Charlotte Knights AAA Ballpark in Third Ward

[dubone]

Ironic that we are ending up with the county (in charge of parks) building roads for the stadium and the city (in charge of roads) potentially helping to build the ball park. Since this is really about the use of the tourism funds like the arena was, I think it is reasonable if there are enough funds.

I do have mixed feelings about this stadium, but I'm curious to see what city council does. As far as investments in tourism-related projects, this one is asking for a smaller percentage of money, meaning it would be a public-private partnership rather than an outright city project like NHOF and NBA arena. I know a lot of people in my neighborhood meetings bring up this as something the city needs. And we seem to be at least 2 decades away from being able to support MLB in this city.

[carolinafuture]

I really want this to be built downtown soon. This will bring so much to an already great downtown. Hopefully we can work on more green space as well. I love the fact that I wouldn't have to pay $300 for my family to go see a game. Between dinner, tickets, drinks, parking, etc., it will have a huge economic impact on the city of Charlotte. Also, I'd look for ACC games to be played at the new stadium as well as other tournaments. Huge for hotels, restaurants, bars, museums, shops, and other tourism related businesses. More condos and development would surely surround the new ballpark which is another exciting aspect of this project. Lots to be excited about with this.

[ah59396]

I agree with a lot of what you just said ^, I think the economic impact would be quite visible. I also like the idea of making it a multi-purpose facility for things like the ACC Championship, ect. My concern, as it has continued to be, is why should Charlotte pay more for it than the $8 million in land it has already committed. If it will be so great for the Knights, let them foot the bill and make it back as quickly as the city apparently would.

Welcome to the forum by the way!

Edited March 6, 2012 by ah59396

[carolinafuture]

Well I agree with not footing the bill as there are many other avenues to pay for a new stadium. But there are reasons why the city should give more money. It's a huge tourism draw as you know. Especially for concerts, games, and other events. This has a direct effect on the local economy which gives local businesses more money and raises property values in the area. But as I understand it, selling the name of the stadium and other marketing tools should be used to pay for the stadium. Through the supported data, the owner should make a substantial amount of money to foot the bill. especially with the ticket sales rising and an estimated annual attendance of 600,000+.

Thanks for the welcoming!

[Guest]

WOW!!! Mark Blackburn the most right wing of the observer right wingers wrote an article in support of the baseball stadium!

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/03/06/3075569/maybe-were-world-class-material.html

[HopHead]

WOW!!! Mark Blackburn the most right wing of the observer right wingers wrote an article in support of the baseball stadium!

http://www.charlotte...s-material.html

He does make some good points. Especially when you compare how far Miami just bent over to accommodate the Marlins and their near $700 million park (which should never be used as logic to build a stadium either). The article also said that Jerry Reese wants to speak to city council next week when the Knights do. THAT should be interesting.

Edited March 7, 2012 by dbull75

[ah59396]

He does make some good points. Especially when you compare how far Miami just bent over to accommodate the Marlins and their near $700 million park (which should never be used as logic to build a stadium either). The article also said that Jerry Reese wants to speak to city council next week when the Knights do. THAT should be interesting.

When is that meeting, I'd love to be there to witness Reese in all his glory...

[Guest]

When is that meeting, I'd love to be there to witness Reese in all his glory...

I might fly down just to kick his ass

[CharlotteDave]

I hope it works out. I grew up going to minor league games in old Crocket Park and have really missed having a team here in town. Here is sort of a fun reminder of just how deep the baseball tradition goes in this town.

Edited March 7, 2012 by CharlotteDave

[southslider]

All of America's most walkable cities (New York, Boston, DC, Chicago, San Francisco) don't have their team's stadium (or teams' stadia) in their central business districts. Even Charlotte has a history of baseball outside of Uptown with the former ballpark in Dilworth.

So tell me, why must the stadium go Uptown? Why not North End? Bryant Park? Eastland?

[Guest]

All of America's most walkable cities (New York, Boston, DC, Chicago, San Francisco) don't have their team's stadium (or teams' stadia) in their central business districts. Even Charlotte has a history of baseball outside of Uptown with the former ballpark in Dilworth.

So tell me, why must the stadium go Uptown? Why not North End? Bryant Park? Eastland?

Honestly they don't have their baseball stadiums downtown because of land prices and space. Each of those places were too built up by the time baseball came around. Charlotte needs baseball downtown or in southend to help make center city that much more of an attraction. If it goes in Bryant Park, North End or Eastland, people are still going to have to drive there, and it will go no where to help create foot traffic. 10k more people downtown for however many games a year is going to be great, 10k more drivers in the above mentioned places will not do much to help.

[carolinafuture]

NY, Boston, Chicago, and San Fran all have public transportation that take their citizens yards away from the stadium. Huge difference between Charlotte and New York. A downtown stadium will offer guests more options to eat, sleep, drink, shop, and play downtown spending more money in the community.

[southslider]

^Do North End, Bryant Park, or Eastland lack public transportation? Sure, they don't have shiny public transportation like Uptown and South End.

But again, that's the point-- why should all of our City's shiny investments go Uptown? Looking at this City's property tax base, there are a lot of areas within West, North and East Charlotte that could use a similar investment.

[kermit]

I do agree with your core point Southsider, focusing development in one place (uptown) pulls development from other places which need it more. However I think Charlotte's current growth pole strategy (concentrate development in uptown and wait for its effects to spillover into Bryant Park, North End etc.) is working well (despite the current real estate climate). The intown apartment projects are testaments to the success of the uptown growth pole approach and I suspect we will see the infill diffuse into the neighborhoods which really need it when financing for real estate projects returns.

Personally I don't have a preference for either an uptown or Southend site (or possibly North End near LRT -- would a ballpark fit into the old intermodal yards?), I would go to 10-15 games per year as long as I don't have to mess with driving and I can hop on the LRT after I have a couple beers in the sun. I am a very pro transit guy, but I dread riding the bus so a ballpark with bus as its only transit option has NO appeal to me (but I am just one datapoint).

From an urban development perspective I can see the merits of an uptown ballpark. Charlotte has become a 'big event' city since the arena, Weston and Sierra were constructed. The city has become an attractive destination for folks from all over the South for events like the ACC championship game, the bowl game, the CIAA, various college bball events or a big convention -- I have to think these big events have a substantial economic impact (room nights etc.) and generate some long-term growth (some of those folks may decide to move here in the future). Baseball would fill the summer gap in the events calendar uptown -- the knights certainly will not draw like the Panthers but getting 10k fans uptown 50 times per summer will certainly increase activity of all kinds in the slow summer months and an ACC baseball tournament in late May would be an additional big event. The end result of increased summer activity would be that uptown becomes a more attractive place for potential residents, the stores which would serve them and hopefully some destination retail to cater to the big event visitors.

Granted I am concerned about the deadspots a ball park would create in the off season and access to easy parking for the suburbanites -- these two things may be more easily managed in a Southend site. Deadspots certainly create some risks to this project, but, from my point of view, uptown baseball would be a net plus for the city (meaning the benefits of an uptown site would be greater than a location outside of 277). Over the long term a year round uptown activity calendar should generate some spillover development in places like Bryant Park and North End.

EDIT: My disdain for bus transit to the ballpark is more than just a personal preference. It has been my experience (particularly at the United Center in Chicago) that buses are poorly suited for handling the pulse loads created by the end of a sporting event. While the LRT reaches crush load capacity after an arena event I have always been able to "squeeze in". With buses I am much less confident that there will be space available for me and it may be unclear when the next bus will arrive -- this situation generally leads me to ignore buses as a post-event transit option.

Edited March 8, 2012 by kermit

[southslider]

^Deadspots is certainly another concern. Superblocks kill streetlife. And parks are only as vibrant as their edges. Look at Marshall Park and the Government District. Now, think of the potential deadzone from a ballpark on Romare Bearden Park.

If superblocks didn't revitalize Second Ward, why will Third Ward be any different? In fact, Third Ward already has a deadspot sports venue that has done little for surrounding blocks or street life. So talk about lessons not learned.

[DEnd]

Southslider I disagree. One of the central aspects of having good streetlife is conectivity, and that part of third ward is not well connected. The only things it is well connected to are the interstates and the CBD, and that is only on it's edges. Which is what makes these third ward sites good for use as a sports complex, or the jail... and since I doubt we'll see the jail move anytime soon...

As a tax payer the Central Business district makes the most sense, there is no need to add infastructure to accomidate the sports complexes, and it is well connected to all of the city. For the business owners it makes the most sense if they are able to afford the land and taxes as it allows easy access for most residents, will be a draw for after work entertainment, and allows the use of the stadium for other purposes like play off games, concerts, or rallies due to amneities that are easily accessed form there.

Yes it will not have good street life but due to the limitation of the site there would never be good street life there anyway.

[New Name]

With a good design, a sports stadium doesn't have to have ANY dead spots. There is a TON of room in the base of grandstands that can be used retail bays, bars, or even residential overlooking the field. You just need someone who is willing to use every single nook and cranny for something positive.

[southslider]

... One of the central aspects of having good streetlife is conectivity, and that part of third ward is not well connected. ...

As a tax payer the Central Business district makes the most sense, there is no need to add infastructure to accomidate the sports complexes, and it is well connected to all of the city. ...

Except this Third Ward site is "not well connected" and has "no need to add infrastructure," such that the site actually requires the removal of a street.

Yes it will not have good street life but due to the limitation of the site there would never be good street life there anyway.

I agree, that once you turn these small blocks into even bigger blocks, this area will never have a chance to have any good street life. But hey, we're doing it for Romare Bearden Park, so why not keep removing streets for more lifeless superblocks.

Edited March 10, 2012 by southslider

[ah59396]

Except this Third Ward site is "not well connected" and has "no need to add infrastructure," such that the site actually requires the removal of a street.

I agree, that once you turn these small blocks into even bigger blocks, this area will never have a change to have good street life. But hey, we're doing it for Romare Bearden Park, so why not keep removing streets for more lifeless superblocks.

Are you arguing that it is a bad idea to put Romare Bearden there? I'm confused.

[DEnd]

Except this Third Ward site is "not well connected" and has "no need to add infrastructure," such that the site actually requires the removal of a street.

I agree, that once you turn these small blocks into even bigger blocks, this area will never have a change to have good street life. But hey, we're doing it for Romare Bearden Park, so why not keep removing streets for more lifeless superblocks.

If Third crossed the railrod tracks I would completely agree with you. The one thing I don't like about the site plan I've seen is it doesn't leave room for much ancillary street life on mint, although even if that site were developed as residential I'm not sure there would be much there anyway.

[southslider]

Are you arguing that it is a bad idea to put Romare Bearden there? I'm confused.

The park shouldn't have taken up two blocks. Or demolished buildings across from Brevard Court. But hey, this is Charlotte. We like new and shiny, even if it's dull and plastic.

[nonillogical]

I agree about that building across from Brevard court. It might not have been all that interesting in itself, but it was begging for some renovation and small retail that otherwise would never be able to afford uptown space. Plus the patios and tables that are planned for the park would be right next to it which would have been perfect.

I am glad that the park is going to be 2 blocks, however. I think it has a better chance of realizing its potential with the extra amenities that allows, and a size that makes it appropriate for holding events. I'm very against the Charlotte philosophy of superblocks too, but this is a very nicely-designed park imo, which is a far cry from the parking garages, plazas and meaningless filler that usually makes those 1-block developments so dead.

[dubone]

Not to mention, with that building gone, you now have a vista of the two ugly concrete parking decks on either side of MLK Blvd. I had brought it up at a number of meetings with the designers, but it was never seriously considered. They simply wanted a blank slate and there was no love for the dying House of Jazz business in it. That is unlike First Ward Park, where they embraced the Dixies building.

[HopHead]

Now, back on topic... Mayor Foxx came out and said yesterday that he didn't think the city spending any more money than what was already committed to for the ballpark, is a good idea in the current economic environment. He definitely feels there are more pressing needs right now, so the Knights may have their work cut out for them on Thursday when they give their pitch. It will be interesting to hear their pitch. Hopefully they don't reference Connaughton's study too much. Although I think Knights in our around uptown makes a lot of sense, his study seems too optimistic to me.

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/queen_city_agenda/2012/03/mayor-doubtful-on-ballpark-funding.html?page=all

[CharlotteDave]

One does have to wonder if the Mayor's comments are a bad sign. The question is, would it be a deal breaker if the extra money isn't approved? Would that be the death knell for a minor league baseball park in uptown or would the Knights still be able to move forward on their own? It seems like I remember reading that there were two different plans, one a more ambitious plan that involved a restuarant and another that maybe was a little less costly. I'll be anxious to hear what they have to say on Thursday.