Page 16 of 38

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 1:31 pm
by RailBaronYarr
https://www.minnpost.com/politics-polic ... cer-stadiu

I guess, this makes the deal seem much worse to me. Among my concerns:

- City paying for basically all the streets, utilities, lighting, and park improvements
- City pays for new parks and plazas without a park dedication fee in lieu of developer-provided park space
- No guarantee the streets/sidewalks will look anything like the renderings (developer would have to pay for improvements beyond basic amenities, no requirement from the city to do so even though this is a projected $550m neighborhood)
- Likelihood any structured parking needs identified by the traffic study beyond what developers plan to build themselves will be asked for the city/HRA to build
- City has a $150m liability, will be asked to pay for future improvements (no different than the Target Center)
- Additional public costs to improve the light rail stops. Not sure how this will be done, the platforms are too narrow to accommodate a ped bridge similar to the Vikings Stadium one. Either way, even the naming rights likely won't cover the cost.

I guess, I know most people here are pretty excited about this. I don't want to get too StrongTownsy here, but what's in it for the city to do all this rather than just building streets themselves? Is a brand new stadium drawing 23k fans 20x a year *really* that big of a draw for development? Why wouldn't the city just build this stuff out and sell off land itself? My gut feel is that this is a lot of risk, given the actual and opportunity costs of the project, to bank on the type of development shown in the shiny graphics to pay back all this infra. Does anyone think a bunch of six-stick apartments with ground-level retail wouldn't get built along Snelling/University without the soccer stadium?

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 1:47 pm
by Didier
RailBarronYarr wrote:- City pays for new parks and plazas without a park dedication fee in lieu of developer-provided park space
The agreements also call for joint development of the large green spaces shown in stadium renderings. While the city might eventually be given the land, the areas will be designed, built and maintained by the team.
Am I understanding this correctly? Seems like a win for the city. They build some sidewalks and somebody else puts a park inside of them, no?

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 1:52 pm
by David Greene
RailBaronYarr wrote:- No guarantee the streets/sidewalks will look anything like the renderings (developer would have to pay for improvements beyond basic amenities, no requirement from the city to do so even though this is a projected $550m neighborhood)
Like I said, fiction.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 1:59 pm
by RailBaronYarr
^ The agreement for the open spaces section says:
The Team, in collaboration with the City, shall design and construct the Midway Green Spaces;
The City shall pay for the following at standard grade: sidewalks, bikeways, landscaping, lighting;
The Team shall pay the costs of any desired upgrades to the Midway Green Spaces;
The Team shall operate and maintain the Midway Green Spaces;
Depends what the squishy "standard grade" phrase means for landscaping (Rice Park? a grassy field? a typical neighborhood park?), but I'm guessing the team won't be in for much in the initial capital costs. I guess, if the team gets naming rights, exclusive use ("The Team shall have the exclusive right to use the Midway Green Spaces in connection with League Events, Home Games, Club Events, tryouts and practices, naming rights and exclusive right to determine any programming, provided that the City’s ordinances and regulations with respect to permitting and fees shall apply"), and will assume maintenance costs, why are they not the ones on the hook for building it?

In any case, the parks piece was just one of my concerns. What exactly is the city getting out of this that it wouldn't get without a stadium? Why is this preferable to the type of development going on elsewhere on the Green Line?

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 2:38 pm
by moda253
Hell I think it's a shame the Historical Preservation society didn't step in to preserve the bus barn in the first place! And good lord how can we let Midway Bowl and Big Top Liquors be toppled!

Next thing you know we will lose the acrid piss smell wafting out of Big V's!

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 2:53 pm
by matthew5080
Sounds like the city council members aren't too concerned with paying a bit for the stadium.

http://www.startribune.com/soccer-stadi ... 370288981/
“It’s probably the best stadium deal for a local government and the city and the people that we’ve seen in recent years,” Council Member Chris Tolbert said. “The city of St. Paul is not putting any money into the building of the stadium. Every dollar that we’re spending is going into public uses and public infrastructure.”

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 3:15 pm
by moda253
matthew5080 wrote:Sounds like the city council members aren't too concerned with paying a bit for the stadium.

http://www.startribune.com/soccer-stadi ... 370288981/
“It’s probably the best stadium deal for a local government and the city and the people that we’ve seen in recent years,” Council Member Chris Tolbert said. “The city of St. Paul is not putting any money into the building of the stadium. Every dollar that we’re spending is going into public uses and public infrastructure.”
Yeah but SPORTS!

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 4:40 pm
by talindsay
moda253 wrote:Midway Bowl
Seriously, Midway Bowl is awesome. That's my only hesitation in support of this project.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 5:08 pm
by Wedgeguy
They can put a bowling alley in with the cinema, not too hard to imagine. Getting a few apartment/office building built before 2026 without the stadium would be fantasy as far as I'm concerned. Without the Stadium you will basically be stuck with the Midway Shopping center for another 20 years as we wait out leases on what would be come a ghost mall as we would not re-lease so that in the future we would have future development. With the stadium, RK and some very deep pocketed partners that will help them out with future building costs. Not something that would happen with out the stadium, or only a very very slim likely hood that anyone would want to sink a large chunk of money into the area without a nice big catalyst to draw people.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 6:27 pm
by Nathan
I definitely read in one of the articles that the owner of RK is promising to honor every current lease and the owner of the bowling alley said he was promised to be involved in the new development, so it sounds like bowling is a pretty sure thing.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 26th, 2016, 7:10 pm
by talindsay
Nathan wrote:I definitely read in one of the articles that the owner of RK is promising to honor every current lease and the owner of the bowling alley said he was promised to be involved in the new development, so it sounds like bowling is a pretty sure thing.
Awesome.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 27th, 2016, 8:05 am
by Didier
To be sure, though, "honor" might mean buying out too. This was asked at the press conference. You really can't move forward if Rainbow Foods is sitting there for five more years waiting out its lease.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 27th, 2016, 8:30 am
by HuskyGrad
Didier wrote:To be sure, though, "honor" might mean buying out too. This was asked at the press conference. You really can't move forward if Rainbow Foods is sitting there for five more years waiting out its lease.
I presume that one will shutter eventually since it was one of six not to be purchased by Lunds or Cub. Already two of those six have closed.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 27th, 2016, 8:55 am
by seanrichardryan
Cub only purchased Rainbow to prevent another grocery user from opening there. I'm sure they'd walk if the building was going to bite the dust.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: February 27th, 2016, 11:39 am
by Nathan
I don't have time to find the specific article I was reading but it was a representative from the grocery store and the bowling alley that stated they wanted to be a part of the new development, not the land owner. Just what I read, take it with a grain of salt, obvi.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: March 1st, 2016, 11:27 am
by mattaudio

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: March 1st, 2016, 12:04 pm
by Didier
I just started reading the same article and immediately thought of mattaudio.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: March 3rd, 2016, 8:09 am
by mplsjaromir

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: March 3rd, 2016, 9:52 am
by MNdible
Yes, but they've always got a secret slush fund available for stuff like this.

Re: Major League Soccer Stadium

Posted: March 7th, 2016, 12:46 pm
by cooperrez
Will Target Field be the temporary home for 2017?

http://m.mlb.com/twins/tickets/info/soccer