Challenges and Opportunities In Latest KC Ballpark Proposal

If there's one thing I know, the Kansas City Royals have done a horrible job convincing anyone that they need a new stadium—well, almost everyone. Kansas politicians are on board with a new stadium, as long as it's on the Kansas side. That said, it hasn't stopped the Royals from pursuing those plans or a few Kansas City area developers from sharing everything from potential ballpark sites to renderings of how a new Royals Stadium might look. Yet the latest idea, the Royals making their home in Kansas City's Washington Square Park, might have legs.

Since the day the Royals confirmed that they wanted a new ballpark, I've believed that the easiest way for them to get everyone on board is simple: Envision a stadium and an experience that makes even the most ardent supporter of Kauffman Stadium stop and think, "Wow, this is a cool idea."

There's not one reason fans don't want the team to leave Kauffman. There are a variety of reasons. It's easy for some fans to get to the K, where downtown or north is a more complicated or longer ride. The tailgaters feel a move downtown will stop that tradition. Some fans don't want to venture downtown. Finally, some of us like the K and think the ballpark will be a treasure if we give it 10 or 15 more years.

None of that seems to matter to the Royals, at least not publicly, which is another obstacle to bringing people together to support the team's goals. Sometimes, acknowledging what we have is pretty nice, along with explaining why something new will be better, can bring people together.

And yet, Vince Bryant from 3D Development brought people together to see if Washington Square Park could give the Royals what they want while addressing fan concerns and, most importantly, the community. He did this without help or input from Kansas City, Jackson County, or the Kansas City Royals.

To date, it seems like the most comprehensive plan anyone has put together for a new Royals Stadium.

On the We Love KC Baseball Site, the website that explains what Bryant and his cohorts came up with, Bryant says, “As Crossroads businesses, we understood the concerns of our neighbors, but we also believed in the Royals’ desire to create something transformational for the city. After months of due diligence, which included sharing it quietly with our neighbors, we feel confident that this is a great home for the Royals.”

The plan addressed parking issues and provided access to the park for those who drive, ride, walk, or bike. It did not displace any businesses, and there is plenty of room for ancillary development opportunities. The site has 10.5 million square feet of office space, 3,000 residential units, 1,770 hotel rooms, and 150 retailers.

Additionally, since the City holds its championship celebrations, not to mention the NFL Draft, at Union Station and Washington Square Park, the area generally works well for large crowds. It is also in the center of Kansas City.

Generally, this seems like a well-thought-out plan. The only thing missing from it is jaw-dropping renderings. There are renderings, but they're mostly to give people some idea of where the ballpark will be and what's around the area. It's not like they presented a specific design, style for the park, or anything they'd do in the area.

If I were the Royals, I'd be taking a long, hard look at this proposal. If what Bryant and his team of architects, real estate brokers, attorneys, and PR people have researched is the real deal. I'd embrace it. Talk to Jackson County and Kansas City lawmakers and get the wheels moving on this site. Then, I'd hire an architectural firm to design a ballpark and a site plan that stops people in their tracks.

Between the Royals winning, a proposal that addresses some of the issues that have been dogging the new stadium plans, and a show-stopper of stadium design, I'm not so sure the opposition would be as solid as it has been so far. Or, to put it another way, with all the above and the Chiefs wanting to stay and redevelop the sports complex, I'm not sure voters would have a problem with any of it.