In addition to the quotes from Friday’s post, it looks as exploration is full steam ahead, according to an article in the Contra Costa Times. The focus is mostly on the Coliseum parking lot, though there’s no distinction between the existing lot and the 8.65 acre gravel auxiliary lot adjacent to the south lots.

“Now, we have to look at what’s under the site,” Wolff said. “Tenants (the Raiders and Warriors) share this site and we have to talk to them. We have to address the parking issue.

“There are difficulties with any venue of this nature,” he added. “You will find that to be the case in any place. Elsewhere in the country, you will run into issues such as these, too.”

In addition, the city got some news on how far the plan is progressing:

Last week, De La Fuente received an indication — via a letter from Wolff — that some advancement already has been made.

“It was official notice to the (Coliseum Authority) that he has engaged an architectural firm in Los Angeles to start exploring the possibility of building a stadium in Oakland,” De La Fuente said. “They’re taking the lead on it, and I see that as a reason to be optimistic.”

If they focus on the existing south lot, a ballpark could remove 4,000 spaces. Someone would have to build a lot of garage parking to make up for the loss. Those parking garages could cost $6-8 million to build, plus there’s the fact that garages don’t make for quality tailgating.

Quotes from Lewis Wolff at today’s 11 AM press conference:

Regarding what would happen if a deal could not be struck with Oakland/Alameda County:

“I’m not going to get into ‘what if’ at all.. We need to put blinders on and look at where we’re at today.”

When asked if he was “optimistic” about the effort:

“I wouldn’t use the word optimistic. I believe we can implement if we can balance the issues here.”

About other sites:

“I think there’s a possibility that there’s more than one site… We’re going to start looking at other sites starting next month.”

Regarding how long it will take to put it together:

“It’s going to take the bulk of the next 12 months. We may get lucky.”

About the financing gap, around $250-300 million:

“There may be other ways to finance this than the (strategy) ‘How many luxury suites can you sell?’ … If I recall, (this area) is not so hot on seat licensing.”

When asked if the San Jose Redevelopment Agency was wasting their time in buying a site for a ballpark:

“You’re going to have to talk to them about that.”

Most of the same information, but two new tidbits came up in the article:

Commissioner Bud Selig said he had no trouble with Wolff’s wanting a deal done by season’s end — “They’ve had enough conversations,” Selig said — but added that Wolff should not look elsewhere.

“I want him to concentrate on getting something done in Oakland,” Selig said.

… and…

Wolff said he could limit a ballpark to 35,000 seats, to minimize construction costs and maximize demand for tickets. He said the A’s could not afford all of what is estimated to be a $400-million bill but would pay 25% and would consider involvement in real estate development — surrounding the park and elsewhere in Oakland — that could help the city and county recoup investment costs.

The first comment indicates that Wolff is sticking with the 6-month planning deadline. Oakland/Alameda County voters have to decide on a new ballpark, even if it’s entirely privately funded. Since this year’s election would be a special election, it’s not likely to be on that ballot. Look for the issue to come up next March.

Limiting the ballpark capacity to 35,000 will create the inelastic demand the owners want, but reducing square footage will cut construction costs a lot. It costs roughly $300 per square foot to build a ballpark, and cutting 100-200,000 s.f. or more would lower the cost $30-60 million. In today’s era of large club areas and concourses, it’s hard to know where the cuts would occur. Pittsburgh was able to control costs significantly by keeping the design limited to two decks.

On the late NBC11 newscast, it was reported that the Del Monte Cannery site in San Jose is no longer available, due to San Jose pulling out of negotiations with KB Home on a land swap. Early next week, San Jose’s planning commission is due to make a recommendation on KB Home’s planned residential community at the cannery, based on a completed environmental impact report. The decision was deferred in early March because the commission felt the need to review new financial documents submitted by KB Home.

That would leave the Diridon South station as the only truly viable ballpark site in San Jose (and the best in my opinion). Much of the other alternative, the FMC site, is already being acquired by the San Jose Airport so it’s almost out of the picture.

During the same news report, the Coliseum site was mentioned, but only the old parking lot option, which may not be in play. Oakland City Councilman Ignacio de la Fuente was interviewed, and while he repeated his stance that Oakland and Alameda County don’t have $400 million to spend, he did mention that there may be a couple of other sites in Oakland that could be under consideration. A smile curled up from his lips as he finished his statement. The reporter, Christie Smith, said that the Uptown site was not available (I tend to agree with this).

That would leave the Coliseum South site as option #1, and the Estuary as option #2, since Howard Terminal is being used in its entirety by Matson (more on that in a future post).

Stadium architectural giant HOK Sport out of Kansas City was selected by the DC Commission to design the Nationals’ new ballpark. HOK’s winning bid came in at $18.4 million, $4 million less than the next lowest competitor who was not named. That $4 million is quite important, as the revised cost estimate released today by DC CFO Natwar Gandhi just $3.6 million less than the cap set for the part of the project associated with land acquisition and preparation.

HOK has designed 10 out of the last 14 new ballparks. While it made its name with Camden Yards in Baltimore (1992) and SBC Park in San Francisco (2000), HOK also designed the somewhat ill-conceived US Cellular Field in Chicago (1991) and Great American Ball Park in Cincinnati (2003). Their experience is not limited to baseball, however. They’ve designed arenas like Atlanta’s Philips Arena and football stadiums such as Reliant Stadium in Houston.

Over the last few years, HOK has been the recipient of some backlash as it appeared that all of its baseball projects had too many similarities. Among those criticisms:

1. Overall themes too “retro” with brick facades, quirky dimensions
2. Upper decks cantilevered too far back to eliminate need for support columns
3. “Mallification” of concourses, often with gimmicky design elements

I happen to think that these criticisms are largely unfair. Architects design for clients. That’s not that difficult for the architect when he’s dealing with a single, unified voice, such as a corporation or homeowner. With a stadium, there’s no single client. Usually the client has numerous public voices (mayor, city council, community group) and private (team, season ticket base) to deal with. This often forces the architect to compromise or move more towards building a consensus on design issues. What may have started as a clean, unified theme can turn into a disjointed hodgepodge quickly. When you consider how all of the ballparks came into being in the 90’s, it’s not surprising that they may seem overly retro. That’s what most everyone wanted. Of all four major sports, only baseball has a the ability evoke such nostalgic notions. Only in baseball can the venue be so integrated with its environment. Add to that the fact the retro trend started in response to backlash against the numerous multipurpose facilities built in previous decades, and there can be a tendency towards overexposure.

HOK Sport has demonstrated its forward-thinking with many non-baseball projects, many of which were cool, modern glass-and-steel designs. Among these are FedEx Field, Gillette Stadium, and Toyota Center. The parent company, HOK, is considered one of the top architectural firms in the world, and has done airports, high-rises, hospitals, and government buildings. HOK Sport Senior Principal Earl Santee, who is also working on the new St. Louis Cardinals’ Busch Stadium, calls the DC ballpark a challenge to make something that’s “part monument, part ballpark.” With the opportunity to take the retro shackles off, DC should expect good things from HOK.