would be cool if they actually kept the port cranes.
121 - 140 of 723 Posts
If you look closely at the renderings- the first one depicts Target Field's exterior, Dodger Stadium's seating bowl, and PNC Park's left field. The second rendering is basically PNC Park against the Oakland waterfront. :lol:
I can't see any scenario where this comes to pass- if it isn't going to be San Jose for the A's, it'll probably be some version of Coliseum City in the end.
I can't see any scenario where this comes to pass- if it isn't going to be San Jose for the A's, it'll probably be some version of Coliseum City in the end.
I LOVE LOVE LOVE this! Please make this happen, although there is probably a very small chance that it will. I never liked the idea of moving to San Jose. The A's need to stay in Oakland and this would be perfect. I would definitely go to more games. Hell, I may even get season tickets
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r...3IDgCw&usg=AFQjCNEIsZXwr7PbAQhw01E_1WhuQ_AsrwOwner Mark Davis: Oakland is on its 'last chance' to keep Raiders
The Raiders want a new stadium and if something doesn't happen soon, they might be leaving Oakland. Owner Mark Davis said this week that he wants to stay in the city where his team has been since 1995, but he needs to see some progress as far as stadium planning goes.
An investment group led by the world's third-largest privately held real estate firm, Colony Capital LLC, made headlines in October when they promised to redevelop the coliseum-area into a 'sports and entertainment center.'
"We are very enthusiastic about the opportunity… to develop this unique property, which we expect will become a transformational and vital urban, residential sports and entertainment center for [Oakland]," Colony CEO Thomas J. Barrack, Jr. said in October, via the Oakland Tribune.
If Colony Capital's plans fizzle out though, the Raiders will likely be leaving Oakland.
"I don't want to call it a last-ditch effort, but it does seem to be the last chance that Oakland is going to get," Davis told the San Francisco Chronicle. "We can't continue to play in that stadium, with the baseball field and all of that stuff."
The Raiders lease at O.co Coliseum actually expired after the 2013 season and the team could've looked at moving to another city, but Davis and the Raiders agreed to a one-year extension to stay in Oakland. Davis made the agreement with hopes of seeing the stadium project move forward in 2014.
The Colony Capital deal looked promising when it was announced in October, but almost five months later, Davis hasn't heard anything regarding the project moving forward.
"They brought in Colony Capital and based on that, I decided to go ahead and do a one-year extension with them. But there's been no progress," Davis said. "I had high hopes when Colony Capital came in. I still do have hopes, but they're not as high because I haven't really heard anything positive from either group. It's gone silent again. We have to get something done."
If something doesn't get done, then 2014 could be the Raiders final year in Oakland. However, Davis didn't want to talk about a possible move to another city, "I don't want to talk about using someplace else for leverage," Davis said. "If I get something done in Oakland, I am staying."
The Raiders had a chance to move-in with the 49ers at their new stadium, but Davis decided that wasn't in the best interest of his team. That's a decision he still doesn't regret, "I really believe with the 49ers moving down to Santa Clara, and leaving the San Francisco Bay Area, that it leaves it wide open for someone to say, 'Wow, this is really a good opportunity for Oakland,' Davis said.
Besides the stadium deal, Davis touched on several topics during his lengthy interview with the Chronicle, which you can read here. If you're a Raiders fan, or you just want to read about Davis calling the 2012 Chiefs 'inept,' it's worth a click.
He really can't possibly be that stupid, can he?"I really believe with the 49ers moving down to Santa Clara, and leaving the San Francisco Bay Area ..."
Just thinking out loud, and as a Raiders fan who doesn't want to see them go, but I wonder if Davis has some backup plans that don't involve LA. I know LA is the likely destination, but if Davis truly wants to stay in the Bay, (and I think he legitimately does), he has some options.
If the Rams move back, it appears they will be doing it in their own building, sidestepping Farmers. That project has made it clear in the past they want two teams for the project to proceed, and if the Rams execute their move, I don't see three teams occupying LA. The Rams could conceivably take in a stadium mate, but they would control the revenue. I have a feeling Davis wants to control the revenue wherever he ends up, another reason he'd like to stay in the Bay.
Option one would be Candlestick. SF is pissed at the Niners for bolting, and while they've made a plan for the park's demolition, the Raiders could swoop in for a short term stint while they worked out a long term solution on the other side of the bay. Raiders played in SF before. Not the greatest stadium, but it's not falling apart to the extent the Coliseum is.
Option two, AT&T Park. Insanely unlikely (like all the plans I have here) but a short term revenue stream for the Giants and San Francisco. And another opportunity for the city to stick it to the 49ers. Maybe in playing the spite card too hard, but I think its at least semi feasible. Can't imagine the Giants would be happy with the field conditions though.
Option three, a temporary stadium. It was discussed in the soccer stadium thread, but Sacto's stadium is being built in a matter of months and doesn't have to undergo a lengthy or expensive EIS because its temporary. I believe it is entirely possible to erect a 50,000 seat temporary park (predominantly bench seating), with significant investment in the locker rooms and luxury suite space. It wouldn't be the best stadium in the world, but it would be football only, so no dirt diamond, and most importantly, no leaking sewage into the locker rooms. Temporary facilities have come a long way, and I'm sure they could slap a butt load of lipstick on that pig to make it presentable. The main focus of this option would be the temporary part, with a long term solution being worked on vigorously, but not desperately.
Option 4 would be using existing college facilities. Cal is hurting bad after the Memorial renovation. Could use the extra cash, but access and parking are an f'ing nightmare. Stanford Stadium is one of the finest venues I've ever been too, and would suit an NFL team perfectly (temporarily anyway).
All pipe dreams, but like I said, thinking out loud. I don't want to see my Raiders leave, but I also understand they cannot stay in the Coliseum, and Oakland is apparently incapable of getting a deal together. LA seems to be having as hard a time getting their stuff together, but no doubt LA lingers in the back of every Raiders fan's mind. I don't really have much hope, but maybe the impending ultimatum gets the gears moving and a deal done or close. Crazier things have happened.
If the Rams move back, it appears they will be doing it in their own building, sidestepping Farmers. That project has made it clear in the past they want two teams for the project to proceed, and if the Rams execute their move, I don't see three teams occupying LA. The Rams could conceivably take in a stadium mate, but they would control the revenue. I have a feeling Davis wants to control the revenue wherever he ends up, another reason he'd like to stay in the Bay.
Option one would be Candlestick. SF is pissed at the Niners for bolting, and while they've made a plan for the park's demolition, the Raiders could swoop in for a short term stint while they worked out a long term solution on the other side of the bay. Raiders played in SF before. Not the greatest stadium, but it's not falling apart to the extent the Coliseum is.
Option two, AT&T Park. Insanely unlikely (like all the plans I have here) but a short term revenue stream for the Giants and San Francisco. And another opportunity for the city to stick it to the 49ers. Maybe in playing the spite card too hard, but I think its at least semi feasible. Can't imagine the Giants would be happy with the field conditions though.
Option three, a temporary stadium. It was discussed in the soccer stadium thread, but Sacto's stadium is being built in a matter of months and doesn't have to undergo a lengthy or expensive EIS because its temporary. I believe it is entirely possible to erect a 50,000 seat temporary park (predominantly bench seating), with significant investment in the locker rooms and luxury suite space. It wouldn't be the best stadium in the world, but it would be football only, so no dirt diamond, and most importantly, no leaking sewage into the locker rooms. Temporary facilities have come a long way, and I'm sure they could slap a butt load of lipstick on that pig to make it presentable. The main focus of this option would be the temporary part, with a long term solution being worked on vigorously, but not desperately.
Option 4 would be using existing college facilities. Cal is hurting bad after the Memorial renovation. Could use the extra cash, but access and parking are an f'ing nightmare. Stanford Stadium is one of the finest venues I've ever been too, and would suit an NFL team perfectly (temporarily anyway).
All pipe dreams, but like I said, thinking out loud. I don't want to see my Raiders leave, but I also understand they cannot stay in the Coliseum, and Oakland is apparently incapable of getting a deal together. LA seems to be having as hard a time getting their stuff together, but no doubt LA lingers in the back of every Raiders fan's mind. I don't really have much hope, but maybe the impending ultimatum gets the gears moving and a deal done or close. Crazier things have happened.
^^None of those sound feasible for a variety of reasons (lack of premium seating, capacity etc), but the one option that still makes sense to me is rebuilding the Coliseum; If they were to keep Mt. Davis with a rebuilt lower bowl containing new club seating it already has enough suites for the Raiders going forward. Then the other three sides could be rebuilt in a much simpler manner, without any suites or club seats bringing the cost way down.
So if they rebuilt the lower portion of Mt. Davis with some suites and a field club, converted half of the top suite level into a new press box and did a simple two level stand the rest of the way (with a really big single concourse near street level to eliminate costly elevators/escalators) around you'd end up with about 60-62,000 seats, 7,000 club seats and about 88 suites. That sounds pretty functional and way cheaper than the new stadium options being thrown around. I know it's not as sexy as a new stadium, and the location isn't exactly scenic at the moment but it seems practical, at least to me.
So if they rebuilt the lower portion of Mt. Davis with some suites and a field club, converted half of the top suite level into a new press box and did a simple two level stand the rest of the way (with a really big single concourse near street level to eliminate costly elevators/escalators) around you'd end up with about 60-62,000 seats, 7,000 club seats and about 88 suites. That sounds pretty functional and way cheaper than the new stadium options being thrown around. I know it's not as sexy as a new stadium, and the location isn't exactly scenic at the moment but it seems practical, at least to me.
Even without that idiotic comment about the Niners having "left the Bay Area", it's obvious that Mark Davis has no clue about the financial facts of life. If they want to stay in California, have someplace new, and a place where they can control the revenue stream, they will have to do it themselves. I'm guessing that Mark's inability to face facts is a reason why Amy Trask quit.
I'm guessing they've tossed this idea around already, but I think it would be so costly, they might as well build a whole new one. Mt. Davis only spans the east sideline, and they would probably have to rebuild the lower section, though it wouldn't be totally necessary. But, it would at least keep the costs down a little I suppose. Especially if they can design a cheaper alternative for the remaining 3 sides.^^None of those sound feasible for a variety of reasons (lack of premium seating, capacity etc), but the one option that still makes sense to me is rebuilding the Coliseum; If they were to keep Mt. Davis with a rebuilt lower bowl containing new club seating it already has enough suites for the Raiders going forward. Then the other three sides could be rebuilt in a much simpler manner, without any suites or club seats bringing the cost way down. So if they rebuilt the lower portion of Mt. Davis with some suites and a field club, converted half of the top suite level into a new press box and did a simple two level stand the rest of the way (with a really big single concourse near street level to eliminate costly elevators/escalators) around you'd end up with about 60-62,000 seats, 7,000 club seats and about 88 suites. That sounds pretty functional and way cheaper than the new stadium options being thrown around. I know it's not as sexy as a new stadium, and the location isn't exactly scenic at the moment but it seems practical, at least to me.
I said a while back that they should be able to raise $600 million fairly easily. Even the Raiders can get $300 million in seat licenses, add $200 million from the NFL's G-4 loan program, and $100 million from naming rights. Then do like was said, remove everything but Mt. Davis, and make a very bare-bones bowl around the remaining three sides. Add some suites and the media areas above the bowl, and add just enough of an upper deck to raise the capacity to maybe 55,000. Once the cash flow improves, add to the west side upper deck. But they will have a (3/4) new stadium, with no one going further into debt.I'm guessing they've tossed this idea around already, but I think it would be so costly, they might as well build a whole new one. Mt. Davis only spans the east sideline, and they would probably have to rebuild the lower section, though it wouldn't be totally necessary. But, it would at least keep the costs down a little I suppose. Especially if they can design a cheaper alternative for the remaining 3 sides.
No no no the Oakland coliseum needs to be completely knocking down.
I don't see why the can't build a new stadium like the titans & buccaneers have, have the endzone's running east to west with views of the Pacific Ocean to the west and the Oakland hills to the east
I don't see why the can't build a new stadium like the titans & buccaneers have, have the endzone's running east to west with views of the Pacific Ocean to the west and the Oakland hills to the east
The Raiders may well have, and there could be any number of reasons for not persuing that option to this point (site issues, demolition costs etc). I would guess a lot of it is no one gets excited about a renovation the same way they get about a new building.I'm guessing they've tossed this idea around already, but I think it would be so costly, they might as well build a whole new one. Mt. Davis only spans the east sideline, and they would probably have to rebuild the lower section, though it wouldn't be totally necessary. But, it would at least keep the costs down a little I suppose. Especially if they can design a cheaper alternative for the remaining 3 sides.
And yes it only keeps one side, but it is the side contains most of the requisite premium seating as is which is typically the most expensive part to build. If the other three sides were built in a fashion similar to Stanford stadium this option would be WAY cheaper than a new stadium as per NFL standard construction. The total price tag for Stanford Stadium was $90 million for a 50,000 seater in the Bay Area in 2006; so even if they double that number to build a nice enough 40,000 seat bowl on the other three sides thats maybe $180 million. Throw in $100 million into revamping the VIP areas/new field club and press areas and locker rooms in Mt. Davis, another $100 million for demolition/site work/landscaping and maybe $50 million for Videoboards. That is $430 million, with a contingency fund it's like $500 million max. Between some seat licenses, a G4 loan and naming rights, they ought be able to come up with that sort of figure.
As long as they could avoid adding large amounts of new premium areas and minimize new escalators/elevators as much as possible (which are super expensive FYI) there is no reason it would need to come in anywhere near the $1 Billion mark, more like half of that. Just because teams like 49ers, Falcons and Vikings have found ways to spend a billion dollars on a stadium doesn't mean everyone has to.
What kind of question is that, $$$ is your reason. In California state subsidies for stadiums don't exist. The Raiders don't have the kind of cash flow to go buy waterfront property and build a new stadium from scratch themselves. Plus they aren't in a position to ask fans to swallow $600 million in seat licenses like the 49ers were.No no no the Oakland coliseum needs to be completely knocking down.
I don't see why the can't build a new stadium like the titans & buccaneers have, have the endzone's running east to west with views of the Pacific Ocean to the west and the Oakland hills to the east
My idea was at the same site as the coliseum and I suppose the Pacific Ocean view would be rather far away but it's a nice idea.
The coliseum is just too old to be renovated. It's a piece of shit and needs demolishing. The Vikings where glad to get rid of the metrodome and that was alot newer
The coliseum is just too old to be renovated. It's a piece of shit and needs demolishing. The Vikings where glad to get rid of the metrodome and that was alot newer
Mt Davis is from 1995, the entire Metrodome was from 1982, we are talking about getting rid of the 60s era portion and keeping the 90s era portion. More to the point Mt Davis has functionally wide concourses enough restrooms and lots of VIP areas. The rest of the Coliseum is undoubtedly falling apart and probably needs to be torn down. And Mt. Davis in it's current form is ugly, but has the requisite programmatic elements for NFL. Keep in mind Lambeau is older than the than anything in the league and renovations have turned it into one of the leagues best venues. Same story with Arrowhead. And while what I am talking about probably isn't going to quite live up to those venues but it could still be a perfectly competitive venue and very decent place to watch a football game.
The trouble with suggesting renovation is that most people don't have the imagination to consider what could be and will simply see what is at the moment.
If money were a non issue then by all means something like what you are talking about would be great (although your not going to see the Pacific from Oakland, the Bay maybe but its a little iffy as well, theres an airport and Alameda between the Coliseum and the bay anyway).
The trouble with suggesting renovation is that most people don't have the imagination to consider what could be and will simply see what is at the moment.
If money were a non issue then by all means something like what you are talking about would be great (although your not going to see the Pacific from Oakland, the Bay maybe but its a little iffy as well, theres an airport and Alameda between the Coliseum and the bay anyway).
The pic below (taken from Mt. Davis) is looking almost due west, and shows the current stadium in football mode. Even though it's a drizzly day, you can tell that there is no view of the bay to speak of. And there are too many mountains on the far side of the bay for any ocean views. The round building just beyond the upper deck is Oracle Arena, where the Warriors play. Still a first rate arena, despite the claims of San Francisco.
![]()
Implode the 60's section of that stadium (which I know is MOST of it) and match it all with Mt. Davis.The pic below (taken from Mt. Davis) is looking almost due west, and shows the current stadium in football mode. Even though it's a drizzly day, you can tell that there is no view of the bay to speak of. And there are too many mountains on the far side of the bay for any ocean views. The round building just beyond the upper deck is Oracle Arena, where the Warriors play. Still a first rate arena, despite the claims of San Francisco.
![]()
The endzones, of course, not having to be as big, but definitely match the sidelines.
um, the A's still play there
We know that. If you go back a bit, it was mentioned that we are talking about what could happen after the A's left.um, the A's still play there
121 - 140 of 723 Posts
SkyscraperCity Forum
A forum community dedicated to skyscrapers, towers, highrises, construction, and city planning enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about structures, styles, reviews, scale, transportation, skylines, architecture, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Katarzyna DJ
7616 Replies
calatravavx
2100 Replies
Srdjan Adamovic
1770 Replies
Recommended Communities
Join now to ask and comment!
