Downtown Baseball Stadium

[im2kull]

Clay and Platte combined are half the size of Jackson. A Royals only tax would only need to be half the amount since the Chiefs are not involved. So the same 3/8 tax should raise about the same amount for the Royals. However, I think they can do it with state only money in the NKC site. It will be far cheaper than downtown with less opposition.

I said this way earlier in the thread but the NKC site will be hundreds of millions of dollars cheaper for the Royals

Why?

Because it's owned by the Sherman's best friend and has essentially already been gifted to them if they want it. In fact, that site was specifically put together by Sherman's best friend because of Jackson County dicking around and giving the Sherman's a bad time. The fact that they could have simply had this for almost next to nothing yet still pursued a downtown stadium should tell you how adamant they are to truly investing in downtown. Jackson County and Frank White just cost Kansas City a generational opportunity.

[Cratedigger]

Goes to show how bad the campaign was. Why not say:

We expect this tax to generate 500m.
We will look to the city for 350m.
We will look to the state for 350m.
And we, the royals will put over 500m into the project.

Obviously using clay county info there but same applies to KC. Share info like the fact you’re relocating the crown from Kauffman to the new plaza. Just lots of missed opportunities.

They took every possible opportunity and missed it. Going to take it's someone close to this whole thing soon I'll ask if they privately realized this

They have.

Can confirm.

[neurosyphilis]

I said this way earlier in the thread but the NKC site will be hundreds of millions of dollars cheaper for the Royals

Why?

Because it's owned by the Sherman's best friend and has essentially already been gifted to them if they want it. In fact, that site was specifically put together by Sherman's best friend because of Jackson County dicking around and giving the Sherman's a bad time. The fact that they could have simply had this for almost next to nothing yet still pursued a downtown stadium should tell you how adamant they are to truly investing in downtown. Jackson County and Frank White just cost Kansas City a generational opportunity.

I'd agree that "generational" is an appropriate way to describe a tax burden that would continue through 2064

[GRID]

Why?

Because it's owned by the Sherman's best friend and has essentially already been gifted to them if they want it. In fact, that site was specifically put together by Sherman's best friend because of Jackson County dicking around and giving the Sherman's a bad time. The fact that they could have simply had this for almost next to nothing yet still pursued a downtown stadium should tell you how adamant they are to truly investing in downtown. Jackson County and Frank White just cost Kansas City a generational opportunity.

I'd agree that "generational" is an appropriate way to describe a tax burden that would continue through 2064

If KC is going to permanently have pro sports, it's basically going to have permanent taxes that support having pro sports. Even if it's not a sales tax, the stadiums will be subsidized by tax payers or KC will not have the teams. It is what it is.

[neurosyphilis]

Well, the permanent taxes will at least support permanent sports teams I'm sure!

[GRID]

Just attended a concert in Baltimore. We parked in a huge garage under a major federal building. Hundreds of other cars going to the concert parked there as well.

They have to be making money, I only paid $15 using parkwhiz in advance, but many were paying the $45 fee at the gate.

I'm only saying this because this makes me think that GSA opposition to a stadium in EV may be BS.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Just attended a concert in Baltimore. We parked in a huge garage under a major federal building. Hundreds of other cars going to the concert parked there as well.

They have to be making money, I only paid $15 using parkwhiz in advance, but many were paying the $45 fee at the gate.

I'm only saying this because this makes me think that GSA opposition to a stadium in EV may be BS.

I mean, they’re not outwardly going to talk about their opposition, but their security perimeter is also different from building to building, and there is a different GSA & FPS supervisor for each region.

You can park in the lot adjacent to Richard Bolling for free after working hours FWIW. You can’t access either of the facilities in the EV footprint though, and we have nowhere near the security staff to deal with even minor crowds. The SuperBowl parade was a shitshow for our manning.

[GRID]

Oh, so you must work there. Yeah, I don't know the details or what kind of parking is available on the actual block of the KC fed building. I never really noticed how many fed buildings there are right around the arena and convention center in Baltimore. It's not a great area though. Too many government buildings in one area really destroy an area's ability to be vibrant IMO which is why I have never liked the EV site in KC.

I was just noticing that some of the do sell parking in their garages. I probably park in gov garages all the time for private events in Balt and DC and I have just never paid attention till the KC stadium thing.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Oh, so you must work there. Yeah, I don't know the details or what kind of parking is available on the actual block of the KC fed building. I never really noticed how many fed buildings there are right around the arena and convention center in Baltimore. It's not a great area though. Too many government buildings in one area really destroy an area's ability to be vibrant IMO which is why I have never liked the EV site in KC.

I was just noticing that some of the do sell parking in their garages. I probably park in gov garages all the time for private events in Balt and DC and I have just never paid attention till the KC stadium thing.

Could be Gov lease and managed by a private company as well, which would be the reason for paying to park. None of the actual Federally owned property AFAIK charge for their parking, and are required by law to be accessible to the public.

[bspecht]

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

[GRID]

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

Kind of makes me think Brookside might support extending the streetcar out to them after all.

[Chris Stritzel]

Kind of makes me think Brookside might support extending the streetcar out to them after all.

And Waldo. I think both would support the Streetcar extension. It would also be cheaper to build than the current line.

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

Thanks for sharing this link. Looking through the results, it seems that South KC and the East Side were majority in-favor of Question 1 (some East Side precincts exceeded 64% yes). Makes me wonder what a city-only vote would be like once you get the Northland involved. Would it follow the East and South or would it follow Central? Could those precincts narrowly lost flip to be in-favor? Would a KCMO-only vote lead to higher turnout in the central core and outweigh votes elsewhere?

Very interesting data in that. Lots to think about.

[langosta]

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

Kind of makes me think Brookside might support extending the streetcar out to them after all.

Can not afford it without regional funding, state funding, a federal grant, or getting the cost down.

I vote for lets put some feelers out there and tackle the cost problem.

[GRID]

Kind of makes me think Brookside might support extending the streetcar out to them after all.

And Waldo. I think both would support the Streetcar extension. It would also be cheaper to build than the current line.

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

Thanks for sharing this link. Looking through the results, it seems that South KC and the East Side were majority in-favor of Question 1 (some East Side precincts exceeded 64% yes). Makes me wonder what a city-only vote would be like once you get the Northland involved. Would it follow the East and South or would it follow Central? Could those precincts narrowly lost flip to be in-favor? Would a KCMO-only vote lead to higher turnout in the central core and outweigh votes elsewhere?

Very interesting data in that. Lots to think about.

75th Street would be a great place to end the line. Then build up that entire area around 74th and Wornall.

The right of way is all there. It seems like it would be far cheaper than the Main St extension per mile.

[KC_JAYHAWK]

Kind of makes me think Brookside might support extending the streetcar out to them after all.

And Waldo. I think both would support the Streetcar extension. It would also be cheaper to build than the current line.

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

Thanks for sharing this link. Looking through the results, it seems that South KC and the East Side were majority in-favor of Question 1 (some East Side precincts exceeded 64% yes). Makes me wonder what a city-only vote would be like once you get the Northland involved. Would it follow the East and South or would it follow Central? Could those precincts narrowly lost flip to be in-favor? Would a KCMO-only vote lead to higher turnout in the central core and outweigh votes elsewhere?

Very interesting data in that. Lots to think about.

75th Street would be a great place to end the line. Then build up that entire area around 74th and Wornall.

The right of way is all there. It seems like it would be far cheaper than the Main St extension per mile.

This development has already started. It's a mess over there. I take my boxer to Collar Club for doggy day care and 74th street is closed from Collar Club to Wornall.
https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/80 ... ansas-city

[CrossroadsUrbanApts]

The work around 75th and Wornall is the long-delayed rebuild of the local street and stormwater infrastructure.

https://www.kcmo.gov/Home/Components/Fa ... &sortd=asc

It actually has nothing to do with the new development on the site of the Well. It took the city years to go to court to just get construction easements from a handful of recalcitrant business owners in the area. One big reason why it is so tough to build out infrastructure in infill areas - a few uncooperative property owners can bog things down for years.

I think it would be a close-run vote in Brookside to extend the streetcar down to 75th. But in a few years when the Main St extension is finished - I think it would shift people in favor.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Map of the vote. https://www.datawrapper.de/_/gnIRR/

Kind of makes me think Brookside might support extending the streetcar out to them after all.

Can not afford it without regional funding, state funding, a federal grant, or getting the cost down.

I vote for lets put some feelers out there and tackle the cost problem.

The less arduous base infrastructure requirements might make this cost more manageable than we’d expect. There isn’t a track bed that would need to be built like the roadbed, and there are fewer utilities in the ROW to relocate, but no question, a bigger funding mechanism would need to be realized for it.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

Would it follow the East and South or would it follow Central? Could those precincts narrowly lost flip to be in-favor? Would a KCMO-only vote lead to higher turnout in the central core and outweigh votes elsewhere?

Does anyone really believe that downtown and midtown residents are against the concept of a downtown ballpark?

The fact that this failed so miserably in those precincts but succeeded in the Eastside and Brookside/Waldo really demonstrates what a poor plan this was. These people should have been the champions of a downtown stadium and, instead, they overwhelmingly voted against it. I think downtown and midtown residents were just more wary of the concerns over the businesses, overall Crossroads impact and streetcar/street closures (yes, along with KCT probably having the most influence in Midtown over anywhere else). It really shouldn't be that hard for the Royals to put a plan together that has downtown's support. Do that and I can't imagine the rest of KCMO not following along.

[KC_JAYHAWK]

The work around 75th and Wornall is the long-delayed rebuild of the local street and stormwater infrastructure.

https://www.kcmo.gov/Home/Components/Fa ... &sortd=asc

It actually has nothing to do with the new development on the site of the Well. It took the city years to go to court to just get construction easements from a handful of recalcitrant business owners in the area. One big reason why it is so tough to build out infrastructure in infill areas - a few uncooperative property owners can bog things down for years.

I think it would be a close-run vote in Brookside to extend the streetcar down to 75th. But in a few years when the Main St extension is finished - I think it would shift people in favor.

Yeah, 75th/Wornall seems like it has been a constant mess of construction starts and stops. They need to just rip out Wornall South of 75th street and start over.

[Highlander]

Would it follow the East and South or would it follow Central? Could those precincts narrowly lost flip to be in-favor? Would a KCMO-only vote lead to higher turnout in the central core and outweigh votes elsewhere?

Does anyone really believe that downtown and midtown residents are against the concept of a downtown ballpark?

The fact that this failed so miserably in those precincts but succeeded in the Eastside and Brookside/Waldo really demonstrates what a poor plan this was. These people should have been the champions of a downtown stadium and, instead, they overwhelmingly voted against it. I think downtown and midtown residents were just more wary of the concerns over the businesses, overall Crossroads impact and streetcar/street closures (yes, along with KCT probably having the most influence in Midtown over anywhere else). It really shouldn't be that hard for the Royals to put a plan together that has downtown's support. Do that and I can't imagine the rest of KCMO not following along.

In the east crossroads? It might have been a poor plan but that plan somehow managed to identify the overall best location in downtown that impacted the fewest existing businesses. There were questions about the ultimate financing issues, closure of Oak, Royals contribution and CBA that were all legitimate questions but the perceived threat to the Crossroads never really existed and that was a huge factor, probably bigger than any of the others for people in the urban core acc/to social media.

Downtown has largely become a residential community with good entertainment/restaurant/bar options. It's no longer by any stretch of the imagination the locus of employment in the KC metro. I believe a lot of people simply voted to keep baseball with all its requirements for parking and traffic issues out their neighborhood. Many simply stated that much. Over and over again.

I still can't see East Village working for the Royals. It may have been the preferred site for years but when it really came down to spending (and risking) the money, the downsides of that location started coming into play.