daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas > Proposed



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 10th, 2010, 03:43 AM   #81
krudmonk
sucks
 
krudmonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sannozay
Posts: 2,132
Likes (Received): 35

Yeah, people are critical of housing over business, but the land was not currently used and the resulting residential does not require much infrastructure on the city's part, since they are infill townhomes.

But the city had to wrap up the Diridon site if it's going to employ any grand plan, ballpark or not.
krudmonk no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old December 8th, 2011, 06:36 AM   #82
vadin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 181
Likes (Received): 10

MLB should be announcing their decision soon about territorial rights for San Jose. Cisco Field in downtown looks like it might become a reality.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mark-purdy/ci_19493556

Quote:
Mark Purdy: More signs point to San Jose for the Oakland A's

By Mark Purdy

Mercury News Columnist
Posted: 12/07/2011 08:31:51 PM PST
Updated: 12/07/2011 08:31:52 PM PST

The saga continues. The A's ultimate ballpark destination remains up in the air, a high and deep fly ball, with the entire Bay Area waiting to see in which glove it lands.

And despite what you hear, nothing is certain. Major League Baseball's so-called "blue-ribbon panel" still has not made public its report. Commissioner Bud Selig has not ruled on whether the Giants' territorial rights claim to San Jose should be overturned. Or whether A's owner Lew Wolff can pursue a San Jose stadium project.

However, the fly ball seems to be descending rapidly. Two recent developments -- a pointed comment by a powerful baseball owner and a lawsuit filed by a front group for the San Francisco Giants' interests -- seem to indicate that Selig and MLB are leaning toward a San Jose solution to the A's problem.

That should come as no shock. If the idea is for MLB to have two healthy Bay Area franchises, common sense says they should be located in the region's two largest cities, more than 40 miles apart, with both teams residing in modern new ballparks. That's instead of the current situation, with the Giants and A's just a short drive across the Bay Bridge from each other and the A's playing in a substandard, outdated and bleak hunk of concrete.

That common sense, however, acquired a strong voice this week at baseball's winter meetings in Dallas. Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf told the San Francisco Chronicle that he was "totally
Advertisement
supportive" of Wolff being able to pursue a ballpark project in San Jose.

"He needs to be there," Reinsdorf said. "It has to come to a head soon."

The "soon" probably translates to sometime in the next few months, most likely at an owners meeting in Arizona scheduled for next month. And for those who believe Oakland might still be in the picture, Reinsdorf threw in jabs at both the Oakland Coliseum and Oakland, saying the stadium was "past its time" and so was the city.

"Oakland's had plenty of opportunity to build a stadium and hasn't gotten it done," Reinsdorf said.

Those words could not have been spoken casually and cannot be overestimated. Reinsdorf has owned the White Sox since 1981. He is not only one of MLB's longest-tenured proprietors but also one of the most powerful, known to have Selig's ear. Reinsdorf also led the relocation committee that oversaw the Montreal Expos' move to Washington, D.C., and conversion into the Nationals.

Reinsdorf's statement about Oakland, meanwhile, outlines a chapter of the A's stadium pursuit that many East Bay citizens either forget or refuse to acknowledge. The chapter dates to 1994, not long after the Haas family sold the team to Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann. The two men had big plans for remodeling the Coliseum into a fine baseball-only structure. They requested a meeting with the Coliseum commission.,

"Here's what we'd like to do," Schott told the commission, outlining his remodeling ideas.

"That's all very nice," the commission replied, more or less. "But we have some news. The Raiders want to come back to Oakland, and we've got a financing plan to make it happen that will include building a new center field addition. You can't fight this, because the important people in Oakland want it to happen and they'll make it difficult on you if you try to get in the way."

Schott and Hofmann acquiesced. From that moment forward, the A's long-term future in Oakland was probably doomed. Years later, after Wolff and partner John Fisher bought the team, Wolff did assemble a new ballpark proposal near the Coliseum site. His plan involved mixed-use redevelopment and required Oakland's assistance to acquire the necessary land. The project went nowhere when the city did not or could not cooperate. Wolff then looked south to Fremont and spent years on another failed plan before finally settling on San Jose as his last, not first, resort.

All of that information is contained in the "blue-ribbon" report. The hunch here is that Reinsdorf has already seen it, which explains his assessment about Oakland.

It is possible, in fact, that the Giants also have seen the report, which might be why they backed a lawsuit filed last week by a group called "Stand For San Jose," which curiously is represented by a lawyer and public relations firm from San Francisco.

The lawsuit cites flaws in the environmental impact report for the proposed downtown San Jose ballpark and charges that the city's decision to give Wolff an option on the proposed ballpark property is illegal because the public didn't vote on it -- even though no ballpark could be built there without a public vote. Attorneys will hash out the whole thing. But we all know what this is about: The Giants want to delay and/or subvert any San Jose deal.

Clearly, the Giants are afraid that Selig will soon decide against them. Otherwise, why file the lawsuit at all? Why not let the other MLB owners decide the right thing to do? Perhaps because, as Reinsdorf's comments demonstrate, the Giants already know what that decision will be.

And that fly ball may plop into San Jose's mitt before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.
vadin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 8th, 2011, 06:09 PM   #83
pesto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,643
Likes (Received): 246

Looks like Santa Clara Stadium ("the Apple Orchard"?) has to move to "under construction" soon.

As for A's stadium (Cisco Field), I think it's coming. But I like the gossipy news better: Lew Wolff has bought the Sainte Claire Hotel in DT SJ, an easy walk from Cisco. Could it be for visiting teams to stay at? Ya think Albert Pujols would draw attention strolling on Almaden or picking up a Psycho Donut?

He is also pushing along the land acquisition and issuing PR on seating packages. The new rumor is that the park has been expanded to 36k, based on demand. All in all, it seems that someone thinks something is going on.
pesto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2011, 12:08 AM   #84
surrill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 231
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Looks like Santa Clara Stadium ("the Apple Orchard"?) has to move to "under construction" soon.

As for A's stadium (Cisco Field), I think it's coming. But I like the gossipy news better: Lew Wolff has bought the Sainte Claire Hotel in DT SJ, an easy walk from Cisco. Could it be for visiting teams to stay at? Ya think Albert Pujols would draw attention strolling on Almaden or picking up a Psycho Donut?

He is also pushing along the land acquisition and issuing PR on seating packages. The new rumor is that the park has been expanded to 36k, based on demand. All in all, it seems that someone thinks something is going on.
I'm glad capacity has been increased to 36,000.. Now if they can just fix those field dimensions
__________________
http://WWW.BUMPCERTIFIED.COM
surrill no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2011, 01:18 AM   #85
vadin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 181
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by surrill View Post
I'm glad capacity has been increased to 36,000.. Now if they can just fix those field dimensions
It's great if they increase the capacity, but 36,000 still seems too small. It would still make it the second smallest stadium in the league. ~40,000 sounds about right to me.

As far as the field dimensions, are you referring to that wierd looking right-center field? When I first saw the renderings, I was thinking that this might be because of limited space due to the lot being bounded by the street beyond right field, but who knows. I hope it's not there just being the architects are being gimicky to create some sort of faux "character".
vadin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2011, 07:27 PM   #86
Jericho-79
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 819
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Looks like Santa Clara Stadium ("the Apple Orchard"?) has to move to "under construction" soon.

As for A's stadium (Cisco Field), I think it's coming. But I like the gossipy news better: Lew Wolff has bought the Sainte Claire Hotel in DT SJ, an easy walk from Cisco. Could it be for visiting teams to stay at? Ya think Albert Pujols would draw attention strolling on Almaden or picking up a Psycho Donut?

He is also pushing along the land acquisition and issuing PR on seating packages. The new rumor is that the park has been expanded to 36k, based on demand. All in all, it seems that someone thinks something is going on.
It's about time that the A's got out that hole of a Coliseum.

I still think Oakland is too much of a dump to keep the A's in.
Jericho-79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2011, 07:59 PM   #87
pesto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,643
Likes (Received): 246

I don't like to dump on Oakland since I have family and friends there and it has lots of good aspects. But it is struggling economically and it doesn't look like it will be in position to build or improve ballparks soon. In any event, SJ is now more than double Oakland's size and growing, with a great corporate base in SC County. It's just economics and demographics.

32k capacity is embarrasing. 36k is at least reasonable since the trend is toward smaller full parks rather than large half empty ones. My guess is that space is too limited to go much larger than that. And you do have to be a bit cautious; for years the A's haven't drawn more than half that.
pesto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2011, 06:20 PM   #88
will101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: silicon valley or Salem
Posts: 2,799
Likes (Received): 406

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
32k capacity is embarrasing. 36k is at least reasonable since the trend is toward smaller full parks rather than large half empty ones. My guess is that space is too limited to go much larger than that. And you do have to be a bit cautious; for years the A's haven't drawn more than half that.
The Phone Booth opened with 40,000 capacity, and the Giants have been among the leaders in attendance ever since. And people (especially in the Comicle) thought the Giants were being optimistic at the time.

What I would love to see is some sort of permanent superstructure built in, where you could easily add 5-10,000 seats for the post season, but the rest of the time it would look like an unfinished construction project. The A's would get their small capacity park for the regular season, and Selig and the rest of the vampires would get a larger park for postseason. I'm just thinking out loud (so to speak), but would this be feasible?
will101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2011, 08:37 AM   #89
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 2,320
Likes (Received): 32

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoulderGrad View Post
Angels - Angels Stadium, could use an update perhaps, but still viable?
It looks nice, but my neck has never hurt more after seeing a game there.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2011, 12:32 PM   #90
Boriska
L'enfant terrible
 
Boriska's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Groland
Posts: 12,362
Likes (Received): 3321

What the hell ?

Oakland will play at San Jose. SF will play at Santa Clara.



Stay in there's city !!!!
__________________
il n'y a pas de filles moches
juste des verres de vodka trop petits
Boriska no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2011, 07:17 PM   #91
surrill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 231
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boriska View Post
What the hell ?

Oakland will play at San Jose. SF will play at Santa Clara.



Stay in there's city !!!!
Bro, if you have t been paying attention or don't understand the situation, stay quiet, read and learn.
__________________
http://WWW.BUMPCERTIFIED.COM
surrill no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2011, 07:32 PM   #92
pesto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,643
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boriska View Post
What the hell ?

Oakland will play at San Jose. SF will play at Santa Clara.



Stay in there's city !!!!
The A's will change their name to San Jose Athletics (it's in the SJ law). The 49ers will remain "San Francisco", although some die-hard fans say that they should be REQUIRED to remove the name.

Certainly the Raiders will become the LA Raiders even if they move to Industry, 20 miles away from LA. But I've never heard that they might change to San Jose Raiders if they move to Santa Clara, even though the park is about 1/4 mile from SJ. I doubt if the SJ brand is strong enough to change the well-established Oakland brand.
pesto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2011, 10:36 PM   #93
Jericho-79
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 819
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Certainly the Raiders will become the LA Raiders even if they move to Industry, 20 miles away from LA. But I've never heard that they might change to San Jose Raiders if they move to Santa Clara, even though the park is about 1/4 mile from SJ. I doubt if the SJ brand is strong enough to change the well-established Oakland brand.
I thought the Raiders were supposed to move into Farmers Field if they were to relocate to Los Angeles?

(Sorry to steer this thread away from the A's.)
Jericho-79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 12th, 2011, 06:17 PM   #94
pesto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,643
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho-79 View Post
I thought the Raiders were supposed to move into Farmers Field if they were to relocate to Los Angeles?

(Sorry to steer this thread away from the A's.)
This is an open issue at this point. Farmer's Field has more momentum behind it but there have been hints that the Raiders are not the preferred tenant for AEG. I didn't mention Farmer's because it's obvious they would be the LA Raiders if they moved there.

But the A's should be pretty clean: named for SJ and play in SJ.
pesto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2011, 06:42 AM   #95
slipperydog
Registered User
 
slipperydog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,453
Likes (Received): 411

What's the deal with this? I keep hearing about all these proposed stadiums in San Jose (baseball, soccer, football) but nothing is happening.
slipperydog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2011, 08:24 AM   #96
krnboy1009
Registered User
 
krnboy1009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 1,349
Likes (Received): 54

San Jose is getting a new Soccer specific stadium, for baseball its all just a talk at the moment, politics, once thats done its pretty much a go.
krnboy1009 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2011, 08:29 AM   #97
will101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: silicon valley or Salem
Posts: 2,799
Likes (Received): 406

Quote:
Originally Posted by slipperydog View Post
What's the deal with this? I keep hearing about all these proposed stadiums in San Jose (baseball, soccer, football) but nothing is happening.
Who told you nothing is happening? Land clearing has been completed for the soccer stadium, and detailed drawings came out last week. Probable date of opening April 2013. The Niners announced the financing plan that will guarantee 100% of the cost of their new stadium, and think that the stadium might open earlier than the planned summer of 2015. The only plan not moving forward is the A's, and they have a specific legal roadblock to negotiate before making further progress.
will101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2011, 08:32 AM   #98
will101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: silicon valley or Salem
Posts: 2,799
Likes (Received): 406

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Certainly the Raiders will become the LA Raiders even if they move to Industry, 20 miles away from LA. But I've never heard that they might change to San Jose Raiders if they move to Santa Clara, even though the park is about 1/4 mile from SJ. I doubt if the SJ brand is strong enough to change the well-established Oakland brand.
The Oakland Raiders of San Jose? That sounds just as bad as the Angels.
will101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2011, 05:27 PM   #99
pesto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,643
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by will101 View Post
The Oakland Raiders of San Jose? That sounds just as bad as the Angels.
The Oakland Raiders of Near San Jose. Although you might very well park in SJ and walk across the Guadalupe River to go to the game.

When you say "legal" roadblock what do you have in mind? I think of the major issue as being permission from MLB, which is more contractual than legal.
pesto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2011, 11:51 PM   #100
will101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: silicon valley or Salem
Posts: 2,799
Likes (Received): 406

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
The Oakland Raiders of Near San Jose. Although you might very well park in SJ and walk across the Guadalupe River to go to the game.

When you say "legal" roadblock what do you have in mind? I think of the major issue as being permission from MLB, which is more contractual than legal.
Unfortunately it's very legal. Congress back in the early part of the 20th Century gave MLB exemption from the Sherman Antitrust Act. And MLB turned right around and granted territorial protection to several teams under that exemption.. Which is how the Giants can exercise a veto on this whole thing.
will101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
baseball, united states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu