Page 28 of 53
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 3:26 pm
by KCMax
kboish wrote:The CEO of Sporting KC tweeted out this image "sneak peak" of their proposed US Soccer coach, training and referee center they are trying to build in KC. No ideas yet on where this will go
@AndyEdMLS
A major announcement to be made tomorrow by KS gov. Sam Brownback, Sporting Club and Wyandotte County. @ussoccer training facility, perhaps?
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 6:03 pm
by kboish
Looks like this will go into an expanded "Village East" area around the Schliterrbahn Water Park along with a bunch of other development- included in which (but not limited to of course) is "multi-family residential, major-multi sport athletic complex, sports facilities, park facilities, commercial buildings, retail, and a hotel"
Nothing integrated, mixed-use or particularly interesting sounding about it!- but its a hell of a development addition for Western WyCo.
STAR bonds are magic!
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:30 pm
by KCPowercat
keep ignoring the urban core KCK
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:32 pm
by chaglang
KCPowercat wrote:keep ignoring the urban core KCK Cerner/SKC
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:41 pm
by KCPowercat
chaglang wrote:KCPowercat wrote:keep ignoring the urban core KCK Cerner/SKC
SKC did put sporting innovations downtown....
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:50 pm
by grovester
Even stevens then!
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:01 pm
by KCPowercat
grovester wrote:Even stevens then!
Point being they don't completely ignore the core like KCK has.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:37 pm
by chaglang
KCPowercat wrote:grovester wrote:Even stevens then!
Point being they don't completely ignore the core like KCK has.
We're one renovated building away from them completely ignoring the KCMO core.
They do seem to have figured out that if they jump their developments back and forth across the state line, local pols will hose them down with incentives.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:43 pm
by KCPowercat
chaglang wrote:KCPowercat wrote:grovester wrote:Even stevens then!
Point being they don't completely ignore the core like KCK has.
We're one renovated building away from them completely ignoring the KCMO core.
They do seem to have figured out that if they jump their developments back and forth across the state line, local pols will hose them down with incentives.
LOL yeah they have that part figured out.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 10:21 pm
by brewcrew1000
This pitch article mentions that the West Bottoms was first looked at but it real estate prices got too high
http://www.pitch.com/FastPitch/archives ... luded-kcmo
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:56 am
by NDTeve
chaglang wrote:KCPowercat wrote:grovester wrote:Even stevens then!
Point being they don't completely ignore the core like KCK has.
We're one renovated building away from them completely ignoring the KCMO core.
They do seem to have figured out that if they jump their developments back and forth across the state line, local pols will hose them down with incentives.
But they didn't.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:09 am
by bobbyhawks
Unless I am missing something, the Legends does not appear to be in a location that would be easily added to a comprehensive commuter rail plan. As with our other satellite stadiums orbiting the outer reaches of the metro, the location could be made into a lot less of a problem if you could hop on a train to a game or to your training facility. That aspect of the location bothers me more than anything else. I completely understand the need for lots of space in this instance, but I'm also still waiting for a big development to come along and tout that they (at least in part) chose a location because of its potential for proximity to future commuter rail lines.
If I understand the potential for this location correctly, we could have future pro prospects moving to KC to be near this facility with the thinking that being in the area will give them the best exposure to an MLS team and participation in USA development camps. On the other hand, this could end up being a really expensive and awesome get for SKC that the top national team rarely uses. It won't help that players and families will definitely feel like they are in "Kansas" when at the facility, and not necessarily ever have to even see the downtown skyline.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:21 am
by Unknown JimmyD
while players will obviously be using this facility, i believe the main focus of it is for training referees and coaches. now, i'm not sure that negates any of your concerns about visitors to the facility barely getting any sort of "kc experience," but i thought it might be worth clarifying. my guess is that it could almost be looked at as something of a convention/seminar facility where large groups come into town and stay/train for blocks of time.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:00 pm
by bobbyhawks
NDTeve wrote:But they didn't.
Uh... based on what I can tell, the state of Kansas is footing the entire bill via existing taxes, just like they did for Sporting Park. So any touting of the jobs and revenue brought to KC should also include mention that $75 million in tax revenue will have to come out of some other part of the state budget (just as the $230 million before it for Sporting Park).
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:18 pm
by rxlexi
Excellent and surprising "get" for the metro, but wow would this have been more impressive in the West Bottoms as mentioned in the Pitch article.
Still, kudos to Sporting Club for having the vision (and STAR bonds) to bring in a national-level project with potential to make the region into a true hub for US soccer.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:36 pm
by TheBigChuckbowski
I agree with the criticism of incentives but do we really want to have 16 soccer fields that won't be used by locals in an urban area? This is the type of thing that should be outside of the urban core.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:41 pm
by WSPanic
TheBigChuckbowski wrote:I agree with the criticism of incentives but do we really want to have 16 soccer fields that won't be used by locals in an urban area? This is the type of thing that should be outside of the urban core.
I agree.
Didn't SKC play a huge part in the Swope Soccer facility?
I'm not saying they're infallible, but I don't see a lot to complain about here with regards to SKC. If we want to bitch about public funding, that's something I'm up for.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:06 pm
by KCMax
TheBigChuckbowski wrote:I agree with the criticism of incentives but do we really want to have 16 soccer fields that won't be used by locals in an urban area? This is the type of thing that should be outside of the urban core.
My thoughts too. I would rather see the West Bottoms become a more funky urban neighborhood/arts district than a soccer training facility.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:26 pm
by bobbyhawks
WSPanic wrote:TheBigChuckbowski wrote:I agree with the criticism of incentives but do we really want to have 16 soccer fields that won't be used by locals in an urban area? This is the type of thing that should be outside of the urban core.
I agree.
Didn't SKC play a huge part in the Swope Soccer facility?
I'm not saying they're infallible, but I don't see a lot to complain about here with regards to SKC. If we want to bitch about public funding, that's something I'm up for.
I'm really happy to get this facility anywhere in the metro. There may be places I'd rather have it, but I thought it was worth mentioning that SKC did not exactly stick its neck on the line financially in the case of the stadium or the new facility.
I'd love to operate a company that is worth $22 million and got 10x that ($230 million) given to them by the taxpayers in incentives. That is what happened to SKC. Their $22 million value in 2008 increased to $103 million in 2013 (according to Forbes). Part of that is the MLS and how well the team is run, but you can't ignore the $200+ million stadium. The team could not be run the way it is without that facility. Overall, I am thrilled with how the team has been run to date, but they still make a lot of money and increase in value at an incredible rate on the backs of tax subsidies.
Re: Sporting Kansas City
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:45 pm
by kcjak
Ironically, if the voters in Kansas had been asked to tax themselves to construct Sporting Park at a cost of $2XX million, I'm guessing they would have voted no.