Thats funny. I thought the first two comments I made on page one of this thread were that Kansas Citians are more concerned about parking lots than with finding a location where a developer would actually want to build something.

Kaufman opened in 1973. Nearly 40 years later, we've got a Taco Bell...so there's that. I'm sure the construction crew just took a wrong turn, though. There's going to be some serious revitalization going on there any second now. Then you'll show me.

Google "things to do near Kauffman Stadium" and click the first result.

It takes you to trip advisor where someone from Chicago asks what there is to do since he is booked at the Sheraton by the stadium. It pretty well captures it.

Your first couple of posts were just sarcastic remarks. This is your first post where you actually started to explain your reasoning. I see no mention of financially benefiting he community around he stadium.

They were sarcastic because the very notion of someone actually developing the area around the sports complex is absurd.

A baseball stadium is an anchor venue which hosts massive events 80 to 90 days per year. Instead of harnessing the economic potential of 2,000,000 people into an area where they might want to engage in revenue generating activities while enjoying a full entertainment experience, we point them towards the middle of nowhere where they park their cars, go directly into the stadium, immediately return to their cars after the game, and leave the area.

Here we are, your first mention of spending money in the local community. Post #126. Yeah, that has been your larger point since the beginning. :rolleyes:

No, we direct people to a place where they can throw one great big party.

And if you were really concerned about spending money in the community around the ballpark, you would be all for development of that area. What better way to bring money into the community than to create jobs?

Am I right to assume that Keitzman owns some property in downtown KCMO?

I know that when I think of Kaufman Stadium, I think of of one big party.

Why would I advocate spending tens of millions of dollars to create another entertainment district when the city just did that downtown? Nobody wants to go to that area, and nobody would if the stadiums weren't there.

If Kansas City never had a baseball or football team but were just granted an expansion team, nobody would suggest building the stadium on the Blue Ridge Cutoff.

When it was determined that a new and/or renovated stadium was needed, we should have said "it was a good run, but 40 years have passed, and the surrounding area is worse now than it was then, so it's time for a change".

This is the civil equivalent to deciding between re-upping Matt Cassel and trying to build more weapons around him and drafting a new QB.

Keitzman is on Facebook as I type this, furiously banging out friend requests to every "Saul" his search comes up with, hoping to find Saul Good.


Saul, your points are not without merit, but I think Reaper nailed it some time back - KC is a travelers city. Everyone here loves to drive. The Complex is literally no more than 30 minutes away for most everybody in the metro, and nobody thinks twice about taking the trip.

In your opinion, had the Royals built downtown and had been playing there the past, say, seven years, do you feel they would have had a significant bump in attendance numbers? Factor in how they've played in that time period before you answer that....

I'm looking at an aerial view of downtown KC, and I'd love to know what city blocks you're going to demolish to make room for a baseball stadium.

That's the other issue.

I assume they'd have to nuke some crackhouse neighborhoods off to the east of downtown to make it work.

I'm pretty sure that in 10-15 years there will be exactly zero use for the big, new Kansas City Star printing building. :D

But wait, it has to be close to P/L.

What, are you trying to get someone on I-670 murdered when Myers hits a homer onto the ****ing highway??/