OFFICIAL - East Village

Issues concerning Downtown as described by the Downtown Council. River to 31st Street, I-35 to Bruce R. Watkins.
User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14422
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by FangKC »

Highlander wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:26 pm
FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:27 am
...
The other question I'd pose is will this create tax revenue for the City, or another tax hole downtown? It would seem to me that the office/apartment mix would produce more revenue for the City in the long-term, and yes, we do need to be concerned about that too.
20,000 people coming downtown 81X per year for a baseball game (not to mention other uses of the stadium) and then spending money downtown on food/alcohol would generate a ton of tax revenue. The vast majority of those people now simply go to the TSC from Johnson County (or wherever the are coming from) and return home without any additional money spent. While there are multitudes of sites remaining downtown for mixed used development, the number of sites a baseball stadium could occupy have become rather small.
...
But do people go out and spend that much (or any) money after leaving a baseball game where they have already been eating snacks and drinking beverages throughout the game? Many of the games are week nights, and most people have to get home to bed for work the next day.

And will that spin-off sales tax revenue downtown offset: taxpayer subsidies for building the stadium and parking garages; the loss of year-round property, sales, and income tax revenue from apartments and businesses that could otherwise be built on those parcels?

Will fans automatically assemble to continue the party in a downtown bar or restaurant instead of all returning to their favorite places around the Metro?

Or are you just rearranging the deck chairs as stated below--the same sales tax revenue is collected downtown instead of Westport/Plaza/Waldo bars. No real new net gain to collect Johnson County fan entertainment dollars at the expense of tax revenue from permanent residents and businesses on those land parcels. Not only have you taken almost five city blocks off the tax rolls, what is to be done with Kaufmann Stadium after the Royals depart it? Taxpayers will likely have to pay to demolish it as well. Granted, that would have to happen if we build a new stadium at the Truman Sports Complex. But what happens to the land where Kaufmann was? Nothing. It becomes more parking for Arrowhead Stadium. Valuable downtown parcels that could produce long-term tax revenue are lost for that purpose, and the former stadium site is also non-revenue producing now. Big win for everyone!

Sports Stadiums Are a Bad Deal for Cities
Sure, some of the money will stay local, thanks to the new economic activity that a stadium helps generate. That’s most likely if a new cluster of restaurants and sports bars sprouts up in an underused part of town around a new stadium. But even then, the economic impact can be limited. When new “stadium towns” are built, residents tend to spend their money in the new geographical location rather than another one around town.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... es/576334/

https://medium.com/concentrated-benefit ... c079f335f3

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9179
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by Highlander »

FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 5:42 pm
Highlander wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:26 pm
FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:27 am
...
The other question I'd pose is will this create tax revenue for the City, or another tax hole downtown? It would seem to me that the office/apartment mix would produce more revenue for the City in the long-term, and yes, we do need to be concerned about that too.
20,000 people coming downtown 81X per year for a baseball game (not to mention other uses of the stadium) and then spending money downtown on food/alcohol would generate a ton of tax revenue. The vast majority of those people now simply go to the TSC from Johnson County (or wherever the are coming from) and return home without any additional money spent. While there are multitudes of sites remaining downtown for mixed used development, the number of sites a baseball stadium could occupy have become rather small.
...
But do people go out and spend that much (or any) money after leaving a baseball game where they have already been eating snacks and drinking beverages throughout the game? Many of the games are week nights, and most people have to get home to bed for work the next day.

And will that spin-off sales tax revenue downtown offset: taxpayer subsidies for building the stadium and parking garages; the loss of year-round property, sales, and income tax revenue from apartments and businesses that could otherwise be built on those parcels?

Will fans automatically assemble to continue the party in a downtown bar or restaurant instead of all returning to their favorite places around the Metro?

Or are you just rearranging the deck chairs as stated below--the same sales tax revenue is collected downtown instead of Westport/Plaza/Waldo bars. No real new net gain to collect Johnson County fan entertainment dollars at the expense of tax revenue from permanent residents and businesses on those land parcels. Not only have you taken almost five city blocks off the tax rolls, what is to be done with Kaufmann Stadium after the Royals depart it? Taxpayers will likely have to pay to demolish it as well. Granted, that would have to happen if we build a new stadium at the Truman Sports Complex. But what happens to the land where Kaufmann was? Nothing. It becomes more parking for Arrowhead Stadium. Valuable downtown parcels that could produce long-term tax revenue are lost for that purpose, and the former stadium site is also non-revenue producing now. Big win for everyone!

Sports Stadiums Are a Bad Deal for Cities
Sure, some of the money will stay local, thanks to the new economic activity that a stadium helps generate. That’s most likely if a new cluster of restaurants and sports bars sprouts up in an underused part of town around a new stadium. But even then, the economic impact can be limited. When new “stadium towns” are built, residents tend to spend their money in the new geographical location rather than another one around town.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... es/576334/

https://medium.com/concentrated-benefit ... c079f335f3
Well, from a tax perspective, it's not rearranging the deck chairs. The KC metro is divided by two states, the wealthiest part of the metro is in a state that doesn't contain KC's urban/cultural core and hence contribute very little to core's well being. So any time you can entice that population to spend money in the core, that's a gain. I don't think people from far flung parts of the metro congregate in far flung parts of the metro for food/drink and then go to the game. If there is a viable nearby option that is exotic (as downtown would be for most people in the outer burbs on most side of the state line), I think they tend to congregate there. That's been my practice and experience every time I go to an event in a downtown area. My last trip to Sprint to watch a Mizzou game was suppose to be accompanied by a dinner before the game. Unfortunately, every restaurant in walking distance to Sprint was packed so we ended up eating at Cosentino's deli area. So I wasn't the only person with that plan. When I went to Minute Maid park in Houston or Coors Field in Denver...same experience. People do tend to eat stadium food but most know it's of dubious quality and overpriced and are willing to try the local establishments - if they exist (obviously not an option at Kaufman Stadium).

I don't doubt that stadiums overall are a bad deal for cities. They cost a fortune but I think that is a total different subject, the issue is whether or not occupying a parcel of ground downtown or in the burbs is better overall for the city. Even with taking a fairly substantial piece of downtown out of circulation, there is still a tremendous amount of undeveloped and underdeveloped space in KC that probably isn't going to be developed in most of our lifetimes.

langosta
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 4:02 am

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by langosta »

FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 5:42 pm
Highlander wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:26 pm
FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:27 am
...
The other question I'd pose is will this create tax revenue for the City, or another tax hole downtown? It would seem to me that the office/apartment mix would produce more revenue for the City in the long-term, and yes, we do need to be concerned about that too.
20,000 people coming downtown 81X per year for a baseball game (not to mention other uses of the stadium) and then spending money downtown on food/alcohol would generate a ton of tax revenue. The vast majority of those people now simply go to the TSC from Johnson County (or wherever the are coming from) and return home without any additional money spent. While there are multitudes of sites remaining downtown for mixed used development, the number of sites a baseball stadium could occupy have become rather small.
...
But do people go out and spend that much (or any) money after leaving a baseball game where they have already been eating snacks and drinking beverages throughout the game? Many of the games are week nights, and most people have to get home to bed for work the next day.

And will that spin-off sales tax revenue downtown offset: taxpayer subsidies for building the stadium and parking garages; the loss of year-round property, sales, and income tax revenue from apartments and businesses that could otherwise be built on those parcels?

Will fans automatically assemble to continue the party in a downtown bar or restaurant instead of all returning to their favorite places around the Metro?

Or are you just rearranging the deck chairs as stated below--the same sales tax revenue is collected downtown instead of Westport/Plaza/Waldo bars. No real new net gain to collect Johnson County fan entertainment dollars at the expense of tax revenue from permanent residents and businesses on those land parcels. Not only have you taken almost five city blocks off the tax rolls, what is to be done with Kaufmann Stadium after the Royals depart it? Taxpayers will likely have to pay to demolish it as well. Granted, that would have to happen if we build a new stadium at the Truman Sports Complex. But what happens to the land where Kaufmann was? Nothing. It becomes more parking for Arrowhead Stadium. Valuable downtown parcels that could produce long-term tax revenue are lost for that purpose, and the former stadium site is also non-revenue producing now. Big win for everyone!

Sports Stadiums Are a Bad Deal for Cities
Sure, some of the money will stay local, thanks to the new economic activity that a stadium helps generate. That’s most likely if a new cluster of restaurants and sports bars sprouts up in an underused part of town around a new stadium. But even then, the economic impact can be limited. When new “stadium towns” are built, residents tend to spend their money in the new geographical location rather than another one around town.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... es/576334/

https://medium.com/concentrated-benefit ... c079f335f3
I don’t think a downtown stadium proposal will ask for much if any city money. Maybe they will ask for the donation of city land or city subsidized garages but little beyond that.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14481
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by GRID »

As much as I would love to see a downtown stadium in KC and I was a huge advocate for moving Kauffman before the renovations, I actually agree with Fang. There is little gain to the city building a stadium downtown. As far as economic activity and urban fabric, they actually do far more harm than good in most cases. The east village would be much better off if it were develop into a mixed use, urban neighborhood like the crossroads is doing. A stadium would fill in the east side of the loop, but the surrounding area would probably remain parking lots for the most part just like they have around the sprint center. It wouldn't hurt the city, but it wouldn't help it either. Even in DC which is nearly totally developed now around nationals park, nearly everyone heads for their cars or the metro after games. Maybe a few hundred of 35000 people stick around and go to bar or something.

I think KC could go either way and be fine, but the fans don't seem to want it in KC. Reading comments anywhere online and it's like 8 out of ten people are against moving the stadium downtown. So for that reason alone, I would not tie up the whole east side of the downtown loop for a decade. Maybe the owners can do it alone, but I highly doubt it. Much of Jackson County is not going to be for it. The TSC is just too convenient to people in Lee's Summit, Blue Springs etc. And that county is the main county that would pay for the stadium. Getting Kansas involved would be a terrible idea and would likely end up with arrowhead relocating to BFE Kansas from what is a perfect location for an NFL stadium.

We will see what happens, but it's exhausting talking to kc people about parking, traffic etc in downtown KC. I sometimes wonder if people in KC have ever been to an actual busy city. Maybe those that want a downtown stadium will have the will to continue trying to talk people into a downtown stadium, it eventually worked with KCI, but look how long that took.

Personally, I think it would be so much more beneficial to just improve the TSC and build a real transit line (not the stupid commuter rail thing), but true light rail in dedicated right of way along I-70 that can move 35,000 people a day (rather than a few hundred commuters on the RI Railway).

Now you are spending money that you will get back. Better transit for downtown and all of Jackson County. The TSC can now host events like the super bowl and world cup. The TSC an be a major park and ride location for commuters and tourists and TOD can develop along I-70. The East Village can actually build out into a true mixed use urban neighborhood rather than a one off dependent on stadium events (90% parking).

I guess my opinion has changed on this over the years after really following what downtown stadiums do for cities for over 20 years. Emotionally, I would love to see a downtown stadium in KC, just so that KC has something to show off that is urban for once. But in reality, there are better ways to improve KC than just plopping a stadium downtown. The problem is I don't see KC doing that either. So I guess just wait and see what happens I guess.

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4905
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by beautyfromashes »

I don’t understand “East Village is better to be developed as a mixed use area”. It’s literally been decades. If it was going to happen, it would have happened. A new stadium jump starts the pace of growth DT exponentially not only will the east side of DT build out, everything between the stadium and Sprint Center would likely happen. And further east in areas depressed in Pendleton Heights would be reborn. New transportation will become viable. And, most important, DT will be the place again for corporate expansion and relocation.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14422
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by FangKC »

Highlander wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:26 pm

Well, from a tax perspective, it's not rearranging the deck chairs. The KC metro is divided by two states, the wealthiest part of the metro is in a state that doesn't contain KC's urban/cultural core and hence contribute very little to core's well being. So any time you can entice that population to spend money in the core, that's a gain. I don't think people from far flung parts of the metro congregate in far flung parts of the metro for food/drink and then go to the game. If there is a viable nearby option that is exotic (as downtown would be for most people in the outer burbs on most side of the state line), I think they tend to congregate there. That's been my practice and experience every time I go to an event in a downtown area. My last trip to Sprint to watch a Mizzou game was suppose to be accompanied by a dinner before the game. Unfortunately, every restaurant in walking distance to Sprint was packed so we ended up eating at Cosentino's deli area. So I wasn't the only person with that plan. When I went to Minute Maid park in Houston or Coors Field in Denver...same experience. People do tend to eat stadium food but most know it's of dubious quality and overpriced and are willing to try the local establishments - if they exist (obviously not an option at Kaufman Stadium).

I don't doubt that stadiums overall are a bad deal for cities. They cost a fortune but I think that is a total different subject, the issue is whether or not occupying a parcel of ground downtown or in the burbs is better overall for the city. Even with taking a fairly substantial piece of downtown out of circulation, there is still a tremendous amount of undeveloped and underdeveloped space in KC that probably isn't going to be developed in most of our lifetimes.
Yes, all these mythological eaters and drinkers associated with baseball games explain the nexus of eateries/bars that sprung up around Truman Sports Complex since 1973 -- seeing that there is still undeveloped, fairly-cheap land (compared to downtown) around it. Once would think in 46 years, at least a couple of sports bars at least would have opened to snag all those Johnson County dollars.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0486967 ... !1e3?hl=en

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14422
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by FangKC »

beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:42 pm
I don’t understand “East Village is better to be developed as a mixed use area”. It’s literally been decades. If it was going to happen, it would have happened. A new stadium jump starts the pace of growth DT exponentially not only will the east side of DT build out, everything between the stadium and Sprint Center would likely happen. And further east in areas depressed in Pendleton Heights would be reborn. New transportation will become viable. And, most important, DT will be the place again for corporate expansion and relocation.
Only because RIdeKC Development held 12th and Charlotte back from accepting RFPs to see if the baby Jesus will return to Earth next year. They might have actually started to move forward if they actually bid it out.
Two other KC Area Transportation Authority properties, land at 12th and Charlotte in the East Village and a parking lot at 31st and Troost, also were part of the RFP.

Milhaus development of Indianapolis was chosen for the 31st and Troost site. RideKC Development plans to negotiate an agreement with Milhaus for what’s expected to be a 52-unit apartment project with a significant number of affordable units.

As for the 12th and Charlotte site, Brien Starner, president of RideKC Development, said the board delayed action because of the possibility the larger East Village development area could be the site of a potential downtown ballpark for the Kansas City Royals.
https://cityscenekc.com/new-developmen ... er-market/

The East Village has languished because of the 2008 crash; waiting to see if GSA would build a new tower; if J.E. Dunn would stay downtown; waiting on the streetcar build-out; and because it had a lackluster master developer (Swope) that was booted after a decade of doing practically nothing.

My take on this is put out RFPs on all of the East Village parcels and see what comes back. They don't have to be accepted. But what would happen if 75 percent of the parcels got proposals with decent density-levels, and little if any requests for subsidies? Would that be worth not waiting 10 more years? What does it hurt to bid out the entire neighborhood?

Sometimes it seems Berlin was reconstructed after WWIl faster than it takes to redevelop a section of downtown.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9179
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by Highlander »

FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:28 pm
Highlander wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:26 pm

Well, from a tax perspective, it's not rearranging the deck chairs. The KC metro is divided by two states, the wealthiest part of the metro is in a state that doesn't contain KC's urban/cultural core and hence contribute very little to core's well being. So any time you can entice that population to spend money in the core, that's a gain. I don't think people from far flung parts of the metro congregate in far flung parts of the metro for food/drink and then go to the game. If there is a viable nearby option that is exotic (as downtown would be for most people in the outer burbs on most side of the state line), I think they tend to congregate there. That's been my practice and experience every time I go to an event in a downtown area. My last trip to Sprint to watch a Mizzou game was suppose to be accompanied by a dinner before the game. Unfortunately, every restaurant in walking distance to Sprint was packed so we ended up eating at Cosentino's deli area. So I wasn't the only person with that plan. When I went to Minute Maid park in Houston or Coors Field in Denver...same experience. People do tend to eat stadium food but most know it's of dubious quality and overpriced and are willing to try the local establishments - if they exist (obviously not an option at Kaufman Stadium).

I don't doubt that stadiums overall are a bad deal for cities. They cost a fortune but I think that is a total different subject, the issue is whether or not occupying a parcel of ground downtown or in the burbs is better overall for the city. Even with taking a fairly substantial piece of downtown out of circulation, there is still a tremendous amount of undeveloped and underdeveloped space in KC that probably isn't going to be developed in most of our lifetimes.
Yes, all these mythological eaters and drinkers associated with baseball games explain the nexus of eateries/bars that sprung up around Truman Sports Complex since 1973 -- seeing that there is still undeveloped, fairly-cheap land (compared to downtown) around it. Once would think in 46 years, at least a couple of sports bars at least would have opened to snag all those Johnson County dollars.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0486967 ... !1e3?hl=en
Hardly the same circumstances. You can park your car downtown, meet friends and have a myriad of places to eat or drink to choose from prior to a game which you can walk to after dining or having a beer. I know people do that in other cities with downtown parks because I've experienced it as I have in KC itself before events at Sprint Center. But there is nothing at TSC. Why would there be? You'd have to drive there and eat and get back in your car drive to the stadium. I've been to many Royals and Chiefs games but I've never tried to do anything around the ballpark. There's no point. I've been to a few events at the PAC and Sprint Arena and each time I've combined them with meeting friends and eating downtown.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7997
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by flyingember »

beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:42 pm
I don’t understand “East Village is better to be developed as a mixed use area”. It’s literally been decades. If it was going to happen, it would have happened.
There's parking lots downtown that have been around since the 1920s. A few decades is nothing on that scale.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7997
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by flyingember »

FangKC wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:28 pm
Yes, all these mythological eaters and drinkers associated with baseball games explain the nexus of eateries/bars that sprung up around Truman Sports Complex since 1973 -- seeing that there is still undeveloped, fairly-cheap land (compared to downtown) around it. Once would think in 46 years, at least a couple of sports bars at least would have opened to snag all those Johnson County dollars.
It's as if the value of density and geography is completely lost. The under developed land today is partially a rail corridor, partially a creek bed, and if I remember right, partially a cemetery


Stop assuming restaurants need to be right next to the stadium. Remember, there's zero chance we can build enough parking for 20,000 cars at a downtown stadium so customers will scatter.


If just 5% of game goers eat out downtown that's nearly 80000 customers over a season. The stadium isn't the be all end all for a business but it's more people looking for restaurant options downtown.


If the goal is to grow downtown we could do a lot worse.

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4905
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by beautyfromashes »

It’s always talked about how stadiums bring restaurants and bars and increased traffic. I’m not so sure that’s the direct case. Stadiums increase transit options. Transit options increase traffic. So, a DT stadium is most exciting to me because it likely increases rail and other transit options to places I already go.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9179
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by Highlander »

beautyfromashes wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:36 am
It’s always talked about how stadiums bring restaurants and bars and increased traffic. I’m not so sure that’s the direct case. Stadiums increase transit options. Transit options increase traffic. So, a DT stadium is most exciting to me because it likely increases rail and other transit options to places I already go.
It would be great to have free buses running E-W down 12th or 11th (or both) on Royal's game nights ferry people from the mass of parking garages in west downtown to East Village. People attending the game could park anywhere along the Streetcar line, have dinner and take a combination of the streetcar and buses to the game. The buses make the experience more palatable for infrequent and the more skeptical downtown visitors transporting them through the more questionable east side of the loop.

shinatoo
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6403
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by shinatoo »

beautyfromashes wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:36 am
It’s always talked about how stadiums bring restaurants and bars and increased traffic. I’m not so sure that’s the direct case. Stadiums increase transit options. Transit options increase traffic. So, a DT stadium is most exciting to me because it likely increases rail and other transit options to places I already go.
Probably the best point made for a DT stadium. Might get some rail going north of the river.

From a purely selfish point of view, by the time this is built I will be able to jump on the streetcar and not worry about driving. But I still don't want it downtown.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2350
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL - East Village

Post by normalthings »

East Village PIEA is up before council this week.

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/LiveWeb/Docum ... sM5TQSdxSh

Post Reply