MLS in STL

STLEnginerd · PostApr 20, 2017#10512017-04-20T17:03+00:00

^^I think if they build in the county they will go full on suburban stadium. The urban areas of the county have to high land values. Also visitors from Chicago or KC are VERY unlikely to fly. The will most likely drive and therefore plan to park at the stadium.

IMHO Likely locations would be
-Fenton Soccer Park
there is already significant investment in fields and it is controlled by an organization headed by one of the SCSTL members.
-EarthCity
signifacant underutilized land/parking near the Amphitheatre, and the old Rams practice facility might be of interest to the team, Regional attractions such as casinos, Westport, and Streets of St. Charles are relatively close.
-Westport
next to the world headquarters of WWT, cheap land is a little harder to come by but Westport would make for a solid pregame gathering spot if the stadium was close enough. Harder to monopolize parking revenue though so i'd put this one in third place.

I realize the disdain for a suburban stadium but realistically i don't see how you build an urban stadium outside the city. Also i don't think metrolink is as strong a motivator as you'd like to think. I am sure they see it as a bonus but i doubt they would compromise on other factors such as highway access, visibility and parking to get a metrolink connection.

pattimagee · PostApr 20, 2017#10522017-04-20T17:10+00:00

Yeah - this is why I'm still holding out some hope. Kavanaugh said the night of the vote that they would, "Take a few days, regroup, and then decide where to go." Every newspaper came out that night saying they had disbanded, but we haven't heard a single thing since then... I'm pretty convinced there's still chatter going on, whether its with State money, County location, etc?

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑
Apr 20, 2017
So, has SCSTL come out and disbanded? I don't think they have. I'm confident we will hear something soon..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dredger · PostApr 20, 2017#10532017-04-20T22:05+00:00

STLEnginerd wrote: ↑
Apr 20, 2017
^^I think if they build in the county they will go full on suburban stadium. The urban areas of the county have to high land values. Also visitors from Chicago or KC are VERY unlikely to fly. The will most likely drive and therefore plan to park at the stadium.

IMHO Likely locations would be
-Fenton Soccer Park
there is already significant investment in fields and it is controlled by an organization headed by one of the SCSTL members.
-EarthCity
signifacant underutilized land/parking near the Amphitheatre, and the old Rams practice facility might be of interest to the team, Regional attractions such as casinos, Westport, and Streets of St. Charles are relatively close.
-Westport
next to the world headquarters of WWT, cheap land is a little harder to come by but Westport would make for a solid pregame gathering spot if the stadium was close enough. Harder to monopolize parking revenue though so i'd put this one in third place.

I realize the disdain for a suburban stadium but realistically i don't see how you build an urban stadium outside the city. Also i don't think metrolink is as strong a motivator as you'd like to think. I am sure they see it as a bonus but i doubt they would compromise on other factors such as highway access, visibility and parking to get a metrolink connection.

Didn't think about Kavanaugh/WWT/Westport connection. But it would make a lot more sense that he would much rather tie it to Westport/Maryland Heights than Galleria/Richmond Heights. Also, LHM which certainly supported MLS next to Union Station would have the same support behind anything near Westport which is also under their domain. Believe it would require some demo and buyouts of light industrial properties but certainly doable.

Also, to tie back to metrolink you got County's future/preferred Daniel Boone extension. Can see some type of generic stadium proposal thrown into the study to support increased ridership numbers.

jshank83 · PostApr 21, 2017#10542017-04-21T04:53+00:00

I am not sure how they would fit a stadium in by westport or the galleria, there isn't enough room in my opinion. You could MAYBE fit it in by the Galleria but I think there is no way it would actually ever happen. It already is a mess with traffic in Brentwood so I can't see any way a stadium would be approved, even if it would fit. Plus, they would have to build bigger parking garages for the cars. I just don't think it would make sense money wise. I can't find anywhere around Westport that a stadium would have any room to fit.

If a stadium is going somewhere besides downtown, I think it would have to be Chesterfield Valley, Fenton, the bottoms by Maryland Heights expressway, or you could tear down the Mills Mall (or whatever it is now). I would lean towards the Maryland Heights option but I don't hate the Mills option since that place is pretty much empty (especially once the Blues leave) and there is 370 right, there plus plenty of parking.

bwcrow1s · PostApr 21, 2017#10552017-04-21T16:48+00:00

What does any of this matter? The MLS won't approve an expansion to have the team play in the county, right?

dredger · PostApr 21, 2017#10562017-04-21T17:01+00:00

bwcrow1s wrote: ↑
Apr 21, 2017
What does any of this matter? The MLS won't approve an expansion to have the team play in the county, right?

I think the franchise expansion fee is what really matter to MLS

joelo · PostApr 21, 2017#10572017-04-21T17:02+00:00

bwcrow1s wrote: ↑
Apr 21, 2017
What does any of this matter? The MLS won't approve an expansion to have the team play in the county, right?

Just like former mayor Slay...they don't believe it's dead. They have "hope". I honestly think it's dead, maybe something will be worked out with the city but it aint happening in the county. They didn't even reach out to the county beyond a formal nope

STLrainbow · PostApr 21, 2017#10582017-04-21T17:27+00:00

The possibility that the MLS effort is dead here just seems hard to comprehend... the hopeful ownership group should still have $30M to play with after the lower-than-possible franchise fee) so that leaves just $30M to fill the difference (assuming state comes through on that end). With a pinch of value engineering, a scosh of more money of their own, and perhaps even a smidgen of traditional TIF type funding that could be passed by BoA if absolutely needed, that gap seems surmountable.

I guess they just didn't want it strongly enough if they're really out.

dmelsh · PostApr 21, 2017#10592017-04-21T17:53+00:00

dredger wrote: ↑
Apr 21, 2017

bwcrow1s wrote: ↑
Apr 21, 2017
What does any of this matter? The MLS won't approve an expansion to have the team play in the county, right?
I think the franchise expansion fee is what really matter to MLS

No, they will get the expansion fee no matter which team joins.

MLS can make demands like urban stadiums because they have 11 cities lined up wanting a team. Don't what to build us an urban stadium, move to the back of the line. STL cannot make demands here, you either do want the MLS is asking for or they will move on to other cities that will.

Sorry MLS is dead here, STLFC will be our Professional Team for the next decade.

dredger · PostApr 21, 2017#10602017-04-21T19:15+00:00

^ All I can comeback with is how many of the 11 owner groups within those cities lined up have forked over the franchise fee? Especially now with league demanding a franchise fee from $100 to $150 million. Heck Beckman and Miami can't even get their act together. IMO, The 11 teams lined up mean squat so I would have to disagree with your thoughts

I have no doubt in my mind if MLS2STL put money into an escrow account as part of the franchise fee that they urban stadium demand will be dropped in a heartbeat

RuskiSTL · PostApr 25, 2017#10612017-04-25T19:39+00:00

gary kreie wrote: ↑
Apr 19, 2017

RuskiSTL wrote:
gary kreie wrote: ↑
Apr 16, 2017
If one were to build an MLS stadium outside the city, what are the best sites? I looked at Google maps and keyed on the large parking lot on the South side of Galleria at 64 and 170. Galleria could construct another parking structure on the North or East side to make up for the lost parking. That location would be very central, highly visible, and with metro link a short walk away.
https://goo.gl/maps/iPj1PCbnAVF2

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1. Richmond Heights would never allow it.
2. IF RH allowed it, no way Brentwood, Clayton, Ladue would stand for it
That parking lot is really only used around Christmas, when there is no MLS soccer. And nobody shops there in the summer. I don't know why Ladue or Brentwood would care or have a say in this. Clayton could make up some revenue now that malls have regressed to Amazon showroom status. And it could spur development of Boulevard II finally, as the stadium in Kansas has done. What is a better site? Maryland Heights near the Page Bridge or near Riverport?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not saying it's a bad idea. I actually would be all for it. But having grown up in Brentwood and had many, many friends/acquaintances in the Brentwood/RH/Ladue/Clayton community I don't see this happening.

If you don't think it matters what Ladue/Brentwood/Clayton would have to say then you don't understand the dynamics here. The people in charge of these fiefdoms care more about what the people they admire/rub shoulders with have to say rather than their constituents. This pocket of Saint Louis is administered by the pride and egos of a select few rather than any sort of logic.

It's quite ironic because a large percentage of stadium supporters in my life were from this area. But the powers that be would never take such a risk, they don't do imagination. The last imaginative legislation in this part of town was the TIF district that brought Target. Then it was all monkey see monkey do. These people have completely squandered 4 metrolink stops in the area. Brentwood in particular has regressed in imagination and seems hellbent on becoming some 1980s version of Leave It To Beaver.

Sorry for the rant. Decades of frustration that one of Saint Louis' most important districts runs at about 40% efficiency.

moorlander · PostApr 26, 2017#10622017-04-26T02:43+00:00

chriss752 · PostApr 26, 2017#10632017-04-26T02:50+00:00

Highly doubt anything will happen now Moorlander

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

STLrainbow · PostApr 26, 2017#10642017-04-26T03:19+00:00

^ the group doesn't want it enough?

dredger · PostApr 26, 2017#10652017-04-26T06:35+00:00

STLrainbow wrote: ↑
Apr 26, 2017
^ the group doesn't want it enough?

The only idea that makes sense to me is MLS2STL pitches the idea to MLS of playing at Busch stadium. A stadium with open grass field that has already hosted a number of friendlies. Don't know the field configuration but who cares if you give out of town fans the seats better suited for another sport. Plus, they would probably spin the added ticket tax revenue back into a franchise fee payment shell game..

robertn42 · PostApr 26, 2017#10662017-04-26T14:02+00:00

moorlander wrote: ↑
Apr 26, 2017

This Ortiz guy.

Every time he opens his mouth I yearn for Burwell and Strauss.

whitherSTL · PostApr 26, 2017#10672017-04-26T14:14+00:00

He's a very odd human being. Very aloof.

downtown2007 · PostApr 26, 2017#10682017-04-26T14:40+00:00

The MLS 2 STL group is proposing a 200 million stadium. The avg cost of an MLS stadium is 120 million. Are they simply changing the plans so it's not as grandiose therefore lowering the price?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dredger · PostApr 26, 2017#10692017-04-26T21:21+00:00

downtown2007 wrote: ↑
Apr 26, 2017
The MLS 2 STL group is proposing a 200 million stadium. The avg cost of an MLS stadium is 120 million. Are they simply changing the plans so it's not as grandiose therefore lowering the price?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Drop the dramatic entrance/front facing Market Street and maybe drop the rebuilt 22nd street on west side of stadium in order to shift stadium onto all city owned property (property transferred from MoDOT)? Not sure, but plan voted down would have included securing some property next to Union Station if not mistaken or at least what I understood

and or simply move it out to Fenton Business Park @ Old Chrysler site and or NorthPark. Trying to think of locations with undeveloped lot under one ownership to accommodate your average $120 million MLS stadium which would be in line with what KC has.

chriss752 · PostApr 26, 2017#10702017-04-26T21:30+00:00

downtown2007 wrote:The MLS 2 STL group is proposing a 200 million stadium. The avg cost of an MLS stadium is 120 million. Are they simply changing the plans so it's not as grandiose therefore lowering the price?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What?!

kbshapiro · PostApr 26, 2017#10712017-04-26T21:39+00:00

Maybe Chesterfield Mall?

Grover · PostApr 26, 2017#10722017-04-26T22:50+00:00

downtown2007 wrote: ↑
Apr 26, 2017
The MLS 2 STL group is proposing a 200 million stadium. The avg cost of an MLS stadium is 120 million. Are they simply changing the plans so it's not as grandiose therefore lowering the price?

I believe MLS2STL had already pulled back from that original $200M figure a bit and were saying the stadium cost would be in the range of $160-$180M (I think this may have been in response to not getting the $40M from the state that they were originally hoping for).

Still, even if you scale back to $100M, that is a reasonable cost for a basic MLS stadium. That was part of my objection to public funds for the stadium.

I do think there is a question as to whether STL with a no-frills stadium would still be a favorite to land a team. I do think MLS wants to be in STL, although I also think many people overstate their desire when there are a number of other good candidate cities. If 4 other cities put out $200M stadium plans, would St. Louis with a $100M stadium still get one of the expansion slots? I don't know.

dredger wrote: Trying to think of locations with undeveloped lot under one ownership to accommodate your average $120 million MLS stadium which would be in line with what KC has.

I'm not sure if you are referring to the location or the cost being in line with the KC stadium, but that stadium did cost a bit more than $120 million. It was $200M ($213M in 2017 dollars). Avaya Stadium in San Jose or BBVA Compass Stadium in Houston could be good examples of recent lower cost MLS stadiums, both being right around $100M

STLrainbow · PostApr 26, 2017#10732017-04-26T22:58+00:00

^ tbh I think MLS will be very relieved if it has two solid proposals to award this year... the majority of what seem to be serious efforts don't seem quite ready yet and others like Indy don't really seem that formidable.

dredger · PostApr 27, 2017#10742017-04-27T00:48+00:00

STLrainbow wrote: ↑
Apr 26, 2017
^ tbh I think MLS will be very relieved if it has two solid proposals to award this year... the majority of what seem to be serious efforts don't seem quite ready yet and others like Indy don't really seem that formidable.

Agree, I'm taking two solid proposals as both having a legitimate stadium plan that can break ground within the year and the franchise fee in hand. .

DogtownBnR · PostApr 27, 2017#10752017-04-27T03:18+00:00

I'm thinking that MLS and US soccer wanted St. Louis to be the Midwest go to location for big games and events. That could be the reason that they wanted St. Louis to have one of the best venues in the league. While Kansas City has a nice venue, it is in the middle of a cornfield-strip mall, way out in the burbs of KS. MLS wants to be in urban areas like teams in Europe.

I think the best option would be to build the venue for $100 million with the opportunity for major expansion in the future. Build the stadium and get the franchise, then build it from there. The group can add amenities and expand as the franchise grows. I'm sure they could cut corners to save the $60 million and then make additions later.

MLS in STL

Choose Display Mode