KCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 7:20 am
Where are you getting ready village is their first choice? Everything I've gathered is they are focused on on 18th and Vine space
This article says East Village is the teams preferred site. But that County and KCPS officials prefer 18th and Vine.
Officials at Jackson County and Kansas City Public Schools, along with U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, want the Royals to select another site they’ve considered near the 18th and Vine Historic Jazz District.
Without making comment on which site is preferable, one thing that is getting absurd is KCPS role in development. Fine if they think they want to provide input on the level of tax incentive...but now that they seem to explicitly want to actually direct the location and type of developments it seems like they are over stepping. It seems like they really think they know how development in the city should play out and any one that has other ideas is just trying to hurt the district. They seem to revel in the power play tactics.
Its such a Kansas City move to landbank properties in an area (EV) for decades andt hen when someone comes along with a real proposal, a completely new area that is currently occupied and not development ready pops up and competes for the development. This is exactly why the Fed complex did not get built in the EV. KC's disparate gov entities competing with themselves.
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 7:20 am
Where are you getting ready village is their first choice? Everything I've gathered is they are focused on on 18th and Vine space
This article says East Village is the teams preferred site. But that County and KCPS officials prefer 18th and Vine.
Officials at Jackson County and Kansas City Public Schools, along with U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, want the Royals to select another site they’ve considered near the 18th and Vine Historic Jazz District.
Without making comment on which site is preferable, one thing that is getting absurd is KCPS role in development. Fine if they think they want to provide input on the level of tax incentive...but now that they seem to explicitly want to actually direct the location and type of developments it seems like they are over stepping. It seems like they really think they know how development in the city should play out and any one that has other ideas is just trying to hurt the district. They seem to revel in the power play tactics.
I believe KCPS is campaigning for this site because they want to sell the Manual Tech Campus. Not because they want to start dictating city planning.
I believe KCPS is campaigning for this site because they want to sell the Manual Tech Campus. Not because they want to start dictating city planning.
Maybe. But their quotes have other issues embedded in them in addition to selling the campus.
KCPS Superintendent Mark Bedell said he would prefer to see the stadium go on that site because of its ability to bring reinvestment and jobs to families on the East Side.
“I think it’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something that’s truly visionary and a catalyst for a part of the city that so many claim to want to lift up,” he told The Star. “But when we have a prime chance to do it, good intentions often waver and we shift back into doing things based on business transactions and who we are connected with rather than serving the greater good of the city.”
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 7:20 am
Where are you getting ready village is their first choice? Everything I've gathered is they are focused on on 18th and Vine space
This article says East Village is the teams preferred site. But that County and KCPS officials prefer 18th and Vine.
Officials at Jackson County and Kansas City Public Schools, along with U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, want the Royals to select another site they’ve considered near the 18th and Vine Historic Jazz District.
Without making comment on which site is preferable, one thing that is getting absurd is KCPS role in development. Fine if they think they want to provide input on the level of tax incentive...but now that they seem to explicitly want to actually direct the location and type of developments it seems like they are over stepping. It seems like they really think they know how development in the city should play out and any one that has other ideas is just trying to hurt the district. They seem to revel in the power play tactics.
Thanks and my apologies, I should just read the story first!
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 7:20 am
Where are you getting ready village is their first choice? Everything I've gathered is they are focused on on 18th and Vine space
I’ve not got this impression. 18th and Vine is a feel good idea but not the smartest move or even best idea for this city.
Baseball stadiums alone don’t guarantee development or success of an area. Look at Baltimore. Location actually has had a negative impact on attendance.
I also think this will take so much private money that Sherman will take on additional investors who will much prefer the East Village location.
I believe KCPS is campaigning for this site because they want to sell the Manual Tech Campus. Not because they want to start dictating city planning.
Maybe. But their quotes have other issues embedded in them in addition to selling the campus.
KCPS Superintendent Mark Bedell said he would prefer to see the stadium go on that site because of its ability to bring reinvestment and jobs to families on the East Side.
“I think it’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something that’s truly visionary and a catalyst for a part of the city that so many claim to want to lift up,” he told The Star. “But when we have a prime chance to do it, good intentions often waver and we shift back into doing things based on business transactions and who we are connected with rather than serving the greater good of the city.”
KCPS has made it known on other developments that they want to be a part of the incentive discussion earlier in the process. It's something a few city council members are supportive of. Not surprised this is happening here and I'd imagine that trend will continue
phuqueue wrote: ↑Sun May 15, 2022 3:19 pm
It's naive to think that "sentimentality" is the main force animating opposition to a new stadium or that opposition will be meaningfully diminished because "sentimental" people aren't paying attention to the day-to-day game results. You aren't going to sneak a generational project past people just because the team isn't playing well right now. If you think a lot of people aren't paying attention because the team is so bad (probably true), ask yourself how those people will be convinced to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds on a team they can't even be bothered to watch. Regardless of whether they are closely following the 2022 Royals, you are not going to catch them sleeping on a costly proposal for a new stadium.
Because if they’re winning then you’ll just get “well the stadium is selling out, we’re winning…why change anything? This is working great”
People will want change more when things aren’t going well. Or atleast they’ll be more open to it. And honestly, yeah I don’t think people are as attached to staying at Kauffman when nobody’s even going to it the past few years. It’s harder to let go of something you’re using a lot.
I understand that's your reasoning, I'm just saying it's simplistic and wrong. There are simply much better reasons to be for or against a new stadium than "sentimentality," and those on the margins who actually are animated mainly by "sentimentality" are probably, by and large, the ones who still care enough about the team to follow them closely through yet another disappointing summer of incompetence (and so are going to be there to vote against the new stadium regardless of whether the team is on pace for a hundred wins or a hundred losses). I don't really think the team's current performance is going to have a huge impact on the stadium debate either way, but to the extent that it has any impact, it's just much more plausible for that impact to be negative toward a new stadium. Just as incumbent candidates do better in elections shortly following a home win, voters are also probably more likely to want to hand tons of public money over to the Royals when they are feeling more sanguine toward the team, and conversely, more likely to tell the Royals to kick rocks when their on-field performance suggests that might be all they're good at anyway. Either way, this effect will only be felt at the margins, so it won't matter unless the vote is exceptionally close to begin with (assuming there is a vote -- if, as many in this thread hope, a huge expenditure of public funds can be made without public input, then the team's on-field performance becomes totally moot).
Kudos to the Star to providing some unique and moderately detailed/researched story about the new stadium proposal. Generally I agree that both potential properties have positives, but I think that indeed being directly downtown in the East Village seems like a no-brainer option but I can see why 18V is in contention. Would be good for the area for that additional foot traffic to the NLBM and the bars/restaurants in the area.
However, as disucssed the stadium by itself cannot completely change an area. Secondly, it's just too far/isolated from the streetcar and larger downtown, especially P&L. I think EV is the best option. Hopefully, since the ATA and KCPS are willing to sell those big parcels for a new stadium,they'd also be willing to listen to a new mixed use development or simialer type of re-vitalization on the same site, as the area definitely needs new life.
normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 1:50 am
There are 2 ways to pay for this stadium: redevelopment district and/or stadium tax. Both options favor 18th Vine.
A redevelopment district works best at 18th Vine where there is more space, the government already owns a lot of it, and land prices are low.
Politicians and community groups support 18th Vine the most of any stadium location
The politicians are more concerned with legacy than efficiency. There are much higher costs for site prep, infrastructure, and transit just to bring it on par with the East Village site. Oh yeah, and KCATA already has momentum developing their old HQ, ideally to build equity towards the relocation to 10th and Main. The community in general doesn't think things threw in Kansas City and just gets emotional and loud. Fact is, East Village has better potential and wouldn't only service the black community but the Hispanic community as well as a MUCH DENSER neighborhood; and lets be real the promises are fickle and as simple as allocating funds to a random organization which requires nothing of physical location. Lets not forget the East Jackson County crowd who a typically frequents games. Were you aware you could go 71 South to 70 East with zero trouble but 71 North (which currently doesn't even have an exit) to 70 East connection doesn't exist. The site immediately East to the 12th St location has 3-4 blocks that could be capped, would not require demolition, has far better transit access, and doesn't get talked about by hypocrites like Cleaver who don't have a clear vision with the Council members in the City District he keeps his Congressional Office in. Paseo West would blow up and prevent gentrification elsewhere. The Jazz District would be better off improving security and developing into an actual human scale neighborhood again.
phuqueue wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 9:04 am
then the team's on-field performance becomes totally moot).
I understand your logic as well. And you might be right, or maybe I’m right.
But if we’re being truly honest, we all know deep down either way whether they’re winning or losing these same people are gonna find a reason why they don’t wanna move the stadium.
Wish it could go on the west side of 71. 71 will create such a barrier if the stadium is east of the highway. I don't like East Village either though unless there is a serious plan to build up the area east of the freeway loop and or cover the freeway loop.
I just don't see how sticking a stadium in that area of downtown will do much. It's landlocked by highways and most of the surrounding development is government buildings which may as well be parking lots as far as how they will interact with a stadium.
If we have to go with these two sites, I would probably choose 18th and Vine. At least the stadium will face something besides a highway as it could really anchor the jazz district, the museums etc. Also, while the east village is a lot closer to the P&L district, a jazz district location would be closer to more of downtown like Crown Center etc.
GRID wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 11:09 am
Wish it could go on the west side of 71. 71 will create such a barrier if the stadium is east of the highway. I don't like East Village either though unless there is a serious plan to build up the area east of the freeway loop and or cover the freeway loop.
I just don't see how sticking a stadium in that area of downtown will do much. It's landlocked by highways and most of the surrounding development is government buildings which may as well be parking lots as far as how they will interact with a stadium.
If we have to go with these two sites, I would probably choose 18th and Vine. At least the stadium will face something besides a highway as it could really anchor the jazz district, the museums etc. Also, while the east village is a lot closer to the P&L district, a jazz district location would be closer to more of downtown like Crown Center etc.
Stadium needs to be close to food and drink options. Not museums or other attractions. Baseball games will help fuel existing bars and restaurants if placed in the right location but it makes no sense to place it close to something like Crown Center for the 5% of fans coming into town making it vacation and wanting to see all the sights.
The city overestimated the tax revenue for PNL and this would be a smart move to bolster those revenues. Not to mention, this would be a great case study in why investment and PPP's are crucial not only for the immediate future but 15-20 years out.
Let's double down on PNL, Crossroads and Rivermarket instead of diluting the overall success because 18th and Vine has never taken off. A baseball stadium won't fix it either, it will be so disconnected from what most people consider downtown and all the people who've been waiting to jump on development opportunities won't hesitate to spend on EV location but will pump the breaks quick on a 18th and Vine location. From what I've been told.
GRID wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 11:09 am
Wish it could go on the west side of 71. 71 will create such a barrier if the stadium is east of the highway. I don't like East Village either though unless there is a serious plan to build up the area east of the freeway loop and or cover the freeway loop.
I just don't see how sticking a stadium in that area of downtown will do much. It's landlocked by highways and most of the surrounding development is government buildings which may as well be parking lots as far as how they will interact with a stadium.
If we have to go with these two sites, I would probably choose 18th and Vine. At least the stadium will face something besides a highway as it could really anchor the jazz district, the museums etc. Also, while the east village is a lot closer to the P&L district, a jazz district location would be closer to more of downtown like Crown Center etc.
People are already buying up land in Paseo West. The connection to P&L can be established on 12th between Grand and Oak. I would rather see the extra money spent on an East Loop cap than a 71N to 70E connection that will be necessary, or did you forget your points on all the East Jackson County residents that make up a significant chunk of the fan base.
GRID wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 11:09 am
Wish it could go on the west side of 71. 71 will create such a barrier if the stadium is east of the highway. I don't like East Village either though unless there is a serious plan to build up the area east of the freeway loop and or cover the freeway loop.
I just don't see how sticking a stadium in that area of downtown will do much. It's landlocked by highways and most of the surrounding development is government buildings which may as well be parking lots as far as how they will interact with a stadium.
If we have to go with these two sites, I would probably choose 18th and Vine. At least the stadium will face something besides a highway as it could really anchor the jazz district, the museums etc. Also, while the east village is a lot closer to the P&L district, a jazz district location would be closer to more of downtown like Crown Center etc.
Stadium needs to be close to food and drink options. Not museums or other attractions. Baseball games will help fuel existing bars and restaurants if placed in the right location but it makes no sense to place it close to something like Crown Center for the 5% of fans coming into town making it vacation and wanting to see all the sights.
The city overestimated the tax revenue for PNL and this would be a smart move to bolster those revenues. Not to mention, this would be a great case study in why investment and PPP's are crucial not only for the immediate future but 15-20 years out.
Let's double down on PNL, Crossroads and Rivermarket instead of diluting the overall success because 18th and Vine has never taken off. A baseball stadium won't fix it either, it will be so disconnected from what most people consider downtown and all the people who've been waiting to jump on development opportunities won't hesitate to spend on EV location but will pump the breaks quick on a 18th and Vine location. From what I've been told.
Thanks for your logic. I feel like alot of people are wanting this 18th and Vine location for the wrong reasons too.
^ I feel like you are scared that a ballpark in the Vine district won't help the P&L district. I really think that a ballpark anywhere in the downtown area (including the Jazz district) will be of tremendous benefit to the P&L district. The district can only support so many people and would likely be overwhelmed if a stadium is too close. If 25,000 people go to a game in the jazz district, I'm sure that a good amount of them would make it to the P&L district before and after the games and they would be the actual customers of the district, not just people parking in the P&L garages.
If the stadium is too close to the P&L district, the district would likely be totally dead "during" games.
If the stadium were in downtown, but not just blocks away, the P&L district could still function yet benefit from fans before and after the games.
This is just from my experience in DC, Baltimore and many other stadiums across the country.
Last edited by GRID on Mon May 16, 2022 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
