KCRag Forum

I'm trying to figure out a location where the parking, hotel, shopping, and future light rail stop could all tie together to make this team a success. Not to mention creating more intrest in this team inside the inner city.

kcmetro wrote: Doesn't Penn Valley park have enough space?

North to South, East to West, sure, but i don't think it's that simple. It's already occupied by the Liberty Memorial, a very heavily used and appreciated dog park, and some very popular softball fields. There's also the issue of topography. Using Penn Valley Park, even if you can get existing features removed, would require some terraforming that would push the expense far beyond almost any other scenario.

Kansas City and Jackson county are already paying for a new arena and stadium renovations.

The idea was for Johnson county to pay for the Wizards stadium to spread the burden of subsidizing sports around. Putting the Wizards in KCMO would defeat that.

Joco needs to step up, or all the people that have said for years that Joco is the problem with regional funding will be proven right - it will be undeniable that the Joco residents are just to cheap to fund anything (besides a really big junior college).

If Joco won't do it, I think Riverside would be acceptible, its in Platte County, and their is plenty of easy to build on flat land inside the new levee.

I think JoCo's opinion on the matter has been made pretty clear.

bahua wrote: I think JoCo's opinion on the matter has been made pretty clear.

Nah. By that rationale, KC has already made it clear they don't want light rail. Except now they do. I think a JoCo site could still happen, but it won't be in OP,it will be somewhere like the hinterlands of Olathe or DeSoto.

And the idea was never for JoCo to pay for the Wizards stadium. It was to be privately financed JoCo was just paying for the surrounding retail, soccer fields and infrastructure.

I think the leading two options at this point are Village West in KCK and the Bannister Mall site.

If it isn't going to take much of a taxpayer subsidy to build it in Joco,  what's the hold up? Get er done.

Oh, there's still a substantial taxpayer subsidy. Sorry if I left the impression there wasn't. I'm just saying the stadium itself was/is supposed to be privately financed. The expensive part is the crap around it. The stadium itself is relatively cheap for soccer.

The other holdup is NIMBY. No one in Johnson County wants a stadium near their house.

KCMax wrote: Oh, there's still a substantial taxpayer subsidy. Sorry if I left the impression there wasn't. I'm just saying the stadium itself was/is supposed to be privately financed. The expensive part is the crap around it. The stadium itself is relatively cheap for soccer.

The other holdup is NIMBY. No one in Johnson County wants a stadium near their house.

I DO, I DO!

but there's nowhere to build in Roeland Park

This stadium is going to end up in an empty field in DeSoto, I fear.

Since no deal has been made yet, where are the Wizards planning on playing their games this coming season? I know their first game is normally at the beginning of April, shouldn't they be finding a temporary home until the new stadium gets built?

KansasCityChiefs wrote: Since no deal has been made yet, where are the Wizards planning on playing their games this coming season? I know their first game is normally at the beginning of April, shouldn't they be finding a temporary home until the new stadium gets built?

They are currently looking. Its going to be an area football stadium augmented with temporary seating.

KansasCityChiefs wrote: Since no deal has been made yet, where are the Wizards planning on playing their games this coming season? I know their first game is normally at the beginning of April, shouldn't they be finding a temporary home until the new stadium gets built?

The first home match is scheduled for May 5th. The location should be announced shortly.

KCMax wrote: They are currently looking. Its going to be an area football stadium augmented with temporary seating.

Huh?

Kard wrote: Huh?

Like at a big high school or a small college. 

I'm a dork.  I read "arena" instead of "area."  /goes for cup of coffee/

This is off topic but does anyone know what happened to the Overland Park Arena? It sounded like a done deal a couple of years ago but I haven't heard anything lately. Did it die with the Sprint Center coming?

Frank,

The OP Arena died, because the developer could not make it work on the ground they had without building parking garages.  When they went to OP for money for the parking garages, OP said no, they weren't interested in paying for the garages.

Thanks valcour. 

Is there anyone else that thinks it failed because of the actual plan..the building plan...aka...the immense amount of soccer fields taking up tons of acrage around the stadium...who wants that in thier back yard?  A stadium...ok...yes......the fields...huh uh...no thanks....

...what is up with this...everyone jumps on the bandwagon and says the TSC has HORRIBLE location...yet we have this soccer stadium plan that failed...surrounded by NOTHING but parking and fields...that would be used half the year at the most...(remember...we do have winter in these parts..) and then we have the Kansas Speedway and Verizon Wireless Amp. (sandstone) surrounded by...wheat fields....at least the TSC has some housing and hotels around it....

Would it not be a repeat of the TSC if they *did* build the soccer stadium/complex out in the middle of bumfuc*ing USA?

Why don't they split the plan...build soccer stadium...build soccer fields at a later time in a different location if the voters don't want both..and if the 12+ soccer fields limits location that much..why not do away with the real problem...its that simple...don't make it any harder and then try explaining why it didn't pass....

And WHAT is sooooo wrong with arrowhead....if soccer EVER was or is a viable american sport...then we're flat fucked if we build a 10K seat stadium...it'd be like going to see an NBA or NHL team with 10 home games a year..imagine that... soccer could very well turn into a major sport in the US within the next 5 years...and Arrowhead after the renovations could be a VERY nice stadium to play in.  People argue about the atmosphere right now..."oh we only draw 7k fans anyways...it APPEARS dead..." Who cares? At least its a major league stadium?  Better than some farm house in the middle of a JOCO field?  What happens when we do draw major crowds....Arrowhead and the TSC COULD have a HUGE home field advantage and atmosphere...like in foreign countrys or at existing major MLS supported city games...what happens then?  Were strapped into an agreement for a small arse stadium and need more money thrown at that to make it viable with the rest of the league?  Why not keep playing at arrowhead and avoid all those issues?  Not to mention how this year...alll our nice games at Ray-Pec stadium will have huge white lines all over from the field...its gonna look real professional playing on a field thats still all marked up for football?  Who gives a flying lick about the atmosphere at Arrowhead right now...it could...and WILL be different...its an illusion made by the fans who complain about a lack of atmosphere...damnit get up and MAKE an atmosphere...its your own fault there's little tailgaiting...if you were serious fans you would do everything you WANT to see....its like greenpeace people blowing up refinerys then speeding off in their geo metros....ironic eh?

im2kull wrote: ...what is up with this...everyone jumps on the bandwagon and says the TSC has HORRIBLE location...yet we have this soccer stadium plan that failed...surrounded by NOTHING but parking and fields...that would be used half the year at the most...(remember...we do have winter in these parts..) and then we have the Kansas Speedway and Verizon Wireless Amp. (sandstone) surrounded by...wheat fields....at least the TSC has some housing and hotels around it....

A downtown baseball stadium and a downtown soccer stadium are quite different things. Baseball is played every day. The stadium would be alive 81 days a year. A soccer stadium would be used, what 15-30 days a year? The other 330 days it sits empty.

Why don't they split the plan...build soccer stadium...build soccer fields at a later time in a different location if the voters don't want both..and if the 12+ soccer fields limits location that much..why not do away with the real problem...its that simple...don't make it any harder and then try explaining why it didn't pass....

Because the team feels that in order for the privately funded soccer stadium to be profitable, it needs to be synergized with retail and youth soccer fields.

And WHAT is sooooo wrong with arrowhead....if soccer EVER was or is a viable american sport...then we're flat fucked if we build a 10K seat stadium...it'd be like going to see an NBA or NHL team with 10 home games a year..imagine that... soccer could very well turn into a major sport in the US within the next 5 years...and Arrowhead after the renovations could be a VERY nice stadium to play in.  People argue about the atmosphere right now..."oh we only draw 7k fans anyways...it APPEARS dead..." Who cares? At least its a major league stadium?  Better than some farm house in the middle of a JOCO field?  What happens when we do draw major crowds....Arrowhead and the TSC COULD have a HUGE home field advantage and atmosphere...like in foreign countrys or at existing major MLS supported city games...what happens then?  Were strapped into an agreement for a small arse stadium and need more money thrown at that to make it viable with the rest of the league?  Why not keep playing at arrowhead and avoid all those issues?  Not to mention how this year...alll our nice games at Ray-Pec stadium will have huge white lines all over from the field...its gonna look real professional playing on a field thats still all marked up for football?  Who gives a flying lick about the atmosphere at Arrowhead right now...it could...and WILL be different.

Because its not there yet. Its like buying a five year old a car because well, someday he will be able to use it. 25,000 seat stadiums are very appropriate for soccer. Should the sport every get to the point where it is consistently drawing 70,000 a game, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.

..its an illusion made by the fans who complain about a lack of atmosphere...damnit get up and MAKE an atmosphere...its your own fault there's little tailgaiting...if you were serious fans you would do everything you WANT to see....its like greenpeace people blowing up refinerys then speeding off in their geo metros....ironic eh?

I don't get what you're saying at all here.

You totally missed my point...especially on that first thing you pointed out...


Basically:
1. Why use another building and add alot of cost to everything if we are just going to want a bigger place in a few years...screw how everyone says the TSC lacks soccer atmosphere...the people that attend could give it the atmosphere...they choose not to.  I'm going to laugh my arse off when in 5 years the wizards are locked into agreement on a multimillion dollar field that is packed every night and has 50 dollar ticket prices, and a LACK of atmosphere when every other team in the league is using huge stadiums, and we had a great chance to use the TSC permanently but failed to do so..because of an invisible thing..the perception of the sport atmosphere...we will draw alot of people..its a given...someday..and then were screwed.

2. Why does everyone say the TSC sucks..location wise....ITS AN ILLUSION within our minds....
example: Sandstone, verizon wireless, the proposed soccer stadium surrounded by fields and miles of parking, Kansas Speedway when it was built, etc....whats so incredibly great about those..why dont I hear how much their locations suck?  At least the TSC has SOME stuff around it...its got 100 times more density than those other places.