Despite the bittersweet tone of yesterday (thanks for the memories Ellie), there was a little humor to be found before the game (via the Chronicle’s John Shea):
Clubhouse blaze: Before the game, a fire broke out near Brian Fuentes‘ locker, the result of an overcharged battery for the reliever’s remote-control airplane. Several players rushed to put it out, as did Isao Hirooka (Matsui’s PR guy), equipped with a five-gallon container of drinking water.
In a smoky clubhouse, managing general partner Lew Wolff sat at a table, sipped on a root beer float and cracked a couple of jokes about how this could have been his ticket to a new ballpark, playfully chiding his players for extinguishing the flames.
Clubhouse manager Steve Vucinich approached Wolff and whispered, “Nobody saw you set that, did they?”
Briefly: Wolff expects to meet with Oakland mayor Jean Quan, who has thoughts for a new Oakland ballpark, in the next month but said, “Don’t read too much into it.” …
Several hours after the A’s late rally fell short, Oakland passed its budget with Quan as the deciding vote. The budget includes the sale of HJKCC, funds the public library system, and is heavily dependent on approval of concessions by the police union, which are to be voted on next week.
Craig Calcaterra feels our pain.
Bankruptcy hearings for the Dodgers are set to stretch out until next January. Bud Selig will be deposed by Frank McCourt’s lawyers in two weeks. That should be fun.
Do you believe David Stern’s line that 22 teams in the NBA lost money going into the lockout? Think again.
Saturday’s Earthquakes-Red Bulls contest will be played at Stanford Stadium, to be followed by a fireworks show. Coincidentally, the A’s play the Snakes at the Coliseum at the same time, also to be followed by a fireworks show. Even though I already have a ticket for the A’s game, I may ditch it to go to the Quakes match instead solely because I’ve never seen a soccer match at Stanford since it was rebuilt.
China’s 800+ mile (roughly Seattle to San Francisco) high speed rail train between Beijing and Shanghai launched last week. After a decade of planning, the line took three years to construct. A one-way fare from Beijing to Shanghai costs as little as $85 and takes less than five hours to complete the run.
P.S. – I wanted to add a commentary item to chew on as we head into the weekend. Over the past few days there have been renewed calls on the blog for alternative sites, such as 980 Park, Fremont, or Dublin/Pleasanton. Let’s consider the process before putting these out there. Selig’s panel spent an unspecified amount of time looking at sites, not just in Oakland, but throughout and beyond the specified stadium territory for the A’s (Alameda/Contra Costa counties). For whatever reason, in 2009 four Oakland sites, three centered around downtown, were presented. Those were whittled down to the Victory Court site. Now I’ll repeat this again: Out of the entire A’s territory. This may be because of political forces in Oakland pushing it to stay in Oakland and the panel going along with it (some were upset when the 2001 HOK study included Fremont and Pleasanton). Or it could be the panel said they preferred a downtown site and no other site within the territory provided that. Whatever the cause, Victory Court is the choice in the territory. 980 Park is an EIR alternative, but there’s no indicator as to whether or not MLB takes the site seriously. I think it’s safe to say that with the Coliseum being dismissed early on and no implicit desire to seek a suburban locale, for Oakland and the A’s existing territory it’s Victory Court or bust. That may be why the search was formally expanded to include San Jose, since there’s a downtown there too. I don’t know, I’m just trying to make sense of it.
newballpark.org 
Happy Fiscal New Year all! As a Raiders fan who despises the Niners, I’ve got to give them props:
Nearly $140 million in luxury suite sales for the proposed SC stadium!
I’m sure those numbers will catch the eye of Selig and MLB (not some Facebook membership number).
Anything north of $100 million would go a long way at financing Cisco Field SJ.
@ML – Thanks for the ‘Deadspin’ link … It is very, very, informative. I suggest everyone read it!
If you’re going to the Earthquakes games, probably better to get tickets sooner rather than later. Last I’d heard at the end of last week they’d sold over 30,000 of the seats for that game (and I’m not sure they’re using the full 50k either at Stanford).
As for the luxury suite sales for Santa Clara, not surprised. They’ve been marketing them heavily at private events to the richer residents of Santa Clara County.
@Tony D – Niners all the way….can’t believe you guys still root for the Al D. and the Traitors! :X
(added to post above)
P.S. – I wanted to add a commentary item to chew on as we head into the weekend. Over the past few days there have been renewed calls on the blog for alternative sites, such as 980 Park, Fremont, or Dublin/Pleasanton. Let’s consider the process before putting these out there. Selig’s panel spent an unspecified amount of time looking at sites, not just in Oakland, but throughout and beyond the specified stadium territory for the A’s (Alameda/Contra Costa counties). For whatever reason, in 2009 four Oakland sites, three centered around downtown, were presented. Those were whittled down to the Victory Court site. Now I’ll repeat this again: Out of the entire A’s territory. This may be because of political forces in Oakland pushing it to stay in Oakland and the panel going along with it (some were upset when the 2001 HOK study included Fremont and Pleasanton). Or it could be the panel said they preferred a downtown site and no other site within the territory provided that. Whatever the cause, Victory Court is the choice in the territory. 980 Park is an EIR alternative, but there’s no indicator as to whether or not MLB takes the site seriously. I think it’s safe to say that with the Coliseum being dismissed early on and no implicit desire to seek a suburban locale, for Oakland and the A’s existing territory it’s Victory Court or bust. That may be why the search was formally expanded to include San Jose, since there’s a downtown there too. I don’t know, I’m just trying to make sense of it.
@Anon,
;(. The Raiders could move to Mars and I’d still be a die-hard.
@Dan,
30k? That’s awesome! Should make for a great atmosphere and match.
@ML–yeah, we’re all trying to make sense of it all too.
OT, going to the game tonight. Should be interesting to see how Harden does.
@TonyD–i was a die-hard Raiders fan in the 70’s, before they moved to LA. Was really pissed when they left for LA and didn’t really follow them at all. When they came back, I was kind of happy and was about to buy 2 PSL’s and then held back, seeing that they couldn’t even sell-out their pre-season games. Good move. I’ve been to a bunch of games since their return, but just can’t get into them like before. Davis has totally lost it.
@ML–You don’t seem to get it. The city of Oakland can’t afford Victory Court. It would cost $70-100M to condemn the land and relocate the business, plus another $50-100M for new parking and infrastructure upgrades. Even with upgrades, vehicular access to VC is limited to one pair of ramps, that also serve Chinatown and the rest of Jack London Square. New parking can’t be self financed because the lots are to far from the Downtown core. Ditto for the San Jose site. The city of San Jose can’t finance the ballpark and infrastructure upgrades because of the lack of redevelopment financing.
–
–
980 Park is free land. The only infrastructure upgrade is relocation of two ramps. Cost $15M. This can easily financed with a revenue bond. Additional parking if needed can be self financed via a parking district because the ballpark is located near the Downtown Core and Uptown District.. An assessment district for the 20 blocks east of the site in Downtown can fund additional security and amenities. 980 Park is not far from the Uptown site favored by MLB now a residential community. The HOK Study never looked at 980 Park. If they did, I never have seen any drawings. If there are drawings, I would like to see them. Possibly this is the new site Quan will be discussing with Wolff this month!!!???
@Bryan Grunwald – Actually it’s you who don’t get it. The commentary was about everything leading up to the demise of redevelopment. In 2009 no one was talking about that in any way.
I agree that Oakland can’t afford Victory Court. However, Wolff can afford San Jose, which has $27 million left to fund plus its ransom payment. If I’m Wolff, would I go with a stadium that has a much better chance of paying for itself or go on a lark with a concept that has very little public support (980 Park)? Here’s another way to put it: You’re the expert on 980 Park. If that site had momentum, shouldn’t the powers that be have a lot of inquiries into you about the site, including Wolff? Because that doesn’t seem like it’s happening.
@ML–In my opinion, San Jose has no chance. I have heard from very good sources that the Giant’s will not give up territorial rights for $$ and MLB will not force them. A deal is a deal. And the gap for land is more than $27M especially if you factor in the roadway improvement cost that is needed. Then how do you get there? The freeway ramps around the SJ site are beyond capacity and BART is nowhere in site. The SJ site will lose its local Oakland fan base.
There is plenty of public support for 980 Park. All three of the surrounding neighborhood councils including Jack London District Council have endorsed the concept and one is taking no position. I am working on getting political support, but frankly need help.
@BG – I have heard from very good sources every possible outcome of the T-rights battle. The only person who knows for certain is Selig. Everyone else has an agenda to push.
$27 million would include the Autumn Parkway project. As much as you like to tout the low cost of 980 Park, we need an independent evaluation of the cost and timeline to know for sure. And while you have a few neighborhood groups in place, you don’t have the grassroots group trying to keep the A’s in Oakland. If you don’t have them, you have no political weight behind your effort. It may take Oakland admitting that Victory Court is no longer feasible to opt for 980 Park, and I suspect there will be a lot of political pressure not to do that too quickly.
re: I have heard from very good sources that the Giant’s will not give up territorial rights for $$ and MLB will not force them
…looks like it’ll be the San Antonio Athletics.
@bg–lets assume sj is out as you suggest….and agree that VC wont happen, I see the benefits of the city of Oakland not having to invest in land/infrastrucutre but what does the 980 site offer to LW that would get him excited about investing $500M in what is considered a sub-standard site today. How would he pay for this park? to keep crediblity you gotta keep reality in your dreams….
@jk-usa The move of the Raiders definitely left a huge impact, but I’m still able to separate crazy Al and the team/fans. He’ll be gone in a couple of years, anyhow. The Raiders get a bad rap, but they do A LOT in the East Bay and Bay in general in terms of charity work. Plus, I just can’t not root for the team my dad and his dad rooted for.
@GoA’s–Firstly, the City could offer below market rent. Say $1M/yr for the land instead of $3.8M the Giants are paying the Port of San Francisco. Second, they could offer the air rights over a portion of the freeway south of 14th Street for supporting commercial use, say a conference hotel and retail (possibly a wine center since Napa is within the A’s Territorial Zone). Or they could offer to assemble land (first right of refusal) in the 20 block area east of the ballpark site between the State Building for redevelopment. No public monies would be used, Wolff would reimburse the City/Agency for any land assembled. Third, the City could form an assessment district from the above mentioned 20 blocks to tap the value added by the ballpark to fund more security and other amenities.
@BG- appreciate you at least providing some ideas beyond LW/JF are rich and should pay for it. Figure mortgage payments of at least $25M—so a few million on rent reduction payments is a start—but the rest of what you suggest is added risk for LW in a market and area that is not at the top of most developers wish list….he needs predictable revenue streams in order to pull this off—and a good chunk of those come from corporations—so given the choice—best neighborhood in China Basin with great exposure v. a ballpark above a freeway in a challenged area in oakland 8 miles away—seriously—which one would you pick?
@ GoA’s That neighborhood in China Basin started out challenged before Att&t. New ballparks are exciting and Oakland, for all its problems, has a young, hip vibe to it that can compare and even top SF’s. I’m sure with the right sales pitch you can win over a corporation to invest in the expensive seats. Didn’t the A’s get a lot of corporate help outside Oakland during the 80’s/90’s? It’s not like the A’s can’t be marketed, they have a long history of winning. Who’s to say for sure what any corporation is willing to do.
proof is in the puddding–at some point oakland needs to show this corporate support that you are confident is there—-SJ doesnt have any problem exposing theirs–Cisco for naming rights…75 CEO’s signing the move to SJ letter to bs…’9ers just released this morning that they have $138M of funding from sale of corporate suites in their proposed Santa Clara Stadium and have hired firms to actively pursue the naming rights….if its there for oakland why are they hiding it?
My suggestion—if oakland is confident that they can obtain ample corporate support to build a $500M ballpark than they ought to offer to build the ballpark themselves—take the risk away from LW-and show us what you got—-why not?
@BG,
In your opinion, of course SJ has no chance (despite the evidence that says it does) because that’s not where your “floating mountains” freeway ballpark is located.
Look, we get it that you love your idea (good for you!), but your over-championing and belittling of SJ is getting a little old.
I used to go to raves in the area that now houses AT&T park. There was nothing down there except empty warehouses and one late night donut shop.
@eb “I’m sure with the right sales pitch you can win over a corporation to invest in the expensive seats. ”
.
“A corporation” won’t do it. We’re talking probably 7,000 – 15,000 club seats plus 100 or so suites. Each corporation – even a big one – is likely to buy one suite or maybe two to four club seats. It requires many, many big corporations. South Bay has ’em, East Bay does not.
“Didn’t the A’s get a lot of corporate help outside Oakland during the 80′s/90′s?”
.
Not sure what you’re talking about here. The kinds of premium seating the A’s need to sell to finance the ballpark barely existed in the 80’s and 90’s, certainly not at the Coli. Maybe a few suites, but nothing like the volume (or pricing) needed under the current economic model.
@David–and it was on the water in SF–not over a freeway in west Oakland–but hey–I would love to be proven wrong—we could end this today–Quan steps to the plate and says that she knows that Oakland will have no problems attracting corporate revenues and the city is so confident (as eb suggests) that it will build the ballpark and manage the mortgage payment itself by selling the naming rights, advertising, corporate suites etc–if there is a shortfall the oakland general fund will pay the difference–LW just pay a rent payment and the A’s remain in oakland….sound familiar–it was the deal offered to get the Raiders back to oakland—and we all know where that is today….
@Bryan Grunwald Your idea is an interesting one, to be sure. However, although I’m no engineer, it’s hard for me to imagine it can be implemented safely in earthquake country without SIGNIFICANTLY adding to the cost. You’ll recall, we had a few freeways and bridges collapse in the last big earthquake, and they weighed a lot less than an entire ballpark with 30 or 40 thousand people in it.
.
Another question is: If this is feasible, why isn’t it being done in cities all across the country? You’re talking about instant creation of millions of acres of very prime real estate almost for free.
@Bartleby I think you’re taking my statement too literally in regards to “a corporation.” I know they would need far more than one. I may not be up to speed on all of this, but give me some credit.
During the 80’s/90’s the A’s had all sorts of corporate sponsors advertising and involved with buying suites/tickets, right? I know I couldn’t go to any store in the area and not see some sort of A’s promotion through various businesses. Different set of obligations needed, I know, but it’s at least an example of the A’s getting some corporate love in Oakland.
Anyway, tit for tat continues. Let’s hope someone takes charge of the situation and is successful.
@bartleby – Why must you BLAST every idea or thought? I’m not an advocate of the 980 site, as of today. I was just opining on the relative potential of the neighborhood.
@David What idea or thought am I supposedly blasting? I didn’t direct any comments regarding the 980 site or the potential of the nearby neighborhood to you. Are you sure you’re yelling at the right guy?
@David Rereading the thread, I think your issue may have been with GoAs.
@eb – Can you expand on your statement of “has a young, hip vibe to it that can compare and even top SF’s”? What nightlife event can top SF SOMA? I’m a hobbyst DJ on the side, i would like to know and check out that scene in Oakland, if it exists.
@ David – I think you are being a little too sensitive when people challenge and idea, especially one that is farfetched.
@ BG – While such a 980 park sounds feasible, what advantage does it have for LW to invest in and not turn into another Coliseum? How would it separate itself from a beautiful waterfront facility across the bay? I’m not dismissing your idea, rather contending while it has some merits, it seems its basis for existence is only cost and cost alone. Personally, I would rather see a VC.
ahh–thx bartleby—didn’t read David’s response since it was directed at you–so @David—great–sounds like you were just reminiscing and not advocating that a 980 ballpark has the same potential or appeal as AT&T in China Basin—my bad—
I agree with BG that 980 needs to be studied in depth and put forward as a viable alternative, especially as it will offer more benefits to Oakland than VC, consolidating the retail potential in and around downtown. It wasn’t going to be considered by our beloved City Councilpersons last year because they’d already made a decision based on conversations that one or another higher-up at City Hall had said was Selig’s ultimatum. BG had asked for and gotten the support of Jack London District Association, West Oakland Neighbors, West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project, Oak Center Neighborhood Association, West Oakland Commerce Association, and perhaps a few others – of course, none of these groups are on the inside of the clique at City Hall (way to go on the budget, guys!), so who really cares whether there’s support from the neighborhood or not?
If anyone from the various A’s support groups wants to talk it over and think through the issues in a more fact-filled way than this, I know BG will likely accept your invitation – should he ever decide to visit this sometimes too-grumpy site again. What say Bryan?
– S
[I was on the Chamber’s “Verification Committee” or whatever it was called back when the HOK report came out. 980 hadn’t been thought of yet, so the choices were Uptown, Coli and Howard Terminal in pretty much that order. Port was resisting Howard pretty much, Bobb was twisting HOK’s arms a lot, and the Coli was therefore demoted by a single point (!) as the best place for a new stadium. After Bobb’s departure (to the relief of many), the Chamber came forward with a plan for the Coli that Lew immediately turned into a nightmare, demanding 60+ acres north of the Coli for his new, utterly bogus development. Let’s get rid of the real problem, Wolff / Fisher, as all they really want is a giant real estate development usinf the A’s as its anchor. Baseball means nothing to these guys; so let’s put something exciting on the table (Victory Court? come on!) and get new owners with some imagination and a love of baseball to come in and put it to MLB as to whether the exclusions from law that have been granted to the game were given so that bigger real estate deals could be had for doofus owners or whether the loyalists who love the game could enjoy it]
@Steve Lowe – Lets clear something up. This site was the first to make Bryan Grunwald’s 980 Park site public, way before other A’s fans sites and the regular media.
Most of the new ballparks built in the last 20 years were done in urban locales where additional developable land was scarce. San Jose Diridon actually has less than 980 Park, and beyond that it won’t be available for at least a decade. The ownership group isn’t going anywhere. Get used to it. Learn to work with them. It seems the only way to get rid of an ownership is if they go bankrupt, and that’s not happening woth Wolff/Fisher anytime soon.
re: Let’s get rid of the real problem, Wolff / Fisher
…and the quest continues for philanthropic billionaires eager to buy the A’s for $300 million and then donate a ballpark to Oakland for $500 million.
Another question is: If this is feasible, why isn’t it being done in cities all across the country?
…There’s some sort of Little Field atop fhe Jersey entrance to the Lincoln Tunnel. But a $500 mill ballpark atop highways in earthquake country? A few yards from where a freeway already collapsed? I don’t think so…
Hi
Gotta get outta here; however, if the A’s had an exciting new park to play in, maybe an interested prospect would step forward? With Victory Court (soon to be known as Can’t Get There Park?) as the only alternative, who wants to even consider stepping up to the plate?
And now, Jean has another site to offer after all this time? Wonder where (and how fast it’ll get buried under reams of criticism…)?
Stay A’s!
@SL – I’m confused by your last statement “if the A’s had an exciting new park to play in, maybe an interested prospect would step forward?”…you’re endorsing the fact that LW build a 500 million dollar park just to sell the team? Should he price the A’s around around 1 billion plus then?!
ML, not knocking you for running a well-managed site at all: what’s disconcerting, at least to me, is the idea from commenters that 980 will never work for this or that supposition, mostly based what grumpy bloggers think are Lew Wolff’s plans. True enough, he’s indicated over the years that he won’t be any kind of a good guy when it comes to great Oakland-based development options for the A’s (and he expects to be treated like royalty); however, he aint royalty, and there’s plenty of reason to think that he’ll want to get outta there (and maybe take Fisher with him) if he tries to pull off another boneheaded proposal like the Flying Fremont Fiasco. How much did that whole exercise cost the team anyway?
So he paid his portion of the $300M or so that it cost to turn Schott and them out to pasture. Let’s say Fisher would welcome a new, more energetic replacement for Lew, someone who wanted to take the team and actually use it for baseball as opposed to real estate wheeling and dealing. So the new ownership cartel comes up with $55M, makes Lew whole, and he moves on to another field of endeavor. New managing partner gathers up the same amount of dough that Lew said the A’s were williing to put up for a new park (except it really isn’t quite that much because 980 costs so much more less), and everyone’s happy – and the damn thing doesn’t have to wait another decade before it’s open for business.
But who, ANON, wants to buy into a club that has a giant millstone around its albatross and obligated to the City of Oakland to build at Victory Court?
@Steve Lowe – Fisher and Wolff have been working together for 20 years. What makes you think Fisher will suddenly stab Wolff in the back? Based on a sell job from a pro-Oakland guy? That’s like the guy who once asked Chris Rock to buy an apartment building just so that the guy could manage it. Rock puts up all the risk and the guy lazes into a job. Try this: If you guys can come up with something solid, Wolff might actually buy into it. Novel concept, I know. Besides, Wolff’s friends and family now have shares of the team along with Fisher. You’ll have to convince them too.
The Wolff-as-robber-baron meme is tired. Right now everyone (Wolff, Oakland, San Jose) is only focusing on a ballpark because it’s so hard just to get that part done. You’ll be best served doing the same.
SL – Your thought process is really confusing….you seem to 1) be a haterz of LW, 2) think 980 is da shiznit 3) and the A’s are “obligated” to build VC? Whuh….?!!! O.o
So many responses:
–
@GoA’s–What do you mean “economically challenged’? You mean “Black”, don’t you. Well West Oakland is not just Black, it is quite diverse and a whole lot more interesting than the “White Bread” San Jose site. Your comments echo MLB, sitting back in their NYC offices, saying Oakland is to dangerous. Well West Oakland is in a renaissance, that the ballpark could facilitate. Thanks eb and Steve.
–
@bartleby and pjk–Examples of building over interstate freeways can be seen in Seattle (convention center, park and parking garage) and numerous other cities. Building over the air rights of the freeway is much easier than you think. None of the spans are greater than 60′–typical of a parking garage. All of the other sites are being considered on poor soils requiring a pile supported deck. There is no difference in building a pile supported deck and a deck supported by columns, in fact the latter is cheaper because the soils are better at the 980 site. Moreover, there is no contamination of the subsoils.
–
@anon–The views from 980 Park would be superb since the Park is oriented to the north with view of Mt. Tam, the Bay, San Francisco Skyline, Berkeley Hills, UC Berkeley Campanile and for those in the outfield, view of Downtown Oakland. Victory Court is oriented to the south, with sliver views of the Estuary and not much else. San Jose’s ballpark has no views, except smog.
—
@ML–I agree we must find a way to work with the ownership group. Oakland (including the Port) must take some of the risk out of the 980 site, by offering better security and healing West Oakland. No body is going to invest in a site if there is concern for personal security. Creative city building solutions are needed to go hand in hand with the ballpark as a catalyst for economic revitalization.
–Remember the key advantage of the 980 Park site is it is that it can be financed with revenue bonds, not redevelopment, and the rent will be lower than comparable sites.
@Bryan Grunwald – Curious about one thing. Have you talked to Nancy Nadel about 980 Park? You’d think that 980 Park would need her support to get moving or get through the procedural hurdles.
One other thing – you’re not doing yourself any favors slamming San Jose. I like Diridon’s view of downtown with Mt. Hamilton in the background. 980 Park should win on its own merits.
@bg – “You mean “Black”, don’t you. Well West Oakland is not just Black, it is quite diverse and a whole lot more interesting than the “White Bread” San Jose site”….you about just lost all credibility trying to place the race card…. /rolleyes
@BG—completely offended that you assume that my comments about economicially challenged mean black–completely and totally out of line—being married to a minority I resent you even insinuating this and shows the level you are grasping–to come back from dinner with my family and find that bs—makes me completely question your character to introduce race into the blog…btw—look up prejudice–you fit the definition of it to a tee—
Let’s stop the racial stuff before I have to start killing comments.
@BG I have to chime in with the others here – calling the area around Diridon “White Bread” makes you sound both biased and uninformed. Downtown San Jose is very diverse. It doesn’t have a large black community, it’s true, but has many asians, latinos and whites of many different ethnicities. Likewise your comment about San Jose having so views except smog. You’re pitching an idea that naturally meets with skepticism; you need to maintain all the credibility you can.
.
As far as the merits of the idea itself, I’m not saying it can’t work from an engineering standpoint, just that I’m still skeptical. A ballpark with people in it is a lot heavier than the other structures you mentioned, and the consequences of the structure failing would be catastrophic (think WTC times 10). While it may be possible, it’s hard for me to believe it doesn’t add to construction costs, otherwise we’d have a lot more high rises over freeways around the country.
.
Of course, engineering issues aside, the fundamental reason 980 park can’t work is the same as VC – not enough corporate revenue to pay for construction.
@eb – Can you expand on your statement of “has a young, hip vibe to it that can compare and even top SF’s”? What nightlife event can top SF SOMA? I’m a hobbyst DJ on the side, i would like to know and check out that scene in Oakland, if it exists.
Boy, a small few here posters will challenge anything positive one says about Oakland. I could say the Oakland hills would be a beautiful backdrop to a ballpark and get, “Oakland hills? I really wouldn’t qualify them as hills, more like big mounds that catch on fire. People will, die! I know, I firefight on the side.”
@anon Oakland is a statistically younger city than most, including SF(hence young), Oakland has a huge foodie scene that is new and burgeoning, a music scene that has introduced new genres of West Coast music, which includes a more hardcore and “cool” hip-hop/punk rock/blues/jazz than can be found in most of the Bay and it’s all in one place, (hence hip vibe). Also, it’s interesting that “young, hip vibe” brings the thought of trendy dance clubs to your mind.
In the voice of Tom Hanks: “There’s no race-baiting in baseball”
Oakland’s restaurant and bar scene has never been better. There are too many new spots to list. Its nowhere near SF … anyone claiming otherwise is putting way too much on it. Also, there are scores of “hipsters” living in downtown Oakland who were priced out of SF.
@ David I’m not claiming the restaurant scene is better than SF’s or even on par. I’m just saying Oakland has that, which as a piece of the whole, makes Oakland a cool place. I would take East Bay/Oakland music innovations and homegrown bands over SF’s, however. As for SF hipsters, hell hipsters in general, they are a plague.
@ eb – I’ll take law abiding hipsters over dumb asses with guns, but i understand what you’re talking about. Yes, the town is a cool place. A nice new baseball park would make it even cooler!
@bartelby–First I must tell you that I am an architect. Second, parking garages are pretty heavy structures. Third, in the US you can only build on the air rights of a interstate freeway if it is for a public purpose. But in Boston, Copley Plaza is built over a state highway. Much of downtown Montreal is built over freeways. So there is plenty of precedent.–
–
@ML–Yes I have spoken with Nancy Nadel. She has told me while she is not interested in baseball, she hasn’t been able to build consensus with other council members to sway the power of the oligarchs, developers, etc. that are putting forward VC. She opposes the VC site. She is a lame duck, so I am speaking with likely candidates for her office. I am trying to inform them the benefits of the ballpark at 980 Park including knitting together the fracture between Downtown and West Oakland.
ML, hope you make it out to the ‘Quakes game, really excited about this one. I know that my ticket rep seemed a bit concerned a few weeks ago, but the entire lower bowl is sold out and there are solid players on both teams. Too bad the A’s weren’t playing during the day so I can go to both events! By the way anyone, has Le Cheval opened back up? Miss that place!
@daveybaby – I got my ticket in the Supporters section online once I saw the FB note about the lower bowl. I may even sing. I’ll be in Palo Alto for the day helping a friend move, so it makes the decision easy. The A’s winning tonight makes things even better!
@ML – Nice to see Harden return, that’s huge for the fellas! Whatever he can give is a bonus. The ‘Quakes lost 3 – 0 to the Red Bulls in the first match this season, so you and Rick Tittle with the Ultras tomorrow night might be what the ‘Quakes need! I’m in a section nearby, I’ll be on the lookout to say hello. Get that golden throat warmed up and enjoy the game my friend!
@daveybaby–Le Cheval opened up a new place a few doors down from the old place on Clay St. called LCX. Pretty much the same menu, but a much smaller, more intimate place and quieter than the hustle and bustle of the original location, which I went to often. I’ve been to LCX twice and will return. Business seems pretty solid. I guess there was a landlord dispute with the original Le Cheval, so they had to move out.
@ML/All–just got back from the game tonight and I’m glad we hung on. Fuentes is killing us. The fans were pissed. No lead is safe with this guy. ERA over 5 now.
@bg I don’t doubt a parking garage is heavy. Still, an entire ballpark with 30,000 people in it has to be heavier, no?
.
How does building a ballpark qualify as a “public purpose” any more than an office building?
@bartleby–hopefully 38-40k capacity for 980 park. 32k for Cisco is too small IMO. Fun fact: the A’s have the smallest capacity in MLB at 35,067, but also has the biggest capacity with all the tarps taken off at around 56k.
ML be prepared to stand the entire game.
BG–With no intention to throw her under the bus, I still need to say this: Oakland should be relieved that NN is not running for D3 relection next year. When she ran for mayor in ’06, she was asked questions about the A’s staying, as part of ‘choose or lose’ [the team]; she dodged questions, was vague, more evasive (than Wolff sometimes is), and unlike other council members+Dellums, she was the only one (or one of two?) in the ‘lose’ column. Talking with her about 980 or Victory Court, both in her district was probably no easier than talking with a rock, no? Just my opinions.
The only problem I would have w/980 in comparison to VC is that it would be much further from the ferry and ground rail stations. As for earthquake safety, Seattle has had earthquakes of 5 or 6 in the past, as recently as 2001; no damage there. Seizmic safety would definitely be worth considering for such a stadium site.
@jk You’re just determined that, even if the ballpark actually manages to get built, it should not break even. As has been explained before, the added capacity adds significantly to the cost of the building while not adding significantly to the revenue it produces (in fact, likely reducing its revenue production by disincentivizing season ticket buying and putting downward pressure on pricing). As an Oakland advocate, you should be looking for ways to make the project more profitable, not less.
re: she is not interested in baseball…
…How did that old Judy Collins song go? “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you got till it’s gone?” Oakland politicians will have no one to blame but themselves when they lose their Major League team.
On the latest AAD podcast Tittle says he expects 95.7 has a good idea of it’s core people and are looking for some people for a few slots now and maybe other slots down the road. He said others will be “auditioning” throughout July and mentioned, not surprisingly, how 95.7 is not interested in being an East Bay sports talk radio station. They want to talk all teams.
For Tittle getting a gig at 95.7 may be a matter of flexibility. Can he co-host a show? He’s very caller-driven as he admitted, while the program director prefers to be topic-driven, which is the norm in the industry. Tittle can get away with that when there are no rules or structure, and when he doesn’t have to worry about ratings. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got another shot with a partner just to see how he handles it.
@bartleby–i know the bigger the park, the higher expense, but this 32k two deck Cisco park looks like a minor league park IMO. Even some of the pro-SJ guys on here feel it’s too small.The newest parks are perfect at around 38-40k, not 48k like Jacobs, Coors, Camden, who rarely fill it anymore. LW wants more luxury suites to make up for the small capacity, where I would like the oppoisite, but I know that these overpriced suite/club seats pay the bills.
ML did an estimate of capacity on the Diridon renderings a while back and estimated the park could be modified to include up to 38K including standing room only. That’s not too shabby.
i still don’t know how the lineup is gonna look like. seems as there are two locks and they are lund/dibley from 10-2 and tierney/davis from 2-6. that leaves a potential morning show and a night time show. townsend should get the night time show although that’ll cut in on his own show during the entire baseball season. i don’t know how much i’d like a tittle/townsend duo at night although the alternative would be possibly tittle in the morning and imo his talents would be wasted working early in the morning where for half the show not many are awake and or listening.
just look at 680’s morning show and they rarely take phone calls, don’t know if that’s because nobody is listening especially those early hours or they don’t take phone calls as it’s not part of their format albeit they do take calls at times. unless 95.7 schedules a mid morning show around the time tittle works now anywhere from 8-10 in the mid morning, then i’m not digging what i’m seeing as this station’s lineup.
-980 Park could have seating capacity of 39-40K. I have used Fenway Park as an overlay to test this thesis.
-980 Park should be less prone to seismic issues because is built on columns that are footed in good soil. Both VC and SJ are going to be pile supported structures located on poorer soils due to the proximity to the Estuary and Guadalupe River.
-980 Park access to rail transportation is fantastic. It close to two BART Stations on lines that have AMTRAK transfer stations. Better than VC or SJ.
–Nancy does not currently swing with the Council majority, for example, look a the way the budget was voted on. Nadel seems to be on the half the Council that includes Kernighan, Schaaf and Kaplan. Council President Reid may be the key vote. Especially since Brunner and De La Fuente are not expected to run for re-election. I don’t know much about the new City Administrator, Deanna Santana–does anyone? How does she feel about a downtown baseball park as a catalyst for economic development and public financing???
HP Pavilion and numerous high-rises have done just fine being close to Guadalupe River/Los Gatos Creek.
You do realize that Diridon is served by Caltrain, Amtrak CC, ACE, VTA light-rail/bus (future BART, HSR).
BG, you’re loosing credibility with each and every post my friend.
@Grunwald Using fenway park as a model is a terrible idea. The place was built in 1912. Poor comparison for a modern stadium.
I am in support of Bryan’s 980 Park idea as an alternative to Victory Court. While I think VC is a good choice for its location and proximity to JLS, I agree with Bryan that in today’s economy, trying to mount a park in that location would be a challenge. Having been raised in the East Bay and spending much time in the area of 980 Park, I think it’s in a neighborhood ripe for renovation and would be a success. As you may recall, China Basin was certainly not a place you’d normally visit until the park was built. I see 980 Park as a similar example without being a “me-too, let’s build it at the water” kind of park. It would be an Oakland flavored park all in its own.
Does it have it’s challenges? Yes. But stop beating up on Bryan for just trying to be proactive in getting a park done in the East Bay should MLB turn down the territorial rights change.
Good post Bill. Here is someone who is putting forth ideas and he is still getting shut down by posters. I’m all for as many positive ideas as possible.
Responding to BG’s constant, complete lack of facts criticism of the Diridon site just to prop up his idea is not “shutting” him down.
You gonna throw out criticism, you’d better be able to take it!
A fly on the wall just reported what was discussed at the Jean Quan/Lew Wolff meeting:
JQ–“Lew, on a scale of 1 to 10, how hard did you really try in Oakland?”
LW–“Uh..uh..,Jean, you got me….a 1 1/2 I guess. I made a half-ass attempt, threw the 66th ave. thing out there, even though I knew it didn’t had a snowball’s chance in hell.”
JQ–“Have you seen the cool site at Victor Court the City and Let’s Go Oakland is touting.?”
LW–“No, can’t say that I have. I’ve never been north of 66th Ave. Don’t really know where Victory Court., Jack London Square or downtown is. If the A’s win the World Series, I have no idea where to hold a parade. I guess I’ll have it in downtown San Jose. I know that downtown very well–I own about half of it..”
JQ–“Well, I’d like take you to a nice Dim Sum place in china town–my treat–just a block from where I was raised in this great city., and after that we’ll take a stroll down to the Victory Court site. You game?”
LW–“Uh, sorry Jean, gonna have to pass, Mayor Reed from San Jose just called, he has a table reserved for us at Original Joe’s in an hour. Later.”
Once again, BG– athough being near 2 BART stations is good, those stations are located along the same road (Broadway) and only blocks apart. Being further from AMTRAK and a litte further than VC is from the ferry terminal, may hurt a little for 980 park. Fortunately, the free “B”roadway shuttle is expanding hours on Fri and Sat, and may eventually be replaced by a street car. The waiting game continues.
A fly on the wall just reported how the Wolff/Quan meeting went:
LW- “Jean, how are those land acquisitions, business relocations, infrastructure improvements, and securing of public funds for my ballpark going?”
JQ- “…………(sound of crickets chirping)……………”
LW-“Uh…OK, well, can you at least tell me how that draft EIR is coming along?”
JQ- “…………(sound of crickets chirping even louder)……”
LW- “Uh….OK! Very well. Thanks for your time Jean and for making Selig’s and my job a lot easier. I’m off to OJ’s in SJ (yum), C’ YA!”
@dinosaur jr.–Fenway is the exact model for the Diredon Park in SJ less the third deck. What Fenway lacks is a grand entrance plaza, relies on Yawkee Way which is great. 980 Park site could have a grand home plate plaza as well as a Yawkee Way Street, especially if 15th Street was made into a” festival street”. Fenway is one of the most beloved ballparks in the country, mainly because of the seating being so close to the action. In AT&T Park by comparison the average seat is twice as far from the action. You may as well watch it on TV.
@Bryan Grunwald – While Cisco Field/San Jose is certainly inspired by Fenway, it isn’t a duplicate in the least. The two-deck design dates back to Fremont and is a cost-saving decision, not an aping. A real third deck would cost an estimated $100 million to implement, not a smart move given the fanbase. I’ll write more about this Sunday.
@ML–but, according to many on here, I thought the fan base is so huge in San Jose with tons of families with super high incomes that will pack Cisco and some very day for years to come. Just look at the Sharks.
@ML–A two deck design is likely to result in fans being further away from the action. The reason Fenway Park is loved, is most fans are very close to the action. You need to compare ballpark sections to understand this. The HOK model, like AT&T Park, eliminated columns and introduced a cantilevered section that made the ballparks much wider and voluminous, resulting in the need for larger sites and more useless interior area (for example look at a the wasted space at the Suite Level). Fenway is half the square footage of AT&T Park, with essentially the same seating capacity. A smaller footprint results in less foundations, less land acquisition; both of which reduce cost. I don’t know where you get the $100M premium estimate for a third deck.
@Bryan Grunwald – Fenway Park is a two-deck design, with the upper deck expanded and renovated over the last decade. It’s also not the ideal vision for a ballpark in this era. Its concourses are disjointed. Circulation between the two decks and along the lower bowl are poor. The grandstand (back) part of the lower deck has 18-inch seats and 30-inch row treads and fans consistently complain about it. Fenway is a great source of inspiration. It should not be the benchmark by which a new ballpark is conceived.
$100 million is an estimate for a full third deck with approximately 10,000 seats and a full concourse and amenities. The “third” deck at Cisco Field doesn’t approach the scope of that estimate.
cisco’s two deck design both in sj/fremont resembles more like pnc’s in pit.
i guess that’s a good thing.