Downtown Stadium Article

[need therapy]

This is a long article and was in Artvoice, of all places, but it makes some interesting arguments. I'm in favor of putting a new stadium downtown after living in Baltimore for years and seeing how Camden Yards and the Ravens stadium helped to expand the rejuvenated Inner Harbor area. See what you think about it.

 

http://artvoice.com/...9/news_analysis

Edited May 21, 2014 by need therapy

[johnnywo]

Great idea. I've been for this for a long time although I don't live in Buffalo any longer. However, I have been to quite a few other downtown stadiums (baseball and football) and they all seem to work. Finding a way to keep the thing going during the offseason might be the sticking point. Maybe combine the stadium with a convention center or entertainment area?

[PaattMaann]

Traffic is a huge issue - did Baltimore add/upgrade highway system in and out of the harbor or was that infrastructure already there?

[zonabb]

First off, Artvoice has historically had better articles on urban issues like this, the Buffalo News is too close to business interests and the developer class to make any real assessment of anything in this region. But Fisher is decidedly pro-urban to a fault and that can cloud his judgment as well, although he's still head and shoulders above any other writer in WNY when it comes to policy. That being said, it was hard to read much beyond the first sentence when he states that Buffalo is "arguably" the smallest NFL market. That's lazy work on his part, not because he can't find the data to show otherwise (it's not although is one of the smallest as we all know) but because by makign this vague argument, it'll support his argument that the stadium must go in Buffalo, and without reading the rest, to support his pro-urban agenda.

 

Although I hate the way he frames his work in many ways, spatially and from a location theory standpoint, it's the most logical location for many reasons.. space, connectivity, and what many miss is that in 10-15 years, as more people move back into the city, it'll be more central to the population and easily connected with public transportation. The reason for city repopulation is partly a preference by some but also the high costs of gas and car ownership as gas will continue to climb and wages stagnate, making the city more viable. To the comment above about traffic... it's a dying issue. We have to get used to the idea that the way we move in the future isn't going to be everyone in a single car, those days are fast coming to an end... again high gas prices will only continue as supply declines and global demand increases. A site with connections to public transportation MUST be the site.

 

Also, who owns property will go along way toward stadium site selection. Govt owned property means "free" for a stadium whereas a Milstein-owned property means added hard costs. So again.... start connection the dots and its gonna be a city site, without question.

Edited May 21, 2014 by zonabb

[PaattMaann]

First off, Artvoice has historically had better articles on urban issues like this, the Buffalo News is too close to business interests and the developer class to make any real assessment of anything in this region. But Fisher is decidedly pro-urban to a fault and that can cloud his judgment as well, although he's still head and shoulders above any other writer in WNY when it comes to policy. That being said, it was hard to read much beyond the first sentence when he states that Buffalo is "arguably" the smallest NFL market. That's lazy work on his part, not because he can't find the data to show otherwise (it's not although is one of the smallest as we all know) but because by makign this vague argument, it'll support his argument that the stadium must go in Buffalo, and without reading the rest, to support his pro-urban agenda.

 

Although I hate the way he frames his work in many ways, spatially and from a location theory standpoint, it's the most logical location for many reasons.. space, connectivity, and what many miss is that in 10-15 years, as more people move back into the city, it'll be more central to the population and easily connected with public transportation. The reason for city repopulation is partly a preference by some but also the high costs of gas and car ownership as gas will continue to climb and wages stagnate, making the city more viable. To the comment above about traffic... it's a dying issue. We have to get used to the idea that the way we move in the future isn't going to be everyone in a single car, those days are fast coming to an end... again high gas prices will only continue as supply declines and global demand increases. A site with connections to public transportation MUST be the site.

 

Also, who owns property will go along way toward stadium site selection. Govt owned property means "free" for a stadium whereas a Milstein-owned property means added hard costs. So again.... start connection the dots and its gonna be a city site, without question.

 

While I disagree about traffic being a dying issue - maybe in 50 years, but for the first 30 years of a new stadium it would be a major concern - then read my comment as "transportation concerns". If it isn't parking/traffic then what is the public transportation plan for a DT stadium?

[BreezeMafia]

Traffic is a huge issue - did Baltimore add/upgrade highway system in and out of the harbor or was that infrastructure already there?

 

Both are right near entry's to major interstate's. I have attended multiple Ravens games and its so cool to tailgate on streets, in store parking lots, awesome environment.

 

If downtown were to be considered for the Bills, need to have multi access to the 33, 190 N and S, and Rte 5 as well.

[PaattMaann]

 

 

Both are right near entry's to major interstate's. I have attended multiple Ravens games and its so cool to tailgate on streets, in store parking lots, awesome environment.

 

If downtown were to be considered for the Bills, need to have multi access to the 33, 190 N and S, and Rte 5 as well.

 

Right - and that's my point - there isn't good access to 33, 190 etc....it would be a traffic nightmare and to fix that would take millions and years (at least that's what I'm envisioning) - so what is the plan to get a DT site viable - because it would be my first choice for a new stadium location

[bigK14094]

I usually don't agree with Bruce Fisher's view, as he is far left wing on many things. But, he has some decent arguments in this piece....he is the only reason, in my view, to read Artvoice at all. Even if I disagree with him, I always read him......he's; that kind of talent. But, having said that.....the downtown has traffic shortcomings, not the great existing network as described. As a long time season ticket holder (3 decades), I am not sure my destination of choice is downtown.....an upgraded OP facility might getter done, as some say. And, they comments on cars are out of touch. EV;s will eventually play a commuter role.....and that will include the football game. And, my car currently has 4 guys in it every game, every season. Carpooling already exists, we party together........

[Spiderweb]

Logical and well written. If anyone is left that cares about Buffalo, the DT stadium should be priority one. I fear the penny rich pound foolish crowd will simply take the easy way out. A DT stadium is more than an investment to keep the Bills, It's an investment in Buffalo. This could be Buffalo's last chance. Be brave, be bold, and just do it.

[need therapy]

 

 

Right - and that's my point - there isn't good access to 33, 190 etc....it would be a traffic nightmare and to fix that would take millions and years (at least that's what I'm envisioning) - so what is the plan to get a DT site viable - because it would be my first choice for a new stadium location

 

Depending on where a stadium may be located downtown, there may not be a long list of improvements needed. A stadium near the First Niagara center or at the Perry Street project site would have decent access to 190. Those sites also would have decent access to 33 through Oak and Elm Streets cutting through the city. Both are 3 lanes wide and have timed traffic lights that allow for a decent flow of traffic. On game days traffic cops could be used to quicken the travel time from 33 to the stadium area. There may be a need for some re-routing as both streets near 190 and the ramps onto and off of 33 would need to be widened, but these are not insurmountable. Route 5 access from the south would be more challenging. I don't know if Ohio Street and the bridge there can be widened and recontructing the bridge over Michigan Ave may not be enough to increase traffic flow substantially.

 

A stadium near City Hall would have some access to 190 and route 5 that would make travel in from those routes relatively easy. Again, the use of traffic cops on game days would help. Travel from 33 would be a lot harder though and I don't know what might help that problem.

Edited May 21, 2014 by need therapy

[BuffaloRebound]

I was for a Niagara Falls stadium until I read this. Writer brings up a lot of good points. Region desperately needs a vibrant downtown area. Bringing 70k+ to the downtown area helps even if it's only 10 times a year.

[PromoTheRobot]

Depending on where a stadium may be located downtown, there may not be a long list of improvements needed. A stadium near the First Niagara center or at the Perry Street project site would have decent access to 190. Those sites also would have decent access to 33 through Oak and Elm Streets cutting through the city. Both are 3 lanes wide and have timed traffic lights that allow for a decent flow of traffic. On game days traffic cops could be used to quicken the travel time from 33 to the stadium area. There may be a need for some re-routing as both streets near 190 and the ramps onto and off of 33 would need to be widened, but these are not insurmountable. Route 5 access from the south would be more challenging. I don't know if Ohio Street and the bridge there can be widened and recontructing the bridge over Michigan Ave may not be enough to increase traffic flow substantially.

 

A stadium near City Hall would have some access to 190 and route 5 that would make travel in from those routes relatively easy. Again, the use of traffic cops on game days would help. Travel from 33 would be a lot harder though and I don't know what might help that problem.

 

I don't get that Niagara St site at all. There is nothing there. Don't make the same mistake we made when we built the Crossroads/MMA/HSBC/FNC Arena. Put a stadium where stuff is already. We had to wait 20+ years for Canalside/Harborcenter to finally take off. Add to it. Don't start another district.

[need therapy]

Logical and well written. If anyone is left that cares about Buffalo, the DT stadium should be priority one. I fear the penny rich pound foolish crowd will simply take the easy way out. A DT stadium is more than an investment to keep the Bills, It's an investment in Buffalo. This could be Buffalo's last chance. Be brave, be bold, and just do it.

 

Bingo

[Homey D. Clown]

I have been and always will be 100% behind a downtown Buffalo site, the city needs something like this desperately. Every other location just seems like wasting an opportunity to continue to revitalize it's image as a sports destination. Niagara Falls, or Batavia, or any other odd location just doesn't make any sense. A new stadium will bring highway improvements, jobs, and growth to the city, and that's where it belongs. The road from Toronto, or fans coming in from Ontario in general won't really see a significant difference if the stadium was built in NF. If anything, the drive to downtown Buffalo would be a shorter commute than the drive to Orchard Park anyway, so there's still a net drivetime gain already.

[need therapy]

 

 

I don't get that Niagara St site at all. There is nothing there. Don't make the same mistake we made when we built the Crossroads/MMA/HSBC/FNC Arena. Put a stadium where stuff is already. We had to wait 20+ years for Canalside/Harborcenter to finally take off. Add to it. Don't start another district.

 

I agree. This article is the only place I've seen mentioning Niagara Street. There isn't anything there worth connecting a stadium to (I work nearby there) and I think it would be more costly do to something on that site.

[May Day 10]

sign me up

[DC Grid]

A downtown stadium is a must. I realize it comes with a bunch of development / land use hurdles but having seen first hand how modern stadiums and smart development can turn around areas, I think every city should look to build downtown stadiums. In DC, Nats stadium turned a baron wasteland into a half-decent area, that will likely turn into something really awesome in the next decade.

[dollars 2 donuts]

Both are right near entry's to major interstate's. I have attended multiple Ravens games and its so cool to tailgate on streets, in store parking lots, awesome environment.

 

If downtown were to be considered for the Bills, need to have multi access to the 33, 190 N and S, and Rte 5 as well.

 

I have been to a few Bengals games over the years and I know exactly what you are talking about.

 

I not only liked the tailgating before the games, but going to downtown pubs afterward.

 

EDIT: Additionally, and not to be a lazy bones, can one of you tech savvy bunch link to a map with these areas, generally, highlighted please?

 

Thank you.

Edited May 21, 2014 by dollars 2 donuts

[SF Bills Fan]

This is the most compelling argument that I have heard for downtown. I'd be interested to see if either site is on the short list the stadium committee has.

[The Wiz]

I have been to a few Bengals games over the years and I know exactly what you are talking about.

 

I not only liked the tailgating before the games, but going to downtown pubs afterward.

 

EDIT: Additionally, and not to be a lazy bones, can one of you tech savvy bunch link to a map with these areas, generally, highlighted please?

 

Thank you.

Not exactly sure where he is talking about on Niagara street but this is the South Park Ave Location.

https://www.google.c...bf70f9d80f026f9

 

Edit: he said near city hall for the Niagara Street location so best guess is somewhere around here:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Buffalo+City+Hall/@42.8866773,-78.8823225,673m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x89d3124bb580f115:0xf18bb130fb19382b

Edited May 21, 2014 by The Wiz

[FLFan]

The decisions to put the football stadium in the outer suburbs and the new UB campus in Amherst were perhaps the biggest mistakes made with respect to urban planning in Buffalo's history, and there have been many. It would be a very different city today if not for those short sighted decisions. The opportunity should not be lost again. I agree with the author.

[Snorom]

Future of Buffalo will be at the Harbor Center and the waterfront canal area.

 

The restaurants bars casinos and storefronts will follow

Edited May 21, 2014 by Snorom

[voodoo poonani]

First off, Artvoice has historically had better articles on urban issues like this, the Buffalo News is too close to business interests and the developer class to make any real assessment of anything in this region. But Fisher is decidedly pro-urban to a fault and that can cloud his judgment as well, although he's still head and shoulders above any other writer in WNY when it comes to policy. That being said, it was hard to read much beyond the first sentence when he states that Buffalo is "arguably" the smallest NFL market. That's lazy work on his part, not because he can't find the data to show otherwise (it's not although is one of the smallest as we all know) but because by makign this vague argument, it'll support his argument that the stadium must go in Buffalo, and without reading the rest, to support his pro-urban agenda.

 

Outside of Green Bay (which is grandfathered in) we are the smallest metropolitan area. That's why the Batavia idea makes some sense. Combining the Rochester and Buffalo greater metropolitan areas would rival Pittsburgh.

 

I don't doubt that placing the stadium downtown would help revitalize the area. That being said, I don't think that is at the top of the NFL's to do list. As Jerrah points out, they want to grow the pie. Do we have a better shot with Canada or Rochester? Toronto is huge, but they won't fill the Sky Dome (excuse me) Rogers Center for us.

[yungmack]

Very good article. I agree with his key points about density and adjacency. As the Bills are seemingly remaking themselves in the image of the Steelers, why not remake Buffalo in the image of Pittsburgh? It's somewhat overlooked, but Pittsburgh has done a tremendous turn-around in the last few decades, from an old and rotting industrial capital falling into irrelevancy, into a quite thriving center of learning and advanced businesses. It has required a commitment of, for want of a better term, the local Establishment, in combination with banks, politicians and, crucially, universities. All of those factors are present in Buffalo, though largely semi-dormant. And as that Establishment did in Pittsburgh, Buffalo too should focus on making the city itself the core of the revival. If Fisher is correct, that the Bills will be staying and a new stadium will be built in any case, then use that inevitability to assist in the revitalization. And use the current enthusiasm about keeping the Bills as a starting point in re-imagining Buffalo itself.

[Lurker]

This is a long article and was in Artvoice, of all places, but it makes some interesting arguments. I'm in favor of putting a new stadium downtown after living in Baltimore for years and seeing how Camden Yards and the Ravens stadium helped to expand the rejuvenated Inner Harbor area.

 

http://artvoice.com/...9/news_analysis

 

As I write this post, I'm sitting in a 12th floor guestroom of the Baltimore Hilton looking down on Camden Yards across the street and M&T Stadium right behind it. If Buffalo could score even 20% of the vibe that Baltimore has with its downtown stadiums, it would be a game changer of epic proportions in terms of the city's economic future.

 

Gotta go with somewhere adjacent to Buffalo's inner harbor--the synergies trump all other possible locations floated to date, IMO...

[DC Grid]

Outside of Green Bay (which is grandfathered in) we are the smallest metropolitan area. That's why the Batavia idea makes some sense. Combining the Rochester and Buffalo greater metropolitan areas would rival Pittsburgh.

 

I don't doubt that placing the stadium downtown would help revitalize the area. That being said, I don't think that is at the top of the NFL's to do list. As Jerrah points out, they want to grow the pie. Do we have a better shot with Canada or Rochester? Toronto is huge, but they won't fill the Sky Dome (excuse me) Rogers Center for us.

 

I think you're 100% right it's not on the NFL's list...but it should be on Buffalo's. Redevelopment of Buffalo's downtown is a must if the city is going to do anything more than shrink further. The trend in most metropolitan areas is a return of young professionals to downtown living. If Buffalo wants to ride the wave that is revitalizing similarly situated cites like Milwaukee and Cleveland and Baltimore they need an anchor to develop around. A new stadium could be that. While giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a billion dollar private entity should make anyone sick, this is a rare case where it makes sense. If Buffalo finances the building of a new downtown stadium it can lock in the Bills for a long time AND help revitalize a city that needs redevelopment.