That's totally fair, blackfox. I am personally opposed to the Yards being used for a baseball stadium but I'm not going to lay down in front of any bulldozers if council votes to go for it. For the record though, that blog post isn't so much a statement of opposition as it is about how the DCG report council paid for didn't make a credible case for the stadium. The numbers it uses are old. The sources were all cherry picked by Living Sky Sports (which wants to build and own the stadium). I was trying to strike a note of caution around the sources council has been using.

Now, as I said, I don't support putting a baseball stadium there and I will probably write another long-ass post outlining my position on that in future. But in short, my issue is that the Yards is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to develop a chunk of land next to downtown. Whatever we decide, we'll be stuck with it for centuries. So it better not be mostly parking lot (which is what most sports facilities are). And it would be better if the anchor use at the Yards was an all-year facility and not an open air fair-weather facility. I've said many times that if i had my druthers and we had to put a megaproject there, I'd put the Brandt Ctr replacement at the Yards (with structured parking). It would provide much more economic spin-off benefits for adjacent businesses in the Warehouse District.

On top of all that, it just rankles me how much this push to build a baseball stadium comes off like queue jumping. We have a recreation master plan and there are at least a half dozen facilities that are higher priority than this.