Downtown Baseball Stadium

eliphar17 · Post by **eliphar17** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:31 pm

What is your list of top cities in the Midwest now?

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:39 pm

Chicago
Minneapolis
Indianapolis
Detroit
Cleveland
but that is just the top 5

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

While the location has many advantages, I agree with the statement about that site not being large enough for a baseball stadium. It would certainly be a tight fit. I'm interested to see a rendering of the stadium at that site. I am not opposed to the site, but question if it's large enough.

I thought the planned location was SW of the I-70 and 71 highway intersection in the Crossroads across from the ATT Longlines Building?

I'd rather see both the arena and the baseball stadium near the downtown loop and KC Live. They need the help more than Crown Center does. However, if commuter rail is ever developed that would bring people to Union Station, it would certainly be convenient.

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 9:18 pm

KCDevin wrote:Chicago
Minneapolis
Indianapolis
Detroit
Cleveland
but that is just the top 5

Is that your opinion? Or was they ranked that way in terms of new development? The Top 5 largest cities in the Midwest are Chicago (8.2 mil), Detroit (4.5 mil), Minneapolis (3 mil), Cleveland (2.9 mil), and St. Louis (2.5 mil). However, these are about 4 years old.

My Top 5 favorite Midwest cities (outside KC) are Chicago (1), Cincinnati (2), Minneapolis (3), Milwaukee (4) and St. Louis (5). The only Midwest city that I have never had the opportunity to visit is Detroit. I hope to get there this year.

As far as the stadium, I was hoping for a location near 18th & Vine.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 9:28 pm

well, just based on what I know of development, population, density, skyline, etc...
Not really an opinion (cause none are close to my top 5 favorites except Chicago) Here is what I see it as of 2020 (or maybe 2030)
Chicago
Minneapolis
Indianapolis
Detroit
Kansas City
cause IMO metro population doesn't do as much for a city as the City Population does. And development is important too. the same for downtown activity.

My top 7 in 2020:

Chicago
Minneapolis
Indianapolis
Detroit
Kansas City
Cleveland
St. Louis

KC_JAYHAWK · Post by **KC_JAYHAWK** » Tue Jan 27, 2004 10:36 pm

dangerboy wrote:We decided to put the Truman Sports Complex where it is, and that is decision we have to live with. Most people agree that the next stadium should go downtown, but we won't need a new stadium for another 30 years. Kauffman is in excellent shape and only needs modest improvements to stay viable.

There are many other things that should be higher priorities than replacing a perfectly good stadium, like a new arena, basic infrastructure, a new Missouri River bridge, mass transit, etc.

I disagree with this thought completely. By the time a new baseball is built (I'm projecting 2008-2012), Kauffman will be 40 years old. There is no conceivable logic to dump hundreds of millions of dollars into what will be a 40 year old structure that is 8 miles from downtown. We can correct the mistakes of the past by planning on a new downtown stadium to be in place in 6-8 years. That gives plenty of time for planning, design and financing.

Mass transit is a waste of money, IMO, especially costly, capital intense projects like light rail. Kansas City is moving in the right direction with BRT, so this argument is moot.

I can't even believe you said we need a new Missouri bridge over a new downtown baseball stadium

Infrastructure is a problem in Kansas City, and I can see your argument, but I think this could be solved by Cauthen's suggestion of issuing a $200M bond issue to catch up on the deferred maintenance. I also think toll roads should be utilized in Missouri, especially 70 and 71.

In my humble opinion a new downtown baseball stadium could work. I personally don't see the attraction that Kauffman receives. I find it a boring and sterile environment going to Royals games, because there is absolutely nothing to do before or after a game. I attended a Yankees game a few years ago and it was a blast after the game because everybody filed out of the stadium and walked to the bars and continued the party.

Just my thoughts.

Dr. Know · Post by **Dr. Know** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 10:25 am

There a lot of great ideas posted here. I'm glad Ellerbee Becket released the rendering to get this discussion to the forefront. Does anyone remember the intitial site plans for the Sports Complex? I recall a document at the Mid-Continent Library in Grandview which envisioned a multi-purpose stadium and arena to be located in what is now called the Cross Roads District.

I was listening to the sports talk show Between the Lines yesterday with Kevin Keitzman and he was interviewing Oliver Luck, the Houston Sports Commission Chairman about the recent sports facility developments in Downtown Houston and the most interesting thing he said was that Baseball & Basketball/Hockey arena are essential to the downtown redevelopment because the foot traffic they generate (imagine an avereage of 25,000 people coming downtown 81 evenings/weekends a year for baseball alone). Furthermore, the cost to build these structures downtown is not as probibitive as one might think. Although land costs are cheaper in the burbs the cost to put in the infrastructure (streets, exits sewers etc.) are more expensive. He also said that downtowns are "built" to handle larger amounts of people and that since most sporting events take place at night congestion is at a minimum.

I like the Ellerbee Beckett plan however the site is occupied by Blue Cross & Blue Shield and the cost for that site would be pretty high (BCBS purchased that building a year or two ago). As mentioned earlier by someone in this thread, it would probably be better to move this location the SW corner of the I-70/Bruce Watkins interchange or better yet between 18th & 20th & Watkins & Holmes. The land would be cheaper and it would be within walking distance of the Crossroads area as well as 18th & Vine. I would like to see some of the old attributes of Kauffman retained in a new stadium especially the fountains and the scoreboard as well as the site lines and dimensions. I would widen the concourses and change the exterior to fit the neighborhood. Although the stadiums are fine facilities now, they will be technologically obsolete in 10 years. Why not start saving funds now for the future.

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 1:27 pm

Yes, there was a proposal for a domed multipurpose football and baseball stadium on the site where the old Webster School and the south end of Bartle Hall now sit, and where the Performing Arts Center is to be built. The parcel ran from the freeway south to 18th St. and Broadway to Baltimore.

This was back in the late 1960s. The proposed domed stadium looked like a huge flying saucer sitting on the hillside. To accommodate both sports, the stadium would have featured movable seats.

That location was chosen because some city leaders wanted a fully-integrated entertainment complex for sports, conventions, entertainment, and recreation. They thought the site ideal because it was situated on 23 transit routes, and within walking distance to hotels, Union Station, and the central business district. City engineers praised this site for the "greater economic impact" it offered, as well as the opportunity to renew a district so close to the heart of downtown.

It was the sports authority that scutted the plan, citing "horrendous traffic problems," as well as threats to move to Kansas by some business owners who would have had to move to make way for the stadium. It seems these threats to move to Kansas were happened back in the 1960s as well.

There were also political grumblings from eastern Jackson County leaders and residents that they wouldn't support that site. Since it was a county-funded facility, it was argued that the new sports complex should be more centrally-located within Jackson County. Another big issue was parking. Downtown Kansas City in the late 1960s didn't have many parking garages--certainly not the number of parking spaces there are today, and will be after KC Live and H&R Block's headquarters are finished.

However, those arguments against a downtown location back then may no longer be relevant. There will be a lot of parking downtown for any future stadium. If Kansas supports a Bi-state funding mechanism for a new stadium, then it could be justifiably argued that a downtown site is more centrally-located to Kansas residents, and Kansas Citians who don't live in Jackson County, but in Platte, or Clay counties.

In addition, one of the biggest complaints about the Truman Sports Complex is that there is nothing to do there after games are over. With KC Live, Crossroads, Union Station, and Crown Center so close, a downtown location would provide post-game entertainment options that don't exist now.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 1:32 pm

At least everyone is on the same page. Most of us would rather not spend 200 million on a 40 year old stadium in a bad location.

Like jayhawk says, start planning now, it will take a while to make it happen. We are going to run out of room real fast the way the core is booming right now.

I'll post this again, I will be updating my master plan soon with some fresh ideas that incorporate the Block HQ, KC Live project and other recently announced projects.

Although I think it might be better to put the stadium just north of the tracks so that it is halfway between Downtown & Crown Center, they wouln't have to build any parking or tear down a major office building and it would enhance the entire Downtown area.

I took out plan for now.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 2:31 pm

A couple things that have come to mind:

-- I like the Royals stadium placement to spur development in a more open area that "needs" it, but I also like the density and surrounding attractions of Crown Center/Union Station. If the stadium goes as a link to 18th and Vine or in another offbeat, open location, the city should do what Wy Co did and buy surounding properties to ensure appropriate development around the stadium. Prospectively, the city could build a stadium and be surrounded by unfriendly/stagnate property owners not willing to cooperate with creating a nice neighborhood around the stadium.

-- Also, what would be the reaction of neighborhoods and communities around Kauffman right now? I realize that they have failed to capitalize off of the sports complex, but a reuse for Kauffman must addressed with the relocation.

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:09 pm

The equation for future stadium construction has changed politically because of the proposed funding mechanism. When Truman Sport Complex was built, Jackson County was footing most of the bill. They still run the stadiums through the sports authority, provide maintenance and enhancements, and negotiate lease terms.

If a new baseball stadium is constructed, it will most likely be funded through a bi-state bond issue with multiple counties contributing, and some funding from Missouri state government. Kansas City, Mo, will probably purchase and assemble the land. There will be more pressure to locate the facility in a central location to all municipalities metro-wide, and not just those in Jackson County like was done last time. Eastern Jackson County (Independence, Blue Springs, Grandview, and Raytown) won't have the political muscle needed to beat out that of Platte, Clay, Cass, Wyandotte, and Johnson counties, who will no doubt have a lot of say in the matter. Remember, when Truman Sports Complex was proposed, those aforementioned counties had no say in the matter. The Leeds site--where Truman Sports Complex currently is now--is no longer considered centrally-located.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:16 pm

I agree, Kauffman is an awesome stadium. I would hope a new ballpark takes after it with the fountains and outfield etc. I donâ€™t want â€œretroâ€

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:23 pm

that question is EXACTLY what I've been thinking, but you put it better than I ever would

eliphar17 · Post by **eliphar17** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:32 pm

Whoa, I just thought of something mind-blowing...

What if all this time, Barnes & Co. have been dragging their feet on a new arena because they are not really putting together an arena plan, but rather a baseball stadium plan? And there's been no public announcement because they want the first announcement to be "We are breaking ground in a month"?

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 11:15 pm

Build the stadium on the hill off Cambridge Circle. The land actually occupies both KCK and KCMO. It offers a perfect view of downtown, and isn't a far drive from restuarants and entertainment. While it isn't the perfect location for walking to entertainment, it definitely would work for Bi-State proposals (half the stadium in Kansas/half in Missouri). One could easily construct an elevated passenger rail line that would connect to the tracks that run to Union Station and JOCO's proposed line.

I jus' hate the idea of destroyin' Washington Square Park for the stadium. I'd much rather see the stadium be constructed in a blighted area first (like between downtown and Vine).

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Wed Jan 28, 2004 11:41 pm

I just think we have enough weirdo locations...Truman Sports Complex, Kemper. It is time for KC to go big or go home.

Just as Grid explained, a new stadium in the C'Roads or across from Crown Center is big-time. It is very showy and very sexy. It is HIGH PROFILE. It is something people from Platte County to Grandview to Leawood to Lawrence would all take pride in. It seems with all the hard work going on getting housing and development in from 31st to the River...this stadium would be the exclaimation point on it all. We need to show the entire metro the city is back, and back big time.

I still feel Hallmark should get very active with this project as it would dump hundreds of thousands of Royals fans at their doorstop in addition to making the housing, retail and office components of CC more attractive to tenants. Who wouldn't want to stay at the Hyatt or Westin when you look out your window and see Union Station and Royals Stadium side by side?

From some comments Barnes has made...she didn't sound in favor of a new ballpark. Does Cauthen have enough sway to change her mind?

I think if the ballpark was built, the arena would have more support as people would be able to better see the pieces of the puzzle. I think people are not fond of Kemper, but they are unsure of a location downtown. With news of a coming ballpark, again a proven economic stimulator, they would see that downtown can be an awesome destination.

LyRiCaL GanGsTa · Post by **LyRiCaL GanGsTa** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:38 am

disclaimer: this is my humble opinion, don't start NO stuff and there won't BE no stuff!

but we won't need a new stadium for another 30 years.

I totally disagree, Kaufman needs nearly 200 million in improvments now. For another 100 million, we can have one of the GREATEST BASEBALL PARKS in the nation! BASEBALL is huge, 82 games TIMES 20-40,000 spectators. KC missed the boat when they built Truman where they did and pushed downtown development back, nearly destroying downtown forever.

Imagine - a new 40K seat stadium, the views, the urbanity, the pleasure of having world class fun within walking distance, just what KC downtown needs. Also imagine - 2 NEW high-rise hotels MINIMUM, that would be built RIGHT AWAY in anticipation of the new stadium. Think of the NEW mid-to-high-rise residential complexes within walking distance of the new stadium that would also happen IMMEDIATELY. Light rail would follow within 5 years if we did this, it would make perfect sense then, even to suburban dorks. This would be the biggest boon for downtown ever. This is needed 100 times more than a new arena, and we DESPERATLY need a new arena. A new baseball stadium DT would draw thousands more $$ and have 100 times more impact than a new arena. AND WE REALLY NEED A NEW ARENA ASAP!

The only other possible place to build a stadium is at the FOOT of Grand Avenue, ( NOT EAST OF GRAND) but I do like the Washington Square location better.

LyRiCaL GanGsTa · Post by **LyRiCaL GanGsTa** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:50 am

I like the Royals stadium placement to spur development in a more open area that "needs" it, but I also like the density and surrounding attractions of Crown Center/Union Station. If the stadium goes as a link to 18th and Vine or in another offbeat, open location, the city should do what Wy Co did and buy surounding properties to ensure appropriate development around the stadium. Prospectively, the city could build a stadium and be surrounded by unfriendly/stagnate property owners not willing to cooperate with creating a nice neighborhood around the stadium.

The city would screw this up and people WON'T go to 18th & Vine.

Build the stadium on the hill off Cambridge Circle. The land actually occupies both KCK and KCMO. It offers a perfect view of downtown, and isn't a far drive from restuarants and entertainment. While it isn't the perfect location for walking to entertainment

WHAT? no ... what entertainment? This location is worse than Truman?

KC's ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT IS CLEAR... it's the area between the loop and CC, That's where the PAC, Union Station, KC LIVE and the new arena is planned...right? Don't we want to reach a critical mass?

phxcat · Post by **phxcat** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 7:48 am

You are riight- I was just thinking that, the way development is going right now, we woiuldn't even need to plan a "ballpark village" like they are doing in STL- it would just spring up on its own- that would be awesome!

KCforumer · Post by **KCforumer** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:13 am

Washington Square Park is an excellent location for a new baseball stadium, the best. It is in the center of the urban core and metro. It will benefit the entire Crown Center area. It will help tie Crown Center with the CBD. And is close enough to the CBD to benefit it as well. If I were a multi-billionaire, I would pay to have it built myself, provided they paid me back in 5-10 years at 0% interest.