urbanSTL

gone corporate wrote:

zun1026 wrote:Just because we are trying to maintain companies like Peabody and Stifel does not mean we need to bend over backwards for them. We simply need to work with them and help them find what they need. I am sure there are more options for STL and Stifel than just BPV. If BPV is their only option, then we should promote a version of BPV that acts in the most beneficial manner to all parties, not just the Cards, Cordish and Stifel.

While I'm not sure if this is the result of a simple typo or a mindframe, I'll only add that companies like Peabody and Stifel are able to maintain themselves, and that Saint Louis is seeking to retain them within our City when they can do whatever they want to do, wherever they want to do it. And from an investment standpoint, these both are really great companies. We're lucky to have them in StL

It has more to do with me running on 3-4 hours of sleep than anything.

I strongly agree that they are companies we want to keep in STL. I just am not sold on how we are going about doing that, if we in fact picking up a large tab for them to be in a proposed development that is lacking.

A couple of things real quickly here.

1 - Can we possible close this thread and begin a new thread with a base post reflecting the updated "renderings" showing the proposed Stifel office building? Anything prior to that is no longer applicable to this project, IMO. The new rendering has no similarities at all to anything on the previous proposals so I think it's safe to assume they are going in a different direction at this point.

2 - Checking out Cordish's website, they have absolutely zero information on this. The only thing there is the rendering from 2005-ish. Maybe the are ashamed to put the new project as is on their site? (They should be)

3 - What happened to the Jan 19th deadline for finding out more information/tennant agreements for the buildings? We are WAY past that now and there has been absolutely less than ZERO information on this "project." Has anyone heard any new information?

gary kreie wrote:

Blzhrpmd2 wrote:Over the weekend, food network ran a Rachel Ray show on ballpark food. She was at Fenway's "Yawkey Way" which closes to traffic two hours before every game. I had not seen it before and thought it was pretty impressive. Street vendors were out in full force, the street was packed, it looked like they had music and performers, etc...It appears that DeWitt has vocalized a similar vision for Clark St. and I hope it works out. Anything close to what I saw on TV would be a great draw and something I think Cardinal's nation could really get into (side note, I think I remember reading that the mini statues at 8th and Clark were once proposed to be spaced out along Clark between 8th and Broadway; that sounds good, too)

Yawkey Way in Boston is set up to be inside the stadium perimeter when they close it off. After you go through the turnstyle to get into the stadium, you can walk out on Yawkey Way to buy food and beer, and still be considered inside the stadium because the old buildings across the street form a wall. It might be nice if they think ahead when they configure Ballpark Village to allow something like that.

Looks like the Cardinals are bringing Clark Street inside the stadium perimeter for the playoffs. I wonder if it has anything to do with potential protests that could be visible by cameras in the street. Here are the Oct 3rd press release words:

"Access to Clark Street between Busch Stadium and Ballpark Village will be restricted to ticket holders only from four hours before first pitch to the end of the game. Non-ticketed guests planning on visiting Ballpark Village will need to use the north entrance."

http://m.cardinals.mlb.com/news/article ... ch-stadium

That wouldn't shock me at all. Initial reaction is I get that, but I think it'd be an unfortunate thing to do long-term. I could be convinced it's actually a good thing, though, but I'm not sure.