mixed use is good

Mixed use is good if there's a residential component, which this one has. Otherwise people could just ignore the whole thing. But does the Tampa-St Pete area really need another office/retail complex? Isn't the housing market in the toilet there? They're using the information that apartment occupancy has been maintained during the housing crisis like it's a good thing. Of course when you don't qualify for a home loan you have to rent, that doesn't mean you'll stay there after you can buy a house, and it certainly doesn't mean that high-end apartments will be in demand. People who can afford those can often qualify for a mortgage. The whole thing seems like a white elephant. I'm not optimistic about MLB in this area.

This actually isn't a terrible place for a stadium. It's in St. Pete but right at the end of the I-275 causeway that goes to Tampa. The Tampa airport is at the other end of the causeway, so the hotel might get some use. The area is currently mostly an office park, meaning there are a lot of parking lots and a lot of wasted space. So there's room to build and it's as convenient as it can be in an area with no transit.

But, yeah, it'd be a flop, and a boondoggle if they actually spend any public funds on it. Zillow says the current average house in Tampa is going for exactly half of what it went for at the height of the bubble. St Petersburg is about the same, slightly worse. The commercial vacancy rate is about 50th of the top 200 markets (tied with Flint, MI -- yeesh). So there's no actual demand for this thing, other than from the Rays, who want to make more money and not have to invest anything to do so.

I guess the counterargument is that the commercial space might get some use other than at gametime, by St Petersburg people going off to fun in Tampa on the weekend, or coming home from work in Tampa. It'd be convenient for that, I guess. And for the office park's current inhabitants. Still, if I'm a voter in Pinellas County there would be no way I'd want to go for this. Maybe I'd vote for bonds to upgrade the roads around the site in order to get people in and out, but I'd wouldn't want to put a penny of public funds into the project itself.

Mixed use is great in many areas, particualrly in walking-oriented districts. We now require it in most of our small suburban downtown, which has buildings that range up to 5 stories.

Seattle's stadia, including the new NBA/NHL arena that the politicians signed off on yesterday, are on the south fringe of downtown, in a light industrial area. Bars and restaurants would be better off with a few more people living nearby to come in when there isn't a game. However, I myself wouldn't want to deal with the traffic and crowds by living that close to a stadium.

EDIT: What the real estate market looks like by the time they get this designed and approved, never mind built, is another question entirely.

The commercial vacancy rate (for St Petersburg) is about 50th of the top 200 markets (tied with Flint, MI -- yeesh).

Then move the Rays to Flint and rename them the Tropics!

I work about 5 minutes from where the proposed stadium would be. Not that it would matter much considering that I work 3-midnight or later but I guess I'd be in good shape to catch most of a noon getaway day game.