Why wasn't new Vikings stadium built near Farmer Market (Minneapolis: sale, real estate)

[MINresident]

Does anybody know why the state, city of Minneapolis, and Minnesota Vikings didn't like the Farmers Market site? I know its a little more crammed over their but its much closer to the other stadiums, the transportation hub near Target Field being built, and all the entertainment/food options on the Western edge of downtown. To me, Downtown East has always been an odd choice for a stadium downtown because there really is nothing around it.

[rogead]

Originally Posted by MINresident

Does anybody know why the state, city of Minneapolis, and Minnesota Vikings didn't like the Farmers Market site? I know its a little more crammed over their but its much closer to the other stadiums, the transportation hub near Target Field being built, and all the entertainment/food options on the Western edge of downtown. To me, Downtown East has always been an odd choice for a stadium downtown because there really is nothing around it.

I think that's the point. The city of Minneapolis wanted to engineer development around Downtown East since The Metrodome failed to achieve that goal. The plan is to seamlessly blend downtown into the West Bank, which requires development on the eastern edges of downtown. The Wells Fargo towers that are planned represent a major step in that direction since they include office space, recreational areas, residential, and retail space. Including the stadium, the area is already slated for about 1.5 Billion dollars in development.

[Thegonagle]

The Vikings wanted to build in a different location from the Metrodome so that they could continue to use it during construction. The Vikings didn't want to play two or three seasons at the U.

The powers that be in the city never really went for that because there's nothing wrong with where it already is, the supporting infrastructure is already in place, they wouldn't need to pay to move the farmer's market or a number of other businesses, and it answered the question of whether to demolish the Metrodome or continue to operate it for college baseball and other events.

Basically, it would have been more expensive and more disruptive to build anywhere other than the current metrodome site. Frankly, it was common sense vs. a pipe dream.

[Yosh01]

The Star Tribune used its considerable influence to not only get the stadium built, but to get it built where they would be able to profit from the sale of land.

[golfgal]

Well, the dome is history...demo starts soon. Vikings won their last dome game so that is nice.

[rogead]

Originally Posted by Yosh01

The Star Tribune used its considerable influence to not only get the stadium built, but to get it built where they would be able to profit from the sale of land.

You're overstating the newspaper's influence. The land in question lies between the central business district and the West Bank of The U of M. This is prime real estate which was destined to see rapid development once the Metrodome came down.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Yosh01

The Star Tribune used its considerable influence to not only get the stadium built, but to get it built where they would be able to profit from the sale of land.

While the Strib certainly didn't get in the way of the stadium debate, I think we're overstating the importance the Strib has in shaping policy and development. Does anyone actually believe that had the Strib been neutral on the issue that this wouldn't have been built?

[Yosh01]

Originally Posted by xandrex

While the Strib certainly didn't get in the way of the stadium debate, I think we're overstating the importance the Strib has in shaping policy and development. Does anyone actually believe that had the Strib been neutral on the issue that this wouldn't have been built?

The Strib was extremely biased in its support of the stadium which was opposed by a clear majority of anyone asked to pay for it. Had they been neutral, I think it's very possible the stadium issue would still be under discussion. Still, the powerful moneyed people who run the state wanted it and in they end, they get what they want.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Yosh01

The Strib was extremely biased in its support of the stadium which was opposed by a clear majority of anyone asked to pay for it. Had they been neutral, I think it's very possible the stadium issue would still be under discussion. Still, the powerful moneyed people who run the state wanted it and in they end, they get what they want.

As someone who studied journalism in college, I would love for papers like the Strib to have as much power as you claim they do.

But if their bias was so obvious, why didn't everyone see through it?

People seem to forget that when discussion got serious about a new Viking's stadium, the Metrodome site was pretty near the bottom of the list. Arden Hills was the de rigueur option. It wasn't until it fell through with funding that the Metrodome site really took over, and by then it was pretty obvious we were serious about the Vikings getting a new stadium.

The Strib is a great scapegoat, especially for people who already don't like it. But the fact is that if the powers that be want to get something done, they don't need a newspaper to accomplish that.

[Ghengis]

Originally Posted by Yosh01

The Strib was extremely biased in its support of the stadium which was opposed by a clear majority of anyone asked to pay for it. Had they been neutral, I think it's very possible the stadium issue would still be under discussion. Still, the powerful moneyed people who run the state wanted it and in they end, they get what they want.

all true...Sid Hartman is the Great and Powerful Oz!!!!!!