38 minutes ago, RJohnson said:

for some reason, Urban Ohio thinks having an arena beside the convention center is a plus.

 

I don't think anyone on this forum is opposed to having an arena in any particular location, we're all talking about the pros and cons of each spot. For my money an arena next to CUT would be great but the people pushing for it haven't even studied it so here we are.

 

40 minutes ago, RJohnson said:

Berning wants a new arena near TLC.

 

TQL stadium and yes, Berding clearly wants an arena on that end of town because it will boost the value of the major developments that FCC is making. It's pretty transparent which I'd admire more if they weren't asking for $700 million in new tax $$ for an arena without a major tenant and with many of the issues that Heritage Bank Center already has such as "limited concourses". Their exact words.

 

43 minutes ago, RJohnson said:

The streets under 75 already exist. why pay money to cap them? And, the rework of Central Parkway doesn't solve any traffic problems. it makes traffic worse.

 

Again, it's a good point that an arena on the West End will probably make traffic worse, other people have pointed that out. The Central Pkwy rework won't be the reason why traffic is worse. It's asking a road grid that was laid out in 1790 to handle 40,000 people coming in from outside the neighborhood without any alternative transit. Putting the arena at the casino makes sense because there's room for it, it would cost less, and would spread crowds out around the city. 

8 hours ago, Broman said:

 

Does anyone know what Hard Rock wants? Are they willing to invest money into this if it’s near their complex? 

 

If I'm being honest, I don't see them wanting to pitch in unless you convince Ceasar's or whoever is the parent company to invest in a permanent major league tenant that can drive traffic to the arena. 

1 hour ago, RJohnson said:

did i say, immediately?

 

No, you didn’t say much of anything actually. 

It is my understanding that ODOT has been working with the City and indirectly the Chamber to accomodate a new arena on the NW corner of 3rd and Central.

The fourth street ramp will be removed as will the existing overhead ramps from 2nd and 3rd.   A new bridge will be constructed across the north side of the site linking 5th and Gest.   Access from 2nd and 3rd will be shifted to the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge at 3rd.   This will all be largely completed in the next 3-4 years. 

2 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

If I'm being honest, I don't see them wanting to pitch in unless you convince Ceasar's or whoever is the parent company to invest in a permanent major league tenant that can drive traffic to the arena. 

 

Caesar's was an original investor in the casino (they own the Horseshoe brand) but sold their part ownership to Rock Ventures (which is why it became JACK). It was then sold to Hard Rock who fully owns it... well, "rents" it, as the assets are technically owned by a REIT.

 

16 minutes ago, GHOST TRACKS said:

It is my understanding that ODOT has been working with the City and indirectly the Chamber to accomodate a new arena on the NW corner of 3rd and Central.

The fourth street ramp will be removed as will the existing overhead ramps from 2nd and 3rd.   A new bridge will be constructed across the north side of the site linking 5th and Gest.   Access from 2nd and 3rd will be shifted to the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge at 3rd.   This will all be largely completed in the next 3-4 years. 

 

Bottom line is that if the City and State work together on this, they can coordinate and work on a phased approach that allows ODOT to hand over that land sooner so arena construction can start. The argument that "ODOT would need to use that land as a staging area" isn't really true, as there are plenty of other places to stage equipment and materials. The state now owns Longworth Hall which has a massive parking lot that could be used as a staging area during construction.

4 hours ago, Gordon Bombay said:

No, you didn’t say much of anything actually. 

well i did my best. 

5 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

I don't think anyone on this forum is opposed to having an arena in any particular location,

maybe we are just reading different comments. few if any want it in KY, few want it at its current location, few want it at the casino, and I want it on central parkway. 

 

5 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

TQL stadium and yes, Berding clearly wants an arena on that end of town because it will boost the value of the major developments that FCC is making.

duh. he wants to make money. what a horrible person. berding wants $700 million in taxes? i think you miss read that.

 

5 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

Again, it's a good point that an arena on the West End will probably make traffic worse,

i don't think I said that. i think I said, narrowing CP and not correcting the dog-leg at Plum and CP will make traffic worse. if I didn't I'm saying it now.

3 hours ago, GHOST TRACKS said:

This will all be largely completed in the next 3-4 years. 

it won't and who says the ODOT will allow anyone to build on any of those properties until the bridge and accesses are completed.

2 hours ago, taestell said:

if

 

2 hours ago, taestell said:

The argument that "ODOT would need to use that land as a staging area" isn't really true,

well i can appreciate what you are saying. my point was that ODOT probably won't allow an arena to be built while construction is still underway. But maybe they will. who knows? anything is possible. it only took 10 years to get permission to build the apartment complex at Liberty and CP. and if Plum and Central are both blocked because of expansion west. Now, what are all the naysayers gonna say about losing another street? Remember all the complaints about losing Elm for the expansion moving east. 

enough space will be freed up on the northwest corner for an arena?
I wrote a whole reply assuming it was the northeast corner because it just didn't cross my mind that that could happen.
I could see it working between 5th and 6th, but that's tight corner for the interchange already.




 

Edited November 25, 2024Nov 25 by zsnyder

7 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

The Central Pkwy rework won't be the reason why traffic is worse.

 

Ahem...WVXU is saying that Central Parkway is being re-imagined.  It's going to be like the recently re-imagined Imagination Alley but a Parkway. 

 

Quote

handle 40,000 people

 

Imagine all the people...

13 hours ago, Lazarus said:

Ahem...WVXU is saying that Central Parkway is being re-imagined. 

 

91.7 WVXU isn't saying that, the parent organization of Cincinnati Public Radio is. Specifically:

 

Quote

Cincinnati Public Radio has rented space in the building behind Music Hall since 1980, but the reimagination of our block and redevelopment plans for this corridor will not include Cincinnati Public Radio.

 

CPR has had active, public plans to construct their own headquarters/building since at least late 2018/early 2019. After the initial plan for a downtown location didn't work out, the organization made the decision to construct a facility in Evanston off of I-71. CPR currently rents from their downstairs landlord, WCET--who floated their own plans for renovating/re-imagining the current building on Central Parkway. That proposal, as far as I'm aware, stalled. CPR declined participation in that plan from the outset, however, because they intended to build their own headquarters funded via a capital campaign.

 

As of right now, WCET is staying put, but much like the ballet (who got a sweetheart deal to move for TQL stadium), they could easily leverage their geographic position. Cincinnati Public Radio, however, has made it clear what their plans are. So, yes, the "reimagination" of the block (arena or not, development is coming to that area alongside notable improvements to the parkway) does not include Cincinnati Public Radio (91.7 WVXU and 90.9 WGUC), but that was their choice to pursue different options.

 

Construction will be complete on their Evanston location in Spring 2025 and CPR is currently soliciting donations for funding.

1 hour ago, Gordon Bombay said:

WCET--who floated their own plans for renovating/re-imagining the current building on Central Parkway. That proposal, as far as I'm aware, stalled.

WCET has some shows that they create on-site, but mostly they broadcast videos I think. What size building would they need to replace what they need now? Would it be the size of let's say, The Shakespeare Theater? could it be part of the Emery Theater? A spot for a new WCET could be any number of buildings north of Liberty in OTR and the property there would be less expensive I think. A group is raising funds to bring back the Imperial Theater.  Maybe WCET and The Imperial could get together and create a refurbished theater and a new annex CET next door. The church at 8th and Walnut is up for sale. I think people would not want to see it demolished. it has history, auditoriums, and size. It doesn't have a gigantic spire and wouldn't look too churchy.

45 minutes ago, RJohnson said:

WCET has some shows that they create on-site, but mostly they broadcast videos I think. What size building would they need to replace what they need now? 

 

Oh, I have no idea, just pointing out that if they're sitting on a valuable piece of land that someone wants (arena, developer, etc.), they're in the driver's seat in terms of making demands suggesting what might be adequate compensation for giving up the Crosley Telecommunications Center. 

On 11/24/2024 at 8:36 AM, Broman said:

 

Does anyone know what Hard Rock wants? Are they willing to invest money into this if it’s near their complex? 

That’s been my question— they were supposed to build a hotel associated with the casino. Wondering if the spot is a distant 3rd because it’s earmarked for hotel

12 hours ago, cblhaus said:

they were supposed to build a hotel associated with the casino. Wondering if the spot is a distant 3rd because it’s earmarked for hotel

Don't think so. I'm pretty sure the hotel is slated to go south of the casino along Court St where the driveway into the garage is currently. And the proposed arena site next to the casino was specifically identified as being on the parking lot to the north. So, no conflict between hotel and arena. If anything, they would complement each other. But that would only be one (not yet built) hotel within walking distance, compared to the many (already built) hotels downtown that are within walking distance of both The Banks and the Convention Center. 

The study states that there are no existing plans for the parking lot at the Casino and that they "expressed interest in being involved with the project." It was further stated that their ownership of the site "could have positive implications for constructions and operations." That suggests to me that they didn't really talk in that much detail about any financial considerations for an arena there.

Mayor Aftab Pureval was once skeptical of building a new arena. Here's why that's changed

By Chris Wetterich – Staff reporter and columnist, Cincinnati Business Courier

Dec 2, 2024

 

Back in January, Mayor Aftab Pureval said he was neither convinced that Cincinnati needed a new arena nor could afford it.

 

In November, after the Cincinnati Regional Chamber released a report outlining the potential costs, locations and funding sources, Pureval is now far more bullish, saying the study had made a “strong case.”

 

He went even further in a recent interview with the Business Courier saying, “I am incredibly excited that economic development data analysis shows not just that it would be a significant boon for our regional economy but it also fits into the strategies that council and I have been leading for the past three years.”

 

MORE

Quote

“This is not a city project. This is not a county project. We’re going to need a collaborative process with the county,” he said. “The hard part comes next, which is figuring out how to pay for it. The community can and should have a big say over what those (revenue) streams are. The arena can’t happen without strong community support advocating for its creation.” 

I interpret this quote as, if FCC wants to put it in the West End, that's where it's going, if Nederlander puts money up in the current location that's where it's going, and if Hard Rock wants it on their site that's where it's going. The Convention center is probably the ideal location since it can connect to the center for large events and would sit on "free" land given over by ODOT, but finding funding for that location would be much harder. 

2 hours ago, The_Cincinnati_Kid said:

Mayor Aftab Pureval was once skeptical of building a new arena. Here's why that's changed

By Chris Wetterich – Staff reporter and columnist, Cincinnati Business Courier

Dec 2, 2024

 

Back in January, Mayor Aftab Pureval said he was neither convinced that Cincinnati needed a new arena nor could afford it.

 

In November, after the Cincinnati Regional Chamber released a report outlining the potential costs, locations and funding sources, Pureval is now far more bullish, saying the study had made a “strong case.”

 

He went even further in a recent interview with the Business Courier saying, “I am incredibly excited that economic development data analysis shows not just that it would be a significant boon for our regional economy but it also fits into the strategies that council and I have been leading for the past three years.”

 

MORE

Before and then after the elections...duh.

I would guess that the mayor is also starting to think about some sort of "legacy project" - while he has led the city competently and drama-free compared to previous administrations, there hasn't yet been a big project citizens can point to and say "Aftab built that". Getting I-75 rebuilt in a Bridge Forward-esque way with the arena on part of the reclaimed land would be a great legacy for his administration.

I wish he would instead try to make his legacy streetcar expansion and real improvements to transit. Oh well. If we want that, the citizens are going to have to make it happen.

I’m fascinated how an expansion Pro Women’s Soccer team costs Just about the same as a WNBA team??? The new Golden State women’s team was 50 Mil now it’s up to 100 Mil with Portland. Why don’t we just bid a WNBA team as a primary tenant to start and work on NHL or something later?

I'd love for Cincinnati to try to get a WNBA team but I can't see that being the justification for a new arena. Only one team averaged more than 12,700 a game this past season and that was Indiana. 

 

I will point out that KC has a nice new arena that doesn't have a permanent tenant, and it does turn a profit despite that. While I still don't see how an arena in Cincinnati could cost anywhere above $500 million, it is conceivable that a new arena could generate a profit without a main tenant. The advantage the T-Moblie Center in KC has is that concerts and other events don't have to be scheduled around the NHL and NBA. I'd kill for an NHL team here but unless the Bengals leave, that's not happening.

19 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

I will point out that KC has a nice new arena that doesn't have a permanent tenant, and it does turn a profit despite that.

It's been stated before but KC is not a fair comparison as they don't have any peer cities within over 250 miles of them so they are more likely to get tour stops, concerts and special events than Cincy who has 3 peer sized cities within roughly 100 miles of them. The study justifying a new arena admits that we would only be looking at an additional 6 concerts a year, going from 18 to 24. By comparison KC's T-mobile arena is the 4th busiest arena in the country, but we could never get there due to us, Indy, Columbus, Louisville and even Lexington cannibalizing each other. 

 

 

Jeff Berding: New arena should focus on serving the public first, not a major league team

 

One of the leading supporters of the region building a new main arena says its primary purpose should be to serve the public through an increase in the number of concerts, regional and national sports and national and international events, not to lure another major league franchise to town.

 

“We should focus on the arena serving the public, not on serving a major league team,” Jeff Berding, the co-CEO of FC Cincinnati and chair emeritus of Visit Cincy, the region’s convention and visitors bureau, told the Business Courier.

 

“We’re not building it for a major league team or the owner of a major league team. We’re building it for the taxpayers of this community, for people who don’t love driving to Columbus, Indianapolis or Louisville for big concerts and events,” he said.

 

In November, the Cincinnati Regional Chamber issued a report outlining the potential costs, locations and funding sources for a new arena, which is likely to cost $675 million to $800 million. It identified three potential sites – west of the convention center in new land that will be created by narrowing the Interstate 75 corridor, at the WCET/Town Center Garage site in the West End and in a vacant parking lot north of the Hard Rock Casino. The study concluded that the west convention center and WCET sites were preferred by stakeholders who were interviewed.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2024/12/05/berding-new-arena-more-events-no-major-league-team.html

 

4 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

Jeff Berding:

 

 

Sounds to me like he's making an argument for the convention center site.
 

What a jackass. 

12 hours ago, zsnyder said:

Sounds to me like he's making an argument for the convention center site.

 

It's closer to the FCC owned real estate and the TQL garages could be used for parking for any arena on that end of town. Heck, my 2023 parking spot for FCC games was the garage at 7th and Plum. 

 

I still think the casino site or the current arena site makes more sense.

6 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

 

It's closer to the FCC owned real estate and the TQL garages could be used for parking for any arena on that end of town. Heck, my 2023 parking spot for FCC games was the garage at 7th and Plum. 

 

I still think the casino site or the current arena site makes more sense.

I get the current site, but I don't understand the casino site. The infrastructure isn't there like at other locations.

1 hour ago, CincyIntheKnow said:

I get the current site, but I don't understand the casino site. The infrastructure isn't there like at other locations.

That’s interesting. I think the casino site is actually the best of them all and most ready. 
 

- Convention Center site: Brent Spence Bridge Construction with lots of questions and may not be ready until late 2020s maybe even 2030 or so.

 

- West End Site: Site acquisition and questions about wether it can fit in a decent way along with extra parking

 

- Heritage Bank Arena Site: Need to demolish the current arena first.

 

Casino Site: A current parking lot next to express way adjacent to Casino Garage and multiple other parking lots.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2024Dec 6 by 646empire

On 12/6/2024 at 3:50 PM, 646empire said:

That’s interesting. I think the casino site is actually the best of them all and most ready. 
 

- Convention Center site: Brent Spence Bridge Construction with lots of questions and may not be ready until late 2020s maybe even 2030 or so.

 

- West End Site: Site acquisition and questions about wether it can fit in a decent way along with extra parking

 

- Heritage Bank Arena Site: Need to demolish the current arena first.

 

Casino Site: A current parking lot next to express way adjacent to Casino Garage and multiple other parking lots.

 

 

Here is my reasoning why the convention center site is superior:

-Timing: We have an arena that functions and will work until land is freed

-Cost of land is practically free

-Proximity to hotels

-Duality of use with convention center

-Plenty of parking in garages rather than just undeveloped lots

-Along with the renovated convention center it can spark development of the West side of downtown and freed BSB land

-Visibility from cut in the hill can be a skyline asset

 

The casino site only works if it is privately funded and the casino wants to do a Nationwide Arena district development around it to develop all those parking lots, but casinos don't want you outside. Look at how that anti-urban building was designed. So if it has to be publicly funded anyway, I just don't see it happening by the casino.

 

I don't see any questions with the Convention Center site. They are going to move forward with the city's approved plan. It comes down to staging, which is negotiable with ODOT if needed. Financing will take time, regardless of which option moves forward. This would not be unlike when the stadiums on the riverfront were built while Fort Washington Way was narrowed.

42 minutes ago, CincyIntheKnow said:

Here is my reasoning why the convention center site is superior:

-Timing: We have an arena that functions and will work until land is freed

-Cost of land is practically free

-Proximity to hotels

-Duality of use with convention center

-Plenty of parking in garages rather than just undeveloped lots

-Along with the renovated convention center it can spark development of the West side of downtown and freed BSB land

-Visibility from cut in the hill can be a skyline asset

 

The casino site only works if it is privately funded and the casino wants to do a Nationwide Arena district development around it to develop all those parking lots, but casinos don't want you outside. Look at how that anti-urban building was designed. So if it has to be publicly funded anyway, I just don't see it happening by the casino.

 

Some of this I understand but a lot of it doesn’t make the Convention center site “Superior” at all.

 

- Dual use with the convention center is going to be VERY RARE. Very few events/conventions would need/want to use both buildings. And using both simultaneously would be very expensive. The only event I can see Cincinnati hosting that this setup could be a real plus would be The Republican National Convention.

 

- Visibility is just not a reason to give the site any points. Even the most expensive arenas being built like Intuit in LA or Chase In San Francisco are not all that interesting to look at. It is a Box even if you dress up the exterior. Also the Casino site would have the exact same advantage along I-71.

 

- To be honest 3CDC and the city already has monster plans for the westside of downtown from the new hotels to a mix use project along with all kinds of great projects along W. 4th st. Don’t forget those blocks are already anchored by another massive building…. The Convention Center. So the area really doesn’t need an Arena at all.

 

- Finally I’m not sure how you come to the conclusion that the casino site only works if it’s privately funded, that makes zero sense. Also what’s great about the casino site is it doesn’t need to be coupled with a “Nationwide Arena District” Development. With the expressway, Central Business District, Pendleton and The Casino it self id argue the site is perfect to just leave it pretty much as is with landscaping and new way finding signage etc. You could maybe do something if the jail was torn down.

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by 646empire

I'm least interested in the casino site. It isn't close to anything except the casino, and there isn't a ton of development opportunity around it. Most people will probably end up parking in the parking garage, going to the event there, and then leaving since there isn't much within walking distance. At least with the West End, Convention Center, or current site there are restaurants, bars, and hotels nearby that can benefit from the 100+ days of programming

The main negative of the Casino site to me is that Reading Road and Liberty is already one of the worst intersections in the downtown core both with congestion and with accidents. Adding an arena that is only accessible off one road is a bad idea and some serious road rework would be needed to better connect Reading to Gilbert, and to redo the exit on/off ramps to 71/471 or else that site would be horrific on event days. The other sites have access from more than one direction and highway access from more than one exit, and the West End site has better connection to the streetcar being one block away.

 

So while agree that the casino site is a good option, and better than West End in many aspects, I still think the convention center site is better long term because the highway access, street alignment and connectivity could be baked into the project from moment one whereas the Casino site would need massive improvements made to the highway and streets that aren't being accounted for currently. 

14 minutes ago, JYP said:

I don't see any questions with the Convention Center site. They are going to move forward with the city's approved plan. It comes down to staging, which is negotiable with ODOT if needed. Financing will take time, regardless of which option moves forward. This would not be unlike when the stadiums on the riverfront were built while Fort Washington Way was narrowed.

But Wasn’t the “convention center site” supposed to be to be for the Convention Center??? Yes the next phase is supposed to go east now but what happens down the line if we burn the westward land on an Arena. I’m starting to really feel strongly that the city should not make decisions on this land right now especially for a arena. West End, Casino or Riverfront should be the options.

6 minutes ago, 646empire said:

 if we burn the westward land on an Arena. 

From what I've seen on this page, the land directly west of the convention center is not the parcel we're discussing. The arena would be directly south of that.

5 minutes ago, ucgrady said:

The main negative of the Casino site to me is that Reading Road and Liberty

I agree this is really the only big negative, but I think people are giving the convention center site a lot of brownie points based on a lot of assumptions, because the site doesn’t actually exist yet. 5th and 6th Streets along with Central are already heavily congested during downtown events could you imagine adding an arena to the mix at that section of downtown? Now we can play the game of wellllll the Brent Spence Project is going to offer some reconfiguring to the grid on that side but we don’t actually know how traffic is going to flow real time until it opens which is many years away.

3 minutes ago, zsnyder said:

From what I've seen on this page, the land directly west of the convention center is not the parcel we're discussing. The arena would be directly south of that.

I’m not seeing that, I can’t imagine a new arena and having long term space to go west with the convention center. Also let’s keep in mind the proposed Convention Center site had the worst parking evaluation of all the sites. It would be a circus.

On 11/24/2024 at 7:14 PM, GHOST TRACKS said:

It is my understanding that ODOT has been working with the City and indirectly the Chamber to accomodate a new arena on the NW corner of 3rd and Central.

The fourth street ramp will be removed as will the existing overhead ramps from 2nd and 3rd.   A new bridge will be constructed across the north side of the site linking 5th and Gest.   Access from 2nd and 3rd will be shifted to the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge at 3rd.   This will all be largely completed in the next 3-4 years. 

 

22 minutes ago, 646empire said:

I’m not seeing that, I can’t imagine a new arena and having long term space to go west with the convention center. Also let’s keep in mind the proposed Convention Center site had the worst parking evaluation of all the sites. It would be a circus.

The combined scale of the convention center, it's eminent expansion, and the addition of an arena, to me, represent the best chance to actually  cap whatever that part of 75 ends up looking like and reconnecting with the western side of the basin.

I am not imagining an arena that marks the western limits of downtown, I'm imagining an arena that sparks development westward. If that's the case, then parking evaluations mean very little.

13 minutes ago, zsnyder said:

I'm imagining an arena that sparks development westward. If that's the case, then parking evaluations mean very little.

No offense, but yikes. Not only did the convention center site score the worst on parking it also tied the casino site poorly in regards to creating new development. This goes back to my point there are a lot of unfounded rose colored assumptions being made about this site. The arena is not going to spark much “westward development”. Convention Center Expansion and an Arena sandwiched next to each other will be proven to be a wall to westward development not bridge, just wait if chosen.

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by 646empire

Why are we so concerned about parking?

The best part is: all the supposed shortcomings of the “convention center” site can be overcome because that land simply doesn’t exist yet and there’s no final design. It is objectively the best location because it’s the only one not requiring a partnership (casino) or requiring drawbacks (“limited concourses” lol). There’s also no need to rush this, since the current arena is not only open, but not missing out on anything besides rare events that wouldn’t be regular occurrences anyways (political conventions, occasional NCAA tournaments). 
 

This whole arena thing can be defined as nice to have, but no need to rush. 
 

Jeff Berding wants the West End/Town Center Garage because it benefits his interests (no fault in that, but it is reality). The casino has expressed no real interest so you can pretty much ignore that pending any major shift. The Bridge Forward/Convention Center/west downtown site allows the most flexibility in design, etc. Not to mention, the current parking considerations of the convention center are being assessed not only in its current renovation, but for anticipated increased use. You’re also extremely close in that situation to the MASSIVE Banks garage and the still yet to be fully realized BANKS. 

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by Gordon Bombay

13 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

You’re also extremely close in that situation to the MASSIVE Banks garage and the still yet to be fully realized BANKS

Im at the banks very often including this past weekend, those garages are remarkably full as it is especially in the evenings and many nights. It’s becoming a myth that those garages are so big they solve all needs in the area lol.

47 minutes ago, tonyt3524 said:

Why are we so concerned about parking?

???? What? Because grid lock downtown hurts everyone. Residents, Hotels, Restaurants, Convention or concert goers and more. Large events/Convention planners 100% look at parking and transportation when picking cities. 

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by 646empire

3 minutes ago, 646empire said:

???? What? Because grid lock downtown hurts everyone. Residents, Hotels, Restaurants, Convention or concert goers and more. 

 

There's parking infrastructure to support three sports venues downtown. They can walk a few blocks.

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by tonyt3524

7 minutes ago, tonyt3524 said:

 

There's parking infrastructure to support three sports venues downtown. They can walk a few blocks.

Alrighty. That wasn’t the point. 

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by 646empire