KCRag Forum

Putting an NFL stadium in Paseo West would be a capitulation. Such a strategic location as GRID says is necessary to reconnect neighborhoods to the east. Putting a football stadium there would be to forsake any possibility of that. And as to the "institutional uses" you refer to NormalThings, those would be low income housing mostly occupied by section 8 tenants. Indeed the need for that housing will never go away but still the area could be densified and reurbanized over time. 20 or 30 years hence this city would rue the day it took up the one natural outlet for affordable housing and neighborhood reintegration with downtown and built a stadium on it.

I think the majority of stadiums have apartments directly adjacent or near adjacent to them.

There aren't that many new baseball stadiums built yearly, or even evey decade. Newest is Atlanta Braves' stadium and that goes way back to 2017 (https://espnlafayette.com/the-ten-newes ... -baseball/).

Most of those are also in already built up areas. Sure, some stadiums may have vacant lots close to them that are left undeveloped after the stadium is complete maybe because of the long construction planning and financing period for a larger tower or a master planned development. You can see that Braves as well as new Busch are good examples that have spin off development integrated into the stadium "neighborhood." Both Phillies and Busch had "Live!" Cordish developments built adjacent to them even!

https://torontoist.com/2016/04/ranking- ... lkability/
Here is an article that ranks the walkability of all MLB stadiums and you'll notice that the majority are in very walkable & urban core areas. My point is that urban baseball is the norm, suburban/unwalkable is not (even though ATL tried their best at walkable/placemaking and that only moved away from the urban core because Cobb County poached the team). https://www.axios.com/local/atlanta/202 ... es-stadium

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 8:30 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 6:44 pm People do want to live near baseball stadiums. It’s just a different energy and experience. Baseball teams practice in their stadiums and obviously have far more game days. I don’t see the point of anyone wanting to live near a NFL stadium though. Not next door at least.

That's what I said. However if you look around the country, there are very few apartment building directly across from baseball stadiums too, Washington DC is becoming quite the exception although the lots closest to the stadium have been the last to develop. Same with Denver, the closer the property was to the stadium, the later it has developed. San Diego's stadium was built directly next to an already booming area.

I think it has more to do with land use, land value and who controls the land directly around stadiums. The land is often more valuable for parking than for development.

The new trend is baseball stadiums includes residential. Teams have figured out ways to generate revenue off the field and outside of the stadium. I’m not sure if Ballpark Village was the first master development to include these things but it certainly kicked off a trend.

The footprint a residential tower takes up represents under 100 surface lot parking spaces that would at most generate a few hundred thousand a season. These towers when full can generate $10,000,000/month in rental income.

Cincinnati, Indy, Denver, Minneapolis, pretty much everyone better or worse than KC gets to have this- but not Kansas City.

Because 'endless parking garages' that every peer seems to deal fine with. Because the TSC is just such a gem that's so much better than this...

https://twitter.com/Bengals/status/1575 ... sJ6k5LdycQ

UMKC Roo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 3:14 pm Cincinnati, Indy, Denver, Minneapolis, pretty much everyone better or worse than KC gets to have this- but not Kansas City.

Because 'endless parking garages' that every peer seems to deal fine with. Because the TSC is just such a gem that's so much better than this...

https://twitter.com/Bengals/status/1575 ... sJ6k5LdycQ

They put the stadiums next to downtown, so I guess people live near the stadiums right? But it's not like the stadiums have caused development. It took like 15 years for that little apartment building to go up between them on top of the parking structures.

I'm not saying the TSC is amazing, I'm saying stadiums don't generate development around them. If you want development around any new downtown stadium, it has to be part of the stadium plan or part of a master plan and it will likely still take a while and a lot of incentives to make it happen. (see STL Ballpark Village and their lone apartment tower.).

The PAC was supposed to have stuff around it. IT's still surrounded by empty lots and underused land. Same with T-Mobile except on the P&L District side which took a decade to put up two buildings.

Can't people be just a little realistic here? There is a serious risk of the entire east side of downtown being parking lots for who knows how long and that's even if the Royals have some grand plan. That doesn't mean don't try, but I really hope KC puts together a plan that can actually be implemented and built along with the stadium. I get this feeling that many Royals fans won't be happy with just a stadium down there surrounded by a deteriorating urban area and gov buildings east of Grand.

High rise construction just does not occur naturally around stadiums. It takes a lot of effort and public money in most cities to force that type of development near a large MLB or NFL stadium and in a city like KC where high-rises just do not go up very often you have to be realistic. If Nashville built a MLB stadium, they would probably get a few developers to do something, but they throw up a dozen towers a year there. It's just not likely that KC will and if they do, it will take a very long time and I hope people are very patient.

EV will not be like LoDo or Gaslamp or Navy Yard anytime soon. It will be interesting if they can even pull off what Cobb County did. That's a fast growing, highly populated, high income suburban area, so it's a very different situation for development.

To be fair: A lot of people want to build around the PAC but Kauffman and related parties have always refused to sell their land or they block the construction of things to the south. EPC and Hotel Bravo are the first time these groups have ok’d something and even then it’s for projects at the far end of doable.

As long as EV Royals development fills up quickly, I am fine with Paseo West Chiefs taking longer to fully fill out. The ability to bring a venue of such a large size to downtown Kansas City is extremely exciting to me. I could see Sporting KC going into West Bottoms or another section of Paseo West allowing all to be connected by a single LRT line.

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 3:59 pm

UMKC Roo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 3:14 pm Cincinnati, Indy, Denver, Minneapolis, pretty much everyone better or worse than KC gets to have this- but not Kansas City.

Because 'endless parking garages' that every peer seems to deal fine with. Because the TSC is just such a gem that's so much better than this...

https://twitter.com/Bengals/status/1575 ... sJ6k5LdycQ

They put the stadiums next to downtown, so I guess people live near the stadiums right? But it's not like the stadiums have caused development. It took like 15 years for that little apartment building to go up between them on top of the parking structures.

I'm not saying the TSC is amazing, I'm saying stadiums don't generate development around them. If you want development around any new downtown stadium, it has to be part of the stadium plan or part of a master plan and it will likely still take a while and a lot of incentives to make it happen. (see STL Ballpark Village and their lone apartment tower.).

Lone apartment tower as of today. The remaining surface parking lot that BPV and OCW sit on will eventually be full of more residential and office towers.

Unless they find something alarming at Arrowhead, it will be 2050 - 2060 before a downtown NFL stadium is a serious reality.

We are in a far more unique situation when comparing our market size and team/stadium history to other cities who have built new stadiums.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 4:08 pm

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 3:59 pm

UMKC Roo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 3:14 pm Cincinnati, Indy, Denver, Minneapolis, pretty much everyone better or worse than KC gets to have this- but not Kansas City.

Because 'endless parking garages' that every peer seems to deal fine with. Because the TSC is just such a gem that's so much better than this...

https://twitter.com/Bengals/status/1575 ... sJ6k5LdycQ

They put the stadiums next to downtown, so I guess people live near the stadiums right? But it's not like the stadiums have caused development. It took like 15 years for that little apartment building to go up between them on top of the parking structures.

I'm not saying the TSC is amazing, I'm saying stadiums don't generate development around them. If you want development around any new downtown stadium, it has to be part of the stadium plan or part of a master plan and it will likely still take a while and a lot of incentives to make it happen. (see STL Ballpark Village and their lone apartment tower.).

Lone apartment tower as of today. The remaining surface parking lot that BPV and OCW sit on will eventually be full of more residential and office towers.

But it took forever to build that tower and it's heavily subsidized like the Light towers in KC. It not like developers are falling all over themselves to throw up un-subsidized luxury towers around Bush Stadium just like they are not doing that in KC. They are doing that in CWE near Forest Park, not near Bush Stadium.

KC sort of has its hands full with the subsidizing of the Light Towers and even with basically free structured garages, it still takes Corish a while to pull the trigger on them. Do you honestly think KCMO city hall is going to just throw another 25 million each in public subsidies at another few towers near a stadium and how quickly would they develop if they did when the Light towers are five years apart. They will be competing for the same people.

I'm saying it will take a ton of city money on top of the stadium to develop the area around the stadium and even then, there is no guarantee they will start construction or build out in a reasonable time frame. And will Modot make the east loop infrastructure look a little less ghetto or will they just continue to patch it up for the next 30 years?

I guess I need to see these plans. I mean if there is a real plan to do some amazing stuff and the city is truly ready to spend a half billion dollars on things other than the stadium to really change the east side of downtown, then I can probably get on board. That would be amazing for sure.

We are so much better than so many of our peers in downtown development.

The one thing that KC gets its ass kicked on compared to its peers is sports venues- Sporting, Chiefs, Royals

Idk why this is the one big piece Kansas City cannot seem to come around on compared to the peers when we do most everything else better than them. We've been the last holdout for over 20+ years now that still refuses to ever go downtown with any of the teams.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 4:08 pm To be fair: A lot of people want to build around the PAC but Kauffman and related parties have always refused to sell their land or they block the construction of things to the south. EPC and Hotel Bravo are the first time these groups have ok’d something and even then it’s for projects at the far end of doable.

As long as EV Royals development fills up quickly, I am fine with Paseo West Chiefs taking longer to fully fill out. The ability to bring a venue of such a large size to downtown Kansas City is extremely exciting to me. I could see Sporting KC going into West Bottoms or another section of Paseo West allowing all to be connected by a single LRT line.

I know the Kauffmans have impacted some, but what about the west side of Broadway? The market is just not supporting development there for some reason or it would have happened by now. And I'm sure something could be built there that would be better than what's there now that the Kauffman's could endorse or maybe they couldn't stop it if they wanted to anyway.

And honestly , if the city is going to subsidize a high end hotel, I think it needs to be larger than that hotel bravo so that it actually adds a major hotel downtown that will actually bring up the numbers. It's telling that they can't build a hotel there without massive incentives when the land already has a parking structure that can be used for the hotel. Same with the Hyatt on Broadway. It also doesn't need a parking structure so the cost to build those should be far less than typical.

UMKC Roo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:11 pm We are so much better than so many of our peers in downtown development.

The one thing that KC gets its ass kicked on compared to its peers is sports venues- Sporting, Chiefs, Royals

Idk why this is the one big piece Kansas City cannot seem to come around on compared to the peers when we do most everything else better than them. We've been the last holdout for over 20+ years now that still refuses to ever go downtown with any of the teams.

I think the time has come for the Royals to go downtown. I just don't think the Chiefs should go downtown. Sporting is probably staying in KCK for at least another decade but Downtown is getting the women's soccer stadium which is the first of its kind in the world.

I just hope the Royals, KCMO, MOdot, Jackson County and the private development community are actually ready to spend some money and take some risks and properly build up the east side of downtown to accommodate a baseball stadium. If not, then what is the point?

Do we really need a Royals entertainment district, Chiefs entertainment district & Power Light district?

Why do we need that many entertainment districts? It feels like something's gotta give. That's way too much and KC will spread itself too thin.

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:16 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 4:08 pm To be fair: A lot of people want to build around the PAC but Kauffman and related parties have always refused to sell their land or they block the construction of things to the south. EPC and Hotel Bravo are the first time these groups have ok’d something and even then it’s for projects at the far end of doable.

As long as EV Royals development fills up quickly, I am fine with Paseo West Chiefs taking longer to fully fill out. The ability to bring a venue of such a large size to downtown Kansas City is extremely exciting to me. I could see Sporting KC going into West Bottoms or another section of Paseo West allowing all to be connected by a single LRT line.

I know the Kauffmans have impacted some, but what about the west side of Broadway? The market is just not supporting development there for some reason or it would have happened by now. And I'm sure something could be built there that would be better than what's there now that the Kauffman's could endorse or maybe they couldn't stop it if they wanted to anyway.

And honestly , if the city is going to subsidize a high end hotel, I think it needs to be larger than that hotel bravo so that it actually adds a major hotel downtown that will actually bring up the numbers. It's telling that they can't build a hotel there without massive incentives when the land already has a parking structure that can be used for the hotel. Same with the Hyatt on Broadway. It also doesn't need a parking structure so the cost to build those should be far less than typical.

Kaufman controlled much of the west side. Recently sold to EPC. Kauffman really looking for highest end luxury developments. Not average apartments and hotels, etc.

How big of a 4 Seasons do you want? I am actually curious of what people are looking for.

Even with all of the incentives, I doubt we can get 5-star above 200 rooms, maybe even less, without direct invest. Do we really need 300+ 5 star rooms? I’m not sure.

UMKC Roo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:22 pm Do we really need a Royals entertainment district, Chiefs entertainment district & Power Light district?

Why do we need that many entertainment districts? It feels like something's gotta give. That's way too much and KC will spread itself too thin.

No.

The Royals district should focus on low-rise residential and retail with a few sports bars mixed in. If it goes in EV the bars will likely be dead on non-game days.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:58 pm The Royals district should focus on low-rise residential and retail with a few sports bars mixed in. If it goes in EV the bars will likely be dead on non-game days.

“Low-rise” like Light 1-3?

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 6:05 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:58 pm The Royals district should focus on low-rise residential and retail with a few sports bars mixed in. If it goes in EV the bars will likely be dead on non-game days.

“Low-rise” like Light 1-3?

No, those would be high-rise buildings unless you disagree with IBC definition.

I'm not saying the Royals should not also do high-rise apartments if they think the market can handle it and if they think they can compete. The smart money would be on low-rise residential though.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 6:07 pm

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 6:05 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:58 pm The Royals district should focus on low-rise residential and retail with a few sports bars mixed in. If it goes in EV the bars will likely be dead on non-game days.

“Low-rise” like Light 1-3?

No, those would be high-rise buildings unless you disagree with IBC definition.

I'm not saying the Royals should not also do high-rise apartments if they think the market can handle it and if they think they can compete. The smart money would be on low-rise residential though.

If they just want low rise then just go to the E Crossroads.

If there’s not gonna be any high rise involved then go to the place with a better streetscape.

"East Crossroads" is kind of hiding the ball as to what people are really advocating for. Y'all want the stadium to come right up to Grand right? That's just the Crossroads. East Crossroads is east of Oak, at least IMO.

FlippantCitizen wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 7:04 pm "East Crossroads" is kind of hiding the ball as to what people are really advocating for. Y'all want the stadium to come right up to Grand right? That's just the Crossroads. East Crossroads is east of Oak, at least IMO.

The streetscape around EV is just so horrifically bad. Imagine they put stadium with horrific EV streetscape *and* you don’t get any high-rise there either. It would be a very sad waste of potential for Royals stadium.

I don’t see how there is salvaging the EV situation unless there’s some high-rise to make up for lack of streetscape.