urbanSTL

Good Article in Kansas City Star about changes going on downtown and elsewhere in St. Louis.





http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 146365.htm

Thanks for posting the link to the KC Star article. It sounds as if the writer would be among supporters for building new stadiums in downtown KC to replace the Truman Sports Complex.

markofucity wrote:they would plan taller buildings right against the stadium .....

Too close and loftlover might get some souvenier window-breaking homerun baseballs to go along with that new condo that he's been saving his pennies for.

You're all invited to my pad opening day 2009! Bring your ball gloves to catch A.P.'s homeruns to left field . . . go Cards!

Hi guys,



first time, long time here. I am struggling to understand the feasability of the ballpark Village including 1,200 residences and 450,000 sq ft of retail space. Can someone please explain to me how it is possible to squeeeeeezzzeee that many units in those few buildings without going up. Anyone know what the acreage is for the ballpark village and how many buildings (not just towers) there will be? I guess I can just count the buildings on the posted graphic....



Thanks

I'm always amazde by how many units they squeeze into buildings - whenever I lok at the building I just can't conceptualize how they manage to put as many units in there as they do ... suppose I lack in the spatial relations department ...



good thing I'm not an architect ...

Yeah, I kinda question the 1200 number too. Just doesn't really seem plausible. Not that I'm skeptical of the Ballpark Village... Of all the new downtown mega-projects, this is the one that I truly believe will get built as promised. Just not with all 1200 units of new housing.

Well with 3 towers it isn't hard to get 400 units in one tower. Thats just 20 units for about twent floors.

I heard that Village will include 18 acres. PLans may include reconfiguring the existing buildings/garages.

stlpcsolutions wrote:If people do not actually spend time at ballpark village, they may not build more than two blocks.



I will certianly use ballpark village, however, I am not confident people outside St. Louis City/County will. It will have to be really good to keep people downtown who do not live close. I hope it is successful, we will have to see.

It may be helpful to do everything the opposite of how Union Station does.



At the top of that list would be not charging $9.00 per hour on parking, and thus actually encourage people to spend time there, as opposed to completely discouraging them.

i disagree. I think patty'os and rhaboskis*sp do a pretty good job at gettting people to stay around after the games and those are just two bars. Imagine when the village gets build out, and all the residential units are in and all the entertainment aspects are completed. It'll be great! Right now there aren't many options for families who go to the games. Parents most likely won't be bringing their tag alongs to patty'os.

I think if you give people something do to, it is only natural for them to hang around.

I almost think that if Ballpark Village can't succeed downtown then nothing can.



If anything can excite any St. Louisan regardless of race, gender, age, or neighborhood it's the St. Louis Cardinals. I really think the ballpark village residential towers might be the only "shoe-in" that I have 100% confidence in. (Not to say I lack confidence in anything else, but they would have to really mess up for this not to work).

Ballpark Village needs not only sports themed stuff, but for it to be awesomely sucessful it needs its own identity. Yes its next to the ball park - but the ball park is dead 6 months out of the year. It needs to trancsend the imagine as just baseball and be a cool place year round - like wrigley-ville <sp?> or around fenway. One of the best atmosphers in the whole world is Fenway during a early summer evening game, its just buzzing. No fancy ESPN crap - just its own identiy - the bars are open year round for the Celtics and Bruins etc. Thats what the village needs.



Also I think of the towers close to the outfield should take a cue from Wrigley. Since the tower will be in the outfield, and the ball park is smaller than before - lets put a resturant in one of the towers about 1/2 way up - over looking the field via a glass window. People can come see a ball game, feel they are in the crowd, and enjoy an awesome St. Louis dinner <i imagine the menu and prices to be a little bit higher as one would be in AC comfort with nice dinner being served to you> It would make our new "retro" ball park different from all the other dozens of retro parks - you can be outside the stadium enjoying a steak dinner with your family watching the game as if you were there.



My idea is pretty lame I know - but something needs to be done to ensure this stadium is as unique as the last one wasn't. STL will love its stadium no matter what - but 25 years from now - will people be saying "Lets go see the Cardinals" or "LETS GO TO BUSCH AND SEE THE CARDINALS" its a slight difference - but its a smimilar difference from the Dodgers: in a plain old stadium and what ever the hell Pac Bell is called now <San Franisco> I went to see the Giants play becuase of the park - I skiped Dodger stadium all together.

Okay Ted Drew's needs to make a new building close to the stadium. They would make so much money because right after a game 40000 fans would want to buy ice cream.

St. Louis Texan wrote:Okay Ted Drew's needs to make a new building close to the stadium. They would make so much money because right after a game 40000 fans would want to buy ice cream.

]



Well, the great thing about Drewe's is he doesn't have to.



My girlfriend lives directly behind his location off Chippewa, and there is a never-ending stream of people; practically year round.



I think they're happy with their tradition and location.



I think a lot of those people trek out there after Cards games as it is.

Your girlfriend is the luckiest person in the world.

LIving next to Ted Drewes might make you the luckiest person in the world, but if you aren't careful it could also make you the fattest.

I thought she was the luckiest because she dates TruBlu!

I used to live walking distance to Ted Drewe's, the Lansdowne-Chippewa-River Des Peres triangle within the Lindenwood neighborhood. I had actually moved there to someday walk to the Shrewsbury station. But I only rarely took advantage of the custard proximity, mostly when friends or family would visit.

On game days its funny how thousands of people come downtown hours before the game looking for something to do, somewhere to spend money. A lot of them have kind of a lost or disappointed look on their faces. Those that actually find places to go and see seem to be fewer than those that don't.



Many stay after the games but many more would if it were clear where to go and what to do. It has to be painfully obvious or people just don't get there.

Matt wrote:On game days its funny how thousands of people come downtown hours before the game looking for something to do, somewhere to spend money. A lot of them have kind of a lost or disappointed look on their faces. Those that actually find places to go and see seem to be fewer than those that don't.



Many stay after the games but many more would if it were clear where to go and what to do. It has to be painfully obvious or people just don't get there.

I completely agree. I find that other cities do a great job of showing off thier potential businesses and activities to those walking around. I think St. Louis does a good job of hiding them. After game 4 of the world series I overheard many Red Sox fans walking around complaining that there was nothing to do. I'm sure it's much of the same for every home game that we have out of town visitors.