KCRag Forum

normalthings wrote: ↑Sat Aug 28, 2021 2:59 am Navy Yard has been my favorite stadium adjacent redevelopment district. I would much rather build a bunch of 5-15 floor buildings out then wait decades to build it out with a bunch of towers.

Riverite wrote: ↑Fri Aug 27, 2021 5:45 pm

FangKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 27, 2021 5:40 pm DaveKCMO, thinking of the future, since the City and VanTrust will control the East Village parcels, isn't now the time to set up a transportation funding district overlay and get it approved for a streetcar extension through the East Village at least to Charlotte?

If they do an extension they should really have long term plans on how to take it further east

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:34 am
Yeah, they do need to do that because I certainly won't be taking the lead on it (assuming you're talking about a TDD). Streetcar now has its own political momentum that didn't exist in 2011 and 2016, so it should be a lot easier now than it was then.

I wouldn't recommend starting that process yet because you have to define the transportation project and the cost before you even submit a petition to the circuit court. NextRail identified a potential project, but that study is so old now the cost estimate ($107 million) would not be reliable. Also, the 12th Street East corridor's fundamentals (job and residential density) haven't changed much. A new stadium is not reliable daily trip generator if you're following a federal process. As a result, anticipated federal funding was LOW.

And, yes, it needs to go a lot further east than Charlotte if 12th Street becomes an expansion corridor.

The frequent and free BRT service between Wyandotte and Prospect -- Prospect MAX -- will be past it's "useful life" of 12 years in 2031.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:34 am And, yes, it needs to go a lot further east than Charlotte if 12th Street becomes an expansion corridor.

The frequent and free BRT service between Wyandotte and Prospect -- Prospect MAX -- will be past it's "useful life" of 12 years in 2031.

FangKC wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 3:39 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:34 am And, yes, it needs to go a lot further east than Charlotte if 12th Street becomes an expansion corridor.

The frequent and free BRT service between Wyandotte and Prospect -- Prospect MAX -- will be past it's "useful life" of 12 years in 2031.

How about a east-west 12th Street starter line from 12th and Jefferson to Independence and Woodland?

FangKC wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:06 pm The reason I had an end stop (for now) at 12th and Jefferson is because of HNTB, KC Southern, and all those new apartments around that area. If no extension to KC ever happens, this would then be a good last stop.

I don't think the 8th Street tunnel is in good enough condition to run a streetcar through it. The old west entrance is sealed up because of the interstate and the east entrance is inside a parking garage.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1055177 ... a=!3m1!1e3

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.104745 ... 384!8i8192

The extension past Jefferson on 12th will likely have a complex funding situation and uncertainty about how to pay for an extension to KCK. It's certainly a better option I'd think than running it over the Lewis & Clark Viaduct which would likely not capture any transportation district taxes.

From 12th and Jefferson, I'd run the track to Charlotte and turn north to 10th, then go north again at Woodland to Independence Avenue. There is an old Piggly Wiggly market building near that intersection that appears it could easily be converted to a streetcar maintenance shed. Until recently, it was a vehicle repair business.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1052195 ... a=!3m1!1e3

DaveKCMO is correct that the stadium will not be enough of a passenger-generator to sustain a line, so I've tried to pick routes that would serve an employment/employee base as well as stimulate development along the route and ending at a university where students and faculty could benefit.

FangKC wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:15 pm Yes, Aldi would be a great lower-cost option to Cosentino's for residents along the streetcar line.

Paseo West is in an development opportunity zone, so there is potential there for new investment and radical change in that neighborhood.

Riverite wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:12 pm That makes sense would be a good spot, didn’t know the tunnel was that rough. Would be nice to see how it catalyzes development in Paseo heights and would be freat to have a stop only two blocks from aldis

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Sun Sep 05, 2021 3:25 pm I’ve heard before the argument to put a Stadium at 18th Vine is that it can’t create much development there on its own without a stadium, but that East Village can develop without a stadium- but does this new* development recently spurring in Vine make it so that argument is moot for putting the stadium there?

flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 7:19 pm Not necessarily. If the city owns it then the city can get stuck with a stadium it has to maintain. Look at how long Kemper sat mostly unused with the city owing money on it. Look at how the city backed P&L and owed money when the district didn’t earn enough.

We don’t want to own the stadium, the team should.

We want to issue the bonds using incentives from a district but not back them with anything outside the district that the team also owns. At the end of the day, the city should be net zero on the stadium itself and make all its money off the base taxes earned in bars and restaurants not owned by the team, hotel room nights and the like

The only incentives should be to give all stadium and district sales taxes to the team and maybe some parking revenue in city owned garages. If they don’t bring people to games they owe money on the bonds to make up the shortfall, not the city.

This incentivizes a district actually happening because it’s where the team makes it’s money and pays back the bonds.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:26 am

There has already been hundreds of thousands spent behind the scenes by a group working on a downtown stadium. They’re not going to release a plan or site location until it’s a nice and neat package.

Like all stadiums it will be a public-private partnership but the ownership group will technically own it and operate it. The less city involvement the better.

Hopefully, they don’t overestimate the tax revenue this time.

aknowledgeableperson wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 9:24 am Sorry about the late reply but had very limited access to the internet these past 10 days.
I believe you live in some sort of fantasy world if you think the team would own the stadium when the Chiefs and Sporting KC don't own the stadiums they play in. Owning the stadium and any surrounding district means the team becomes major risk takers and speculators, more so than just hopefully putting a winning team on the field. And any bonds issued would be revenue bonds that without city financial backing would definitely be rated as junk bonds and have an extremely high interest rate. If the Royals agreed to such a deal bankruptcy will likely occur.

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:22 am
The new football stadium in LA is privately owned and funded.

aknowledgeableperson wrote: ↑Sun Sep 12, 2021 10:33 am

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:22 am
The new football stadium in LA is privately owned and funded.

That's football not baseball. Big difference. Plus that stadium will house two teams not one.