Downtown Baseball Stadium

[DColeKC]

It's not just being realistic, it's every time that someone posits their opinion on how they think the EV would shake out, you're instantly yelled down about how it would fail & nothing ever gets done in KC. That attitude kept the airport the way it was for 50 years. You have your opinion for the site that others share, and so do we have our own opinions.

It is what it is. I'm losing hope at this rate with disinformation coming out of people like Bulldog Bob Fescoe that isn't doing any help for any site.

What "disinformation" has he said, besides the drastic and dramatic claim about 140 something businesses being kicked out via eminent domain?

99% of the world doesn't know about East Village. They don't care about it and hardly anyone ever even drives by it. It's not this big gaping hole that is holding back downtowns progress. No doubt it would be great to get it developed but not all developments need to be huge buildings. It can just as easily be built out as mid-rise residential which is a huge gap we are missing in the downtown residential sector.

[DColeKC]

Quit knocking the view from the EV site. Looking at buildings a few blocks away does not constitute a view. The NE view from EV is from the highest elevation in the loop with a panoramic view of the MO river valley, the most prominent geographical feature of the area. The view includes the valley and hills from Parkville to Liberty, with the New soccer stadium, Bond Bridge, WOF coasters.

Looking at the downtown skyline is exactly what constitutes a view from a true downtown ballpark. If we want views of the river, build it by the river. If you want views of valley's and hills, build it in the country. We're talking about downtown baseball here.

Lastly, those things you're mentioning far off into the distance would perhaps be viewable from the far upper deck, maybe.

Doesn't really matter because if it were to go in East Village it would face southeast. Which is just a stunning view (sarcasm).

[Midtownkid]

The view from the East Village aren't even bad. Our City Hall is one of the most beautiful towers downtown. You would also see 909 Walnut which is another beauty.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1017865 ... ?entry=ttu

The Crossroads site did have nice view of our city a decade ago. I think the new Light towers have really ruined that view. When Messenger first opened, the roof deck had views that were really impressive looking North. You got a great skyline view with a tapestry of materials, styles, massing etc. Now it's all blocked with a boring wall of glass.

I'm not saying those towers ruined downtown. I'm glad they exist. I just think they removed the 'looming big city' feel from the North Crossroads and
now that view is much less interesting.

[TheSmokinPun]

It's not just being realistic, it's every time that someone posits their opinion on how they think the EV would shake out, you're instantly yelled down about how it would fail & nothing ever gets done in KC. That attitude kept the airport the way it was for 50 years. You have your opinion for the site that others share, and so do we have our own opinions.

It is what it is. I'm losing hope at this rate with disinformation coming out of people like Bulldog Bob Fescoe that isn't doing any help for any site.

What "disinformation" has he said, besides the drastic and dramatic claim about 140 something businesses being kicked out via eminent domain?

99% of the world doesn't know about East Village. They don't care about it and hardly anyone ever even drives by it. It's not this big gaping hole that is holding back downtowns progress. No doubt it would be great to get it developed but not all developments need to be huge buildings. It can just as easily be built out as mid-rise residential which is a huge gap we are missing in the downtown residential sector.

This is what I'm talking about with being shouted down. It isn't even about that, the Fescoe stuff is about him saying the council no longer has the votes & Frank White's veto would stand.

[KCPowercat]

It's not a top priority but it's certainly a element that any owner and architect should take seriously. Other sports where you traditionally build a fully enclosed stadium don't matter, but for baseball where it's very common to have outfield open due to a low demand for seating at that distance from the action, views are important.

So maybe it's not an element that you as a concerned citizen has, and that's not what I'm even talking about. It's a major concern for the people who will design and build the thing.

View should have zero impact on location when tlsking urbsn stadiums and that's the stage we are at. Want to care in the design phase okay I'm ready for that to be an element, not now. It has no bearing.

If you said this to someone at Populous they'd laugh out loud. Location can make or break something like this and one element of selecting and building something as important as a baseball stadium is what kind of view's it will have. The second biggest failure with The K was this aspect, possibly because they people who were behind it back in those days had the same attitude you do about views.

Agreed location can make or break it. Not the view. Location is bad at Kauffman hence it's struggles as anything but a baseball stadium in a parking lot. Is Wrigley a failure, it has no views. Fenway?

[DColeKC]

It's not just being realistic, it's every time that someone posits their opinion on how they think the EV would shake out, you're instantly yelled down about how it would fail & nothing ever gets done in KC. That attitude kept the airport the way it was for 50 years. You have your opinion for the site that others share, and so do we have our own opinions.

It is what it is. I'm losing hope at this rate with disinformation coming out of people like Bulldog Bob Fescoe that isn't doing any help for any site.

What "disinformation" has he said, besides the drastic and dramatic claim about 140 something businesses being kicked out via eminent domain?

99% of the world doesn't know about East Village. They don't care about it and hardly anyone ever even drives by it. It's not this big gaping hole that is holding back downtowns progress. No doubt it would be great to get it developed but not all developments need to be huge buildings. It can just as easily be built out as mid-rise residential which is a huge gap we are missing in the downtown residential sector.

This is what I'm talking about with being shouted down. It isn't even about that, the Fescoe stuff is about him saying the council no longer has the votes & Frank White's veto would stand.

Asking you a question is shouting you down? I don't listen to him, so I was simply asking if he's saying more ignorant things on air.

[GRID]

View should have zero impact on location when tlsking urbsn stadiums and that's the stage we are at. Want to care in the design phase okay I'm ready for that to be an element, not now. It has no bearing.

If you said this to someone at Populous they'd laugh out loud. Location can make or break something like this and one element of selecting and building something as important as a baseball stadium is what kind of view's it will have. The second biggest failure with The K was this aspect, possibly because they people who were behind it back in those days had the same attitude you do about views.

Agreed location can make or break it. Not the view. Location is bad at Kauffman hence it's struggles as anything but a baseball stadium in a parking lot. Is Wrigley a failure, it has no views. Fenway?

Fenway and Wrigley both have views. The upper deck of Fenway has an awesome view of back bay. Regardless, both those parks are in built out neighborhoods, something EV will never be. So it wouldn't matter as much if there are no views. But to not have a view nor be in a neighborhood?

[DColeKC]

View should have zero impact on location when tlsking urbsn stadiums and that's the stage we are at. Want to care in the design phase okay I'm ready for that to be an element, not now. It has no bearing.

If you said this to someone at Populous they'd laugh out loud. Location can make or break something like this and one element of selecting and building something as important as a baseball stadium is what kind of view's it will have. The second biggest failure with The K was this aspect, possibly because they people who were behind it back in those days had the same attitude you do about views.

Agreed location can make or break it. Not the view. Location is bad at Kauffman hence it's struggles as anything but a baseball stadium in a parking lot. Is Wrigley a failure, it has no views. Fenway?

[DColeKC]

From one amazing interstate view to another...

[KCPowercat]

yeah get real high you can see anything. The location is very important in a urban built stadium, including what you are impacting, the views from that location are so much less important it's not even a debate.

It's definitely become too much of a focus here in these early stages of where we are going to drop a 30k stadium in the middle of our downtown. It just feels like that one element is being romanticized when we have so much bigger macro issues to figure out first.

[KCPowercat]

If you said this to someone at Populous they'd laugh out loud. Location can make or break something like this and one element of selecting and building something as important as a baseball stadium is what kind of view's it will have. The second biggest failure with The K was this aspect, possibly because they people who were behind it back in those days had the same attitude you do about views.

Agreed location can make or break it. Not the view. Location is bad at Kauffman hence it's struggles as anything but a baseball stadium in a parking lot. Is Wrigley a failure, it has no views. Fenway?

Fenway and Wrigley both have views. The upper deck of Fenway has an awesome view of back bay. Regardless, both those parks are in built out neighborhoods, something EV will never be. So it wouldn't matter as much if there are no views. But to not have a view nor be in a neighborhood?

Well that's not very urban planner of you. EV is 2000 feet away from the streetcar and it can never be built out? There isn't much hope for any location if that's the case. I thought it was posted earlier that the stadium shouldn't go there because it WOULD be built out with a better idea?

[DColeKC]

I can agree that the views are not as important as some other factors. I can't agree that views are not important. It's a major factor when deciding between a few locations.

[KCPowercat]

We all know Kaufman view sucks. Most of us have also been to these other stadiums. That doesn't change my point.

Not to mention that crossroads site view is equally poor.

[DColeKC]

We all know Kaufman view sucks. Most of us have also been to these other stadiums. That doesn't change my point.

Not to mention that crossroads site view is equally poor.

What do you mean the crossroads site view is equally poor? I've literally put together drawings to scale to show how awesome the views could be.



You think this is equally as bad as the EV views?

[DColeKC]

Right Field views could be fantastic.

[GRID]

Agreed location can make or break it. Not the view. Location is bad at Kauffman hence it's struggles as anything but a baseball stadium in a parking lot. Is Wrigley a failure, it has no views. Fenway?

Fenway and Wrigley both have views. The upper deck of Fenway has an awesome view of back bay. Regardless, both those parks are in built out neighborhoods, something EV will never be. So it wouldn't matter as much if there are no views. But to not have a view nor be in a neighborhood?

Well that's not very urban planner of you. EV is 2000 feet away from the streetcar and it can never be built out? There isn't much hope for any location if that's the case. I thought it was posted earlier that the stadium shouldn't go there because it WOULD be built out with a better idea?

Yeah, a tram that goes 20mph and runs every 15 minutes is a half mile away. I mean, EV is going to be battery park! Come on.

There are like 10,000 places that would be more ideal to develop first in the downtown and crossroads areas. And it's not like large projects have really been built right on the streetcar line. A few have been proposed, but nothing but small five over ones and tiny office buildings have been built. And yet people think 25 story buildings are going to go up in EV.

The streetcar is what it is. It's fine, but if you are moving downtown to be near transit, I don't think EV is really all that great of an option. And don't tell me the transit center over there makes a difference.

And I said it would build out once the owners realize that they are not going to get Denver prices for the land and nobody is going to build 30 story apartment and hotel towers everywhere over there. It will develop as it should, a neighborhood of cheap five over ones once the prices are right and if they are not right the lots will sit empty, just at they have been waiting to cash in on that big development that they have been waiting for.

There is just nothing what so ever that indicates that substantial development will occur in the EV. Any development in KC in the next 25 years will be in the same places that have proposals now such as such of 670, down by the Freight house District and random lots in the crossroads.

Otherwise all you are doing is simply building a stadium over there to fill the hole. It will not be an activated urban area. There is a chance to at least have a ballpark that is interwoven into the urban fabric of KC in the CR. Pedestrians around it all the time, retail at its street level and around it that is open all the time etc.

[GRID]

If you are happy with a stadium and more of the same riverfront development around it (after 15 years of waiting for bigger projects to never be built) and never having a reason to go there unless to a game, then EV is your location.

If you want a stadium to be a major anchor of downtown activity and be a part of an area that is already developing for a reason, then crossroads.

[TheSmokinPun]

I can agree that the views are not as important as some other factors. I can't agree that views are not important. It's a major factor when deciding between a few locations.

I'd love this situation too but comparing PNC Park to what the Crossroads would be is crazy. You just won't get the same effect at all.

Plus those digital views don't show the Cordish buildings blocking downtown completely, which I think is part of your reasoning since what would be better advertising for Coridsh than being the only thing visible of the direct CBD?

[DColeKC]

I can agree that the views are not as important as some other factors. I can't agree that views are not important. It's a major factor when deciding between a few locations.

I'd love this situation too but comparing PNC Park to what the Crossroads would be is crazy. You just won't get the same effect at all.

Plus those digital views don't show the Cordish buildings blocking downtown completely, which I think is part of your reasoning since what would be better advertising for Coridsh than being the only thing visible of the direct CBD?

I'm not offering up PNC park as apples to apple comparison. I'm offering it up as a comparison to The K.

Two Light and Three Light wouldn't block the skyline view. Not even from the lowest level seating sections along the 3rd base line. The only building it would block is the Hilton President.

[DColeKC]

Views from the worst seats -