Something that irks me about Truman Sports Complex (Jackson, Richmond: appointed, landscaping)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually yes...I don't think any politically or religiously divisive organization should have their headquarters within the vantage point of a multi-regional public venue like an NFL or MLB stadium. The reason? ...IT LOOKS TACKY!!
It's like putting MoveOn.org's headquarters right next door to a family amusement park where people can see it.
Even if it isn't true, out-of-towners will THINK the place has some kind of value-driven agenda.
Just my opinion/point-of-view; you don't have to agree with it.
You damn right I don't have to agree with it. But that's what your saying others should do if you had your way. Your whole "view" is just plain silly. "Divisive"? On who's account, yours? The homosexual lobby's? There's something out there called "freedom" and it's just TDB if someone's thin-skinned immaturity is "irked" by the presence of something they don't agree with. I guess under your "view" you could remove or demolish hundreds of churches, mosques, synagogues and other nonprofit organizations which no doubt are in view of public places, be they sports venues, parks, zoos and other governmentally (or quasi) operated facilities. Or privately-owned like your amusement park example. And just under what authority do you think Big Brother would have to accomplish such a thing? The First Amendment? Eminent domain? Talk about spreading divisiveness, just try that.
Or we could take it one step further and ban all "controversial" "political" or "divisive" organizations from using any sports or civic facilities. Whoops, there goes the convention business! But hey "IT LOOKS TACKY" in person or on TV to have people in costumes or outfits in support of a cause or a candidate. Or to have "WELCOME DEMS or GOP" banners and signs on the outside, Hey, somebody just might be offended, so hell with freedoms of speech and association. If it "offends," just ban it. Sheer genius.
You damn right I don't have to agree with it. But that's what your saying others should do if you had your way. Your whole "view" is just plain silly. "Divisive"? On who's account, yours? The homosexual lobby's? There's something out there called "freedom" and it's just TDB if someone's thin-skinned immaturity is "irked" by the presence of something they don't agree with. I guess under your "view" you could remove or demolish hundreds of churches, mosques, synagogues and other nonprofit organizations which no doubt are in view of public places, be they sports venues, parks, zoos and other governmentally (or quasi) operated facilities. Or privately-owned like your amusement park example. And just under what authority do you think Big Brother would have to accomplish such a thing? The First Amendment? Eminent domain? Talk about spreading divisiveness, just try that.
Or we could take it one step further and ban all "controversial" "political" or "divisive" organizations from using any sports or civic facilities. Whoops, there goes the convention business! But hey "IT LOOKS TACKY" in person or on TV to have people in costumes or outfits in support of a cause or a candidate. Or to have "WELCOME DEMS or GOP" banners and signs on the outside, Hey, somebody just might be offended, so hell with freedoms of speech and association. If it "offends," just ban it. Sheer genius.
You should consider running for office ...anyway, I'm done with this thread.
MRG Dallas I agree with you
I used to live in kansas city, kansas and have been to both stadiums many times. not once did I hear anyone gripe about that building. It is rather odd shaped but Im not offended.
Two questions I always hear from out of town visitors about KC-why are KCI's terminals like they are and not single terminal. And the second question is why aren't the stadiums downtown.
I think the church is fine. I only wish the area was more built up around it. Even some office buildings or something. If it were more built up, that church wouldn't stand out like it does. I doubt 99% of the people at the stadium have any idea what that place is or their ideals. All I ever knew is it had something to do with a religious organization and athletics?
I just thought it always sort if fits the bill for KC's image though. Most cities get a pretty skyline to look at while KC has a few mid range freeway hotels, some grass and a big church on a hill .
At least the trade school is there now. I still remember the 1980 world series and the broadcasters were talking about the cows across the freeway (not sure if there were actualy cows there or not).
I'm surprised the area isn't built-up also, especially since it's the intersection of two major freeways and the growth at the time the stadiums opened, 72-73 was definitely in that direction both southward and eastward. Also "suburban" stadiums were the norm, I don't think it was until Baltimore's Camden Yards opened that planners realized the desirability of central city venues.
Still, I think it's a desirable location for many things besides trucking companies, which Google Satellite shows alot of in the area. Warehouses, distribution centers, etc. seem natural fits yet now as you travel east on 70 what used to be nice places like Blue Ridge Village Apts. and BR Mall are shot. Why that corridor didn't grow is puzzling.
It's just a case of bad placement. The stadiums were placed in an area that was already sort of haphazardly developed. It was an industrial/blue collar area. There are homes and what not all over the area so even to build an office park would require developers to acquire property etc. This is KC where you can go five miles away and develop a farm field for half the cost. In the 60's and 70's Raytown was considered a premier suburb. People didn't want to live in that part of kcmo because like many parts of KCMO, the city simply didn't take care of that area. Raytown became developed and rather dense compared to any part of KCMO that touched it.
KCMO has way too much land and the area around the stadiums is another area of kcmo that should be in a suburban city where it could have gotten more attention and kcmo could concentrate on more urban areas or even build new sprawl. But to annex industrial sprawl and super low density low income residential in a very rugged and difficult area to develop in the first place and then throw some stadiums in the middle of it? Fail.
KC should have moved the baseball stadium downtown while it had a chance (last renovation) and kept the football stadium there (the location is perfect for an NFL stadium).
Bottom line. Stadiums don't flip or transform industrial blue collar areas. Kemper didn't and the TSC didn't. If you want a stadium in a vibrant area, you have to place the stadium in or very near an existing vibrant area.
For a lot of people in KC, it's too close in, or not far enough away, therefore it is ghetto to them. Or maybe people there really like to drive long distances for the fun of it. Perhaps they like the feels-like-it's-bigger-than-it-really-is vibe that KC has.
I don't understand the "bad placement" aspect. Especially given the growth trends you've got 435 servicing both North of the River and KCI, plus So. Joco. I-70 brings the Downtown business crowd and the booming east suburbs of BS and LS. I never thought the drive was too bad or too far, no matter where I lived in the Metro. The Rangers draw pretty well with a centrally located stadium in a so-so suburb (Arlington). Maybe a DT stadium would have worked, where was the proposed location(s)?
Head 4 miles east to I-70 and M-291 (I-470) intersection. I was over that way yesterday. Unbelievable retail development. Wish it had all been there back in the 80s when I lived in Blue Springs and was a semi shopaholic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...anyway, I'm done with this thread.
