Here is the most recent Citrama site:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Arnold+Dr,+Cincinnati,+OH+45215/@39.2505083,-84.4793005,781m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x88404db452f154a9:0x516d9200bf20b750!8m2!3d39.2494407!4d-84.477085

 

Here is 2016:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Collegevue+Pl,+Cincinnati,+OH+45224/@39.2074532,-84.5559655,391m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x88404b25686948a7:0x58e8a95790f99ec8!8m2!3d39.205194!4d-84.5550509

 

 

Someone needs to check to see if these 6 homebuilders were Cranley donors and how the remaining lots are sold.  There should be an auction process, if fairness were the goal here. 

It's not the highest and best use of this land, I will say that. However, I don't think this is all that terrible of a proposal. When you look at neighboring blocks, 50 homes in this parcel doesn't seem too out of whack. Most of the surrounding neighborhood to the east is comprised of single family homes, albeit older and more densely packed together, and it has a really pleasant, almost sleepy vibe. Adding more families and owner occupied housing will help to keep this area safe and stable. I can also see this neighborhood being a good option for young couples who live in OTR or Downtown who want more space to start a family, but don't want to move out of the core. It's another housing typology that can now be found in the basin. At least that can be the positive spin.

 

I get that the density isn't really what it could be here, but there are so many other sites available both in the West End and downtown, that I'm not really worried about the loss of this particular development site. If this Citirama is successful, perhaps it will jump start further development and redevelopment of the greater West End.

 

I’m the exact person you’re describing here and I do wish there were more housing options available for young families in the core. The problem is, I think that more than 54 people think the same way and so that should mean these homes will be priced very high.

 

As I mentioned before, from the diagram it looks like the backyards of these are going to be little quasi public strips of grass in between driveways. So they’re not going to be much practically different than townhomes (which you could fit in a lot more of, and I would consider townhomes to be an acceptable option for families as well.) Even though this is an empty field now I see this design as limiting the number of people that can live next to downtown instead adding to it because I assume the demand is there.

My point was that the last Citirama was considered successful, and all we got was more crap out of it.  I don't see how this one is any different.  It's like "oh all those other magic bullets didn't work, but THIS ONE will, it's totally different I promise."

 

I think we might be talking past each other. Was there another Citirama in the West End? To my knowledge, there has not. City West is a Hope VI project that mostly consists of public housing, so equating that to this is not fair. I don't think this development is going to be a magic bullet for the West End, but I do think that adding wealthier home owners to the WE is a positive thing, and will help the neighborhood. If Cincy becomes some boom town in the next couple years, and development takes off all over the basin, maybe then we can lament about how this is a missed opportunity.

 

Other Citiramas have been successful, I would say. They provide relatively affordable, smaller new homes in the city limits (plus Woodlawn last year), and present the opportunity for new home ownership for a lot of people who otherwise might not be able to purchase such a home. Specifically, I would imagine Citirama is popular with African Americans who want new construction but don't want to move out to Fairfield or West Chester to find it. College Hill, which has had several Citiramas recently, is doing really well these days, and there is a fair amount of development happening right along Hamilton Ave. There is some pretty nice new infill multi-family right on Hamilton, and there are some quality restaurants that are planning to open in the heart of the business district, too. Maybe these things aren't a result of having hundreds of new residents in the neighborhood due to Citirama, but I don't think that hurts!

I think that jjakucyk[/member] means that what we get with other Citiramas is... suburban crap: Rockford Place in Northside. I mean, it looks great, but it's still suburban.

I'm talking about the original Citirama/Longworth Square developments from the mid-late 1990s along West Court Street.  The two blocks bounded by Central, Court, Mound, and Elizabeth is Longworth Square.  That's a lame suburban garden townhouse typology of clusters of four townhouses.  I don't know if that was the Citirama development or the stuff on Weninger Circle and Mound south of Court.  That is better deployed on the ground with a consistent street wall and true alleys, though they area all detached single-family homes, and the construction quality and detailing is sorely lacking. 

 

A big problem with a lot of these developments, partly inspired by trying to shoehorn in well-meaning new urbanist principles into zoning categories that don't really fit, is the over-accommodation of automobiles.  When the fire department gets involved and says the alley has to be 30 feet wide and the garages then need another 5-10 foot setback from said alley, along with the desire (by banks and real estate agents) for an attached garage, you end up with no back yard and a huge sea of pavement in the rear.  I'll credit the Mound/Weininger development for having detached garages right up to the alley, but with the front yard setback and rather wide alley pavement there's not much room left for a back yard, and most have turned it into a deck.  More typically you see what you get at Longworth Square or the bulk of City West, with equally sized front and back streets and large parking pads.  Yes City West doesn't have garages for the most part, but there's no back yard and tons of parking and wide streets.  This development in Bond Hill is the worst misapplication of alleys that https://goo.gl/maps/8jNU13NJQ4k  It's basically snout houses along an automobile-dominated "rear" lane but with the front facing an equally automobile-dominated street.  That's what this new development looks like to me.

This development is going to hideous for all of the reasons mentioned, along with the complete lack of trees.  At least dropping a Dallas Donut into this block would avoid the tree problem. 

This development is going to hideous for all of the reasons mentioned, along with the complete lack of trees.  At least dropping a Dallas Donut into this block would avoid the tree problem. 

 

A lot of the streets in City West have trees between the sidewalks and the street, and some of them are starting to mature enough to look decent. It takes at least a decade for most trees to grow to decent size, so I hope (and expect) the City will plant trees as part of this Citirama.

 

How would a Dallas Donut "avoid the tree problem"? Even if you built a large apartment complex, you'd want to plant to trees between the sidewalk and street.

This development in Bond Hill is the worst misapplication of alleys that https://goo.gl/maps/8jNU13NJQ4k  It's basically snout houses along an automobile-dominated "rear" lane but with the front facing an equally automobile-dominated street.  That's what this new development looks like to me.

 

Oh man... that Bond Hill development makes me so sad because it was such a missed opportunity. Your point is spot on: by making the "alleys" so overbuilt, you end up with no pleasant backyards... AND no usable front yards. And it looks like that is exactly what is going to happen with this proposed West End Citirama. All of the potential "backyard" space will be dominated by driveways and overbuilt alleys.

This development in Bond Hill is the worst misapplication of alleys that https://goo.gl/maps/8jNU13NJQ4k  It's basically snout houses along an automobile-dominated "rear" lane but with the front facing an equally automobile-dominated street.  That's what this new development looks like to me.

 

Oh man... that Bond Hill development makes me so sad because it was such a missed opportunity. Your point is spot on: by making the "alleys" so overbuilt, you end up with no pleasant backyards... AND no usable front yards. And it looks like that is exactly what is going to happen with this proposed West End Citirama. All of the potential "backyard" space will be dominated by driveways and overbuilt alleys.

 

What's amazing is that if they just reduced the curve radius on the alleys and streets, it would look and feel more urban. Most of these new-suburbanism (a term I use when developer try and fail at applying urbanist principals) projects would succeed if they just tried a little bit harder.

I'm talking about the original Citirama/Longworth Square developments from the mid-late 1990s along West Court Street.  The two blocks bounded by Central, Court, Mound, and Elizabeth is Longworth Square.  That's a lame suburban garden townhouse typology of clusters of four townhouses.  I don't know if that was the Citirama development or the stuff on Weninger Circle and Mound south of Court.  That is better deployed on the ground with a consistent street wall and true alleys, though they area all detached single-family homes, and the construction quality and detailing is sorely lacking. 

 

I was pleasantly surprised by the housing at Weninger Circle. It is a step above all of City West and I think its the best new-urban single-family infill in the entire city. If you compare it to other peer-city markets new urban residential like in Columbus (Gay and N. 5th for example) then its at best a C+ but for Cincinnati this should be the standard for infill, not the exception.

The Jehovah's witnesses just transferred all of their property south of Wade between John and Central into "MIDTOWN CONGREGATION OF JEHOVAHS WITNESSES C/O SAMUEL JOHNSON" via an AF (Affidavit) deed. 

 

I'm not quite sure what situations an affidavit deed is used for, but it's no secret that the church holds the largest chunk of privately-held property that FC Cincinnati would want for the stadium. 

I'm talking about the original Citirama/Longworth Square developments from the mid-late 1990s along West Court Street.  The two blocks bounded by Central, Court, Mound, and Elizabeth is Longworth Square.  That's a lame suburban garden townhouse typology of clusters of four townhouses.  I don't know if that was the Citirama development or the stuff on Weninger Circle and Mound south of Court.  That is better deployed on the ground with a consistent street wall and true alleys, though they area all detached single-family homes, and the construction quality and detailing is sorely lacking. 

 

I was pleasantly surprised by the housing at Weninger Circle. It is a step above all of City West and I think its the best new-urban single-family infill in the entire city. If you compare it to other peer-city markets new urban residential like in Columbus (Gay and N. 5th for example) then its at best a C+ but for Cincinnati this should be the standard for infill, not the exception.

 

Wow, I looked at the example you listed at 5th and Gay in Columbus, and those are really excellent! Columbus does so much more with so much less, compared to Cincinnati.

 

I'm not expecting great architecture from this development site in the West End, and I'm not stoked about the relatively low density for this location, either. That said, there are elements of the development that are positive. Design is not the only consideration when it comes to development, especially when we are talking about development in a very low income neighborhood like the West End.

 

Here in LA there are lots of straight up ugly neighborhoods that function well and provide safe and decent housing and retail for residents. The current West End functions very poorly. For starters, there is very little retail presence in the neighborhood, in part due to its declining population, but also due to the low purchasing power of its residents- most of whom are either impoverished or close to it. Venture beyond City West to streets like Baymiller, and see how fractured and destitute the community is up there. There isn't pent up demand to live in the West End, otherwise we would have seen development proposals for this site and others in the neighborhood before. Cincinnati barely gets proposals for development of surface lots in the CBD, so to expect some hyper dense, beautifully designed structure here is a bit naive, IMO. We can do better in terms of design and site planning, for sure, but to come to the conclusion that the project sucks because of these issues is to totally overlook the challenges of the neighborhood, and the positive results that will come from introducing owner-occupied housing, and residents of choice to the West End.

A neighborhood can't "function" without people, and a lot of them.  These 54 houses will only add 100~ new residents since some people will live alone in 2,000 sq foot homes.  This block could easily house 500+ people. 

^ It could house 500+ people, just like Cincinnati's population could be 500,000, or Cincinnati could have a functioning subway.

 

There are massive slums in Mumbai and Nairobi with very high populations and population densities that support almost no legitimate retail. South Los Angeles has some extremely densely populated areas that have almost no retail presence outside of liquor stores or bodega type corner stores. Neighborhood success is a bit more complex than having 'people, and lots of them.'

...

 

 

If we built 500 housing units on this block, the people that move into them would have far more disposable income than people living in Mumbai or on Skid Row. There is huge demand for new residential in the urban core right now are we're just not building it. We're letting the opportunity pass us by. We continue to build single family townhomes on prime urban real estate.

My point continues to be completely missed. Forget it.

 

If this site was so desirable for dense multi-family housing, why has no one proposed anything for it yet? In a larger city, or one that is actually growing in a meaningful way, maybe we’d see more ambitious proposals for sites like these. But this is low to no growth Cincinnati, where we can barely develop riverfront housing, in what is supposed to be some of the best real estate in the region. This is a site in the West End, a neighborhood that has some of the worst crime and poverty stats in the city and highest concentrations of public housing. The majority of surrounding development is townhomes or detached single family homes. But yes, let’s continue to lament that this site isn’t getting developed with a 500 unit apartment building.

^I would normally be inclined to agree with statements like those. But to me it is glaring obvious that anything they put here is going to succeed. It’s contiguous to, and actually surrounded on all four sides by, successful market rate stuff. They could keep the basic concept of single family homes and easily double or triple the density with the space they have to work with.

This publicly-owned land, to my knowledge, has never been put up for sale.  Developers can't bid on it if it isn't for sale.  This project is a giveaway to these home builders if they're giving them these lots for $1, or whatever the incentive is for them to throw up a spec house. 

 

Right, this land was never developed because it was owned by the city and reserved for future development. During streetcar construction it was used as the construction staging area. I always thought that this land would eventually be used for more phases of City West. But I guess the current administration thinks that a bunch of Drees and Fischer homes Straight Outta Mason are a better use for the site.

Right now the lot is a dead space.  It's still going to be pretty dead after adding these homes.  It's just not enough people.  Plus, immediately south of this superblock is the grade school which is also a huge waste of space. 

 

This block needs a large amount of mixed-income residential, maybe a hotel and a CVS/Walgreens to bring life to this area.  It's not that complicated. 

My point continues to be completely missed. Forget it.

 

If this site was so desirable for dense multi-family housing, why has no one proposed anything for it yet? In a larger city, or one that is actually growing in a meaningful way, maybe we’d see more ambitious proposals for sites like these. But this is low to no growth Cincinnati, where we can barely develop riverfront housing, in what is supposed to be some of the best real estate in the region. This is a site in the West End, a neighborhood that has some of the worst crime and poverty stats in the city and highest concentrations of public housing. The majority of surrounding development is townhomes or detached single family homes. But yes, let’s continue to lament that this site isn’t getting developed with a 500 unit apartment building.

 

Because single family homes are much, much easier to finance

From today's Enquirer:

 

"CPS would engage our stakeholders in a significant way before discussing any changes or proposals to the current use," the statement continued. "The CPS Board of Education would welcome future conversations with FC Cincinnati if they become an MLS expansion team."

 

Many West Enders said they would welcome the club to their neighborhood.

 

A smile crossed Deborah Glenn's face when she opened the door to her hair salon, Flamingo, a few blocks north of Stargel Stadium on Bauer Avenue. She thinks a soccer stadium on her property is a great idea: "Make me an offer I can't refuse."

 

The idea of a soccer stadium next to Revelation Missionary Baptist Church pleased the Rev. Todd Ingram.

 

"I can see FC flags flying down Central Parkway," Ingram said. "I can see them walking down Central Avenue and right into the stadium. It is just win-win."

 

If the stadium doesn't go to the West End or Oakley, that leaves Newport. The vacant Ovation property owned by Corporex – FC Cincinnati General Manager Jeff Berding's former employer – has been talked about as a possible location.

 

 

I find it interesting that The Enquirer made any effort to get quotes.  It looks like they were instructed to do so by Berding & Co. 

 

I wonder if any members of the school board are buddies with Cranley...

^Also, look at the geography in those quotes.  Looks like the soccer team might be coming after everything north to Liberty St., including the newly rehabbed condos on Wade that are about to be listed. 

^Also, look at the geography in those quotes.  Looks like the soccer team might be coming after everything north to Liberty St., including the newly rehabbed condos on Wade that are about to be listed. 

I'm not sure how much to read into that in terms of what site plan FCC is pursuing. I assume the Enquirer just went out and tried to get quotes from any nearby property owners. That doesn't necessarily mean FCC wants/needs to buy their property.

 

What I find more interesting/surprising is that we haven't heard much significant opposition to the idea of the FCC stadium going in the Stargel site. I had assumed more CPS advocates would - rightfully so - be upset about losing their football stadium (which is used by many CPS schools) without any details around a replacement. Since Stargel is a shared facility for CPS, it makes sense that it could be relocated without causing a ton of problems (since I assume Taft students are only a small percentage of CPS users of Stargel), but even still, I was expecting more vocal opposition to the idea of moving/replacing Stargel.

^If you look at the area on a map, if a stadium  is built on an east/west orientation abutting the SW corner of Liberty and Central Parkway, requiring the demolition of about 20 structures, then the HS football field could be preserved by shifting it south onto the land occupied by the current south bend of the running track.  So losing just the running track would be, politically, a lot less controversial than losing the entire field and/or high school.

 

That site plan doesn't align with the published rendering, but then again, this whole thing has been a big game. 

 

 

^If you look at the area on a map, if a stadium  is built on an east/west orientation abutting the SW corner of Liberty and Central Parkway, requiring the demolition of about 20 structures, then the HS football field could be preserved by shifting it south onto the land occupied by the current south bend of the running track.  So losing just the running track would be, politically, a lot less controversial than losing the entire field and/or high school.

 

That site plan doesn't align with the published rendering, but then again, this whole thing has been a big game. 

That seems like a worst-case solution... since having two fields right next to each other it not good use of urban space. And CPS needs a full sized track since most CPS schools have track teams, and not many of their campuses have full-sized tracks.

^Also, look at the geography in those quotes.  Looks like the soccer team might be coming after everything north to Liberty St., including the newly rehabbed condos on Wade that are about to be listed. 

I'm not sure how much to read into that in terms of what site plan FCC is pursuing. I assume the Enquirer just went out and tried to get quotes from any nearby property owners. That doesn't necessarily mean FCC wants/needs to buy their property.

 

What I find more interesting/surprising is that we haven't heard much significant opposition to the idea of the FCC stadium going in the Stargel site. I had assumed more CPS advocates would - rightfully so - be upset about losing their football stadium (which is used by many CPS schools) without any details around a replacement. Since Stargel is a shared facility for CPS, it makes sense that it could be relocated without causing a ton of problems (since I assume Taft students are only a small percentage of CPS users of Stargel), but even still, I was expecting more vocal opposition to the idea of moving/replacing Stargel.

 

I have seen a lot of opposition from West End and OTR residents and CPS advocates online. Also keep in mind that the library has now scrapped their plan to sell the downtown branch's north building to 3CDC because the "anti-gentrification" people got worked up about it and made it into a big issue. I assume these same groups will put up a similar fight for the stadium.

Here is the city's web article on the single-family home CityWest project, to be called "Stowe Place":

 

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/community-development/news/citirama-coming-to-the-west-end/#.WjlknCUW8f0.twitter

Rumors are still persisting that West End is going to be the announced site for the FCC mls stadium.

 

Is is possible that land/buildings are being purchased that are under the table, without fcc/linders name attached? Everyone is saying land /buildings are being collected behind the curtains, and that the sellers are under tight NDA’S about the sale but I’m not sure how realistic of a story that is...

 

Rumors are still persisting that West End is going to be the announced site for the FCC mls stadium.

 

Is is possible that land/buildings are being purchased that are under the table, without fcc/linders name attached? Everyone is saying land /buildings are being collected behind the curtains, and that the sellers are under tight NDAS about the sale but Im not sure how realistic of a story that is...

 

 

There has been no recent activity recorded by the auditor other than the November 27 retitling of the Jehovah's Witness properties, which comprise about a dozen individual parcels. 

 

Also, the sale of this small building on Providence St. is pending:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1558438/1509-Providence-St-Cincinnati-OH-45214

 

 

Im still holding out for the old Hudepohl site or a similar West End Adjacent (never thought id say that before) property that used to be a car lot or other suburban sprawl type use. Except for the already announced demolition of the smokestack (grrr) there are no issues for those who are already set to pounce and protest the loss of the school property and homes and other 'gentrifying' that plopping a stadium in a currently used and populated lower income area will cause. Some of my facebook friends are all ready to roll on this from what i see.  I also think the assumed west end site at Stargell field will ruin Liberty street as a high access thru road for another generation or more. Why shoot yourselves in the foot by picking a controversial site when this should be a win and plus for the whole city......location wise at least financially it is a different story. My ultimate dream is something like this hanging from the  hill in Mt Addams with Sky Trams and inclines and bars all decorated in a sea of blue & orange. http://www.sir-robert-mcalpine.com/projects/index-thumbnailIndex=3&id=29071.html

 

That said it will probably just go to Oakley in the bland awkward spot by what Mayor Cranley already described as a half-a$$ development by saying "beggars cant be choosers" when it was approved to be a sea of big box nothingness. If so it would be a horrible missed opportunity to make something uniquely Cincinnati. On a similar note the stadium design i initially though was cool and unique lost a lot of that when I googled MLS soccer stadiums and saw that many of them look similar but just in their own team colors and not blue & orange like ours.

 

I can't figure out what other site in the West End or Queensgate could fit a stadium besides CPS's Stargel Stadium. Unless you are talking about removing/relocating some roads to make more space.

I can't figure out what other site in the West End or Queensgate could fit a stadium besides CPS's Stargel Stadium. Unless you are talking about removing/relocating some roads to make more space.

 

It wouldn’t fit at Stargel Stadium either unless Central Avenue was re-routed. (Assuming 500x600 ft footprint like Mapfre Stadium in Columbus which is on the small end footprint-wise of soccer stadiums.)

^ Nothing cleared and open but thinking underutilized areas like the 60's era block where Paycor used to be or the block on 8th that is mostly a Fuller Ford dealership. Not saying kick anyone out though and the current owners know the value so maybe not the best path. 

 

Comical.  After languishing at $500k for the past 4-5 months, a price reduction to $199k:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1533242/514-Oliver-St-Cincinnati-OH-45214

Stadium?

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/01/22/fc-cincinnati-to-cincinnati-public-schools-let-s.html

^ Being discussed here.

Planning Commission is suggesting a zoning change for the Brighton area of the West End: (page 15) https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/planning/about-city-planning/city-planning-commission/feb-2-2018-packet/

 

The zoning change would make that area Urban Mix, which would allow residential above commercial storefronts... which would be good. I'm not clear though about what impact, if any, this would have on parking requirements:

http://cincinnati-oh.elaws.us/code/coor_titlexiv_ch1410_sec1410-09

 

Can somebody clarify how/if parking rules differ in Urban Mix as compared with the existing RM 0.7 and RMX?

Chunk of Cincinnati’s West End could be rezoned for housing

 

The Cincinnati Planning Commission will consider rezoning a significant chunk of the Brighton part of the West End on Friday with the hope that it will spark housing development in the area.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/01/chunk-of-cincinnati-s-west-end-could-be-rezoned.html

Josh Spring has put his vacant lots on York St. on the market:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1568877/515-519-York-St-Cincinnati-OH-45214

St. Vincent de Paul plans $12M West End facility

 

St. Vincent de Paul will expand and build a new outreach center in the West End across the street from its Liz Carter Outreach Center and needs to raise $4 million for the $12 million project.

 

Officials announced the project on Wednesday. The new, 40,000-square-foot facility will be located in the northwest corner of Bank Street and Winchell Avenue with a projected start this fall and completion by the end of 2019.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/28/st-vincent-de-paul-plans-12m-west-end-facility.html

West End homeowners back FC Cincinnati in the neighborhood but oppose relocated Stargel

 

A group of West End homeowners in the City West development south of Ezzard Charles Drive support building a new $200 million Major League Soccer stadium in the neighborhood but oppose rebuilding the stadium it would replace, Robert A. Taft Information Technology High School's Stargel Stadium, at a site currently slated to be used for Citirama.

 

Judy Sroufe, a City West homeowner, said neighbors have concerns about lighting, noise and the close proximity of the potential new Stargel Stadium to their homes, which in some cases would be as close as 60 feet. FC Cincinnati has proposed building a new Stargel Stadium in the southwest corner of Ezzard Charles Drive and John Street, which is now slated to become the Citirama development known as Stowe Place. That would place the new Stargel Stadium across the street from Taft High School. About 84 homeowners share her concerns, Sroufe said.

 

Sroufe and her neighbors want to know whether the Stowe Place site can even house a stadium or if U.S. Housing and Urban Development agreements that set up City West require it to be housing. Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority and city officials have not been able to answer that question, she said.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/03/02/west-end-homeowners-back-fc-cincinnati-in-the.html

Just listen to those NIMBY's!  Their kids will be able to see the stadium from their rooms! 

Right!? If you want your kids to have a nice view of grass and trees and whatever and not buildings, its probably wise to not live downtown.

No one would want that hideous, hulking, empty, guarded structure in their back yard. Or the associated asphalt parking. Or the pay to park garage. NIMBY or Not, structures like this should be built in low density areas where major, unburdened highways intersect. Northern Kentucky Speedway is perfectly located. Ross Ohio near the Rumpke Dump would be a nice spot.

MLS doesn't allow that anymore.

No one would want that hideous, hulking, empty, guarded structure in their back yard. Or the associated asphalt parking. Or the pay to park garage. NIMBY or Not, structures like this should be built in low density areas where major, unburdened highways intersect. Northern Kentucky Speedway is perfectly located. Ross Ohio near the Rumpke Dump would be a nice spot.

 

Speak for yourself. I would love the stadium by my house. These people are missing some serious opportunities.

I guess you are right. It depends entirely upon what the alternatives are. Yours would be different from mine.  But, if I make a list of the things that could be put in the back yard and the stadium is on that list, it is somewhat below many of the things I think of as desirable.