Downtown Baseball Stadium

[GRID]

I could be wrong but I don’t know anyone who’s living downtown because their job or office is there. Most everyone I know who lives down there is because they want the downtown experience. Although most of my friends are in their 20’s, but I figure that’s most of downtown.

But that's my point. Is there a finite amount of the population willing to do that? I think there is. KC has been playing catch up by even giving people that want to be downtown an option. Those people have been moving downtown and would live there no matter where they work.

But eventually I think demand will slow once everybody that wants to live downtown no matter what is there. In order to sustain the same type of growth and go to the next level (more expensive high-rise construction etc), I think you are going to have to improve the job market and corporate presence downtown.

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my opinion. If you look at cities with sustained residential high-rise construction (Denver, Austin, Charlotte, Nashville, DC, Seattle et), you have a very active and growing downtown job market too.

[AlkaliAxel]

I think one thing that could buy some more voters is actually having the stadium designed and showing the visual of it to people. Just let people visualize what they could have, instead of letting nimby’s tell everyone horror stories.

[earthling]

^Hopefully KC doesn't become those cities. You're making an assumption that more downtown jobs are needed to support more downtown residential. Yes that happens in high growth cities, somehow if KC isn't doing what those cities do then it's almost a failure to you. There are countless examples of urbane thriving neighborhoods that exist with zero office presence and needing to commute. Downtown KC will have more than good enough balance even during down office jobs periods, even if residential somehow surpasses employment base (it won't). But looking at the trend of pro biz jobs, there doesn't seem to be a concern to begin with. WFH is more an impact in the short term.

[AlkaliAxel]

^Hopefully KC doesn't become those cities. You're making an assumption that more downtown jobs are needed to support more downtown residential. Yes that happens in high growth cities, somehow if KC isn't doing what those cities do then it's almost a failure to you. There are countless examples of urbane thriving neighborhoods that exist with zero office presence and needing to commute. Downtown KC will have more than good enough balance even during down office jobs periods, even if residential somehow surpasses employment base (it won't). But looking at the trend of pro biz jobs, there doesn't seem to be a concern to begin with. WFH is more an impact in the short term.

I think that the fact KC is supposedly “not bringing jobs downtown” but yet its still booming should really be a wake up call to the city and business leaders that downtown is where people want to be and we need to start building speculative buildings, not being slow and waiting when the evidence is all there.

[Riverite]

^Hopefully KC doesn't become those cities. You're making an assumption that more downtown jobs are needed to support more downtown residential. Yes that happens in high growth cities, somehow if KC isn't doing what those cities do then it's almost a failure to you. There are countless examples of urbane thriving neighborhoods that exist with zero office presence and needing to commute. Downtown KC will have more than good enough balance even during down office jobs periods, even if residential somehow surpasses employment base (it won't). But looking at the trend of pro biz jobs, there doesn't seem to be a concern to begin with. WFH is more an impact in the short term.

I think that the fact KC is supposedly “not bringing jobs downtown” but yet its still booming should really be a wake up call to the city and business leaders that downtown is where people want to be and we need to start building speculative buildings, not being slow and waiting when the evidence is all there.

When it does happen I bet it will be an out of town developer that starts it because KC developers are just more risk adverse but will follow once it works

[normalthings]

^Hopefully KC doesn't become those cities. You're making an assumption that more downtown jobs are needed to support more downtown residential. Yes that happens in high growth cities, somehow if KC isn't doing what those cities do then it's almost a failure to you. There are countless examples of urbane thriving neighborhoods that exist with zero office presence and needing to commute. Downtown KC will have more than good enough balance even during down office jobs periods, even if residential somehow surpasses employment base (it won't). But looking at the trend of pro biz jobs, there doesn't seem to be a concern to begin with. WFH is more an impact in the short term.

The lack of jobs downtown is a weakness. OP, etc are building out somewhat dense and walkable areas. Those are starting to be and will be in the future competition to downtown. Closer to work, cheaper to rent, etc.

Without high income job growth downtown or incentives, higher rise apartment building downtown will stop. GRID is right that we will eventually hit a wall with residential unless job growth happens.

[earthling]

^Not the case in many urbane residential districts in large cities that have few offices. But there isn't really a problem with downtown jobs right now to begin with. There's a problem with many working from home but not with jobs based downtown. And again, the KS side is struggling with job recovery while MO side gaining well above US avg, including many in/near downtown. Also consider that the downtown/Plaza stretch already has a great deal of office space relative to comparable cities.

What's an example of a downtown with a continual residential boost that declined because the job growth didn't keep up?

edit: And what lack of jobs? Downtown still has about 100K it's just that currently many are WFH.

[Riverite]

^Not the case in many urbane residential districts in large cities that have few offices. But there isn't really a problem with downtown jobs right now to begin with. There's a problem with many working from home but not with jobs based downtown. And again, the KS side is struggling with job recovery while MO side gaining well above US avg, including many in/near downtown. Also consider that the downtown/Plaza stretch already has a great deal of office space relative to comparable cities.

What's an example of a downtown with a continual residential boost that declined because the job growth didn't keep up?

Also as the northland and eastern Jackson county is really picking up steam I find it hard to see how companies can continue justifying joco

[earthling]

^If measured by office vacancy, Northland vacancy is worst in the metro, E Jaxco doesn't have much space and city core in relatively good shape. Measured by BLS, MO side getting the significant office job growth, better than US avg. Factoring the two together as well as downtown/midtown flex space doing well, a good chunk of growth likely in city core (and Cerner) but might be hard to see right now with the WFH thing. This downtown decline scare chatter is much ado about nothing. Baseless.

[AlkaliAxel]

Fully agree no matter what we need to keep getting jobs downtown. I thought we had momentum going with Waddell coming and Strata being built for more Class-A space and then it died.

[earthling]

^And there are signs there might be downtown job growth but hard to tell because of WFH. However it's possible to have healthy downtown with more residential growth than job growth. Vancouver had that in the 90s and early 2000s.

[normalthings]

However it's possible to have healthy downtown with more residential growth than job growth. Vancouver had that in the 90s and early 2000s.

What is the downtown job growth from 2000-2020? Seems like many higher paying employers left and while we added hospitality and leasure jobs those aren't comparable.

[earthling]

^There were peaks of 120K yet downtown is in better shape than since the 70s. Case in point. Would be a bonus to continue job growth but not required for a healthy downtown if offset by enough population growth and events. The original claim was that if downtown doesn't grow jobs, the population growth won't continue. Am not aware of any examples of that.

[normalthings]

if offset by enough population growth and events.

What I and I think others are saying is that we are going to reach a point where additional population growth is not going to be possible without job growth. Demand will be fully satiated

[earthling]

Examples?

[beautyfromashes]

I would anticipate that office space will see a boom similar to the recent residential one where demand is high but supply almost non-existent due to covid concern and shutdown. It's a perfect time for office speculation and buying of properties that are depressed due to perceived future lack of demand.

[beautyfromashes]

I think one thing that could buy some more voters is actually having the stadium designed and showing the visual of it to people. Just let people visualize what they could have, instead of letting nimby’s tell everyone horror stories.

Cause it's good to let me people hate on a stadium design as soon as possible?

[AlkaliAxel]

I think one thing that could buy some more voters is actually having the stadium designed and showing the visual of it to people. Just let people visualize what they could have, instead of letting nimby’s tell everyone horror stories.

Cause it's good to let me people hate on a stadium design as soon as possible?

If KC really has the best design firm here locally, they shouldn't be getting many complaints on the stadium design. I think they should take it a step further and design the whole district if they can too.

[Riverite]

From Q’s Facebook, looks like he is serious about playing ball and testing the waters.

“ A few thoughts on the Royals to downtown discussion.

1. The Royals will continue to play in Kansas City, MO for the next 50 years, so ignore comments suggesting otherwise.

2. The real debate of downtown baseball is a funding question, not an infrastructure/is it good question.

Re (2), downtown baseball works and stimulates development in St. Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Denver, MPLS, and the list goes on. It makes sense and can stimulate more development around the park and team revenue

Re (2), on parking, no downtown is not "too crowded." Have you been lately? We have space and ways in and out. I have been to Truman Sports Complex lately and everyone exiting a giant parking lot at once isn't a cup of tea. I can see easier ingress/egress for a full bball game DT.

Re (2), I see lots of adaptive reuse models for (eventually old) Kauffman Stadium. I hate tearing things down (Old Buck O'Neil Bridge; extra KCI terminals; stadiums). You get a concert/sports/convention venue w/concrete to last forever and whatever the Chiefs may want to do.

Now re (1)/$$, that should be the debate. If folks are thinking a KCMO funded alone model, that would be tough/imprudent. A bistate would be preferred, but would KS play ball? Extension in JaxCo alone will some day be needed on new round of renos, but are we there yet?

And, yes re (1)/$$, if completely privately financed--the free Maserati approach--I think we'd all be game.

https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/edit ... 17618.html”

[KCPowercat]

There is 0% chance the Royals are staying at Kauffman.