July 27, 2007
Say Hello to Loudoun County United
Yes, you heard it here first -- the District's pro soccer team might be moving out to Loudoun County. Or Baltimore. Anywhere but here.
Why? The stadium, of course. D.C. United had long ago requested the rights to build a stadium at Poplar Point, an unused stretch of federal land along the Anacostia River. But, unlike the publicly financed $611-million baseball stadium it would sit across from, D.C. United owner Victor A. MacFarlane promised to build the stadium himself, to the tune of $150 million. All he wanted in return was the rights to develop the surrounding land and $200 million in city subsidies including roads and tax incentives. That deal fell apart late last week, when Mayor Adrian Fenty opted to open the land's development to competitive bidding.
Of course, as the Post reports today, Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) and a number of neighborhood activists are none-too-happy with Fenty's decision. To them, Fenty's slight amounted to turning his back on residents east of the river and a development project that would greatly benefit their neighborhoods. Fenty has stated that a new development proposal will likely be announced by the end of the year.
In terms of stadium debates, MacFarlane seemed to have won. His offer to pay for the stadium could not have gone unnoticed, especially after the fierce debate over the financing of the baseball stadium. But, Fenty was right to have raised concerns over whether affordable housing would be part of MacFarlane's plans. Whether or not Fenty voiced these concerns and tried to work them into MacFarlane's original plan is unknown, but we hope he at least tried. We're still hopeful that a compromise can be met.
What remains to be seen is whether or not MacFarlane decides to move the team outside of the District. We hope not. Because L.C. United just doesn't sound right.
|
actually, we didn't hear it here first -- we heard about it in the Post last weekend, and then on local TV news all week. but still, thanks for the update.
And, we also must remember that DC still does not own or have title to this land. Whether DC decides to go with a stadium at Poplar Point or not, DC must reach agreement with the National Park Service before the title will be turned over to DC. And, that means relocation of facilities for 100 personnel currently on the site and a heliport.
Also, the infrastructure on that plot of land is seriously lacking.
This also means that DC United would likely have to wait until these issues are resolved. The earliest we would ever see a stadium on that site is 2011, I am thinking. Negotiations with the National Park Service are likely to drag out into 2008. Financing would have to be arranged after DC approves the project, et cetera, et cetera. And, they are already moving at a snail's pace!
And, affordable housing was in MacFarlane's plan all along.
i really like dc united, but i won't be trekking out to the l.c. to watch any of the games. what's wrong with rfk besides the sucky concessions? once the nats leave after this season, it will be a soccer only stadium.
for local commentary on this issue, check out
www.anacostianow.blogspot.com
There will never in our lifetimes be any development at Poplar Point. The place will remain an urban wasteland thanks to the feet-dragging of the city. Somehow, I guess, people think that nothing is better than a mixed use development with a stadium, hotel, retail, and housing.
dc dawg:
Don't penalize DC United for the poor decisions of the DC govt. DC United was willing to build a 100% privately financed stadium and bring with it tons of new development. All they asked for was for the city to pay for infrastructure upgrades. Upgrades that the city will have to pay for regardless of who develops that land.
DC United can not be a successful franchise at RFK. That is the economics of the MLS. Its more than concessions. It involves luxury seating options as well as "behind the scenes" stuff like lockerrooms that are fit for a professional sports franchise.
At some point, DC United has to make a decision. It is clear that despite presenting the city with the most attractive stadium plan imaginable, they aren't getting anywhere so for the financial health of the franchise, they have to look outside of the city.
Blame Fenty, blame the storefront "ministers" in Ward 8 that opposed this, blame the "affordable housing or nothing" crowd, blame Barry for waffling on this and providing NO leadership, but don't blame the DC United for doing everything they could to stay in DC.
I grew up with Diplomats season tickets. I'd love to see MLS stay in DC. But RFK was and is good enough for me. Poplar Point? Maybe I'm naive, but I just have trouble imagining it.
I agree, nothing wrong with RFK at all..except for the poor land use around it. but that could be fixed
#7 again- I whole heartedly accept #8's comment as a friendly amendment.
And then maybe we can consider NCPC's intended use for that space in the context of available unused space at Poplar Point...
"nothing wrong with RFK at all...except for the poor land use aroundt it. but that could be fixed"
Exactly. All we need is a couple hundred million in infrastructure improvements from the District. Oh, yeah, they're not willing to help improve their own city when opportunity strikes. After all that talk about how if MLB were paying for it's own stadium it would be different.
If Fenty was Mayor when the Nats Stadium negotiations were going on, and MLB offered to pay to build the stadium, we still would NOT have a stadium being built today. I said it then, and this MLS failure supports that. Anthony Williams had a vision, and got things done. Period.
it'd still be D.C. united, not LC, i mean hey at least that way there are fewer ...... around
DC United isn't going anywhere. DC United knows that they have to be within the urban core of the DC area (and by that I mean inside the beltway in a metro accessible location) in order to attract a broad fan base and thrive. The team realizes it would fold within two years if it moved somewhere outside this zone. The problem for DC United (which they have openly admitted) is that they have made this postition very public. Frankly, it is beyond laughable that the team has thrown out Loudoun (or the Baltimore area) as "leverage" at this late date. The most likely scenario right now is that the team will stay at RFK for at least the next few years where modest upgrades will be made (probably paid for by both DC and the team) and by 2012/13 -- if MLS still exists -- a new stadium will rise on the banks of the Anacostia next to RFK. The upshot for DC area concert fans, though, is that RFK (and eventually the new soccer stadium) will be available once again for major shows. Where do you think Virgin will play next year?
It would be hard for me to imagine DC United moving to Loudoun. It would be a strange choice for a sports franchise that surely depends upon a large number of foreign-born supporters. Huntington or Hybla Valley I can imagine. Wheaton I can imagine. Even one of those vacant parcels along Route 1 near Woodbridge. But Loudoun? Something about that seems incongruous.
Too bad all of this is happening after Arlington already decided to convert the weedy wasteland between I-395 and Clark Street to a municipal park (and a condo or two, if I'm not mistaken.) That would be an ideal location.
Your headline is misleading. There's no talk about a Loudoun County stadium. It's not only wrong, but not even humorous. No sane person would consider a DC United stadium in Loudoun County. Why are you trying to sensationalize this issue?
And please dont claim that since this is a "blog", some journalistic rules dont have to be followed.
I'd love to see DC United at Poplar Point, but I also am a tax paying DC citizen, and I wouldn't want to see the city fleeced. I understand it looks great that they're willing to build the stadium with their own money, but it's not altruistic. The value of the development rights there are pretty huge. This isn't exactly a Abe Pollin style deal. He built the MCI Center with his own money and with infrastructure costs covered by DC, but he didn't demand the right to develop the entire Penn Quarter in exchange.
If what DC United is offering is a good deal, then open bidding will demonstrate that.
The reason United can't stay in RFK is economic viability, as was said above. Yeah, they need luxury boxes and all that, but they also need not to be paying rent to play in somebody else's building. MLS has been clear about this for years - for their teams to be profitable (and hence, to continue to exist) they're going to need to be playing in their own, specific-use stadiums. That's why Chivas USA and Galaxy play out in Carson, Cal. instead of LA proper.
As far as negotiations, Fenty's announcement seems to have come out of the blue. I think that's why MacFarlane's comments about Baltimore/LC are so out there themselves. I don't know how far off of his request for development rights MacFarlane is willing to come...Maybe this whole thing is a sort of Machiavellian negotiating ploy by the city?
What about the inherent structure and location of RFK makes it unviable?
When was the last time a soccer team even reached RFK's capacity?
What would prevent DC United from a rent (and improve) to own deal with RFK?
-#7
Fenty's an aloof, inexperienced, poor excuse for a mayor. It comes as no surprise that he's fucked this one up. It's not the first time, and it certainly won't be the last.
Number 13 has obviously never been to Sterling Park, or nearby (albeit in Fairfax) Herndon, both places with ENORMOUS Salvadoran/Hispanic populations...
Why don't they implode RFK and construct a new soccer stadium at the site. They could have their games at nearby FedEx Field or Byrd Stadium until their new venue is ready.
Staying at RFK is not an option. The stadium is literally falling apart (and with having 2 tenants there now it's crumbling even faster). I'm not exaggerating, I've been down in the bowels of RFK and you can see the cracks. It's very expensive for the team to be there, they lose money as they have to pay hefty rental fees to the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission and they get none of the concession and parking money. The DCSEC doesn't own the land, the federal govt does so blowing up RFK and rebuilding another stadium still means DCU would still be a renter. The current arena space is too big (can't sell out for regular season games), the concession areas are old and too small.
I'm sorry, but those saying RFK is just fine haven't been in the place lately nor understand D.C. United's business needs.
If they're gonna blow it up, they better do it within the next 4 years. In 2011 it'll be 50 years old. RFK the very first doughnut stadium built in the US, and was built by famed stadium builders Dahl and Osborn.
All the technical requirements are there for a Landmark application.
If there's one lesson to be learned from the Nationals fiasco, it's to at least consider every option and to vet all proposals through an open and competitive bidding process. MLS has none of the leverage that MLB had. Fenty is doing the responsible thing here, even if it means losing out on a potentially reasonable development plan. Perhaps another party could make a better offer, or MacFarlane could make a stronger play in light of competition.
Oh dear god, the last thing we need is for the landmark commission to get its hands on RFK....a rusty hulk of a stadium surrnounded by a sea of parking lots....that's really worth saving!
Just because something is more than 50+ years old, it doesn't mean it is good or worth keeping.
RFK sits on NPS land provided at no cost to DC for limited use, including the stadium authority. That's why there was speculation about using the land for an Olympic facility (doa) or a new Redskins stadium (likely doa). DC does not have the authority to raze RFK and develop according to its priorities.
Maybe the city isn't eager to give away valuable developing rights to a stadium that will be empty in 5 years when MLS folds?
5 years? What an optimist! What's Pele doing these days? Maybe he could be paired with Beckham to revive pro football in the US.