New baseball stadium in Miami

[rxlexi]

  I think the biggest issue re: Kauffman Stadium is not that it isn't downtown.  It's that, even beyond the parking lots, it is completely surrounded by under-utilized land, with absolutely nothing, save the Denny's, Sheraton, and BP Convenience Store (Taco Bell is drive-thru only after games, at least from my one pedestrian experience there) within walking distance.  It is surrounded by highways and blight and vacant land.  It isn't in the 'nice' suburbs, where everything is new like Texas.  It isn't in a rough or semi-barren area that is at least close to DT, like Atlanta or Philly.  It's far away and old and blighted. 

  If they had even built another hotel across I-70, or like 1 or 2 FREAKING SPORTS BARS anywhere within rough walking distance I think many folks would be somewhat happier (at least I would be). Or if the surroundings were the same but it was a quick, couple-minute drive or cab ride to downtown, either way.  Instead we have the worst of both worlds, and unfortunately fantastic stadiums sitting there. 

  I absolutely love the K and I think the renos will be beautiful.  But they'll also be bittersweet, b/c we'll have a gracefully aging, classic stadium with all of the new modern touches and you still won't be able to talk shit about the Royals latest foibles anywhere remotely within walking, or really even close driving distance.  And that to me is a shame.

[LenexatoKCMO]

But they'll also be bittersweet, b/c we'll have a gracefully aging, classic stadium with all of the new modern touches and you still won't be able to talk shit about the Royals latest foibles anywhere remotely within walking, or really even close driving distance. 

There is still a tittie bar . . .

[kcdcchef]

Talk about rewriting history.  Most, if not all, of the people who wanted a new baseball stadium wanted it downtown.  Just go back to the discussions.  And all of the options for the new stadium were in what the city calls downtown.


By the way, Dodger Stadium is plopped down right in the middle of parking lots.  From the following:

http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/la/ba ... istory.jsp

The 56,000-seat Dodger Stadium has parking for 16,000 automobiles on 21 terraced lots adjacent to the same elevations as the six different seating levels. More than 3,400 trees cover the 300 acres of beautiful landscape, which is maintained by a full-time staff of gardeners. 

And it looks like it will stay the home of the Dodgers from some time.

In order to ensure the continued vitality of Dodger Stadium, the Los Angeles Dodgers announced a multi-faceted stadium improvement plan in April of 2008 that will bring the most modern amenities to Dodger fans while preserving the tradition of the historic venue, first opened in 1962. The improvements, anticipated to be completed by Opening Day of the 2012 season, are designed to protect Dodger Stadium's place as the home of Los Angeles baseball for the next 50 years

Don't believe any public money is involved.

so but yet another stadium surrounded by seas of parking lots. damn, this list keeps getting bigger.

[chrizow]

so but yet another stadium surrounded by seas of parking lots. damn, this list keeps getting bigger.

you're fixating on the "parking lots" aspect of this.  the K suffers from both (a) being in the middle of a sea of parking lots (an even bigger sea since arrowhead is next door), and (b) being 10 miles from downtown or any other viable part of the urban core, and (c) being in a suburban area that itself is blighted, with scrap yards, no dining or nightlife options, and the like. 

this is not that complicated. 

also, it is worth observing that just b/c other cities have stadiums situated in a sea of parking, that doesn't make it a good thing.  but the point remains that the K is in an especially shitty location. 

[LenexatoKCMO]

so but yet another stadium surrounded by seas of parking lots. damn, this list keeps getting bigger.

If you had ever been to Chavez Ravine, you would know that it doesn't really fit the mold you are advocating all that well.  Plus, despite the rosy oulook in AKP's article - no way one of the most valuable franchises in the league soldiers on for several more decades in one of the most dated parks in the league without either replacing it or massively reconfiguring and developing the site.  I am sure all that land is probably worth a development fortune given the location.  

[kcdcchef]

you're fixating on the "parking lots" aspect of this.  the K suffers from both (a) being in the middle of a sea of parking lots (an even bigger sea since arrowhead is next door), and (b) being 10 miles from downtown or any other viable part of the urban core, and (c) being in a suburban area that itself is blighted, with scrap yards, no dining or nightlife options, and the like. 

this is not that complicated. 

also, it is worth observing that just b/c other cities have stadiums situated in a sea of parking, that doesn't make it a good thing.  but the point remains that the K is in an especially shitty location. 

gee, i wonder if i am fixated on something i kept hearing on this site repeatedly...........

no other stadiums are surrounded by a sea of parking lots
no other stadiums are built downtown
no other stadiums are remodeled in shitty outlying locations

heard any of that on here???? gee, i wonder!!

[KCMax]

I guess I don't understand why the fact there ARE other stadiums built surrounded by parking lots in the middle of nowhere makes it a good thing that TSC is too? I mean, there are strip malls in other cities too...does that mean strip malls in Olathe are desirable?

If some suburban area in the middle of nowhere builds a huge waterpark/entertainment area, does that validate Schlitterbarn?

So what if Milwaukee and Philly built new stadiums in TSC type environments? I thought Philly's stadium area sucked. I don't see why we would want to emulate that.

[Maitre D]

1.  Dodger Stadium is a putrid rebuttal, given that the stadium was built in the 1960s and was done so with private money.   The argument should be focused on new stadiums only and a vast majority of them are in DT/urbanized areas.


2.  Philly's ballpark is in a decently-populous area and is serviced by the subway nearby.   So that example is retarded as well in comparing to the K.


Wrigley Field isn't "downtown" but it's in a prime spot.   The K didn't have to be built adjacent to the P&L but if it had been located in, say, Westport area, nobody on here would be bitching about it.

[Maitre D]

So what if Milwaukee and Philly built new stadiums in TSC type environments? I thought Philly's stadium area sucked. I don't see why we would want to emulate that.

Judging from the overhead here, TSC's spot really isn't anywhere close to a similar density or proximity to DT.  And Philly is so densely packed that it's far tougher to build downtown there:

[GRID]

^  That's better than the TSC?  Seriously???

[ShowME]

No sh*t what an eyesore.  TSC still has it beat.  Surrounded by a rundown I-70 & 435 interchange, a closed for decades GM plant, an import parts lot and a WWII rundown housing stock.

[Maitre D]

No sh*t what an eyesore.  TSC still has it beat.  Surrounded by a rundown I-70 & 435 interchange, a closed for decades GM plant, an import parts lot and a WWII rundown housing stock.

Bravo!   

[GRID]

I don't know, I get off I-70 and there is the stadium.  I guess I don't drive by the GM plant (which is several miles away) or the run down residential areas etc.  I just get off the freeway and go to a game.

Just like I do in most towns.

Even in most "downtown" stadiums, there is very little around the parks, but there are a lot of parks that resemble the TSC.  Do you really think those stadiums in Miami are any better than the TSC?  Seriously?  I just find that laughable.

I know our stadium, arrowhead is fine, is not in the best of locations.

But go down to St Louis and look at all the amazing development that stadium has generated since opening?  Look at Houston.  Hell, look at Seattle.  Those stadiums in Seattle are "downtown", but they are still in parking lagoons and only one or two bars in the area.

It would be nice to have a stadium downtown to have that skyline beyond the outfield, but it's also nice that our downtown doesn't need an additional 20,000 parking spaces.  Even in Denver and Cincy and hell, even San Diego.  Parking is still the number one real-estate development spurred by a downtown stadium.  Those are cities with a strong urban condo demand that can overcome that to a degree.

Why is this still such a big issue.  The location of Arrowhead is perfect and the location of Kauffman blows.

But once inside the stadiums, especially after their renovations are complete, they are two of the top venues in pro sports and I think we are doing plenty with downtown now with the arena and PAC and other venues.

Downtown just needs more residents and office workers.

[aknowledgeableperson]

... and a WWII rundown housing stock.

There is no housing stock actually around TSC (except for a few isolated houses that may not be there anymore on Blue Ridge).  On the east side of 435 directly south of the stadiums there might be a few houses you describe but the bulk of the housing stock was built in the 50's and early 60's.  The housing stock along the west side of 435 is a mixture of styles, older homes, homes built in the 50's and 60's, and then some in the 80's.