On 10/18/03 1:15 PM, "Andy Driscoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Furthermore, if proponents and opponents alike would do their research - as > with Andrew Zimbalist and others publishing data on publicly funded stadia - > the economic development spin-offs from stadiums/stadia are essentially nil, > especially in the long run. People really do not want to live in the shadow > of a sports stadium. Why should they? The chaos surrounding professional > sports fan behavior sickens the society, but worse, ruins surrounding > properties rendering them valueless.
Here's a quote from Andrew Zimbalist that is popular with Driscoll and other pro-sports haters: "[New stadiums] don't feed any positive economic growth or impact. It won't produce a huge-per capita increase or mean many more jobs. People don't travel great distances to see these teams. It is revenue recirculated in the community. They spend it at the minor league ballpark instead of the Cineplex." Andrew Zimbalist is the perfect example of the out-of-touch Ivory Tower elitist. This is a guy who claims that if a city didn't have a pro sports team, that everybody would just spend their entertainment dollars on theatre shows, the movies or some other such thing. Yeah right. Because there's just teeming numbers of folks throughout Minnesota wearing Guthrie Theatre caps and Orchestra Hall T-shirts. And people are falling all over themselves to get to the movie theater in Block E rather than go to the ones out in the suburbs. What Zimbalist and his supporters fail to take into account when trying to understand whether pro sports are a legitimate draw is that there are many of us who are sports fans, period. About 1.9 million such folks braved the "wastelands" in Elliot Park to see the Minnesota Twins this past summer. About 620,000 will do so during this Vikings season. Even the lousy-drawing Gopher football team will attract at least 200,000 fans this season. How many people came downtown to the State Theatre or the Orpheum or all of our various performing arts venues combined? Two of my best friends are Viking season ticket holders. Next to them are a couple guys who are also season ticket holders who live in South Dakota! So these guys drive all the way from South Dakota 10 times a year to see the Vikings play, rather than check out the various entertainment opportunities that are undoubtedly located closer to them, since I'm sure even SD at least has some movie theaters. These guys are hardly alone. Folks travel from ND, SD, IA and northern MN to see the Vikings. Likewise for the Twins and even the Timberwolves and probably the Wild, too. They do that because they are sports fans. It's not logical and it doesn't make any sense to non-sports fans. But remember that "fan" is short for "fanatic" and understand that we don't care whether it makes sense to you non-believers. > Check out what has happened to the eight block radius around both the Hump > and the Target Center. Wastelands. Once-thriving 1st Avenue, 3rd, 4th 5th > and 6th Streets are disasters and the Warehouse district is taking a major > hit from Target Center's impact on the cozy arts and performance mecca that > once defined the entire community. Um, I used to go downtown after school at least weekly in the late 80's when I was attending Minneapolis North, before Target Center was built. Anyone who thinks First Avenue and the Warehouse District was thriving during that period needs a reality check or something to jog their memory because it was truly a wasteland and an eyesore, much like what Keith Reitman and others describe for West Broadway now. Target Center changed all that. Not only did it bring the number of bars and restaurants so despised by Driscoll, but it has also brought a great deal of reinvestment in office space and performing arts venues. Between the Timberwolves, the concerts, the high school sports, the Gopher wrestling matches that are too big for the Sports Pavilion, the ice skating shows, etc. I would guess that Target Center hosts events at least 200 days out of the year. Those events draw people downtown. Lots and lots of people. The Timberwolves games alone draw about 700,000 people per season, not counting playoff games. As a season-ticket holder, I can state with certainty that they draw me downtown 40 times more than I would go otherwise, since as a deaf person, the theatre performances and orchestra concerts really don't interest me and I'd rather visit one of the bars/pubs in NE than go downtown if I'm thirsty for a beer, though I'll stay downtown after a Wolves game if I don't have to be up early the next morning. > Stadiums are never a public asset, only a private one - they're without a > true public purpose and their impact on a huge area of every city core where > they've been erected has been ghetto-creation, little more. Horsepucky. Target Center revitalized the Warehouse District. Xcel Energy Center is revitalizing pretty much all of downtown St. Paul since it was so completely and utterly dead before they got the Wild. Camden Yards helped revitalize Baltimore. Coors Field helped revitalize Denver. And on, and on and on. Yes, the Metrodome has not been such a savior for Elliot Park, but Barb Lickness pointed out at least one likely reason why. It wasn't the stadium itself so much as the horrible decisions made on how to use the land surrounding it. One of the best selling points for locating a ballpark in Minneapolis is the Rapid Park site would have far less need for infrastructure improvements than any possible sites in St. Paul or anywhere else in the metro. The biggest ones, parking and freeway access, are already there. And even the much-maligned Metrodome hosts something like 100 other events each year besides the Twins, Vikings and Gopher football team, so it must be good for something besides holding those "drunken louts" clad in purple and gold who root for the (now 6-0, baby!) Vikings or the "unwashed boors" armed with baseball caps and gloves who come cheer for back-to-back AL Central Division champion Twins. Does this mean ballparks or stadiums are automatic winners? Of course not. Metrodome can certainly be cited as a reasonable example to the contrary. But the numerous examples of stadium, ballpark and arena success stories does show that a well-planned, well-designed and well-located ballpark or stadium or arena can be a huge part of an area's revitalization effort. Personally, when compared to such notable success stories as City Center, Gaviidae Commons and St. Anthony Main, I think the track record for arenas/stadiums vs. other revitalization efforts in both Minneapolis and St. Paul looks pretty damn good. I'm not an advocate of taxpayers funding a Pohlad Park, but if I'd had the choice of that vs. Block E or the downtown Target on a referendum, I'll vote for the ballpark every time. And I'll bet that most list members would as well, despite the rantings of a vocal few who do little to disguise the fact that they hate pro sports in all forms. Remember, this list has some 900-1000 members and there's been maybe a dozen or two who've stated their opposition to a Twins ballpark in any shape or form being located in downtown Minneapolis in recent years. I think most of us would at least listen to or read the proposed financing for such a project before rejecting it outright. Mark Snyder Windom Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
