Today's letter comes from Santa Clara resident Susan H., who lives in a neighborhood very close to the location of the proposed stadium. She sent us a copy of the letter she sent to the Mayor and City Council, and we are posting it here with her permission:
Dear Mayor Mahan and Council Members,
We have been living in the area near the proposed stadium site for the past 30 years. We’ve seen changes such as new housing developments in place of where the stable used to be, and erection of the power stations, the Niners training camp and soccer field, as well as improvements to this area, especially the addition of Rivermark Plaza. All was fine and added value to a quality of life to the area residents.
However, I cannot see the benefit of having a stadium near our residential area because facts have always shown that property value will decrease in areas near any stadium, not to mention the noise pollution, environmental pollution, and excess wear and tear on our local roads, not to mention the decrease in the quality of life in our neighborhood. We certainly do not welcome the sound of construction going on for the next few years as well.
Since the City is planning to subsidize this project with public money, then it should be put up for a public vote. You need to allow the public to decide, not just amongst the Council. I urge you to place this up for a public vote for the sake of the residents in Santa Clara, as well as your integrity. This is a republic country and we should have a say so in how our tax dollars are spent. If you do not allow us to vote, then it would be no different from a dictatorship. I urge you to give this much reconsideration and thoughts. I am sure that you would want to leave a positive legacy, not a negative one. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Susan H.
It's no surprise that all of us at Stadium Facts share Susan's concerns about the impact a stadium would have on Santa Clara, and Susan summarizes these concerns well. For those residents who live in the immediate vicinity of the proposed stadium, those impacts are even more significant. The years of construction would be just the start. Once the stadium is opened, anyone who lives anywhere near the stadium will have to contend with street closures and restrictions, increased noise and traffic, and increased crime.
NFL football stadiums are not an asset to a neighborhood, and if property values in these neighborhoods fall, the city will collect less in property taxes. In fact, at least one study suggests that simply announcing plans to build a publicly-subsidized stadium can cause property values in the entire city to decrease.
In their study The Impact of Stadium Announcements on Residential Property Values: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Dallas-Fort Worth, economists Carolyn A. Dehring, Craig A. Depken, II, Michael R. Ward found that
. . . a series of announcements regarding a new publicly-subsidized stadium in nearby Arlington, Texas, had a deleterious effect on residential property values in Arlington. In aggregate, average property values declined approximately 1.5% relative to the surrounding area before stadium construction commenced.
Every property owner in Santa Clara, especially those who live closest to the proposed stadium, should be concerned about this evidence.
We also support Susan's call for a public vote on any proposal that would require any public financing for or operation of a stadium. The City Council should WANT the support of the residents for any project of this size.
Thanks for writing Susan! I hope you'll continue to contribute to the discussion.
3 comments:
It's very gratifying to hear from our neighbors who really live in the area of the proposed stadium.
We have no City Council members elected from the Northside, and we should. Maybe by the time of the next City Council election, we'll have that choice - I'd vote for a Northside candidate just to keep some balance on issues just such as this one.
I hope that letters like Susan H.'s will encourage other residents in the northern part of our city to write to StadiumFacts. Please speak your minds.
I would like to see you look at more case studies on what happens to property values After construction of new stadiums. Several cities are starting to build mixed-use developments including housing around their new stadiums (look at Denver) and they have spurred new economic growth and an increase in property values. I think over the long term this can be a plus for the city.
Hi Kacey,
If you have studies that show property values increase, please send them to the "Contact Us" link on the website. We'd be happy to take a look at them.
In the case of Denver, the new stadium was built right next to the old stadium, so the value of existing property in the neighborhood would have already accounted for the presence of an NFL stadium.
The City of Santa Clara has also said that no new housing can be built in this area, so while a mixed-use development of any kind (not necessarily mixed with a stadium) might be an idea worth exploring, the City would have to change its position on building new housing in the area.
The City's own consultants say that the direct benefit to the City would be $650,000 per year, an extremely poor return on a requested public subsidy of $222,000,000 and 15 acres of land.
If developers and other businesses think that they can profit from development in this area, they should join forces with the 49ers to build and operate the stadium WITHOUT public money.
A stadium can be built and operated without a public subsidy.
Post a Comment