First time I went to a Nats game in 2010 the Navy Yard area was awful. Get in then leave as fast as possible. Past few years the area has gotten progressively better and not a number of restaurants and bars are down there while I can't really remember there being more than maybe one a few years ago. Also new residential and commercial buildings have shot up. The left field view past few years at Nats Park has been a ton of cranes. I think if the new DC United stadium really develops as a mixed use facility with the northeastern plaza bringing in some new restaurants and bars, plus more residences nearby, then then in 2023, fifteen years after Nats Park opened, you won't be able to recognize the area with multiple major parks in easy walking distance to each.
I'll let someone else argue the question of costs to the taxpayer as well as the idea with property value so high in DC, Northern Virginia, and development of Anacostia made development in the Navy Yard area a guarantee with or without the stadium. I think more often than not stadium deals are bunk for taxpayers and don't see major change in the area but Nationals Parks seems to have been an overall pretty darn good deal and redeveloped the area like the MCI Center did Chinatown. So, yes, I think the deals have been good for DC compared to other venue deals around the nation.
But, overall, I hate the idea that taxpayers are paying massive amounts for stadiums and arenas. I am all about governments at the local and state level sweetening the pot and using smart incentives for economic development purposes but for some reason pro sports have found a way to take this to an absolutely ridiculous level.
If I was DC I would see very little reason to subsidize a new Redskins stadium. Baseball, hockey, and basketball are questionable deals but they cost significantly less and have many more home dates.