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.
FWIW I grew up in St. Louis in the 1970s/80's and have lived elsewhere for the past 25 years or so. I still visit my family once a year, and I've been amazed at how things have changed. Everyone seems to live further and further away from the city. My family, which originated on the south side, now lives in Jefferson County or the far western part of St. Louis county. The areas that were considered on the edges of the suburbs back in the 1980s (Chesterfield, Arnold, St. Charles) are now at the heart of the burbs. It's almost like the city is a bulls-eye with people starting at the center and moving further and further away. 270 used to be a ring around the sprawl, now it's almost at its inner edge. The last time I visited I had no reason to venture within that ring except to hit the City Museum (a true gem).
It's an organic trend, and one that will most likely reverse on its own. But when? I do wonder if the city's future is more like Detroit - with the central areas becoming so depopulated that there's talk of physically moving the people out of them and making the city smaller.
You really had no reason to visit inside of 270 except for city museum? So I take it you didn't go to a cards game, the zoo (or anything at Forest Park), a non chain restaurant, the Botantical Gardens, Soulard, the Loop, the Arch etc etc...?
People may still be moving out but the vast majority of what makes St. Louis special remains in the core of the area. By a long shot.
Also - this article in today's post highlights some interesting news regarding the city's high single population. #4 in the country is pretty impressive. The post also recently reported that the city is the region's youngest area, despite a large loss in families with children. In other words, the city is doing very well in getting young professionals to move here. Will employers follow suit? I sure hope so...few things are as soul crushing as working in a cubicle in an office park surrounded by massive parking lots and interstate highways...for me at least.
The idea of Arnold or Chesterfield or St. Charles being the heart of the suburbs is pretty ridiculous to me. It's not where most people live, it's not centrally located to anything, and there are few cultural institutions.
The only way you could possibly think that St. Louis was heading down Detroit's path was if you didn't step foot in the city itself. You say you went to the City Museum -- do you remember what that area looked like when you moved away?
You really had no reason to visit inside of 270 except for city museum? So I take it you didn't go to a cards game, the zoo (or anything at Forest Park), a non chain restaurant, the Botantical Gardens, Soulard, the Loop, the Arch etc etc...?
People may still be moving out but the vast majority of what makes St. Louis special remains in the core of the area. By a long shot.
Most of those things are for tourists. How many times does the average St. Louisan visit any one of those in his or her lifetime - let alone regularly (Cards games and restaurants excepted? And technically the U-city loop is not in the city).
It seems to me the city has lost importance to the majority of people who live outside of it. Their kids go to school outside the city. They work outside the city and they shop outside the city. In order for a city to thrive it has to offer services that other areas don't. Now that the jobs have moved out, I'm not sure what it has to offer that North County or St. Charles don't. It therefore is dying.
Is that a good thing? No, but I don't see how to save it. Lacledes Landing. Soulard. The Central West End. DeBaliviere. Tower Grove - the city has attempted at one time or another to revitalize these areas. Has it succeeded?
And what MUTGR said would make me think. What is the urban center going to offer that the other areas are not? It's also a chicken/egg situation, who's moving first jobs or people? If the people continue to expand on the far reaching suburbs, then i'm sure more jobs will also be incorporated in those areas because as we know, people requires infrastructure. I'm not talking bridges and roads, but McD's, home depots, schucks, dierberghs, farmer's markets, car dealerships, donut companies, cops, fire departments, bankers, teachers, etc etc etc...if that massive infrastructure isn't already in place, then it will be once folks start moving out there simply to support the influx of people. That's the real point here, least as i'd see it. While you might see one major company move out of the area causing a major loss to the city, and a major gain for ONE municipality, that isn't what's typically bringing the mass number of jobs to the area...it'll be all the other jobs that support the area in general, and typically speaking the small business...not the big business.
You hit the nail on the head here. The vast majority of the jobs that follow people outward are service-based fields that everyone deals with on a semi-regular basis where we live. To add to your list: family docs and dentists and their staffs, bank tellers, insurance salesman, retail clerks, landscapers, people in various service and construction trades, etc. A lot of these jobs are more rank and file, nuts and bolts necessities that can't be considered major "job wins" for a middle class area economically: your standard minimum wage to $10 an hour job with no benefits working behind a counter asking someone paper or plastic, do you want fries with that, or would you like your change in 20s or 10s. For every professional job gained out there, there are probably 8-10 of these jobs gained.
The fact that St. Charles county jobs grew in lockstep with population increases suggests to me that the bulk of the job growth is service-based. STL city and county's job losses outpacing population losses is a bit misleading as well. There are a few factors playing into that:
1-the manufacturing crunch that hit the global economy really has nothing to do with jobs moving closer to where people live, and STL city and county had a higher concentration of manufacturng jobs.
2-there is a lag effect when it comes to pulling up shop in areas with negative growth, and chances are we are seeing the tipping point where things are getting "right-sized" in the city. For example, and area of 500K served by 5 Schnucks doesn't necessarily shrink to 4 when that 500K declines to 400K. They may drop a store when it goes from 400K to 375K the next decade, however. We could be in that decade now.
3-the trends in the article don't account for age of the population in varous counties or the city. As certain parts of the workforce age in STL city and county, a total population decline of 10% may be more like a 15% or even 20% decline in population among those of working age. Older people also don't use as many services as younger families: more doctor visits, but less eating out, home improvement, general discretionary spending, filling up as much at the gas pump, etc. Most people can't save enough to maintain their working age lifestyle in retirement.
This isn't to say that job loss is a good thing, just that not all job loss is equal. It would be much more interesting if we could measure the in/outbound migration of those with college degrees who are of working age and also the in/outbound migration of jobs requiring college degrees. I think the city and county are still losing, but it's not nearly as the more general numbers in the article. In a new economy, the college degree numbers are much more important.
Wow you are pretty clueless. First of all, actually part of the Loop IS in the city and not U.City which is why it is referred to at the Delmar Loop and no longer the U. City Loop. The east loop which includes the Pageant, Regional Arts Commission, and Pi restaurant among several other places in the city. In addition, I was referring to your comment...
Quote:
270 used to be a ring around the sprawl, now it's almost at its inner edge. The last time I visited I had no reason to venture within that ring except to hit the City Museum (a true gem).
...about not going inside of 270 and including all of those areas and not just the city proper so even if all of the Loop was in U.City, my point still applied.
Finally, if you had actually took the time to check out the city, you would see that all the areas you named actually ARE thriving. Especially Tower Grove compared to 20 years ago. The CWE, Soulard, and even the Landing (though not my fave) are all doing very well. And how often does the average St. Louisan go to the zoo, Forest Park, or Botantical Gardens? Well those who like those things, which is a LOT of people, do it quite frequently. Please, do some research before spouting off about a "dying city". Your ignorance is borderline offensive.
Most of those things are for tourists. How many times does the average St. Louisan visit any one of those in his or her lifetime - let alone regularly (Cards games and restaurants excepted? And technically the U-city loop is not in the city).
It seems to me the city has lost importance to the majority of people who live outside of it. Their kids go to school outside the city. They work outside the city and they shop outside the city. In order for a city to thrive it has to offer services that other areas don't. Now that the jobs have moved out, I'm not sure what it has to offer that North County or St. Charles don't. It therefore is dying.
Is that a good thing? No, but I don't see how to save it. Lacledes Landing. Soulard. The Central West End. DeBaliviere. Tower Grove - the city has attempted at one time or another to revitalize these areas. Has it succeeded?
With respect to the neighborhoods you've mentioned, nearly all (or even all) are much better off than they were 15-20 years ago, so I'd say, yes, they have succeeded on some scale.
As for those things being for tourists, I'm not so sure about that. I think it depends upon how urban minded you are in your choices of where you spend your money. Do the outer burbs have an art museum that can compete with the one in Forest Park? A zoo? A symphony, ballet, or opera co.? A sports team? Would you rather grab a burger at Applebees or Blueberry Hill? Brunch at Kopperman's or Waffle House? A tavern in a strip mall in the burbs or one in a walkable neighborhood like the Loop, CWE, Soulard, Laf Square, around Tower Grove, or Wash Ave. Do you want a taco from an area where Mexican people actually live, made by people who grew up preparing this food, or are you content with Del Taco or mid-scale faux Mexican? Those are personal choices. I'm not saying you can't find authentic and unique experiences in the outer burbs, because they do exist. They're just not as commonplace as things tend to get watered down to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
I think that in many regards the areas you mentioned (Laclede's Landing, Soulard, CWE, DeBalivere, Tower Grove) have actually come a long way and are very vibrant neighborhoods. Has the improvements in these neighborhoods been able to stem the outflow of people from the city? No. Have these neighborhoods improved the standing and desirability of St. Louis City? Yes. Are more desirable neighborhoods needed within the city core to help promote St. Louis City as a place to reside? Absolutetly.
Getting large numbers of young people to St. Louis city is great! However, i don't think that's gonig to be enough to bring massive influxes of jobs to the area. New generation businesses however, IT, Webservices, or yet to be discovered technology businesses which employee lots of young people, or are founded, owned, operated by younger individuals might want to build in an urban area...simply based on the younger generation's love of urban lifestyles. However, the real trouble with St. Louis city is the migration of new and established families. The "typical" progression of a persons life will involve some form settling down and starting a family. If St. Louis can't find a way to retain those individuals, it'll just be a transitional destination along the journey of a person's life, as opposed to a solid "home" to those individuals.
Wow you are pretty clueless. First of all, actually part of the Loop IS in the city and not U.City which is why it is referred to at the Delmar Loop and no longer the U. City Loop. The east loop which includes the Pageant, Regional Arts Commission, and Pi restaurant among several other places in the city. In addition, I was referring to your comment...
...about not going inside of 270 and including all of those areas and not just the city proper so even if all of the Loop was in U.City, my point still applied.
Finally, if you had actually took the time to check out the city, you would see that all the areas you named actually ARE thriving. Especially Tower Grove compared to 20 years ago. The CWE, Soulard, and even the Landing (though not my fave) are all doing very well. And how often does the average St. Louisan go to the zoo, Forest Park, or Botantical Gardens? Well those who like those things, which is a LOT of people, do it quite frequently. Please, do some research before spouting off about a "dying city". Your ignorance is borderline offensive.
Wow, aren't you just the internet tough guy?
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.
