The impact of urban form on downtown stadium redevelopment projects: a comparative analysis of Phoenix and Denver

Abstract

Prior analyses of stadium-focused economic development efforts suggest these projects are multifaceted in scope and one-size-fits-all approaches are rarely successful. This study builds upon prior analyses of stadium development projects and provides a comparative analysis of two stadium projects in Denver and Phoenix, with a focus on the role urban form has on the opposing outcomes of the two projects. Results suggest urban form has an impact on the prospects for success of these projects and that strategies to deal with the urban form of a city should be incorporated into comprehensive plans to revitalize downtown areas. A consideration of urban form is particularly important for polycentric urban areas where the success of downtown economic redevelopment efforts remains largely unexplored and unproven.

Keywords:

• urban form
• economic development
• sports stadiums

Notes

1. The 2% tax represents a doubling of the food and beverage tax from 1% to 2%. Neighboring suburban counties are also expected to enact a restaurant tax of 1%. Half of this tax will be given to the stadium and the counties will keep half (The Indianapolis Star 2005).

2. Chase Field is formerly called Bank One Ballpark (BOB). The park underwent a name change in September 2005 when JP Morgan Chase acquired Bank One (Ballparks of Baseball 2009).

3. American West Arena is now called US Airways Center. The name change was made on 1 January 2006 (Amusement Business 2005).

4. In 1999, the Phoenix MSA was renamed the Phoenix-Mesa metropolitan statistical area. In this same year, Pinal County was added to the MSA.

5. The Table was computed by constructing circular buffers of various sizes (in miles) around the point for the populated place location, as provided by the United States Geological Survey’s Board on Geographic Names (USGS 2009), and then computing the number of people within a given distance of the downtown center (populated place) of interest. There are two important items to note with respect to this methodology. First, it is likely that the residents in each of these areas live farther from downtown than estimated because people travel via street networks instead of ‘as the crow flies’ or via Euclidean distances. Second, only the population of the block groups whose center was located in the buffer was used in the calculations of Table 2.