urbanSTL

goat314 wrote:Not looking bad with the signs on it, should look great lit up at night time. Even better when we get some mixed use residential infill around it.

Looks nice. It will be cool to see a picture from the same spot once the season starts.

Most of this front side looks fine, but I don't like the grey and green on the corner-looks extremely cheap. What's going on with the east facade and those white boxed in windows? Will those be opened up , or is it related to some future expansion?

^ i think they're still hanging the brick facade on that corner. the other corner looked the same way before they were finished–cinder blocks. can somebody else who knows architecture refute or verify?

^ I think that's the finished product. Look, the hanging lights have been hung! I hope I'm wrong! It still looks better than P&L in KC.

urban_dilettante wrote:^ i think they're still hanging the brick facade on that corner. the other corner looked the same way before they were finished–cinder blocks. can somebody else who knows architecture refute or verify?

The concrete block you see is the finished product

Really? Well that's disappointing. I don't understand that design decision.

Isn't that funny? The bunch of us here can see that that's not quite right, but I bet that most people won't notice the difference

that's dumb as sh*t. guess they were going for the "ran out of bricks" look. success!

Nice Ford sign, didn't know ford has a presence (ie office or dealership) at ballpark village. The city sign code doesn't permit off premise signage so ford must have some sort of a presence

The Ford sign will sit directly behind the Ford Plaza at Busch (really the whole BPV phase 1 does). I have to think that's the actual reasoning for the large sign there.

How they're going about making it fit within or around the code, I'm not sure.

Or perhaps Ford will have some sort of display on site at BPV as well.

Eastward wrote:^ Has security or crime been seen as an issue near the stadium on game days? I've not heard of any problems and wouldn't think, with so many people around that it would be an issue.

I don't know of any violent crime, but last summer I was walking by the stadium with my friend during a game and this guy tried selling us some of that crack rock right in front of tons of people. They saw what was going on, too, he wasn't hiding it very much at all.

beer city wrote:

urban_dilettante wrote:^ i think they're still hanging the brick facade on that corner. the other corner looked the same way before they were finished–cinder blocks. can somebody else who knows architecture refute or verify?

The concrete block you see is the finished product

I could be wrong, but isn't the intent to have another building built in close proximity to that wall? Or maybe with only an access walkway between it and the theoretical new corner building? If it was build assuming that wall would see little-to-no exposure once the corner lot was built on, it would explain a window-less wall with less expensive (looking, at least) materials used.

EDIT: This story from the RFT in August '13 includes this picture, showing a covered pavilion of some sort against that section of the building:





-RBB

That still doesn't account for the front corner there. The southwest as well as the south wall of that "tower" section. It's very peculiar. If you look at some of the other renderings, you can see it is just exposed ugly concrete brick. It doesn't look as bad in the rendering of course, but it's still odd.

From seeing that picture you know what it looks like to me? A dressed up parking garage with retail on the bottom ..

shimmy wrote:I don't know what it says about me that I'm mostly neutral to this first phase. I'm hoping for much more to come, but I see this and all I can really garner is a "Meh, it works."

I don't know what it says about me that I think you are an optimist.

jstriebel wrote:That still doesn't account for the front corner there. The southwest as well as the south wall of that "tower" section. It's very peculiar. If you look at some of the other renderings, you can see it is just exposed ugly concrete brick. It doesn't look as bad in the rendering of course, but it's still odd.

Apologies, thought you meant the gray 'panels' down the east side of the building; that's what I noticed as cheap first.. Yeah, understand what you're saying, but I think it'll be OK with some dressing up. There's apparently a sign that's yet to be installed over the green arched window panels (note the lights currently pointing at a blank gray box in the picture on the last page). I'd also like to see some sort of signage on the green panels between the two sets of windows.

Overall it's... OK. Urban scaled, which is nice. Will have to wait until I see it in person to make a final judgement on the materials, but it appears to be in line with what was used on the stadium itself. The design is nothing ground-breaking, but it's fine. And there's nothing in phase one that makes me want to go there on a regular basis aside from maybe the HOF and the seating section. I do understand the demographic they're going for, but it seems to me that those establishments will be barren on non-gamedays.

-RBB

Apologies, thought you meant the gray 'panels' down the east side of the building; that's what I noticed as cheap first.. Yeah, understand what you're saying, but I think it'll be OK with some dressing up. There's apparently a sign that's yet to be installed over the green arched window panels (note the lights currently pointing at a blank gray box in the picture on the last page). I'd also like to see some sort of signage on the green panels between the two sets of windows.

Overall it's... OK. Urban scaled, which is nice. Will have to wait until I see it in person to make a final judgement on the materials, but it appears to be in line with what was used on the stadium itself. The design is nothing ground-breaking, but it's fine. And there's nothing in phase one that makes me want to go there on a regular basis aside from maybe the HOF and the seating section. I do understand the demographic they're going for, but it seems to me that those establishments will be barren on non-gamedays.

-RBB

Really, I see these places being very busy on non-gamedays weekends. And if the food is good at the brew house and priced right, I could see that place being very busy for a lunch crowd. How cool will it on a day like today, 80 degs and sit outside in the beer garden in downtown STL looking onto Busch Stadium. Sounds like a great lunch to me.

I think the drunken fish will do pretty well you be amazed on how many people actually enjoy sushi i for one enjoy sushi every now and then. I think this first phase will do great. I just hope for the 2nd phase they'll actually add something cutting edge and state of the art whether it be a new residential offices or hotel... It be awesome to see a W hotel go into BPV ...

Just walked by. The place is a bit sign crazy. Although I think it will be successful, I worry about how this will look from the seats and wonder how well it will age.

The exposed concrete blocks near Budweiser Brewhouse is completely unacceptable and looks like crap. The east and west ends look even worse. No sign of the Biergarten (steel structure in renderings) going in on the east side.

Overall, looks and feels like an amusement park. Was happy to see real flags used above "Cardinal(s) Nation". Now if I could just speak to someone about the fake, plastic "flags" on Busch's score/video board.

Phase I is basically the Union Station restaurant scene from about 20 years ago: Themey, gimmicky, and popular national chains with decent food and strong cocktail/bar elements, and a iconic dessert vendor (i.e. Fudgery instead of Ted Drewes). The main difference is 81 home games, Cardinals Hall of Fame, and a generally more convenient location for downtown workers and visitors. Hopefully those attributes will lend it more stability/staying power than Union Station.

That stuff at Union Station probably would have worked out if it were still used as an actual train station.

rbb wrote:Overall it's... OK. Urban scaled, which is nice. Will have to wait until I see it in person to make a final judgement on the materials, but it appears to be in line with what was used on the stadium itself.

Just from the handful of times I've walked by this winter, the brick facade doesn't even seem to be of the same quality as the brick on the stadium. It appears more "pinkish" than the dark red of Busch III, much less the traditional handmade St. Louis brick of Cupples Station. Just my amateur eye, but it looks to be built of cheap materials comparable to a Schnucks. I don't know why they couldn't have used the same brick as the stadium. It would've helped to better tie the two pieces together, so that in fifty years when hopefully these two structures are still standing, casual observers might think they were built in tandem and not almost a decade apart and that the smaller building is merely an imitation of its much bigger brother (which in itself is an imitation).

With that said, I still think it'll do good business.

Does anyone think if the first phase of this is successful that it could start off a potential south downtown retail commercial and even residential boom?