Downtown Baseball Stadium

[Anthony_Hugo98]

I can't believe the shit some of you raggers are saying in support of this site. GRID, what a disappointment. What if it was just 14 businesses? And 14 owners who have redeveloped their buildings? I expect this crap from DcoleKC who sucks so much Cordish cock that he has to wear galoshes but this is a forum about urban development, ferchrissakes.
Do any of you old farts or young whippersnappers remember how many businesses were operating at 18th and Wyandotte 25-30 years ago? Or 20th and Baltimore?
Displacing owners and businesses for a baseball stadium when there is a shit ton of vacant land a par 3 away is insanity. Please, my friends, come to your senses.

This is the only assessment of value in the past two pages worth of responses. Thank you, Taxi.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

I'm sure many of the investors who have purchased these parcels, invested, made money off leasing them and would love to now cash in

Sure, if the Royals are going to offer a substantial premium. Many real estate owners are not looking to cash out at all, they're looking to own long-term. This should be very clear based on the fact that not every parcel in all of downtown is for sale. If real estate investors were just looking to cash in, wouldn't they always have their properties for sale?

So, if the Royals are going to offer such a massive premium on all of this land that every owner decides to sell, then great (aside from all the local businesses that would be displaced). But then the question is, why should taxpayers help pay for the stadium? We're tearing down functional tax productive buildings with local businesses and paying significantly above market value for the privilege only to then contribute to a billion dollar stadium when there's banked land a few blocks away ready to be built on? Good luck selling that to voters.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

It's not even an average to good location outside of being kinda close to pnl (which isn't materially different that EV). The highway access is non existent and there is no existing big garages to reuse. This is ignoring the fact that it's being proposed to kick out existing businesses and close oak.

You don't think people who are going to invest hundreds of millions of dollars have had hours upon hours of meetings and conversations about what they deem a good, bad or ok location? I understand that you personally don't think this site is any different than EV but the people who do these things for a living strongly disagree with your opinion.

Once more, this notion that existing businesses will be "kicked out" is all speculation at this point. Would you still hold the same opinion if it's determined that every single parcel owner wants to sell?

Parcel owners =/= existing businesses. You know that, right?

[KCPowercat]

I can't believe the shit some of you raggers are saying in support of this site. GRID, what a disappointment. What if it was just 14 businesses? And 14 owners who have redeveloped their buildings? I expect this crap from DcoleKC who sucks so much Cordish cock that he has to wear galoshes but this is a forum about urban development, ferchrissakes.
Do any of you old farts or young whippersnappers remember how many businesses were operating at 18th and Wyandotte 25-30 years ago? Or 20th and Baltimore?
Displacing owners and businesses for a baseball stadium when there is a shit ton of vacant land a par 3 away is insanity. Please, my friends, come to your senses.

Thanks for the compliment! I'm sure many of the investors who have purchased these parcels, invested, made money off leasing them and would love to now cash in appreciate you advocating for them.

When someone willingly sells their property to the highest bidder, we call that "displacement"?

I don't expect anything out of you, but I did at least expect you to know how more about golf before suggesting 845 yards is even remotely close a par 3.

Sorry for any spelling mistakes, hard to type with a mouthful!

I mean it's no par 3, but it's under 500 yards corner of PNL to corner of where stadium would be as the crow flies

[KCPowercat]

It's not even an average to good location outside of being kinda close to pnl (which isn't materially different that EV). The highway access is non existent and there is no existing big garages to reuse. This is ignoring the fact that it's being proposed to kick out existing businesses and close oak.

You don't think people who are going to invest hundreds of millions of dollars have had hours upon hours of meetings and conversations about what they deem a good, bad or ok location? I understand that you personally don't think this site is any different than EV but the people who do these things for a living strongly disagree with your opinion.

Once more, this notion that existing businesses will be "kicked out" is all speculation at this point. Would you still hold the same opinion if it's determined that every single parcel owner wants to sell?

What part of me saying it's an average site is incorrect to those who "do these things for a living"? what is the fact that makes this site anything above average to those who "do these things for a living"? I mean I live in the neighborhood, they don't, so what we value is definitely different but trying to look at it from a big facility getting people to/from it, I don't see how it's anything but an average location. This should be an easy answer that doesn't betray any confidences.

[DColeKC]

It's not even an average to good location outside of being kinda close to pnl (which isn't materially different that EV). The highway access is non existent and there is no existing big garages to reuse. This is ignoring the fact that it's being proposed to kick out existing businesses and close oak.

You don't think people who are going to invest hundreds of millions of dollars have had hours upon hours of meetings and conversations about what they deem a good, bad or ok location? I understand that you personally don't think this site is any different than EV but the people who do these things for a living strongly disagree with your opinion.

Once more, this notion that existing businesses will be "kicked out" is all speculation at this point. Would you still hold the same opinion if it's determined that every single parcel owner wants to sell?

What part of me saying it's an average site is incorrect to those who "do these things for a living"? what is the fact that makes this site anything above average to those who "do these things for a living"? I mean I live in the neighborhood, they don't, so what we value is definitely different but trying to look at it from a big facility getting people to/from it, I don't see how it's anything but an average location. This should be an easy answer that doesn't betray any confidences.

They wouldn't be considering one site over the other for fluffy feel good reasons. They obviously see some benefits and they think it's worth pursuing even as they have this vacant plot of land sitting there as a much easier target. Why? Because it's a better location.

[KCPowercat]

Quite the insight. It's a mess of a site logistically but guess we don't want to deal in realities here. I knew I bowed out of this convo before, damn that KC Star owner guy!

[DColeKC]

I'm sure many of the investors who have purchased these parcels, invested, made money off leasing them and would love to now cash in

Sure, if the Royals are going to offer a substantial premium. Many real estate owners are not looking to cash out at all, they're looking to own long-term. This should be very clear based on the fact that not every parcel in all of downtown is for sale. If real estate investors were just looking to cash in, wouldn't they always have their properties for sale?

So, if the Royals are going to offer such a massive premium on all of this land that every owner decides to sell, then great (aside from all the local businesses that would be displaced). But then the question is, why should taxpayers help pay for the stadium? We're tearing down functional tax productive buildings with local businesses and paying significantly above market value for the privilege only to then contribute to a billion dollar stadium when there's banked land a few blocks away ready to be built on? Good luck selling that to voters.

Most downtown properties sell off market. They're never listed and advertised for sale. Those deals are done behind the scenes and often, the property owner didn't have any predetermined intentions to sell.

The tax revenue from a stadium would be so much greater than what the city and citizens are getting now it's likely not even comparable. The stadium would have a much larger web of positive impact to the area than existing businesses in this area. It's very hard to argue that a baseball stadium in this location wouldn't be better for taxpayers and the cities coffers than what's already there.

As for the voters who are opposed, they don't care about the physical location. They're opposed regardless. I see no major pushback on a larger scale over the exact area. Those same people are opposed because they're opposed to any change that they deem a inconvenience to them. Downtown losing a U-haul store, tire changing place and some businesses they've never heard of just won't mean much to them.

I don't want to see anyone forced out, I'd like to see this all happen and everybody wins as unrealistic as that may be.

[DColeKC]

Quite the insight. It's a mess of a site logistically but guess we don't want to deal in realities here. I knew I bowed out of this convo before, damn that KC Star owner guy!

Well, if EV is so fantastic, ready to go with a bow on it, why would they be looking at this more complicated site?

The reality is they have an assembled chunk of land that's been land banked for years, waiting on a baseball stadium yet they're deeply considering this alternative despite the fact it's a mess logistically? I mean this isn't a target or new Starbucks, this is a future downtown landmark. Something we will be using and hopefully bringing major attention to our city for the next 5 decades. Let's at least seriously consider the options.

[KCPowercat]

It's very hard to argue that a baseball stadium in this location wouldn't be better for taxpayers and the cities coffers than what's already there.

I mean you can't isolate this one element and then opine it's better location. If that's the only criteria then EV is way better. it's giving nothing to the city coffers. What is in crossroads most definitely is adding to the general fund right now.

[KCPowercat]

Quite the insight. It's a mess of a site logistically but guess we don't want to deal in realities here. I knew I bowed out of this convo before, damn that KC Star owner guy!

Well, if EV is so fantastic, ready to go with a bow on it, why would they be looking at this more complicated site?

The most obvious answer is JaxCo has more influence on EV and they obviously are at odds. Combine that with Cordish obviously push for this site and their influence

[bspecht]

Crossroads site is better from a business perspective, East Village site is better from an urban growth pattern perspective – seem to be the real positions.

Depending on the camp you fall in you're likely not going to agree with the other. I support EV vastly more that Crossroads.

[TheSmokinPun]

It simply isn't worth giving up on the attempt to revitalize the East Village. I'll never support the idea for that alone.

[taxi]

I don't expect anything out of you, but I did at least expect you to know how more about golf before suggesting 845 yards is even remotely close a par 3.

Sorry for any spelling mistakes, hard to type with a mouthful!

I am a shitty golfer but if I hit my driver off the roof of the Star building, the entire area is paved and I will be on the green that is EV. In fact, I might even roll all the way to Columbus park.

[GRID]

I can't believe the shit some of you raggers are saying in support of this site. GRID, what a disappointment. What if it was just 14 businesses? And 14 owners who have redeveloped their buildings? I expect this crap from DcoleKC who sucks so much Cordish cock that he has to wear galoshes but this is a forum about urban development, ferchrissakes.
Do any of you old farts or young whippersnappers remember how many businesses were operating at 18th and Wyandotte 25-30 years ago? Or 20th and Baltimore?
Displacing owners and businesses for a baseball stadium when there is a shit ton of vacant land a par 3 away is insanity. Please, my friends, come to your senses.

For the record, I have not said I like any site over the other. Honestly, EV still seems like the way to go. I'm just questioning the 140 businesses thing for the crossroads location.

I'm holding out for some real details before I get behind one site or another.

As I have said all along, I don't see the crossroads site materializing. It just has way too many complications. The highway, the star building, not having all the land, the displacements and the idea of leaving all that land in the east loop un developed.

But at the same time, I question if much of anything will be built near the stadium in EV. I question if any decent improvements are made to the east loop of the highway to make it more pedestrian friendly and less of an eyesore, I feel like paseo west would become parking lots and the stadium will be near nothing and have views of nothing.

What I'm saying is I'm not sold on either site and would like to see what people can come up with.

I have yet to be wowed by any of the locations or renderings and I think that's a lot of the problem with the lack of support for moving the stadium.

[Rusty Irish]

https://www.kmbc.com/article/voters-sou ... s/46290120

These people as Highlander said IMO are only going to feel further empowered when another separate groups forms opposition to the eminent domain stuff. Absolute cloud cuckoo land stuff that these people so militantly want the team to remain at the K. Are they simply too stupid or ignorant to understand the team will leave the County otherwise unless they are willing to accept an alternative? Not surprising though that the Chiefs are valued higher. The Royals need them to get anything done.

[KCPowercat]

But at the same time, I question if much of anything will be built near the stadium in EV. I question if any decent improvements are made to the east loop of the highway to make it more pedestrian friendly and less of an eyesore, I feel like paseo west would become parking lots and the stadium will be near nothing and have views of nothing.

Given this logic and what we've seen in other cities around stadiums, it makes the crossroads site even worse. We're tearing out growing area, dropping in a facility that we don't think is gong to grow development around it, in one of our best neighborhoods. Make that make sense?

[smh]

My main observation about the Crossroads site is that a stadium plan would need to be developed with a strong attention to detail to make it work as part of the neighborhood in a way that doesn't totally blow up the place (to a lesser extent I also think this is true at EV if we're to have anything beyond a stadium and parking garage district w/ a few bland apartments on top). I haven't seen anything so far in the Royals pursuit or process demonstrates they are executing at the required level of sensitivity and detail.

[KCPowercat]

My main observation about the Crossroads site is that a stadium plan would need to be developed with a strong attention to detail to make it work as part of the neighborhood in a way that doesn't totally blow up the place (to a lesser extent I also think this is true at EV if we're to have anything beyond a stadium and parking garage district w/ a few bland apartments on top). I haven't seen anything so far in the Royals pursuit or process demonstrates they are executing at the required level of sensitivity and detail.

Agreed.

[wahoowa]

But at the same time, I question if much of anything will be built near the stadium in EV. I question if any decent improvements are made to the east loop of the highway to make it more pedestrian friendly and less of an eyesore, I feel like paseo west would become parking lots and the stadium will be near nothing and have views of nothing.

Given this logic and what we've seen in other cities around stadiums, it makes the crossroads site even worse. We're tearing out growing area, dropping in a facility that we don't think is gong to grow development around it, in one of our best neighborhoods. Make that make sense?

100% this, either you believe the stadium will attract builds in its immediate environs or you don't. there is no reason to believe it's more likely at EV vs XR or vice versa, especially given how close these sites are. i don't think anyone is trying to sell that--not trying to construct a strawman--but if you accept that i don't see how a normal person who is simply a fan of the royals and a fan of downtown can land ambivalent between these two sites, let alone prefer XR.

EV needs builds so if builds happen, EV is the preference. i don't even think that's especially controversial. if build good, sweet new neighborhood. if build disappointing, sweet huge upgrade over status quo.

if no build, we know economic analyses used to justify public investment in stadiums have the credibility of an art laffer and jeff epstein keynote panel at a childcare safety tax credit symposium. the benefit of the public investment in *the stadium* is basically never an objectively verifiable economic benefit to the area, it's to the ownership, the team, and the city writ large for soft factors (basically not losing a team, maybe driving attendance and increasing operating budget, stuff like that). seems to me that the people that don't think the build is likely but are nonetheless already talking themselves into XR are probably just saying well i'd vote for whatever to keep the team. fair! but not the question posed. yet...

obviously some others like my guy DCole think about it slightly differently than i've described above and while that doesn't resonate with me i respect that it's a valid perspective. it's just not the one i expect to be prevalent on this board (and agree with others who have pointed out that this topic seems to be driving some unexpected preferences from some contributors--which is i think objectively interesting and not at all objectionable or problematic, to be clear--but it is surprising nonetheless!)