Americans,
as a group, are sports nuts. It is not surprising then that a massive
amount of construction every year involves sports arenas. Stadiums
and arenas are often key components for downtown development or re-development
plans.
The track record of ballparks as revitalizing catalysts has been spotty
according to some who have done studies on the economics. A stadium
or arena, which draws large crowds a limited number of days each year
but remains unused for long stretches of time, will not alone revitalize
a non-dynamic part of town…unless it is supported by solid planning.
Fortunately, multiple examples abound of projects which have succeeded,
as well as those which have not.
One quite successful venture occurred in Cleveland ten years ago,
where a sports arena and baseball park were built in a run-down area.
A comprehensive plan, including hotels, bars, restaurants and condominium
projects, supplemented the sports venues. Cleveland planners not only
designated retail and residential-development areas but the city also
installed sidewalks and lighting to attract retailers and restaurants
and helped businesses improve their facades. Developers received incentives
to build condos around the sports complex.
Where to place and how to fund these projects are always questions.
Creativity is sometimes called for in order to gain public acceptance.
Not atypically, Miller Park, the four year old home of the Milwaukee
Brewers, was built in an area ripe for re-development, and it has,
at least in part, been responsible, for outside development dollars,
both private and public, being invested in the surrounding area.
New York is mired in controversy over proposals for new sports facilities.
The most controversial is a proposed stadium for the Jets in downtown
Manhattan. It is getting ‘heat’ over the location - many
of the ‘locals’ think that prime real estate could be put
to better use - and over the funding, which would require $600 million
of public funding, plus a $1.9 billion train extension. This project
is sometimes compared to the Georgia Dome, both because it is intended
to supplement the convention center and is touted as a centerpiece
for New York’s bid for the 2012 Olympics.
Financing is always a major issue. Users fees are quite popular as
a way to lessen the resentments of those who may live nearby but either
can’t afford to attend sporting events or simply choose not to.
The case is always made to these folks that the economic benefit of
a professional sports team extends into the entire community, but exact
dollar amounts of the benefit can be elusive.
Tucson, although a smaller market and without a major professional
team, is also still considering a new Arena to replace the 30 plus
year old one which is part of the convention center. Proponents are
comparing the potential to the Van Andel Arena in a similar size market
- Grand Rapids Michigan, which has been making a profit of over $1
million annually since it was built in 1996. Without the backing of
a sports franchise, the funding for a new Tucson arena would likely
come from bonds.
In other parts of the country, stadiums are still being placed on
the dockets. A new $1.1 billion Yankee stadium looks to be close to
approval – this in a city where controversy seems to abound about
everything! One creative way in which it has been made palatable to
taxpayers: The Yankees are putting up $800 million themselves for the
construction. Yes, it pays to be rich. Further, the city will get 100%
of the revenue from the parking. Conservative estimates are that this
alone should bring in around $20 million annually, which should make
the $100 - $150 million investment pay off relatively quickly.
In Washington D.C. the proposed ‘Nationals’ Stadium seems
mired down in funding impossibilities. Meanwhile, in Minneapolis, the
Twins are cautiously optimistic that a new stadium proposal may finally
be approved. The latest plan for the $478 million, 42,000-seat stadium
project would not require any state contribution, which gives it the
best chance of getting safely through the legislature. Twins owner
Carl Pohlad would put up $125 million. A county-wide sales tax of 0.15
percent — about 3 cents on a $20 purchase — would provide
$28 million a year in financing. The ballpark, when opened in 2009,
would be owned by the county.
A sports arena by its nature makes a statement – the size makes
it impossible to ‘blend’ into its surrounds. The architecture
makes a statement, but what it adds…or detracts to the community
is all the more important. All these projects first bring in construction
dollars, then later add to the local economy, but the real benefit
may lie in their success at re-vitalizing neighborhoods which are sorely
in need of an economic boost.
Return to Top
------------------------------
