Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Where Newbies Go to Get Flamed

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Most likely it would not change the situation too much. But there is no doubt that the city is less willing to work something out for DC United because they got hosed by MLB. My problem with the comment made by the unnamed city official is that it is not as if DC United has a whole lot to bring in the first place. Compare this to MLB and the potential owner list they were looking at when contemplating bringing the Expos into our town. The fat cats not only got in for free but got dessert served at the table. Meanwhile the little guy has to cater the banquet table.

I am not advocating that DC or any other jurisdiction should build a stadium for DC United. If there is something that works out for both parties, OK. But the comment made was not necessary in light of the facts of the MLB deal.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

I'm very, very familiar with the Capitol City Market location: it's not far from where I live, and I've participated in a number of community workshops on redevelopment ideas for some or all of the market. A few comments on the location:

First, people should be aware of what it is: the primary wholesale food market for D.C. While there are certain things (primarily fish) that tend to come from elsewhere (Jessup, MD and to a limited degree the waterfront), the majority of small restaurants and corner stores in D.C. get their food (produce, meats and supplies) from wholesalers in the Capitol City Market area (bounded by Penn Street NE, 6th Street NE, Florida Avenue NE, and the RR tracks/NY Avenue NE). One of the many hold-ups to development of this area in the past has been "Where do these wholesalers go? How do you relocate them in a way that does not destroy them economically and damage the restaurants and markets they service?" It's a run-down area, no question; but it's not abandoned. It's busy, full of companies that perform essential services for D.C.

Second, there's also a substantial retail component there too -- and I'm not just talking about the "D.C. Farmer's Market" building, which is indeed filled with retail meat and produce vendors. Many of the wholesalers also do a substantial bulk retail business. I've gone to U.S. Beef (within the Sang Oh tracts) to pick up 40-60 pounds of short ribs for the tailgate on more than one occasion. Regular retail customers would be upset to see the Market go; there's nothing in the D.C. area that's really a substitute.

Third, the land in this area is owned by a bunch of different people. From the article, I'm presuming they've primarily spoken to Sang Oh Choi, whose Sang Oh Development owns most (all?) of the land between 4th Street and the tracks/NY Avenue. Other chunks of the area are owned by different stakeholders; a large chunk of the market area is owned by Gallaudet University. Maybe the Sang Oh tracts are enough to get stadium + parking built; but I'm not so sure. At any rate, it'd definitely require traffic through the rest of the market area. If more of the market were involved, more owners would be involved.

Fourth, I disagree with Eastern Bear (I think that's who it was) who suggested there probably wouldn't be NIMBY concerns. The community has been actively involved in discussions of redevelopment plans; in fact, community objections have been a major factor in why Sang Oh Choi hasn't been able to proceed with his initial plans for the land west of 4th Street. Among area residents who don't do business in the market area, there have been three points-of-view expressed up to this point:

• "It's an awful area as it is; build something, anything there right away." This group might support the stadium, provided any gameday concerns (e.g. traffic -- and see below) can be addressed. But maybe not: one of the main reasons this group wants to see the market area redeveloped is because of the perception that it attracts crime, especially prostitution, in the evenings/at night when the business activity is dormant. There'd be a lot more inactive time for a stadium.
  
• "Leave it alone: it's important to DC, the retail serves underserved customers, the businesses there don't deserve the economic hit/shutdown associated with relocating and operating from a more distant location, etc." This group isn't going to support getting a stadium built.
  
• "I support *some* redevelopment, but only parts of the market, or only if it's done in the right way." You'll have to work hard to convince these people that a stadium on all or part of the land is a good idea, seeing as they opposed the Sang Oh Development plan, which would have provided much more to the local community (in shops/restaurants/etc.) than a stadium would.

Those are all reasons why it'd be hard to make something happen there.


Some additional thoughts . . .re: traffic, you're a long way from any freeway. The closest freeway access of some kind is probably the terminus of 395 at NY Avenue NW and 4th Street NW. Post game traffic going west on NY Ave, through the Florida Avenue/North Capitol Street area . . .what a mess that'd be. Florida Avenue near the Market is *not* an arterial; speed limits are low because of numerous deaf pedestrians.

Someone mentioned the H Street bars being nearby. Not *that* nearby: nearly all of them are above 11th Street NE, so you'd be talking a minimum of 10 blocks walk (7 along Florida, 3 down to H).

On the plus side, Metro access is pretty much right there, as compared to Buzzard's Point. And if the streetcar doesn't die, and additional lines get built like one down South Capitol Street (which several people have mentioned), the same phase of construction puts one down Florida Avenue NE, turning down 8th Street NE to SE -- easy way to get to H Street bars or even Barracks Row. But both a streetcar on Florida Avenue NE and a streetcar on South Capitol Street are years and years and years away, if they ever happen at all.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

In regard to distances from H St. NE, or distances to proposed stadium at Buzzard's, I've gotta give a huge shout out for Capitol Bike Share.

I don't have a membership (yet), but my buddy let me borrow his key fob so I could use the bikes to meet up with some folks in the Atlas. What a blast! I was able to safely(dynamo lights front and back) get back to Eastern Market Metro for the Orange line train in no more than 8 minutes! I could totally envision getting a membership if a new stadium was built in either of these locations. I can't stand transferring trains, and I'd much rather just ride back to an Orange Line station for a ride home.

Bike share rocks!

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Bootsy - Aren't there plans to redevelop that area already? I was under the impression that most of the wholesale area was going to be torn down...or have those plans been stalled/killed.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Well I believe Chang and whats-his-name bought the team for $30 million so if you've got 60 you'll want to keep some in the bank (which will help since there are annual losses until the stadium is built)

If you do decide to spend it we'll all be part of Discuit's Army

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: In Buzzard We Trust?

The last time there was a quoted price IIRC was when Chang/MacFarlane bought for (again IIRC) $36 million. I would guess it wouldn't be worth much more today. Whether you could become majority stakeholder would depend on Chang, but I would guess that even though he likes owning the team, if it were a good offer, one could have a good conversation on it.

A really basic, cookie-cutter facility? $60 million or so. That's what it cost to build BMO Field in Toronto's urbanized area back before the Great Recession, when construction and labor costs were higher.

So you could probably have the whole kit-and-caboodle for ~$100 million. . . if you're the kind of person who has $100 million in cash lying around and wouldn't need a bank loan. (And if you could get necessary permits, overcome any purely NIMBY objections, don't need major infrastructure upgrades, etc.)

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Great comments on the Florida Market. I, too, think there's far more of a constituency there for the existing conditions in some way shape or form than most realize.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

There have been several "plans", all of which appear currently stalled (for different reasons). First came Sang Oh Choi's plan (the "New Town" project), which involved the tracts that he owned at the time (in the 2006-2007 timeframe; I'm not sure what land he owns now) plus some additional tracts. That plan is stalled, despite starting out with tremendous support from the District government (including the Council); strongly negative reaction from the neighborhood, some of the landowners (including Gallaudet), and business owners in the market have all played a role there, as has the economy as a whole. In parallel, the District's Office of Planning did an extensive Market Study that included a series of public meetings (that's what I participated in) to discuss guidelines for what an acceptable redevelopment ought to include (not in the sense of specific commercial activities, but more along the lines of "Can wholesale and regular retail commercial coexist? How important is it to be walkable?" etc.). The District OP published their first report, which went over the status of the Market area and the economic/real estate contexts for development, planned more meetings to discuss options . . .and then it all faded away. If there's *any* redevelopment in the works, none of it is happening very quickly at all.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

For a while, that constituency didn't seem to matter: Harry Thomas (Ward 5 Council rep) did a couple of meetings with landowners, business owners, and neighborhood members in which *everyone*, from small business owners to official representatives of Gallaudet, used the term "railroaded" while Harry Thomas hinted at eminent domain seizures of whatever the city wanted a la Kelo v. New London. But there hasn't been any movement on any of this in maybe three years . . .which is probably a factor in why Sang Oh Choi wants to talk with DC United.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Maybe. But I'm not sure that any of those things are related at all to DCU getting a stadium. FIFA wouldn't make a decision on whether or not to award a WC to the US in 20 years on the basis of whether or not DCU got help getting a stadium built; and the USSF certainly didn't care about that issue when it put DC forward on the list of sites for the most recent bid.

To me, it did *politically*. My sense from listening to (e.g.) Tommy Wells talk is that Council members are more skeptical now than they were before the Nats stadium deal was made (and amended, and amended, and amended). Whether that skepticism is *bad* is a separate conversation.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Heavens to Betsy. Twenty whole minutes. Why bother?

Seriously, we all know that Metro access is important to a big segment of the fan base, but pissing on what could be a potentially workable site because the walk is longer than you would like shows why people like me (who drive two hours each way when coming to games) roll their eyes at comments like this.

So it's 20 minutes. Would you prefer them leaving for Baltimore or San Antonio to save you the walk?

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

agree with this.

skepticism in this case is certainly "bad" from DC United's perspective.

had MLB opted to branch out and go to Puerto Rico or Las Vegas, there's a very good chance that United could/would have been working with a "less-skeptical" City Council. (not that that possibility would have necessarily helped their cause as a soccer team looking for a new stadium under the conditions that they have been able to offer.)

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

The Armory stop ain't all that close to RFK Stadium - or more immortantly Lot 8 - either

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

I was trying to calculate how long it takes to walk from the station to Lot 8 in my head just now. I think if you walk at a comfortable pace it's probably around 15 minutes, so i don't see the 20 minute walk as all that bad.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

I'm not roadkit, but I think you may be misreading him. I thought his point was this:

1. The walk to/from Metro will be a long one, for most people.
2. Therefore, few people will go to/from matches there via Metro . . .which means even more drivers dumped into a bad traffic situation.

That's how I read it, anyway -- not as a personal complaint about having to walk, but as part of an assessment of what traffic would be like.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

Sure. But I'm not just a DCU fan; I'm also a DC resident, and what's good for DCU is not the only thing I think about here. I very very much want United to play in DC -- but not under *any* terms. To use an extreme example to illustrate what I mean, if the District agreed to help finance a stadium in DC for United, and made up the expenditure by seriously cutting the police budget, I wouldn't be in favor. Having been hosed by MLB, I don't want the District to get hosed again, even if it is my favorite team doing the hosing.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

completely see what you're saying. and I agree.

and that whole "hosed by MLB" thing is the baseline from which everyone can now consider and work from (or work against).

remove "MLB" from the history of DC in the last ~6 years or whatever, and I think DC United likely could have worked toward and gotten a new stadium under better terms (for them) than what they'll likely have to be involved with now in order to stay in DC.

the relative lack of skepticism (or the methods used for overcoming it) on the DC City Council wrt to the National Stadium project, truly does seem to create and focus a more-intense skepticism around any DC United Stadium project. (and as you note the rightness or wrongness of that skepticism might be fodder for a separate thread.)

having said all that, it appears the Buzzards Point option looks to be a very decent opportunity. wonder what pieces have to fall into place and how quickly something could get planned/approved and built.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: In Buzzard We Trust?

ask not what DCU can do for the city, ask what the city can do for DCU.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

If that's the case, then sarcasm retracted. But the walk from Metro and traffic concerns should be way down on the list of why a location is a bad idea, IMHO.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

These things have a funny way of working themselves out naturally. When Nats Park opened, the club begged people to take Metro because they were worried about the apparent lack of parking (by MLB standards). So everyone panicked and took Metro - which was packed - and the surface lots in the neighborhood sat empty (and the team offered free shuttle parking from RFK). Now things are more balanced - people have figured out their preferred way to get down there - and they've reduced the price of some of the pay lots. Pretty sure that would happen with any urban United stadium - though the tradition of tailgating might steer things slightly towards more drivers.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: In Buzzard We Trust?

One way the Nationals could help out DCU - put Strasburg to work:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/17/AR2011011703721_2.html

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: Vote for a New Front Office!

My $.02... the Nationals Park situation did not hurt United with Fenty and Poplar Point, but it has hurt a bit in the chaos after Poplar Point and Morgan Blvd fell apart. Certainly there are council members and community leaders who would not be as willing to stick their necks on the line to support a new stadium when the PR surrounding Nats Park was so bad - they'd take a ton of heat. Personally, I don't think the Nats stadium deal has actually hurt the District's bottom line that much - and could still be a help over it's long lifespan. But it's the public perception of it being a bum deal that's politically relevant.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: In Buzzard We Trust?

It would be expensive, and control of the adjacent land may not be available.

 

Re: Stadium News and Speculation XXIV: In Buzzard We Trust?

The distance on foot from the Stadium Armory Metro exit to roughly where the Barra have their tailgate is @ 2,321 ft. The distance from the M & Half St. SE Metro entrance/exit closest to Nat's Park is @ 3,475 ft. to 1st & R St. SW.
I do understand that many folks aren't fit enough to walk a mile. (ironic for soccer fans no?), but some are making it sound like it's some sort of grueling death march. The streets leading there will be lined with bars and restaurants, with any luck you'll have butt loads of pedal cabs, etc. helping you along. Perhaps it would be an opportunity for United to have the fittest supporters in the league!