City denies Bush Stadium reports

October 4, 2007
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bush StadiumThe city has not decided whether to tear down Bush Stadium, spokeswomen for the mayor and the Department of Metropolitan Development said this afternoon, denying news reports. WTHR reported on its Web site that the historic ballpark will be razed, citing a WIBC interview with Mayor Bart Peterson. City officials tell Property Lines that no decision will be made until after a pair of appraisals come back. IBJ was first to report on the city-ordered appraisals, a first step toward eventual reuse or demolition.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Cory did you see on the news a few days ago that the hotel complex around Victory field is delayed because the administration did not like the boring architecture! Maybe the administrators have been looking at all of our posts!
  • that would be great, we definatly need some more inspiring architecture around the city.

    Like I think we could have done a better job making the new stadium more interesting rather than just building a giant version of conseco fieldhouse, but thats almost done now so now we need to improve on some of these other big projects as we will all have to look at them for many years to come, since in my entire life I don't think a giant structure has been demolished downtown other than market square arena, as this is not vegas and we don't rebuild our hotels every few years.
  • Knock down Bush Stadium. I'm sorry, but historic preservation can only go so far until it is nonsensical. Yes, I understand that the stadium is an important part of some people's history, but we cannot save everything. Unless some private donor comes up with the money, it should be knocked down to make way for progress on 16th Street.

    I was reading an article last night about people complaining about the cobblestone alley on Mass Ave being used as a path for the cultural trail. They feel the loss of the historic bricks will hamper people's appreciate of a historic area of town. It is just ludicrous. I say save what you can when you can, incorporate where possible, but to keep something for the sake of keeping it and impeding progress just reeks of self-importance and obstructionism.

    As for delaying the Marriott, I have not heard that. Link?
  • No, Mark, I didn't see it. Who did the story?
  • ^^^ Cory it was WISH TV. David Barrass reported. I believe it was the Tuesday's 6 pm edition.

    http://www.wishtv.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?ClipID1=1803780&h1=Architects%20Back%20at%20Drawing%20Board%20on%20New%20Downtown%20Hotel&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=177067&LaunchPageAdTag=Homepage&activePane=info&playerVersion=1&hostPageUrl=http%3A//www.wishtv.com/&rnd=95435270
  • Thanks, guys. I watched the story, and there didn't seem to be anything new.
  • Nick -- what's really silly about people complaining about the alley brick removal/replacement is that the old bricks are being saved to be reused in the future. Chatham Arch has apparently been rehabbing their brick alleys for a while and will use the bricks in that process. Hell, they could even recreate a brick alley if they wanted to!

    I completely agree with you: historical preservation has it's place, but too often it's used as a tool for obstructionism.
  • I thought one of the reasons White Lodging was chosen was because they could meet the deadline of being open and having the place ready to go by the 2010 Mens Final Four.

    I don't know why they are taking so long on this, its not like they don't have hotels across the world and couldn't use a design they already have. Something like the Marriott RiverCenter in San Antonio would be great with twin towers look.

    http://www.marriott.com/hotels/photo-tours.mi?marshaCode=satrc&pageID=HWHOM&imageID=1
  • I would rather have a unique look to Indianapolis for the JW. But then again the JW isn't unique at all...

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT