St. Louis has. It looks like there are a few new projects going on, too.
Those pics have been around for years. There is a guy who flew around all major cities and shot them. I feel like his shots make most cities look bigger and more dense than they really are.
That said, STL has an impressive building stock. Here's hoping the city can make a come back, because right now places like Houston and Phoenix boom at the expense of places like STL. So yes, STL has the BUILT form of a much larger city. That's because 100 years ago, it was a top 5 city. Now that it has lost the majority of its population, the buildings are still there, but the commerce is not. That is why although there are walkable urban strips here and there, it is not walkable like Chicago or NYC, or even Boston. Cities on a smaller scale that are more compact and walkable are New Orleans, Charleston, Austin, Portland, and Louisville. Now, with the exception of Portland, and perhaps New Orleans, STL has just as much or more retail, restaurants, and commerce as the aforementioned cities, but when it is spread from Clayton to downtown to Soulard etc, it just doesn't fill all the "gaps" and make STL seem "suburban" (ie car reliant) when it is actually a completely urban city
But STL has the built form to be like Boston or DC. Only time will tell. Certainly the parks, sports, museums, and architecture are world class.
Last edited by Peter1948; 06-20-2015 at 06:56 AM..
STL is no slotch in the architectual arena.Nola is an intriguing city architectually but there are other cities that can hold there own and there is no city in this country that has a certain architectual style that is just unique to that city that I know of.
STL is no slotch in the architectual arena.Nola is an intriguing city architectually but there are other cities that can hold there own and there is no city in this country that has a certain architectual style that is just unique to that city that I know of.
STL is no slotch in the architectual arena.Nola is an intriguing city architectually but there are other cities that can hold there own and there is no city in this country that has a certain architectual style that is just unique to that city that I know of.
This thread has deteriorated into a comparison of the architecture of St. Louis and New Orleans. I thought it was Missouri vs Louisiana
I agree.
So, as far as states go, I'm not nearly as familiar with LA, but perhaps I was a bit unfair to MO in my last post. Outside of KC and STL, you have the Lake of the Ozarks which is a huge recreation area in the northern tip of the mountain range. You have Columbia which is a pretty decent college town. Springfield, MO is a midsize city that's pretty unique. Its nickname is the "Queen City of the Ozarks" nestled within large foothills at the northern periphery of the mountain range. It is perhaps the first city in MO I would say truly has southern influences and is actually seeing pretty good growth similar to points south in NW Arkansas. You have Branson which is sorta meh IMO but it's a big tourist draw for a lot of people within a large radius.
Then of course you have the Ozarks themselves which provide a ton of outdoor opportunities as one of the few actual mountain ranges located within the Midwest. Here are a few pics I snapped during a backpacking trip down there last fall:
Again nothing spectacular compared to other mountain ranges but it shows how non-flat parts of MO are.
LA again not as familiar with but outside of NOLA, my impression is mostly swamps and bayous at least in the south of the state, I know next to nothing about northern LA. I do know that the Cajun culture is not just limited to New Orleans, but is rather spread out throughout southern LA. Maybe someone can touch on this some more.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I posted 37 pics, 8 were aerials... The reason for the aerials, which are mostly of downtown, downtown west, midtown, the central west end, and onwards to clayton, was to show the scale and density of the core as a poster called St. Louis suburban. Showing this in addition to the street level housing shots where you can see the houses built up to or close to the street, no curb-cuts/driveways/etc., the density of and sometimes attached housing, etc., etc. was to in a large part address that comment for I found it to be absolutely crazy as the city has a very urban form. The poster has now confirmed though what he meant was that it seems like there's not a lot to walk to and that you have to drive (which you seem to be getting at now as well). I'll share my thoughts on that in a min, but since I already prepared a bunch before reading this, more of Mr. Cobb's awesome aerials!!!
