New Target Field in Minnesota

[KC Kropf]

Took a road trip earlier this Spring to check out the new Target Field on it's opening weekend, when they were also playing the Royals.  A number of people came up to me and wanted to know what I thought about the stadium and to compare it to Kaufman.  I really loved informing everyone (esp. this drunk guy talking smack) that in fact their stadium was designed by KC Architects and that they could thank me now if they like. 

[Roanoker]

Wonderful pictures. Great day for a game. Was there an empty seat anywhere? A stadium right in the middle of the city! You can see the skyline from your seat. Or, at least, part of it.

Thanks for posting.

[KC Kropf]

Yes it was a great day for baseball, and nope not a single empty seat.  It was the opening weekend for the stadium I hope there wouldn't be any seats.  I had the pleasure of attending 2 games (both Royal losses) and sitting in 3 different sections including one in their "Super Club Level" (my words) which was kinda like the crown club.  Overall the stadium is nice, it has a small feel which I like, and I love how you can tell the urban fabric lead to the creation of the stadium.  I was a little surprised that the only skyline view was in right field, but it's a good view of a few building.  Your mind does kinda wonder what is on the other side of the stadium beyond left/center field.  I honestly don't know, is there a river there, one of the 10,000 lakes, or just some other shorter buildings or a ghetto??

[mykem]

How does Target Field compare to Kauffman in terms of architectural design, and amenities????

[trailerkid]

nice looking stadium in a very wonky location. should've shelled out more $$$ for a decent site downtown.

[staubio]

nice looking stadium in a very wonky location. should've shelled out more $$$ for a decent site downtown.

Huh? This isn't a bad spot. It straddles the line between downtown and the Warehouse District and it is right on the end of the light rail line, which they extended just one stop to connect the stadium. Do you just make up stuff to be negative about?

Granted, it isn't the intersection of two interstates, but it'll do.

[KC Kropf]

How does Target Field compare to Kauffman in terms of architectural design, and amenities????

Amenities I would say are about the same as the "new" K.  I was fortunate enough to sit in a few locations and check out their "founders club" area.  Their club level seamed to have more total enclosed space with very nice options for food/beer/etc inside.  There is of course no ferris wheel, putt put, kid zone, little K, Outfield Plaza area.... which people seam to like/enjoy....  I've always thought of that stuff as distractions from the game, but I also do not have any little ones.... 

Architecturally - I am a little jealous of the stadium compared to the K.  Mostly due to the obvious fact of it being in a downtown setting and being build ground up in 2010 with 2010 materials.  The site really does dictate it's design and I love the spuratic/almost random seating sections. 

The K is still The K and it's the stadium I grew up with and love today... 

[trailerkid]

Huh? This isn't a bad spot. It straddles the line between downtown and the Warehouse District and it is right on the end of the light rail line, which they extended just one stop to connect the stadium. Do you just make up stuff to be negative about?

Granted, it isn't the intersection of two interstates, but it'll do.

i wasn't the first one to say the location is bad. collison wrote an entire article about it and i've heard the term "shoehorned" thrown around while my old roommate was watching miserable Royal's games. it's a pretty common sentiment outside your apparent, cheery, vanilla two-scoops perspective.

btw, the location is near the intersection of two interstates-- 394 & 94. i walked around it last Fall...it's directly behind the target center, next to a parking garage/greyhound station, various social services agencies with some nasty energy plant blocking on its north end.  yes, it is located in the greater downtown area. HOOOOORAAAYYY!

i really wish people that don't want a lively discussion would quit engaging with me. there are plenty of others wanting an honest, multi-leveled discussion about development issues like what used to go on here. i would encourage the forum discussion to be as negative, positive, indifferent, realistic, idealistic as it needs to be. it is a discussion board after all-- not an agreement board.

[grovester]

uh...I think he was disagreeing with you.

[trailerkid]

uh...I think he was disagreeing with you.

no. he was telling me there wasn't a discussion to be had and i was being "negative" for the sake of being negative.

[KCMax]

i wasn't the first one to say the location is bad. collison wrote an entire article about it and i've heard the term "shoehorned" thrown around while my old roommate was watching miserable Royal's games. i walked around it last Fall and it's a pretty common sentiment outside your apparent, cheery, vanilla two-scoops perspective.

btw, the location is near the intersection of two interstates-- 394 & 94. i walked around it last Fall...it's directly behind the target center, next to a parking garage/greyhound station, various social services agencies with some nasty energy plant blocking on its north end.  yes, it is located in the greater downtown area. HOOOOORAAAYYY!

i really wish people that don't want a lively discussion would quit engaging with me. there are plenty of others wanting an honest, multi-leveled discussion about development issues like what used to go on here. i would encourage the forum discussion to be as negative, positive, indifferent, realistic, idealistic as it needs to be. it is a discussion board after all-- not an agreement board.

Baseball stadiums in urban areas have historically been "shoehorned in" (thus the short distance, and great height of the Green Monster at Fenway - because there is a street just beyond it). I find it odd that you of all people would object to that kind of style. It creates a more dense atmosphere, puts transit right at the front step of the stadium, and makes it a vibrant area on game days. Leveling entire blocks of salvageable buildings to make way for a stadium isn't as appealing to me as preserving as much of the historic district as you can and building the stadium around it. For another great example, look at Petco Park in San Diego, where they actually use an old building as part of the stadium.



I mean really, you're complaining that there is a bus station and social service buildings around it? I mean god forbid there actually are people LIVING in a downtown area that have day-to-day needs.

[trailerkid]

Baseball stadiums in urban areas have historically been "shoehorned in" (thus the short distance, and great height of the Green Monster at Fenway - because there is a street just beyond it). I find it odd that you of all people would object to that kind of style. It creates a more dense atmosphere, puts transit right at the front step of the stadium, and makes it a vibrant area on game days. Leveling entire blocks of salvageable buildings to make way for a stadium isn't as appealing to me as preserving as much of the historic district as you can and building the stadium around it. For another great example, look at Petco Park in San Diego, where they actually use an old building as part of the stadium.



I mean really, you're complaining that there is a bus station and social service buildings around it? I mean god forbid there actually are people LIVING in a downtown area that have day-to-day needs.

a greyhound bus station, salvation army, massive parking garage, fugly 1980s arena, interstate highway, and a large energy plant are not the best neighbors for a baseball stadium.

this is across the street from the new stadium:


behind this:


the immediate foreground is the stadium site...on top of the freeway and the largest parking garage i've ever seen in my entire life:

[kcmetro]

It's still downtown though so people can walk or drive a short distance to bars after the games.  Plus, they have a nice view during the games of the skyline.

[LenexatoKCMO]

So TK should they have just tore down a couple of those skyscrapers so they could get it a couple blocks closer to the action?

[KCMax]

I thought the prevailing thought was stadiums create spinoff development. Its kinda silly to think that they would build the stadium and voila, a bar district would pop up around it overnight.

[voltopt]

I think TK's point is similar to the discussion about the Omaha Arena a few years ago - sure, its adjacent to downtown, but it is more detached from a continuity standpoint.  It would be like placing a new Kauffman Stadium on the southeast edge of downtown, at Truman and Holmes, which would put it very near existing urban, walkable amenities but also adjacent to a large switching tower for AT&T, the KC Star printing presses, and parking lots and low density industrial uses, and on the other side of the Sprint Center...  in that sense, I agree.

[Downtowner]

I thought the prevailing thought was stadiums create spinoff development. Its kinda silly to think that they would build the stadium and voila, a bar district would pop up around it overnight.

I used to think the same but people seem to go to a game for the overall experience, eat, drink and leave. I noticed this in St Louis. Not many people supplement a 3 hour commitment with going to another bar or restaurant before or after. Wrigley gets some people in bars across the street that don't go to the games but want to hang out in the atmosphere. And that's in a true neighborhood.

But St Louis, with the strong fan turnout, has never had any spinoff from the stadium(although they've talked Ballpark Village). My Cardinal friends say the same thing: People go in for the game---not to go to the bar or restaurants nearby.

[kcjak]

I thought the prevailing thought was stadiums create spinoff development. Its kinda silly to think that they would build the stadium and voila, a bar district would pop up around it overnight.

I'm with you - a stadium or arena in an already 'nice' part of town means a) land costs more and b) spinoff development is limited.  And by building on the fringes you can direct development towards areas that need it.  Wasn't Target Field built primarily on a surace lot, near two interstates, mass transit and an already built 'massive parking garage?'  It sounds like a good combination, except for the lack of immediate development next to the stadium.

[GRID]

I thought the prevailing thought was stadiums create spinoff development. Its kinda silly to think that they would build the stadium and voila, a bar district would pop up around it overnight.

They don't.  They create parking lots.  Even when you put a stadium next to an existing and emerging entertainment district (Denver, San Diego etc), development around the stadium can and usually does tend to actually slow due to the value of parking lots and the annoyances of traffic and parking congestion during games.

[trailerkid]

it's an ugly, isolated location. that's all i'm saying. for millions of locals and tourists, a baseball game might be the only reason he/she comes downtown. they're probably not going to think downtown MPLS is horrible, but this property doesn't paint the city in the light it deserves. i'm not sure why you'd OK a location for a $300 M project between a hideous 1980s arena, parking garage, and a power plant.

as someone else mentioned it'd be the KC equivalent to squeezing a baseball stadium between the Star press and the At+t building...BUT you'd need to add a parking garage the size of the City Market + a massive power plant next to it. i'm not sure a surface parking lot is worse.