Downtown Baseball Stadium

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Oak is closed for sure on the renderings we've all seen. Truman is tunneled under the park cap.

While I know closing Oak is hated by some, it creates a really cool pedestrian experience. The bridge over Truman funnels to the upper concourse which is acts as an outfield plaza in between the buildings and stadium. My favorite angle of the stadium:

Oak closing to vehicle traffic is a non-starter is the issue. Having that many thoroughfares over 670 closed (when you include the Cap closures and Grands frequency of closure) destroys any hope of Streetcar being functional unless Main was closed to vehicle traffic and became a transit-way.

I think there's probably a solution that makes everyone happy and allows Oak to close. Does walnut remain open?

The only way to keep Oak open would be to slam the stadium up against Grand, which eliminates the nice wide sidewalks needed for heavy pedestrian traffic. Even if Oak remains open, it will be closed on game days so it seems like the problem will need to be addressed either way.

Hypothetically, what if we figure out a way to never close Grand outside of a few non-baseball game days a year?

Just spit-balling, I think there are ways to do this right and ensure we don't screw over the much needed streetcar.

Losing parking on Grand would be paramount. It’s 65’ currently from Curb to Curb. We could go to 11’ car lanes, maintain the bike lanes, and maybe lose the center turning, but even if that is kept you can still gain near 20’ of sidewalk width if you include both sides, if you double load the eastern side of grand with the sidewalk addition and dogleg the roadway you can gain all of that adjacent to the stadium. I’d say doing that would make it work.

[Belvidere]

Oak closing to vehicle traffic is a non-starter is the issue. Having that many thoroughfares over 670 closed (when you include the Cap closures and Grands frequency of closure) destroys any hope of Streetcar being functional unless Main was closed to vehicle traffic and became a transit-way.

It seems we've reached a new phase for downtown. 20 years ago there were very few people downtown, but they were people that were committed to urban environment and the arts and uniqueness. We've seen the area grow substantially which has largely allowed it to be a place for suburbanites to also come and enjoy. But, as the momentum grows, there will be conflict between urban design and suburban demands. I really don't know who will win. Will it be the streetcar, or parking garages? Street-level activity or pedestrian bridges? Historic preservation or eminent domain and fake brick facades? Street grid or teardowns and mini-mansions? I don't know if we've created enough urban-minded people that will resist the huge wave of suburban ones that are coming. It's going to move fast.

That's my sense. There are stadium deals being pushed like this all around the country, but it's a loser's game for taxpayers.

https://www.cagw.org/reporting/fields-o ... SAuCfhM8Io

I would be pretty excited about this if the Royals and investors were picking up the tab, but that's not what any of this is about. It's about making them money, and it looks like Cordish made some kind of play that was successful.

The South Loop cap is not a public park. It's a publicly accessible private park, which means it will be pretty tightly controlled and surveilled, so outsiders feel comfortable being there.

The mallification of downtown urban settings is a real trend, and unfortunately, Kansas City is on the cusp. That ferris wheel? Everybody has one. Check.

Suburbanites are the ones who are winning in this scenario. Most of the speculators in my neighborhood do not live anywhere near us, for example. The people who set up dedicated Airbnbs were also outsiders. They evicted long-term tenants. They live in places with less pollution, less crime, and better schools, as we turn ourselves inside out to entertain them and pick up the tab.

I would be very interested in the conversation, however, that did multiple things at once. If a stadium could renew a neighborhood instead of tearing one down, I'm listening. If a stadium can expand daily transit and transit investment, I'm interested. If it could be combined with decommissioning the North Loop, then I'm excited. If they will give money to the housing authority to improve public housing, and make a far more robust voucher system, that would be incredible.

But that's not the conversation we are going to be allowed to have.

[DColeKC]

And so it begins.

[KCPowercat]

Yeah if needs more space, just find a way to route oak into locust. Might be tough with the bridge though

[KCPowercat]

And so it begins.

What is incorrect?

[taxi]

Good question.

[DColeKC]

^ I'm not saying any of it's wrong. Outside of the numbers used, it's just a political position.

We said it was coming, so here it is. KC's biggest anti-development group back at it, attempting to continue to slow our cities progress at all costs.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Oak closing to vehicle traffic is a non-starter is the issue. Having that many thoroughfares over 670 closed (when you include the Cap closures and Grands frequency of closure) destroys any hope of Streetcar being functional unless Main was closed to vehicle traffic and became a transit-way.

It seems we've reached a new phase for downtown. 20 years ago there were very few people downtown, but they were people that were committed to urban environment and the arts and uniqueness. We've seen the area grow substantially which has largely allowed it to be a place for suburbanites to also come and enjoy. But, as the momentum grows, there will be conflict between urban design and suburban demands. I really don't know who will win. Will it be the streetcar, or parking garages? Street-level activity or pedestrian bridges? Historic preservation or eminent domain and fake brick facades? Street grid or teardowns and mini-mansions? I don't know if we've created enough urban-minded people that will resist the huge wave of suburban ones that are coming. It's going to move fast.

That's my sense. There are stadium deals being pushed like this all around the country, but it's a loser's game for taxpayers.

https://www.cagw.org/reporting/fields-o ... SAuCfhM8Io

I would be pretty excited about this if the Royals and investors were picking up the tab, but that's not what any of this is about. It's about making them money, and it looks like Cordish made some kind of play that was successful.

The South Loop cap is not a public park. It's a publicly accessible private park, which means it will be pretty tightly controlled and surveilled, so outsiders feel comfortable being there.

The mallification of downtown urban settings is a real trend, and unfortunately, Kansas City is on the cusp. That ferris wheel? Everybody has one. Check.

Suburbanites are the ones who are winning in this scenario. Most of the speculators in my neighborhood do not live anywhere near us, for example. The people who set up dedicated Airbnbs were also outsiders. They evicted long-term tenants. They live in places with less pollution, less crime, and better schools, as we turn ourselves inside out to entertain them and pick up the tab.

I would be very interested in the conversation, however, that did multiple things at once. If a stadium could renew a neighborhood instead of tearing one down, I'm listening. If a stadium can expand daily transit and transit investment, I'm interested. If it could be combined with decommissioning the North Loop, then I'm excited. If they will give money to the housing authority to improve public housing, and make a far more robust voucher system, that would be incredible.

But that's not the conversation we are going to be allowed to have.

Any study measuring only the direct tax benefits and income to a city from a stadium, and not measuring secondary and tertiary economic impacts is flawed from the start.

It’s like saying the Interstate system doesn’t directly make a profit so it’s fleecing tax payers, instead of addressing the logistical benefits provided to society from it, and the economic return from that.

[Highlander]

And so it begins.

What is incorrect?

That they have a better vision for the future is one thing that is wrong. The visions are not mutually exclusive despite their insistence that it's either or.

[bricknose]

This is the type of rhetoric I don't like.

I would be pretty excited about this if the Royals and investors were picking up the tab, but that's not what any of this is about. It's about making them money, and it looks like Cordish made some kind of play that was successful.

Yes, the stadium is for-profit. So what? Yes, private investment is picking up most of the tab. the 3/8 percent sales tax is only going to hit about $60 per Jackson County resident per year. Does Cordish have some history of being a mustache-twirling villain that makes everyone assume this is all some pretense for him to turn KC into a shit-hole?

The mallification of downtown urban settings is a real trend, and unfortunately, Kansas City is on the cusp. That ferris wheel? Everybody has one. Check.

How is having a ferris wheel at an entertainment district "mallification"? It's not a shopping center.

Suburbanites are the ones who are winning in this scenario. Most of the speculators in my neighborhood do not live anywhere near us, for example. The people who set up dedicated Airbnbs were also outsiders. They evicted long-term tenants. They live in places with less pollution, less crime, and better schools, as we turn ourselves inside out to entertain them and pick up the tab.

This couldn't be more the opposite of the truth. The development, and thus the investment is in the urban core. That helps urban KC, because that's where the money is going. Even if it draws tens of thousands of subrubanites, they are spending money in the urban core, which means they're funding things like public transportation with their spending.

I would be very interested in the conversation, however, that did multiple things at once. If a stadium could renew a neighborhood instead of tearing one down, I'm listening. If a stadium can expand daily transit and transit investment, I'm interested. If it could be combined with decommissioning the North Loop, then I'm excited. If they will give money to the housing authority to improve public housing, and make a far more robust voucher system, that would be incredible.

This is ludicrous. You want an East Crossroads project with a focused scope to be tied to a completely unrelated North Loop renovation? If that was how development worked, where every major new addition needed to come bundled with some unrelated improvement elsewhere, literally no development would happen.

But, as I mentioned previously, by bringing in suburbanites and their money to be spent in the downtown, more tax dollars are raised to fund major projects like the North Loop redevelopment. In fact, it's literally the only way to raise the money for that kind of thing apart from increasing taxes or population density.

And for the record, this will expand public transportation because it:
1. Invites, or even forces, suburban visitors to use the streetcar, showing them that public transportation isn't so bad.
2. Brings people into the streetcar's taxable district, which raises money to fund the streetcar.

[bricknose]

And so it begins.

Their math is just off. The median income in Jackson County is about $32k. $167/year is more than 3/8 of a percent of their entire gross income. This is a sales tax, not an income tax. At least if they want to be honest about it. Maybe they took the average, intending to intentionally lie and mislead.

Their "vision for KC" isn't worth shit if it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of actually working. Idealism of this degree is the death of real progress.

[KCPowercat]

I mean everybody knew that group would be against this, why give them more views?

[bricknose]

And so it begins.

How much influence do these dipshit propagandists really have? Please tell me it’s nearly none.

[shinatoo]

I don't want to pay for a billionaire's new stadium, I also don't want to pay for low-income housing, mental healthcare, and schools. Or frankly police and firefighters. But I'm also smart enough to realize that all those things, in their way, are a benefit to our city.

[DColeKC]

I mean everybody knew that group would be against this, why give them more views?

They're going to make plenty of noise, I thought it would be fun to see their supporters in here.

[DColeKC]

And so it begins.

How much influence do these dipshit propagandists really have? Please tell me it’s nearly none.

Enough to have slowed various projects and get some city ordinances passed that really make zero sense.

I tend to see their stuff being shared by Hartzel Gray who is a giant hypocrite as he makes his money working for billionaires.

[Metro]

is KC Tennants powerful enough to kill this project?

[Highlander]

And so it begins.

Their math is just off. The median income in Jackson County is about $32k. $167/year is more than 3/8 of a percent of their entire gross income. This is a sales tax, not an income tax. At least if they want to be honest about it. Maybe they took the average, intending to intentionally lie and mislead.

Their "vision for KC" isn't worth shit if it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of actually working. Idealism of this degree is the death of real progress.

And a sales tax is shared by more than just the residents of the city. I live in Kansas but spend a lot of time in Missouri and nearly all of my entertainment budget and many of my day to day purchases are spent in Missouri. All visitors coming in from out of town for a Chiefs game, an NCAA or B12 tournament or concert contribute to the sales tax.

[bricknose]

I don't want to pay for a billionaire's new stadium, I also don't want to pay for low-income housing, mental healthcare, and schools. Or frankly police and firefighters. But I'm also smart enough to realize that all those things, in their way, are a benefit to our city.

Downtown development is also a benefit to the city, even if you were paying for the stadium in full (which you won’t be, not even close). Having something like a stadium means other developers have confidence of a steady audience to the region, making them more inclined to make risky investments in the area.

But if you’re principally against all public funding, then at least you’re a consistent Libertarian.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

is KC Tennants powerful enough to kill this project?

Yes*