Downtown Baseball Stadium

Discussion about new sports facilities in Kansas City
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10169
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by Highlander »

shinatoo wrote:The more downtown stadiums I've visited the more I have cooled on this idea. And Highlander, what are you talking about with traffic? It is not even remotely difficult to get out of the TSC after a Royals game. Chiefs, yes, I don't know what the Chiefs did to F that up after 45 years but somehow they seem to be making it worse, but I would never say Royals games have been a problem.

But most importantly, no downtown baseball stadium without serious rail connections.

I could get behind a multi-use stadium (baseball + convention space). Build it over the I-35/I-670 interchange and connect it to Bartle Hall. Otherwise, for single use, it's a classic, keep it where it's at. No need to spend 750 million when we have what is still considered a top 5 stadium.
Last time I went to a Royals game was a couple of years ago when they won the world series, it was a close game so nobody left early, and it was a half hour to get out of the parking complex.

I am not advocating for a downtown stadium right now, but it's something to consider when Royals stadium has finally outlived its usefulness. I am just pointing out that putting stadiums downtown do not necessarily cause traffic or parking issues. On the traffic side, my experience is that traffic dissipates much faster when there are a multitude of routes available for exit and downtown certainly offers that luxury. There are 4-5 functional exits from Royals Stadium.
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10169
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by Highlander »

flyingember wrote:If the stadium is really some development inducing location it should be put in a blighted area to drive new development.

So "downtown adjacent" seems to be the smartest idea.

I would think the best spot would be right along one of the studied streetcar corridors and also lines up with the bus backbone.
It also needs to be somewhere that breaking the grid can't have a huge impact

Troost to Tracy, 12th to 14th seems like a good candidate.

The Paseo gives good access to the north and south with direct line ups to I-35 and I-70 and 670
Troost is near ramps to/from the south for 71
There's lots of good access from the loop
It's on a future streetcar corridor and current bus cooridor
And it's an area that if they really want a large parking garage, it can also serve future efforts to revitalize Paseo Industrial
Arrowhead and Royals Stadium have been at I70/I435 for decades and have totally failed to spur any development in that area outside of the Adams Mark Hotel and a couple of other small hotels. I've always thought spurring development requires a critical mass that the stadiums on there own cannot provide. KC's downtown area is on a roll but having the Royals would definitely provide some more fuel. KC has made huge mistakes with the location of its infrastructure in the past (a mistake we are still repeating with Cerner) - I'd rather see KC concentrate the primary infrastructure and let more organic grass roots growth take place on the peripheries.
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by DaveKCMO »

anecdotally, i hear a lot of people talking about the traffic implications of a downtown stadium. completely ignoring the fact that the vast majority of transit routes terminate downtown from every corner of the region...
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by flyingember »

DaveKCMO wrote:anecdotally, i hear a lot of people talking about the traffic implications of a downtown stadium. completely ignoring the fact that the vast majority of transit routes terminate downtown from every corner of the region...
It would be interesting to see what percentage of tickets are purchased by someone with a bus line within 10 blocks of their home
User avatar
TheLastGentleman
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2912
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by TheLastGentleman »

Highlander wrote:Arrowhead and Royals Stadium have been at I70/I435 for decades and have totally failed to spur any development in that area outside of the Adams Mark Hotel and a couple of other small hotels. I've always thought spurring development requires a critical mass that the stadiums on there own cannot provide. KC's downtown area is on a roll but having the Royals would definitely provide some more fuel. KC has made huge mistakes with the location of its infrastructure in the past (a mistake we are still repeating with Cerner) - I'd rather see KC concentrate the primary infrastructure and let more organic grass roots growth take place on the peripheries.
Why should we expect a relocated stadium to spur development when the original stadiums didn't? Anecdotally, I've never seen an example of an area taking off once a stadium is built. They seem to act as islands surrounded by parking lots that only get active when there's a game. To me, that just doesn't seem like the kind of building you'd want downtown.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by beautyfromashes »

TheLastGentleman wrote: Why should we expect a relocated stadium to spur development when the original stadiums didn't? Anecdotally, I've never seen an example of an area taking off once a stadium is built. They seem to act as islands surrounded by parking lots that only get active when there's a game. To me, that just doesn't seem like the kind of building you'd want downtown.
I’ve been to most every baseball stadium and this is not correct. If they are placed in an area that has most any kind of other buildings nearby they almost always spur additional development. Of course, if placed in the middle of nowhere with nothing else around, they are not sufficient enough by themselves to generate significant development. A location with transportation, other buildings and some minimal form of activity already will see significant transformation.
User avatar
TheLastGentleman
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2912
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by TheLastGentleman »

beautyfromashes wrote:I’ve been to most every baseball stadium and this is not correct. If they are placed in an area that has most any kind of other buildings nearby they almost always spur additional development. Of course, if placed in the middle of nowhere with nothing else around, they are not sufficient enough by themselves to generate significant development. A location with transportation, other buildings and some minimal form of activity already will see significant transformation.
Can you give some examples?
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10169
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by Highlander »

TheLastGentleman wrote:
Highlander wrote:Arrowhead and Royals Stadium have been at I70/I435 for decades and have totally failed to spur any development in that area outside of the Adams Mark Hotel and a couple of other small hotels. I've always thought spurring development requires a critical mass that the stadiums on there own cannot provide. KC's downtown area is on a roll but having the Royals would definitely provide some more fuel. KC has made huge mistakes with the location of its infrastructure in the past (a mistake we are still repeating with Cerner) - I'd rather see KC concentrate the primary infrastructure and let more organic grass roots growth take place on the peripheries.
Why should we expect a relocated stadium to spur development when the original stadiums didn't? Anecdotally, I've never seen an example of an area taking off once a stadium is built. They seem to act as islands surrounded by parking lots that only get active when there's a game. To me, that just doesn't seem like the kind of building you'd want downtown.
My point was that stadiums augment development, they don't single-handedly create it. There was nothing at I-70/435 in 1970 before the stadiums and there is essentially nothing there now. They do not create enough traffic on a regular basis on their own to sustain business. Put them in an area like downtown where there is already a critical mass and they will indeed augment local business. Sprint Center already does the same for the Power and Light district. If the district had to depend only on Sprint Center activity, every business there would have already closed down but there is enough going on in downtown on a regular basis that the various restaurant, bars et al are not totally dependent on the Sprint Center. Sprint Center certainly helps but it's not the sole reason for their existence. There obviously are some downsides like being a dead zone when the Royals are not playing at home but even that can be somewhat alleviated by location and design.

I would disagree that downtown stadiums are necessarily islands surrounded by parking although there are some like Houston's Minute Maid Park and Busch Stadium that do have a huge amount of associated surface parking. While no stadium arrived and by itself transformed an area (for the very reasons I state above), many have really augmented the area they occupy without being "islands" surrounded by parking. One of the best examples is Coors Field in Denver. Going to a Rockies game is a really great experience. Cincinatti's Great American Stadium and Camden Yards in Baltimore are also well integrated into their downtown setting.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by beautyfromashes »

TheLastGentleman wrote: Can you give some examples?
Giants Stadium has helped transform the entire east pier of San Francisco with new shops, business development and high end restaurants and hotels.

Orioles Camden Yard, while built several years ago, was a huge focus to helping rejuvenate the inner harbor of Baltimore.

Coors Field can arguable be credited with sparking the development of all of Denver’s DT. New lofts, corporate buildings, entertainment districts, etc.

PNC Park helped move development across the river and increased neighborhood values.

Target Field, Comerica Park, Jacobs Field, etc.
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4560
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by grovester »

I think downtown and crossroads don't need a stadium. Around 71 highway is as close as I would bring it.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by beautyfromashes »

As far as what could happen with a baseball stadium in DT Kansas City: it would immediately push us past the renovation stage to the new build stage for residential buildings with parking lots filled with new towers, it would make DT the #1 location in this city for corporate locations (companies similar to Cerner and Sprint would locate there instead of the suburbs like they would have in the past), rail transportation would be a major focus, convention business would increase, etc, etc.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by beautyfromashes »

grovester wrote:I think downtown and crossroads don't need a stadium. Around 71 highway is as close as I would bring it.
That would be a huge waste. Companies want to walk out of their corporate HQ and walk to the stadium with clients. They want entertainment and restaurants and nightlife. 71 might as well be Truman if you have to get in a car to get there. I’d vote stay where they are or build in JC if that is the location chosen.
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4560
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by grovester »

It would include a streetcar from downtown.

Considering our weather, they'd probably drive the few blocks most of the time anyway.

This seems like something we could use to shave 20 years off of development timelines that would fill the gaps. I'm thinking of 18th Street in particular.

Downtown is already a done deal in the time frame we are looking at.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by beautyfromashes »

Everyone would drive and park then leave after the game. It wouldn’t be an economic driver at all. You have to make it so the conversation is, “Hey, let’s go an hour early to park and grab dinner.”, or, “Let’s go grab a drink after the game while traffic clears out.” 71 gets us nothing.
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10169
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by Highlander »

grovester wrote:It would include a streetcar from downtown.

Considering our weather, they'd probably drive the few blocks most of the time anyway.

This seems like something we could use to shave 20 years off of development timelines that would fill the gaps. I'm thinking of 18th Street in particular.

Downtown is already a done deal in the time frame we are looking at.
I think there is a location that is absolutely doable and a bit closer to the Crossroads than that. Look at the general area between McGee and Holmes and south of 19th street (further east) or 20th street (further west). That area is completely underutilized except by Hospital Hill's giant surface lot and borders the south side of the Crossroads. That would be a closer and more integrated boundary with the Crossroads without halting organic growth and requiring tear downs. The existing surface lot could be replaced by a parking garage on Hospital Hill itself which is a much better solution for workers on the hill and everyone wins. It's a near perfect location.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by im2kull »

Highlander wrote: I would disagree that downtown stadiums are necessarily islands surrounded by parking although One of the best examples is Coors Field in Denver. Going to a Rockies game is a really great experience.
Yes, Rockies games are a great experience. However, what exactly is the stadium doing to help downtown Denver today.. Or any other day in which there isn't a game? How about throughout winter? I'll give you a hint. It's a giant unused monolith with a density of zero that covers a massive swath of the downtown core in which it prevents ANY effective use of the area on a down day. It's a giant development and pedestrian roadblock. I don't know about you, but myself and everyone else in Denver is tired of having to park across the freeway and walk a mile down 20th just to get to work. Game nights are even worse because then parking is a minimum of 30 bucks for the same experience. The Mall is what has helped DT Denver the most.. Not Coors Field.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by im2kull »

beautyfromashes wrote:As far as what could happen with a baseball stadium in DT Kansas City: it would immediately push us past the renovation stage to the new build stage for residential buildings with parking lots filled with new towers, it would make DT the #1 location in this city for corporate locations (companies similar to Cerner and Sprint would locate there instead of the suburbs like they would have in the past), rail transportation would be a major focus, convention business would increase, etc, etc.
Or it would create an immediate stoppage of the DT building boom and bring any possible new construction to a halt by evaporating the only cheap grounds being eyed for potential high density, high rise buildings. Welcome to the reality of urban renewal.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by beautyfromashes »

im2kull wrote:
Or it would create an immediate stoppage of the DT building boom and bring any possible new construction to a halt by evaporating the only cheap grounds being eyed for potential high density, high rise buildings. Welcome to the reality of urban renewal.
There is no shortage of land in our DT for development. Acres upon acres east of City Hall can be developed. Same with north loop. Lots of empty lots and low rise buildings in the Crossroads,especially east. When a city can name four sites big enough to build a baseball stadium in your DT, you have plenty of land.
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by flyingember »

beautyfromashes wrote: There is no shortage of land in our DT for development. Acres upon acres east of City Hall can be developed. Same with north loop. Lots of empty lots and low rise buildings in the Crossroads,especially east. When a city can name four sites big enough to build a baseball stadium in your DT, you have plenty of land.
Remember the key aspect of all this land.

This is not a socialist country, the city cannot just claim any piece of land for any purpose. The owner must be willing to sell or the city must be willing to drag the purchase into the courts if the owner fights it.

So when you see acres of parking, you should also see acres of personal rights that we shouldn't be quick to ignore.
shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 7393
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Would you like to see the Royals move to a downtown stadium?

Post by shinatoo »

im2kull wrote:
Highlander wrote: I would disagree that downtown stadiums are necessarily islands surrounded by parking although One of the best examples is Coors Field in Denver. Going to a Rockies game is a really great experience.
Yes, Rockies games are a great experience. However, what exactly is the stadium doing to help downtown Denver today.. Or any other day in which there isn't a game? How about throughout winter? I'll give you a hint. It's a giant unused monolith with a density of zero that covers a massive swath of the downtown core in which it prevents ANY effective use of the area on a down day. It's a giant development and pedestrian roadblock. I don't know about you, but myself and everyone else in Denver is tired of having to park across the freeway and walk a mile down 20th just to get to work. Game nights are even worse because then parking is a minimum of 30 bucks for the same experience. The Mall is what has helped DT Denver the most.. Not Coors Field.
I agree. Not everyone is a baseball fan. I think the resurgence in Denver development is more about Denver being a great city on the rise than a baseball stadium being built. And no one is talking about St. Louis. That stadium has always been downtown. Other then the new Cordish development and a few bars to the south I don't think it's ever had much impact. Atlanta finally figured it out too.
Post Reply