World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Can't get enough of sports even on a development board? Get your fix here. Expect heavy moderation on smack talk.
User avatar
rxlexi
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1929
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 10:30 pm
Location: City Market

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by rxlexi » Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:53 am

Yeah, I've got to think when you're inclusive of Mexico and Canada, for KC to host any game at all would be a major coup. And not likely.

KanzaSphinx
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:21 am

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by KanzaSphinx » Fri Jul 20, 2018 12:06 pm

Just so we are all clear, with the expanded field there will be 16 cities out of a possible 23 options. Mexico and Canada each have 3 options so if we just assume all 6 are selected what we are really looking at is 10 US cities picked from a field of 17. So really we just need to be selected over 7 other cities in the US, and no Chicago Minneapolis or PHX is huge for our chances. I doubt TX and FL will get two cities, same with Baltimore/D.C. So that is 3 I think we can safely throw out. That leaves us with 4 cities we would need to beat out and that seems doable IMO.

alejandro46
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:24 pm
Location: North Plaza

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by alejandro46 » Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:49 pm

One of our lowest scores in the FIFA review and the biggest feasible improvement KC could make is improving connectivity to the stadiums. I recommended Streetcar expansion in my opinion makes the most sense long term to help develop the east side. Obviously, funding + time frame would be difficulty. Would have to be partially done in parallel to UMKC extension which already faces (federal) funding questions.

Russia had a brief driverless bus route that took guests to and from the stadium:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... t-in-kazan

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28660
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by KCPowercat » Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:13 pm

Lol in 8 years? No way. Nope. Don't even dream.

We can satisfy with a bus line for the event.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16633
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by DaveKCMO » Sat Jul 21, 2018 9:00 am

KCPowercat wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:13 pm
Lol in 8 years? No way. Nope. Don't even dream.

We can satisfy with a bus line for the event.
Correct. A higher-quality* BRT route on Linwood/31st from Southwest Blvd to the stadiums can be planned, designed, and built in five years with minimal federal investment.

* Articulated electric buses, 100% level boarding, off-board fare collection, dedicated lanes, adjacent protected bike facility.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28660
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by KCPowercat » Sat Jul 21, 2018 3:19 pm

Yeah that even seems like a heavy lift and that wouldn't get clear to stadiums I wouldn't think logistically. Feel like best case would be van brunt.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14274
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by GRID » Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:49 pm

alejandro46 wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:49 pm
One of our lowest scores in the FIFA review and the biggest feasible improvement KC could make is improving connectivity to the stadiums. I recommended Streetcar expansion in my opinion makes the most sense long term to help develop the east side. Obviously, funding + time frame would be difficulty. Would have to be partially done in parallel to UMKC extension which already faces (federal) funding questions.

Russia had a brief driverless bus route that took guests to and from the stadium:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... t-in-kazan
Why would you ever run the streetcar to the stadiums? I’m still not understanding this idea of running streetcars all over the metro as if they are commuter or heavy rail transit options. In cities with downtown stadiums and extensive light rail systems in dedicated right of way and with multiple trains have a hard time dealing with stadium crowds. So how would a small, slow streetcar do that would likely be in mixed traffic do?

If you don’t build a true rapid transit line along the I-70 corridor that can move a lot of people quickly, I think it would be pointless to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a streetcar extension through a relatively sparsely populated and industrial area. Better off spending that money to build streetcar spurs in the urban core such as to wesport, KU med, west side, Indep Ave.

I can’t imagine even the most robust streetcar line coming anywhere close to moving as many people as the old Chiefs Express did with buses.

Am I missing something with KC’s streetcar system? I just don’t see how it could really be anymore more than a people mover in the urban core. Even if they could go 50 mph down the middle of I-70 in a dedicated right of way, I don’t see how they would really be ideal for longer commutes compared to even light rail trains.

I have never seen an urban tram just transition into a regional train system. They typical co-exist and compliment light/heavy/commuter rail. I know people bring up Houston, but they have built more of a light rail infrastructure for their trains, even in the downtown area.

User avatar
rxlexi
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1929
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 10:30 pm
Location: City Market

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by rxlexi » Tue Aug 21, 2018 2:43 pm

I agree Grid, I think it would be crazy to run the streetcar out to TSC, or any rail for that matter. Total waste of resources.

As long we're stuck with TSC, let's just enjoy the fact that we have two beautiful, borderline historic stadiums, maybe push for better surrounding infrastructure (and perhaps a couple of sports bars), and resign ourselves to the fact that a sports complex on a freeway interchange in damn-near Independence is never going to be an urban solution to the pro-sports question. And that's OK.

Long term, would love to see a new ballpark downtown but until talk gets more serious, hard to discuss in detail. And I think there is a legit argument that some folks really do value the quality and history of the existing stadia.

Frankly, the one that really hurts is Sporting KC - woulda/coulda/shoulda been downtown.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14274
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by GRID » Wed Aug 22, 2018 9:15 am

rxlexi wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 2:43 pm
I agree Grid, I think it would be crazy to run the streetcar out to TSC, or any rail for that matter. Total waste of resources.

As long we're stuck with TSC, let's just enjoy the fact that we have two beautiful, borderline historic stadiums, maybe push for better surrounding infrastructure (and perhaps a couple of sports bars), and resign ourselves to the fact that a sports complex on a freeway interchange in damn-near Independence is never going to be an urban solution to the pro-sports question. And that's OK.

Long term, would love to see a new ballpark downtown but until talk gets more serious, hard to discuss in detail. And I think there is a legit argument that some folks really do value the quality and history of the existing stadia.

Frankly, the one that really hurts is Sporting KC - woulda/coulda/shoulda been downtown.
Yeah, people need to let go of the idea of a downtown baseball or football stadium. That is just never ever going to happen. The football stadium should never move and moving the Royals downtown is a ship that sailed when they renovated Kauffman. Since the renovations, downtown has become much more popular and it would be prohibitively expensive now to build downtown. Especially in a smaller MLB market like KC which has relatively low attendance etc. (just not enough revenue to spend a billion dollars on a stadium).

Honestly, other than the sex appeal of having the stadium downtown, the actual benefit to downtown is very small and you really need to put the stadium on the fringe of downtown to avoid doing more harm than good to the urban fabric and vibrancy of the city. The parking demand is just too high, the footprint of the stadium would be too big and the area around the stadium is more disturbed by the games than anything with traffic etc.

I have been to all the MLB stadiums, but just using Camden Yards and Nationals park as examples since I now know those stadiums very well.

The area around Camden yards is a huge dead zone in the downtown area with tons of parking lots etc. Sure you can walk to the Inner Harbor, but 95% of people that go to games drive there. Some out of town fans walk into downtown, but I think out of town fans vising Kauffman also find their way downtown too. But the stadiums area of downtown Baltimore is just a humongous dead zone unless it’s an hour before or after a game and even then it’s just a traffic jam and people walking to the stadiums. The stadiums have produced zero economic development in their immediate area. The location is fine because it is a fringe location, but any closer to the inner harbor and the stadium would just mess up downtown. Downtown Baltimore has a ton of development occurring, but none is near the stadiums.

Then you have Nationals Park which was built in an underutilized industrial area. Imagine the entire crossroads district torn down and replaced with 12 story towers on every single block over a period of about ten years. The development occurring around Nationals Park is incredible and now the same thing is about to happen around the new MLS stadium across Capital Street. You have subway access, water taxi etc. But this area developed more because of the hot DC market more than the stadium. It would have developed without the stadium. But as the area has developed, parking has gone from $10 on surface parking lots to $40-50 to park in underground garages of the newly built towers and probably 20-30% take transit. Not a likely situation for KC. Also, the area is pretty much fucked during games with closed streets, congestion, limited parking and clogged metro stations for the people that actually live in the area. So the stadium can be more of a negative than a positive for the actual neighborhood. The actual neighborhood would probably be more appealing without the stadium there.

Everybody I talk to out here loves KC’s stadiums. Their location never comes up. KC just needs to clean up the Truman Sports Complex area. Like I mentioned before, the county/city needs to make it more like the Philly sports complex and just make it a nicer area with better landscaping, some more amenities like a few bars and restaurants, sidewalks around the perimeter and maybe a nice hotel between the stadiums.

Having said all that, I do agree that KC’s MLS stadium should be near downtown. A smaller venue like that (more comparable to Sprint Center) is much more ideal for an urban environment. But that ship has sailed too.

I would still love to see a downtown ballpark, but the only good locations would be in the east crossroads or east village but I can’t imagine there will be a lot of land in those areas in 20 years for a ballpark although you never know with East Village as slow as it’s developing.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6838
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by flyingember » Wed Aug 22, 2018 2:52 pm

GRID wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:49 pm

Am I missing something with KC’s streetcar system? I just don’t see how it could really be anymore more than a people mover in the urban core. Even if they could go 50 mph down the middle of I-70 in a dedicated right of way, I don’t see how they would really be ideal for longer commutes compared to even light rail trains.

I have never seen an urban tram just transition into a regional train system. They typical co-exist and compliment light/heavy/commuter rail. I know people bring up Houston, but they have built more of a light rail infrastructure for their trains, even in the downtown area.
Let's start with
GRID wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:49 pm
I have never seen an urban tram just transition into a regional train system.
Denver.

L is downtown only and is a local service tram.
F,D and H share the same tracks. I checked and F nearly leaves the metro area

I don't know if I could call the L line as a 2.2 mile system with 8 stops anything but a tram no mater the name. Strengthening the argument, part of the D line was replaced by the L line. So this frequent service tram-like section used to be served by a train to the suburb of Littleton.

As for system naming, it gets really weird. The difference is crazy blurred. Compared to the 1990s many newer systems are hybrids in style.

It's not the train that defines the system anymore, not since so many companies started selling articulated streetcars that run on standard gauge.
KC runs the Urbos 3 as a streetcar. CAF says they're for streetcars/light metro
SLC runs the Siemens S70 as a streetcar. Siemens says they're for trams and light rail
Houston runs both types as light rail.

Houston is a good example of a hybrid system. The common segment for the green/purple line is exactly like in KC. Trains run in shared lanes with traffic through downtown. Their downtown red line is tram-esque with frequent stops ever 0.2 mile. But go further out and it's clearly classic light rail service with stops spaced further out.

SLC S-Line is another mixed system. It's streetcar spacing but it's not running near a street. The Loop Trolley is clearly a tram but it's half in dedicated space, kind of like if this train replaced a cycle track. Both are more dedicated than even Houston is in terms of separation and they're not light rail systems. So you can't used "dedicated" as the defining factor.

I would call Houston Light rail and it's looking like KC will continue a streetcar style to UMKC, but nothing says a line through NKC couldn't be a seamless extension and be in dedicated lanes. Our system could be half and half someday.

alejandro46
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:24 pm
Location: North Plaza

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by alejandro46 » Wed Aug 22, 2018 3:06 pm

GRID wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:49 pm
alejandro46 wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:49 pm
One of our lowest scores in the FIFA review and the biggest feasible improvement KC could make is improving connectivity to the stadiums. I recommended Streetcar expansion in my opinion makes the most sense long term to help develop the east side. Obviously, funding + time frame would be difficulty. Would have to be partially done in parallel to UMKC extension which already faces (federal) funding questions.

Russia had a brief driverless bus route that took guests to and from the stadium:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... t-in-kazan
Why would you ever run the streetcar to the stadiums? I’m still not understanding this idea of running streetcars all over the metro as if they are commuter or heavy rail transit options. In cities with downtown stadiums and extensive light rail systems in dedicated right of way and with multiple trains have a hard time dealing with stadium crowds. So how would a small, slow streetcar do that would likely be in mixed traffic do?

If you don’t build a true rapid transit line along the I-70 corridor that can move a lot of people quickly, I think it would be pointless to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a streetcar extension through a relatively sparsely populated and industrial area. Better off spending that money to build streetcar spurs in the urban core such as to wesport, KU med, west side, Indep Ave.

I can’t imagine even the most robust streetcar line coming anywhere close to moving as many people as the old Chiefs Express did with buses.

Am I missing something with KC’s streetcar system? I just don’t see how it could really be anymore more than a people mover in the urban core. Even if they could go 50 mph down the middle of I-70 in a dedicated right of way, I don’t see how they would really be ideal for longer commutes compared to even light rail trains.

I have never seen an urban tram just transition into a regional train system. They typical co-exist and compliment light/heavy/commuter rail. I know people bring up Houston, but they have built more of a light rail infrastructure for their trains, even in the downtown area.
My point is that primary purpose would be to run MAX/streetcar down Linwood/39th (as proposed by the original NextRail plan) and spur significant revitalization and growth down this largely vacant and dilapidated corridor.

It would make sense to include TSC in any eastern streetcar line extension as I think there is the potential to help find some additional funding through various mechanisms (bi-state sales tax, usage fees on gameday) as a purely TDD will not be sufficient to fund the streetcar in the same manner as the original line. Obviously this all is long term stuff, still leg work left on the Plaza extension. IMO Indep. Ave and the Linwood/31st st. eastside extensions make the most sense for the next challenges, but favorable political and economic environments are critical, especially after the recent flurry of tax increases.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14274
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by GRID » Wed Aug 22, 2018 3:27 pm

I’m just impressed that somebody read that bloated post with enough comprehension to reply to it! I can get really wordy when typing sometimes.

I’m very familiar with the systems in Denver and Houston as well as similar systems (Baltimore, MSP, SLC etc) where light rail trains function more like streetcars downtown.

However, KC is building its system as a streetcar system well beyond the downtown loop and even in downtown the track would have to be changed quite a bit and more room given to the trains to be more comparable to places like Houston and Denver not to mention the station platforms etc which are basically bus stops in KC.

I suppose KC’s streetcars could be coupled and passed as light rail “lite”. But it seems like most of the infrastructure that has been built or is planned to UMKC will be more of a streetcar route than a route capable of being the spine of a regional train system like what you have in Denver and Houston. I don’t even think KC’s trains can get up to commuter speeds (55mph plus). To mean it’s a rather small gauge vehicle for longer distances. It could work I suppose though. Even if KC extends the streetcar into places like the northland or east / south, it will probably always be a streetcar using streetcar infrastructure. I don’t see KC ever spending the money it would take to get the trains into dedicated right of ways, bridges etc like you see in Denver, MSP, San Diego etc. Never say never I guess.

I’m not saying anything negative about KC’s system. It’s a great urban core tram system. It just does not seem like it’s being built in a way that would accommodate or transition into the spine of a more comprehensive system if one were to ever be built. The trains and much of the track and stations would have to be upgraded or highly modified, but I guess that’s much easier to do from what KC has built than from nothing at all.

But unless you do some of these drastic upgrades like you see in places like Denver and Houston, I don’t see the point in running a couple of 25 mph 150 passenger trains to 70,000 seat Arrowhead stadium for 200-300 million dollars and that’s just to the stadiums. Nothing about that makes any sense to me. If KC does start building a system more comparable to Denver or Houston then that’s a different story.

User avatar
normalthings
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by normalthings » Sat Sep 15, 2018 11:26 am

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kc ... ld-cub-bid

The article really does not talk at all about transportation improvements. Instead the only thing of note is that Kansas City was scored the lowest of the remaining cities by United 2026. I really don't think that a shuttle bus is going to be enough for us to be competitive.
Thoughts? Does anyone have any insights on the transit improvements we are apparently looking into.?

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16633
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by DaveKCMO » Sat Sep 15, 2018 9:45 pm

normalthings wrote:
Sat Sep 15, 2018 11:26 am
https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kc ... ld-cub-bid

The article really does not talk at all about transportation improvements. Instead the only thing of note is that Kansas City was scored the lowest of the remaining cities by United 2026. I really don't think that a shuttle bus is going to be enough for us to be competitive.
Thoughts? Does anyone have any insights on the transit improvements we are apparently looking into.?
The positive spin is that it won't take us years to spin up a bunch of buses.

kboish
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2349
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: World Cup 2026 at Arrowhead?

Post by kboish » Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:01 am

Everyone can ride birds!

Post Reply