Downtown Baseball Stadium

[aknowledgeableperson]

I mean come on, I understand wanting to have more details about the CBA and what the Royals will do for those displaced businesses but let's have some basic trust in our city leaders, architects, engineers and stakeholders who do not want to make anything worse or a massive inconvenience to do good work.

That's just it, there are many out there that do not trust it will be done right. Especially not much trust in city leaders.

[KCPowercat]

I don't understand why some people think we need to have high levels of detail on something that we have years to figure out. I also don't understand why people assume these things are put together by idiots who won't take all of this into consideration. Like why would the city support anything that would have a negative impact on such a massive investment like the Streetcar?

Because we've watched other projects.

[DColeKC]

I don't understand why some people think we need to have high levels of detail on something that we have years to figure out. I also don't understand why people assume these things are put together by idiots who won't take all of this into consideration. Like why would the city support anything that would have a negative impact on such a massive investment like the Streetcar?

Because we've watched other projects.

Like what! Nothing is remotely comparable or transformative as a stadium, Village and cap park. PNL and the arena are the two biggest downtown projects in the last 50 years and outside of the leasing challenges, I’d say those have both been wildly successful and were done as promised.


I’d love to hear some examples of why we shouldn’t trust so many interested parties on these projects. We have the city, state, feds, private donors, Sherman, Cordish, Loews and the MLB all involved here.

[KCPowercat]

I don't understand why some people think we need to have high levels of detail on something that we have years to figure out. I also don't understand why people assume these things are put together by idiots who won't take all of this into consideration. Like why would the city support anything that would have a negative impact on such a massive investment like the Streetcar?

Because we've watched other projects.

Like what! Nothing is remotely comparable or transformative as a stadium, Village and cap park. PNL and the arena are the two biggest downtown projects in the last 50 years and outside of the leasing challenges, I’d say those have both been wildly successful and were done as promised.


I’d love to hear some examples of why we shouldn’t trust so many interested parties on these projects. We have the city, state, feds, private donors, Sherman, Cordish, Loews and the MLB all involved here.

you are right, nothing is as big as this. that could be a huge advantage that we'll finally try and get things right like what the concerns are. The other way it could go is we can't get the little ones right what makes anybody think we can pull off big one? You want to know why we can't trust the state of Missouri? that one made me chuckle the most.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

I’d love to hear some examples of why we shouldn’t trust so many interested parties on these projects. We have the city, state, feds, private donors, Sherman, Cordish, Loews and the MLB all involved here.

"They didn’t talk to anyone and tried to go at it all alone and finally did talk to people but it was too late to put together a strong message. So it was all just rushed." This is what you've said about the Royals leading this project. Are the Royals going be iced out of the process? Are they incompetent? Are they still leading this? If so, why should we assume that they're going to get it right? And, how do I know what's right for them is aligned with what's right for me without the relevant information being made public or actually planned in advance? Closing Oak is a red flag and isn't okay with me. Why should I assume that that's going to be fixed after we approve the tax?

I'm sorry, this is a multi-$billion project. Depending on assumptions and an artistic rendering isn't good enough. I have to do more due diligence and planning for a $10,000 technology purchase for my company than the Royals have shown us thus far. It's crazy to me.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

Actually let's break this down further:

city

LOL. Too many examples of poor management to take the time to list here. If you trust the city to do 100% competent work then I'm not sure what city you're living in.

state

The same state that doesn't trust us to run our police department (or gun laws or minimum wage laws) and micro-manages the budget, while delivering an insanely high crime and murder rate? The same state that somehow has a multi-billion dollar surplus and is spending it on highway expansion.

feds

Subsidy after subsidy to expand suburban sprawl and decimate urban cores around the country. The reason there's even a 670 cap park proposal is proof enough that we can't trust these previous two entities to make good urban planning decisions for downtown.

private donors

Sherman

The guy that has poorly managed this process and owns one of the worst teams in baseball?

Cordish, Loews

Cordish and Loews are only interested in what benefits Cordish and Loews. I don't fault them for that but that doesn't necessarily align with what downtown residents need or want.

MLB

Why would the MLB give two shits about downtown KC?

I noticed you didn't list the DNA, Crossroads, streetcar, urban planners, local businesses, residents, etc.

[KCPowercat]

"look a lot of entities are involved, just trust them" is not a great argument for a yes vote. Especially when that's all there really is at this point.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

"look a lot of entities are involved, just trust them" is not a great argument for a yes vote. Especially when that's all there really is at this point.

And none of those entities have downtown KC or good urban planning as their primary priority. For many, they're not priorities at all.

[Metro]

Actually let's break this down further:

city

LOL. Too many examples of poor management to take the time to list here. If you trust the city to do 100% competent work then I'm not sure what city you're living in.

state

The same state that doesn't trust us to run our police department (or gun laws or minimum wage laws) and micro-manages the budget, while delivering an insanely high crime and murder rate? The same state that somehow has a multi-billion dollar surplus and is spending it on highway expansion.

feds

Subsidy after subsidy to expand suburban sprawl and decimate urban cores around the country. The reason there's even a 670 cap park proposal is proof enough that we can't trust these previous two entities to make good urban planning decisions for downtown.

private donors

Sherman

The guy that has poorly managed this process and owns one of the worst teams in baseball?

Cordish, Loews

Cordish and Loews are only interested in what benefits Cordish and Loews. I don't fault them for that but that doesn't necessarily align with what downtown residents need or want.

MLB

Why would the MLB give two shits about downtown KC?

I noticed you didn't list the DNA, Crossroads, streetcar, urban planners, local businesses, residents, etc.

/Thread

[DColeKC]

I’d love to hear some examples of why we shouldn’t trust so many interested parties on these projects. We have the city, state, feds, private donors, Sherman, Cordish, Loews and the MLB all involved here.

"They didn’t talk to anyone and tried to go at it all alone and finally did talk to people but it was too late to put together a strong message. So it was all just rushed." This is what you've said about the Royals leading this project. Are the Royals going be iced out of the process? Are they incompetent? Are they still leading this? If so, why should we assume that they're going to get it right? And, how do I know what's right for them is aligned with what's right for me without the relevant information being made public or actually planned in advance? Closing Oak is a red flag and isn't okay with me. Why should I assume that that's going to be fixed after we approve the tax?

I'm sorry, this is a multi-$billion project. Depending on assumptions and an artistic rendering isn't good enough. I have to do more due diligence and planning for a $10,000 technology purchase for my company than the Royals have shown us thus far. It's crazy to me.

I said and agree they fumbled the roll out and delivery. There's not reason to think they same will happen with the actual project itself which is still in the conceptual phase.

[DColeKC]

Actually let's break this down further:

city

LOL. Too many examples of poor management to take the time to list here. If you trust the city to do 100% competent work then I'm not sure what city you're living in.

state

The same state that doesn't trust us to run our police department (or gun laws or minimum wage laws) and micro-manages the budget, while delivering an insanely high crime and murder rate? The same state that somehow has a multi-billion dollar surplus and is spending it on highway expansion.

feds

Subsidy after subsidy to expand suburban sprawl and decimate urban cores around the country. The reason there's even a 670 cap park proposal is proof enough that we can't trust these previous two entities to make good urban planning decisions for downtown.

private donors

Sherman

The guy that has poorly managed this process and owns one of the worst teams in baseball?

Cordish, Loews

Cordish and Loews are only interested in what benefits Cordish and Loews. I don't fault them for that but that doesn't necessarily align with what downtown residents need or want.

MLB

Why would the MLB give two shits about downtown KC?

I noticed you didn't list the DNA, Crossroads, streetcar, urban planners, local businesses, residents, etc.

Too much to address line by line. Once again, the city has only one example of a major project like this. The state management of our police department issue is complex and I don't see how that is a reasonable example in how they'd manage this process.

Sherman - Poorly managing the rollout and hiring professionals to handle the actual project are not comparable.

Cordish - They don't care about downtown resident needs and wants? LMAO They've built more downtown residential than anyone else in the last half century. But tell me more.

No, I didn't list every single involved community org, business and resident. I kept it to the people who will be actually make the decisions, granted while considering input from the groups you mentioned. Opinions Vs Money.

[DColeKC]

"look a lot of entities are involved, just trust them" is not a great argument for a yes vote. Especially when that's all there really is at this point.

And none of those entities have downtown KC or good urban planning as their primary priority. For many, they're not priorities at all.

This is so ridiculous. Why would someone invest billions of dollars into an area without considering Urban Planning? Cordish has won multiple awards for Urban Planning, dozens of which are from PNL. Why would a baseball team make it hard to fans to get to their stadium? Why would a developer and team owner make downtown harder to navigate when they're going to be looking for corporate tenants and will need a mixture of downtown residential customers, suburban and out of town customers?

I get that some people think they need to be "in the know" before agreeing and many never will think others are capable of anything, but this is all pie in the sky crap. We have professionals for a reason and nothing happens without the deep pockets of private developers. You want their money? We NEED their money, so buck up and deal with it.

[KCPowercat]

Dcole - again you are trying to discount/dismiss these concerns and give reasons people should have different opinions of these topics. That isn't going to switch no votes to yes or convince any undecided voter. What these entities need to be doing is showing more to fill in the gaps and show why/how. We're trying to get yes votes here not try and tell people why they are wrong.

What is being brought up here are real things out in the voter world they are worried about. Simply brushing it off and saying "trust them, there is a lot of entities here" and "trust us we're professionals" isn't a convincing story, especially with their track record. That's our point.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

I said and agree they fumbled the roll out and delivery. There's not reason to think they same will happen with the actual project itself which is still in the conceptual phase.

The reason one would believe that the same will happen with the actual project is that they fumbled the first part. And, have yet to give any level of acceptable detail to voters. Add to that that the Royals have no experience with building an urban stadium. What possible reason is there to give them the benefit of the doubt on this?

This is so ridiculous. Why would someone invest billions of dollars into an area without considering Urban Planning? Cordish has won multiple awards for Urban Planning, dozens of which are from PNL. Why would a baseball team make it hard to fans to get to their stadium? Why would a developer and team owner make downtown harder to navigate when they're going to be looking for corporate tenants and will need a mixture of downtown residential customers, suburban and out of town customers?

The primary objective of this development is to make the Royals and anyone else involved money. The second objective is to create a great gameday environment. At best, improving and/or limiting the damage to downtown is a third priority.

That is not a criticism. That's what I would expect them to do. But, the problem is that if money comes first and the quality of the stadium comes second, any conflict with good urban planning practices will lead to a negative decision for downtown. Oak is a perfect example. Any urban planner or downtown defender could tell you that closing Oak is a bad idea but it makes the stadium design simpler and probably cheaper, so Oak is closed in the initial plan. You keep making it seem like it's so obvious that they would never do any damage to downtown transportation and yet, that's exactly what their plan shows. The only assumption about this project that people should be making is that it's going to be worse than whatever's in the rendering. That's true of pretty much every project ever, it's just how it works.

I'm not saying these people aren't professionals, I'm saying their priorities are different than mine and assuming that they're going to choose my priorities over their own makes absolutely zero sense. And, as soon as the vote goes through, all leverage is gone.

[KCPowercat]

I said and agree they fumbled the roll out and delivery. There's not reason to think they same will happen with the actual project itself which is still in the conceptual phase.

The reason one would believe that the same will happen with the actual project is that they fumbled the first part. And, have yet to give any level of acceptable detail to voters. Add to that that the Royals have no experience with building an urban stadium. What possible reason is there to give them the benefit of the doubt on this?

This is so ridiculous. Why would someone invest billions of dollars into an area without considering Urban Planning? Cordish has won multiple awards for Urban Planning, dozens of which are from PNL. Why would a baseball team make it hard to fans to get to their stadium? Why would a developer and team owner make downtown harder to navigate when they're going to be looking for corporate tenants and will need a mixture of downtown residential customers, suburban and out of town customers?

The primary objective of this development is to make the Royals and anyone else involved money. The second objective is to create a great gameday environment. At best, improving and/or limiting the damage to downtown is a third priority.

That is not a criticism. That's what I would expect them to do. But, the problem is that if money comes first and the quality of the stadium comes second, any conflict with good urban planning practices will lead to a negative decision for downtown. Oak is a perfect example. Any urban planner or downtown defender could tell you that closing Oak is a bad idea but it makes the stadium design simpler and probably cheaper, so Oak is closed in the initial plan. You keep making it seem like it's so obvious that they would never do any damage to downtown transportation and yet, that's exactly what their plan shows. The only assumption about this project that people should be making is that it's going to be worse than whatever's in the rendering. That's true of pretty much every project ever, it's just how it works.

I'm not saying these people aren't professionals, I'm saying their priorities are different than mine and assuming that they're going to choose my priorities over their own makes absolutely zero sense. And, as soon as the vote goes through, all leverage is gone.

and to build upon this, the same logic can be applied to those who are scared of a downtown stadium (parking, traffic, whatever). If there isn't details before they vote that helps with those voters priorities, they will vote no versus lose their leverage.

[DColeKC]

Dcole - again you are trying to discount/dismiss these concerns and give reasons people should have different opinions of these topics. That isn't going to switch no votes to yes or convince any undecided voter. What these entities need to be doing is showing more to fill in the gaps and show why/how. We're trying to get yes votes here not try and tell people why they are wrong.

What is being brought up here are real things out in the voter world they are worried about. Simply brushing it off and saying "trust them, there is a lot of entities here" and "trust us we're professionals" isn't a convincing story, especially with their track record. That's our point.

This is personal. This isn’t an attempt to change votes. I’m only being realistic and at some point you have to trust the people who actually make these things come to life. I don’t disagree that more details about the CBA would be nice but where I disagree is that we need more details or commitments on various aspects of the overall plan and design at this point. We have processes in place that require plans to be submitted and approved. The community can make their voices heard via city orgs, elected officials and committees. If closing Oak is a deal breaker, make sure your elected officials know this as they have the ability to deny that approval. Why do we need the royals to say right now that they won’t close it? If making sure Main isn’t negatively impacted is your concern, make sure your elected officials know this so they can address it as traffic management plans are submitted for approval. Why do we need the full plan from the royals now?

At some point, you have to trust the process and realize how to push for what you want while also knowing you won’t get it all. Voting no before we can even get into the weeds isn’t the move. It’s just small city nimby par for the course bullshit. In my personal opinion of course.

This vote isn’t a free pass for the royals to go and do whatever they want with no input from the community. It’s a baby step needed to even get serious about everyone’s opinions.

[KCPowercat]

The process has screwed downtown at every turn. Your pollyanna approach of trust the system is ignorant at best. Projects are decided back room and rubber stamped during "the process" in even smal projects. Declaring these things now you deem insignificant is the only time to get buy in. It may already be too late. See nobody knowing about this site officially until the day it was approved to go on the ballot.

[Imarealperson]

Again, this has turned into a bizzaro world thread.

Parking? Traffic? Sounds like a Prairie Village planning commission meeting.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

This is personal. This isn’t an attempt to change votes. I’m only being realistic and at some point you have to trust the people who actually make these things come to life. I don’t disagree that more details about the CBA would be nice but where I disagree is that we need more details or commitments on various aspects of the overall plan and design at this point. We have processes in place that require plans to be submitted and approved. The community can make their voices heard via city orgs, elected officials and committees. If closing Oak is a deal breaker, make sure your elected officials know this as they have the ability to deny that approval. Why do we need the royals to say right now that they won’t close it? If making sure Main isn’t negatively impacted is your concern, make sure your elected officials know this so they can address it as traffic management plans are submitted for approval. Why do we need the full plan from the royals now?

At some point, you have to trust the process and realize how to push for what you want while also knowing you won’t get it all. Voting no before we can even get into the weeds isn’t the move. It’s just small city nimby par for the course bullshit. In my personal opinion of course.

This vote isn’t a free pass for the royals to go and do whatever they want with no input from the community. It’s a baby step needed to even get serious about everyone’s opinions.

I would absolutely love to see you blow a gasket because some committee holds up the stadium over a technical code issue. Would you be trusting the process in that case? Honestly, the potential of that is swinging me to yes more than anything you've said.

[GRID]

Has anybody done any sort of real traffic studies on this? A quick study giving you pretty decent overall results of closing streets etc would only cost like 10k.

How does anybody here know what Oak will do etc? I'm not saying it should be closed or that there will be no negative impact, but I don't even know what it would do and I spent 15 years of my career doing traffic studies.