Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium
Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:31 pm
Also if they did choose Crossroads, we'd need to fill out 100% of the highway cap.
I'm not sure you can call owning large swaths of land in downtown KC circa 1990-2005 land banking as there wasn't nearly the amount of interest there is now. Only development for decades was income restricted building flips.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:22 pmLike how P&L was landbanked? Seems a bit "cut your nose off to spite your face". Sure, I hate landbanking, but if we can eliminate a very large amount of it in one project, that's what we should do instead of tearing down functional buildings in use.
But are they going to demand that the surface lots in the Crossroads remain? Or can we still get them developed. That's a problem.DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:35 pmI'm not sure you can call owning large swaths of land in downtown KC circa 1990-2005 land banking as there wasn't nearly the amount of interest there is now. Only development for decades was income restricted building flips.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:22 pmLike how P&L was landbanked? Seems a bit "cut your nose off to spite your face". Sure, I hate landbanking, but if we can eliminate a very large amount of it in one project, that's what we should do instead of tearing down functional buildings in use.
If you can eliminate a large amount in one project and it's the best location to ensure the future success of said project, you've got a homerun. My point is more about forcing locations in an effort to get rid of these lots. The EV location is great, but it has faults and #1 is how disconnected it is from existing development. Betting on a stadium to fire off more development is a bad plan.
I can't think of a much better situation where a new stadium is located in one established entertainment district and within a 5 minute walk to another. If we want to induce demand for Royals tickets and make going to a Royals game on the weekends a fantastic fan experience, it doesn't get much better than that. If we want to boost Royals weekday games attendance, a location smack dab in the middle of multiple established residential areas and close proximity to so many hotels is imperative.
I've said this before but I look at this a bit differently than some other stadium builds across the country where they were banking on the idea that it would spur new development. We are in the opposite situation in KC. All the development over the last 15+ years has spurred the desire for downtown baseball. So a new stadium should go in decent proximity to existing developments. That ensures it will add to what's already been built while also continuing to increase demand downtown for more housing.AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:38 pmBut are they going to demand that the surface lots in the Crossroads remain? Or can we still get them developed. That's a problem.DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:35 pmI'm not sure you can call owning large swaths of land in downtown KC circa 1990-2005 land banking as there wasn't nearly the amount of interest there is now. Only development for decades was income restricted building flips.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:22 pm
Like how P&L was landbanked? Seems a bit "cut your nose off to spite your face". Sure, I hate landbanking, but if we can eliminate a very large amount of it in one project, that's what we should do instead of tearing down functional buildings in use.
If you can eliminate a large amount in one project and it's the best location to ensure the future success of said project, you've got a homerun. My point is more about forcing locations in an effort to get rid of these lots. The EV location is great, but it has faults and #1 is how disconnected it is from existing development. Betting on a stadium to fire off more development is a bad plan.
I can't think of a much better situation where a new stadium is located in one established entertainment district and within a 5 minute walk to another. If we want to induce demand for Royals tickets and make going to a Royals game on the weekends a fantastic fan experience, it doesn't get much better than that. If we want to boost Royals weekday games attendance, a location smack dab in the middle of multiple established residential areas and close proximity to so many hotels is imperative.
It’s not servers holding data in the cloud. It’s where physical lines come in and interconnectDColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 6:54 pmMoney - I don't truly understand the functional purpose of the LL building but I'd have to assume that with a slight change in tech over the last 50 years a near windowless 300' building is no longer needed to house mission-critical infrastructure. The need for roof mounted antennas are also no longer required so you'd think a mission critical telecommunications facility that likely houses several server farms would be better placed underground. I mean at this point, we are sinking server farms in the ocean, not placing them in nearly windowless brutalist style high rise buildings.normalthings wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 6:39 pm What would motivate a developer to change the exterior of the AT&T building. This is a mission-critical piece of infra for our region.
normalthings wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:07 pmIt’s not servers holding data in the cloud. It’s where physical lines come in and interconnectDColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 6:54 pmMoney - I don't truly understand the functional purpose of the LL building but I'd have to assume that with a slight change in tech over the last 50 years a near windowless 300' building is no longer needed to house mission-critical infrastructure. The need for roof mounted antennas are also no longer required so you'd think a mission critical telecommunications facility that likely houses several server farms would be better placed underground. I mean at this point, we are sinking server farms in the ocean, not placing them in nearly windowless brutalist style high rise buildings.normalthings wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 6:39 pm What would motivate a developer to change the exterior of the AT&T building. This is a mission-critical piece of infra for our region.
Not saying it would be demolished but purchased by a developer.KCPowercat wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:31 pm Yeah that building is critical and. It going anywhere.
I just walked these sites this evening just randomly. Even more convinced the Star site is not the best site.. there are a lot more viable buildings than I was even remembering
The LL function was basically just the rooftop array.. which has been long gone. I doubt you even remember it at this point. Normalthings is correct.. that building has more to do with being the central tying point for everything coming into and out of the midwest. It's about connections. Not server space.DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:45 pmnormalthings wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:07 pmIt’s not servers holding data in the cloud. It’s where physical lines come in and interconnectDColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 6:54 pm
Money - I don't truly understand the functional purpose of the LL building but I'd have to assume that with a slight change in tech over the last 50 years a near windowless 300' building is no longer needed to house mission-critical infrastructure. The need for roof mounted antennas are also no longer required so you'd think a mission critical telecommunications facility that likely houses several server farms would be better placed underground. I mean at this point, we are sinking server farms in the ocean, not placing them in nearly windowless brutalist style high rise buildings.
Limited knowledge on the building but I don't think that's the case. From reading about the building and tech, Long lines system refers to an older technology that actually was meant to eliminate the need for long physical lines needing to be ran. They were mission critical as you say during the cold war when military and TV broadcast used the technology. The technology has been abandoned since 1990 when fiber and satellites made it obsolete.
So as space freed up in the facility I'm sure they started leasing space to other companies to house telecom and data equipment since the building is perfect for this. Just like the same type of building does in NYC, including the NSA.
Knowing this, I'm even more confident whatever equipment remains in the building could easily be relocated and I'm sure AT&T knows exactly what that would cost. They've done it before in other cities.
But if you're saying we won't hardly get any spinoff development from it- then what's the point?DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:50 pm I've said this before but I look at this a bit differently than some other stadium builds across the country where they were banking on the idea that it would spur new development. We are in the opposite situation in KC. All the development over the last 15+ years has spurred the desire for downtown baseball. So a new stadium should go in decent proximity to existing developments. That ensures it will add to what's already been built while also continuing to increase demand downtown for more housing.
If the crossroads location is selected, it would look out to our current skyline including 3-6 residential towers built in the last decade.
As for parking, I'd hope any new parking would be garage style which can at least be more attractively built than hideous surface lots.
Wish I could find more info on it, sounds like something I'd find interesting.im2kull wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 12:13 amThe LL function was basically just the rooftop array.. which has been long gone. I doubt you even remember it at this point. Normalthings is correct.. that building has more to do with being the central tying point for everything coming into and out of the midwest. It's about connections. Not server space.DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:45 pmnormalthings wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:07 pm
It’s not servers holding data in the cloud. It’s where physical lines come in and interconnect
Limited knowledge on the building but I don't think that's the case. From reading about the building and tech, Long lines system refers to an older technology that actually was meant to eliminate the need for long physical lines needing to be ran. They were mission critical as you say during the cold war when military and TV broadcast used the technology. The technology has been abandoned since 1990 when fiber and satellites made it obsolete.
So as space freed up in the facility I'm sure they started leasing space to other companies to house telecom and data equipment since the building is perfect for this. Just like the same type of building does in NYC, including the NSA.
Knowing this, I'm even more confident whatever equipment remains in the building could easily be relocated and I'm sure AT&T knows exactly what that would cost. They've done it before in other cities.
I think the Crossroads site is vastly superior to the East Village.KCPowercat wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 7:30 pm I fail to see how this crossroads site is superior to EV. It's equal to worse to me.
You've already stated that any current buildings are expendable. None of the buildings between Main and Grand in P&L are historic or architecturally significant. H&R Block probably wants to downsize now anyway. Cordish has already demonstrated their buildings were built to have a short shelf-life since they are already considering demolition of the empty retail building on the NW corner of 14th and Main. Current businesses don't really matter anyway.DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:39 pmBackhanded, neat. Something like 11 of 14 spaces along that section are leased. But this was just a dig so moving on.Critical_Mass wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:39 am
If there are those who think it's acceptable to demolish the downtown fabric to locate a ballpark with a 20 to 30 year shelf life, can I suggest a vast swath of architecturally insignificant empty retail spaces along 14th between Main and Grand? Great spot for a stadium.
What downtown fabric? You think Abbott has been buying up properties just to continue to flip them into event spaces? He’s no dummy and his existing event spaces would stand to see a massive benefit from a stadium.
And this is a 35-50 year stadium build.
Likewise - Sorry I wrote a freaking novel last night; nobody has time for that nowadays.KCPowercat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:27 am Definitely respect your opinion kcdowntown. Will have to read that post more in depth.
I enjoyed it. I like hearing the full depth of opinions on an issue as big as this stadium site is going to be.KCDowntown wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 10:02 amLikewise - Sorry I wrote a freaking novel last night; nobody has time for that nowadays.KCPowercat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:27 am Definitely respect your opinion kcdowntown. Will have to read that post more in depth.
KCDowntown
Listen I know environmental concerns are a big issue for you, so I get it.FangKC wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:19 amYou've already stated that any current buildings are expendable. None of the buildings between Main and Grand in P&L are historic or architecturally significant. H&R Block probably wants to downsize now anyway. Cordish has already demonstrated their buildings were built to have a short shelf-life since they are already considering demolition of the empty retail building on the NW corner of 14th and Main. Current businesses don't really matter anyway.DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:39 pmBackhanded, neat. Something like 11 of 14 spaces along that section are leased. But this was just a dig so moving on.Critical_Mass wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:39 am
If there are those who think it's acceptable to demolish the downtown fabric to locate a ballpark with a 20 to 30 year shelf life, can I suggest a vast swath of architecturally insignificant empty retail spaces along 14th between Main and Grand? Great spot for a stadium.
What downtown fabric? You think Abbott has been buying up properties just to continue to flip them into event spaces? He’s no dummy and his existing event spaces would stand to see a massive benefit from a stadium.
And this is a 35-50 year stadium build.
Yep. It's okay to tear down others' buildings just as long as they aren't the real estate you are promoting.
Why would you ask a bunch of business owners what they think when you’re needing to buy up the property? These things usually happen quietly and if the Crossroads leaders don’t want a stadium in Crossroads, they need to talk to the business owners who I’ve seen get very excited about this possibility.KCPowercat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:47 am And there is this that nobody seemed to ask the neighborhood. Good indication this site isn't viable
https://twitter.com/kclightrail/status/ ... tmWBg&s=19