News for 11/09/11

Tomorrow morning I’ll be in SF to check out oral arguments for the State vs. Redevelopment case. If I can liveblog it, I will.

The regular media (SFGate, Merc, MLB.com, KGO) covered yesterday’s proceedings fairly well, though I’m surprised there wasn’t a bigger mention of the discussion about the referendum requirement. No matter, the San Jose City Council formalized the requirement by amending the motion just before passing it. Still, I don’t think this is the last of the referendum discussion.

There’s other news on the ballpark/stadium front:

  • The Royals may or may not have agreement in place to sell the naming rights to venerable Kauffman Stadium.
  • Rangers Ballpark in Arlington is undergoing $12 million in renovations, including a major revamp of the area behind centerfield. Changes will include relocation of the suboptimally located visitor’s bullpen, the addition of an indoor club and several concession stands.
  • The University of Washington’s Husky Stadium just started a massive $250 million renovation project. The track will be removed, the field dropped four feet, and more seats will be added close to the field, similar to the changes at the LA Memorial Coliseum. In addition, new locker room and training facilities will be added, as well as premium seating options. Like the $321 million Cal Memorial Stadium renovations, these will be largely dependent on donations for funding. The Huskies will play next season at CenturyLink Field (formerly Qwest Field).
  • The Populous architect overseeing the 2022 Qatar World Cup project believes that the venues will not need air conditioning. The goal is to make the venues carbon neutral, something that made the winning Qatar bid attractive. A company called Arup Associates has a demo of the technology in place at a 500-seat stadium, though you could naturally be skeptical about the ability of the tech to scale to a venue with 100 times the spectators.
  • The Sacramento Bee’s Marcos Breton wonders what the ongoing NBA lockout means for the local arena effort.
  • A report on NPR’s Morning Edition goes over the economic impact of the lockout.
  • A’s naming rights sponsor Cisco Systems (Nasdaq: CSCO) beat the Street today, which may signal an upswing for the networking giant. The stock was down during the regular session but up in after hours trading.

That’s all for now.

94 thoughts on “News for 11/09/11

  1. Another item the Rangers are correcting (from the article):
    .
    “The club said the railings on the front row of all seats will be raised this offseason as well, as previously discussed following studies done after the death of fan Shannon Stone in July.”
    .
    I’m glad to hear that.

  2. HOPEFULLY its not the last of the referendum discussion. Know what you’re doing and don’t make this harder than it should be SJ. that’s all I’ll say about that.

  3. Oh, that great wonderful company Cisco. After hours stock surge will be such comforting news to the 6500 (or 9%) of the work force who were recently fired.

  4. @jk-usa, Listen, before we go round and round about company layoffs or moving out of certain cities having any meaning, let me say that it doesn’t change the fact that there is a company lined up for $120M naming rights on a SJ park, and none for an Oakland park.

  5. JK: How are your efforts going to get Oakland pols to do something about the A’s? What did you say to them? What have you heard back? Because if you really want the A’s to stay in Oakland, bashing anything and everything to do with the full-speed-ahead San Jose ballpark in a chat room won’t get the job done. Getting on the phone with Oakland pols or meeting them in person is the way to go.

  6. Cisco today reported a quarterly profit of $1.8 billion on revenues of $11.26 billion. Yes, sure looks like Cisco is falling by the wayside…

  7. THEN HIRE THE DAMN PEOPLE BACK IF THING ARE THAT GREAT!!!!!!

  8. @jk–has Clorox ever had a layoff? Don’t you recommend them for ballpark naming rights—not that they are interested–come on man–find something real to contribute

  9. oops…sorry for my outburst there.. This economy sucks and big, profitable companies like Cisco aren’t helping by all these layoffs.

  10. @JK- You can’t win the fight you started. The economy sucks everywhere.

  11. OT: better sense (more like nonsense) SJ deleted two posts of mine earlier on their FB page. Appears if they don’t like what was said they simply delete (mind you: no profanity or insults, just the truth). What a bunch of @#$% morons! So much for that “war.” And so the truth will remain here and at BBSJ.

  12. Tony: Ask them if they opposed the arena and if they think it’s a failure. See if they answer you.

  13. @David-tell me about it. My company is working on razor this margins, not like the 16% Cisco just posted, and has cut the workforce down dramatically the last 5-6 years. We (union) just signed a 4 year contract, but no raises and increased health care premiums. It sucks, but am glad I still have a job.

  14. Is Cisco supposed to keep people on if they don’t really have work for them because of shifting priorities, strategies, consolidation, etc? When Cisco’s name shines brightly on the San Jose ballpark, that will give it more exposure, more sales, more revenues and more leeway to hire people. Cisco now has about 65,000-70,000 employees. Sounds like quite a huge employer. Clorox has about 8,000 employees. Can’t Clorox hire some more people even if they don’t have any work for them?

  15. @TonyD – when you say “f — you and your website” that might lead the moderator to censoring your comment(s).
    .
    just sayin’

  16. It would just be nice if the 1%ers hired some of the 99%ers back, be it Cisco, Clorox, Safeway, whoever.

  17. @david,
    That was my first post a few days ago. If that means I’d be censored from here on out, that’s pretty weak. Appears what they really want is to keep their wall “pure” with lies and nonsense.
    @pjk, I asked them just that about The Tank. Their response (again) was to delete my post’s.

  18. @ JoaKland-USA : you really have no clue on how business or the economy works do you? Never worked for a corporation nor didn’t have a meal ticket handed to you on your own accord? Still, attacking SJ, Cisco, space monkeys, whatever isn’t going to change the fact that Oakland has 1) no money 2) no plan and 3) no support from the owners. You need at least 2 of the 3 to have a realistic chance. As i said in the other thread, your posts all seem scripted: avoid the main issue and deflect to a tangent attacking other cities, companies, and people. Accountability at its finest…not!

  19. It isn’t rare for facebook page owners to prefer that their facebook page serves as an echo chamber. One of my favorite aspects of Let’s Go Oakland’s is that, for the most part, they don’t delete comments that are pro other places… they let a healthy debate take place. Not that I visit that page much.
    .
    That said, you can’t start off with a “f$%^ you” post and expect them top be open to further posts, even if they are insightful and honest. I think of it as “respecting the curve ball.” You can’t start out with a high hard one under the chin and not expect one back, repeatedly.

  20. btw – I sent another email to Pierluigi Oliverio –

    “I sent you an email the other day regarding your dissenting vote on the baseball land sale. I was curious to the reasons and background why you declined the sale of unused land for a proposed $500+ million private stadium that will infuse revenue, jobs, and city wide publicity on SJ? Was there a technicality on Chuck Reed’s presentation of the revenue stream that was missed? All the other council members voted yes on it, particularly because there was a sunset clause of 2 years as well, but you declined without offering any additional information during the meeting.”

    if he doesn’t email back, i will call his office.

  21. Agreed with you jeffrey on last paragraph.
    FWIW, I wish we had an ignore feature on here so I don’t have to see a certain posters constant crap. The name calling is getting way too old.

  22. According to the Merc article, Pierluigi said he voted against because he thought it should be decided by the voters, not the council.
    .
    But it will be put to the voters anyway. It’s appropriate for the council members to take a position on the issue one way or another and not just say “I don’t know, you guys (voters) decide.”

  23. @ steve – i saw that already, but wanted to see his personal views. Sure enough, he did email me back finally: “I was quoted accurately in the mercury news.”…..so will continue to press him on his personal stance. Don’t you love it when your elected officials actually answer your emails regarding issues such as a city ballpark stadium (hint, hint)? 😉

  24. fwiw – isn’t it ironic that some Jokers here agree with comments about posting “high hard one under the chin and not expect one back, repeatedly”…the more they spew crap, the more i will post hard rebuttals right back at them because for every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction…

  25. Gotta love the conceptual graphic of Cisco Field posted on the Better Sense SJ Facebook page. Talk about exaggeration and misrepresentation.

  26. @Jeffrey,
    I should have just thrown a four-seamer straight at BSSJ’s head if I knew I’d be “banned.” LOL! Anyhow, no love loss with that pathetic org, site.

  27. fc, I just asked him why he doesn’t use the renderings to prove his point instead of that ridiculous thing… I think I know the answer… They don’t prove his point, but still it should be asked.

  28. @Anon–having property in PO district I sent him an email asking him to explain–he responded immediately with a measured response that was very insightful—not wanting to misrepresent my interpretation of his response I would say it centers around moving the ball forward by having the referendum sooner than later….he is a big advocate of the A’s moving to SJ and sports in general in SJ–once again–my take on his response

  29. As you all know I am pro-Oakland. I would love nothing more than a beautiful ballpark in the city that currently bears its name. I understand the economics of this whole thing and, after watching the SJ city council meeting yesterday, I am nearly convinced that Oakland has done nothing to retain the A’s. I’m not talking about years ago, I’m talking about since Quan was elected and we heard all the talk about VC. I have sent countless inquiries over the past year and have received nothing back. Gag-order or not, I think this is unacceptable. Part of me wishes that it is, in fact, the gag-order. The other part of me thinks there is nothing to report. When you have a deep love for something, you go after it with all of your might. I am reminded of an old song where the Irish rebels were attempting to defend their homeland. While it might sound corny to some, this illustrates the passion and love for one’s possessions. Here it is… “Never till the latest day shall the memory pass away, Of the gallant lives thus given for our land; But on the cause must go, amidst joy and weal and woe, Till we make our Isle a nation free and grand. God save Ireland! said the heroes; God save Ireland said they all. Whether on the scaffold high Or the battlefield we die, Oh, what matter when for Erin dear we fall!” This does not mean I’m giving up. I just think the pro-Oakland crowd should rise up and demand some kind of information from those in charge. Sinn Fein!

  30. Just in case anybody was wondering, yes, I’m 1/2 irish. My maternal great-grandparents came from the Belfast area.

  31. @Go-A’s – thanks for the insight! Much appreciated! P.O. is somewhat of a political unknown at this point, so it’s nice to understand his personal stance on these large scale projects.
    @Columbo – I feel for you (really i do). I understand the emotional ties for a team you’ve been rooting since childhood and knowing the fact they may indeed leave not due to fan support, but the incompetence in Oak City Hall must be very disheartening. I still really wish that VC or wherever was a viable plan, just in case somehow SJ TR issue doesn’t get resolved. It scares me more to death that the A’s would have to somehow entertain the thought of leaving the Bay….

  32. @Anon – Thanks. After thinking about it I realized that comparing this stadium situation to the massive and bloody struggle for Irish independence throughout the decades was wrong and was an insult to the Irish people. For this I apologize if I offended anyone. On the other hand I do think that it’s about time that Oakland had more transparency about what is going on. SJ appears to be the only one talking and doing something right now. If this all falls apart for Oakland and we find out, in the end, that they never did anything of substance then the blame is not on SJ.

  33. Nice catch Genaro! But still doesn’t set a definitive timetable…only that it will be eventually taken care of (yes, I’m impatient after years of waiting!):

    “According to baseball insiders, the reason A’s co-owner Lew Wolff, the L.A.-based real-estate developer and close personal Selig ally, is not going to be a bidder in the Frank McCourt Dodger auction (as had been frequently speculated) is because the commissioner has given him tacit assurance that his effort to move the A’s to a new stadium in San Jose is eventually going to be approved.

    Once Selig completes his major accomplishment of ridding the game and liberating the Dodgers of McCourt – which hopefully will be before Opening Day – he can turn his attention to the A’s, who have been waiting more than two years for his relocation study committee to deliver its report on San Jose and the San Francisco Giants’ territorial rights there.”

  34. I remember Zennie Abraham reporting this same thing about, two years ago… Nothing will get me excited until there is an actual shovel in the dirt somewhere in the Bay Area

  35. Who are these baseball “insiders”? Another bunch of hogwash heresay rumours. Wolff never was interested in the Dodgers. He doesn’t have game to take on that franchise anyways. Running not one, but two storied franchise into the ground in a short period of time is not god for baseball. I wish him and Bud would get out of the game I loved so dearly since i was 7.They’ve ruined it for me and many others on how they’ve treated my A’s.

  36. Jk–just curious–how do you feel about those city leaders in Oakland and how they have treated “our” A’s

  37. @GoA’s-I admit they haven’t helped the situation out either but when the last 2 owners showed little interest in the O and much interest in the SB, it was an uphill battle for any city leader. Throw in BS’s hatred for the O and shooting down that group in 1999 was the thing that really got to me. I think they would of shown an interest in Uptown whereas Schott didn’t, and that could of changed the Coucil’s vote to not give it to developers.

  38. @JKer – For a guy that believed one anonymous poster on SF Gate concerning how SJ citizens don’t care for baseball, it’s hysterical that you would dismiss a professional, national writer on his credibility for a major newspaper in a major city. You should stop nitpicking what you want to hear and open your eyes….

  39. @jk–absent the owners, oakland has had bs and sf as their great saviors for the past 15+ years–by blocking any relocation to the south bay at least since 1995—-and even with this–more than 15 years later—Oakland still doesnt have a site–they don’t have an EIR—they are as fragmented as ever—-at some point enough is enough—and I think we are reaching that point–

  40. @GoA’s–We shall see. I’m still holding out hope. If VC blows up, there will be a site–The Coliseum– if the Raiders go to SC or LA. It may be a repeat of 1981, but this time with a new park.

  41. JK: If the report is accurate, this means the A’s are a step closer to having their very own baseball-only, state-of-the-art ballpark, close enough for all of us to continue going to A’s games for generations. Do you think this is a bad thing simply because the ballpark would be a whole 35 miles south of the existing non-ballpark?

  42. I’m with Jeffrey on this one; would be nice though. Interestingly, Wolff and soon-to-be former Giants owner Bill Neukom were at a Japanese baseball event in SF recently. Wonder how that encounter went?

  43. @pjk—the further drive really doesn’t mater to me; the Oakland legacy does. It will never be the same in SJ. For some of you, it would be the ultimate. For me, it won’t. Not sure I’ll go there if they get the okay for SJ. It will give you guys a better shot at good seats, and my budget couldn;t afford it right now anyways. If it was VC, I’d go in hock to get season tix, but not SJ. A Rickey,Stew or Haas statue at Cisco wouldn’t be the same as in the O. Might as well put a LW and BS statue cuz they made it happen there. I’ve always rooted for the underdog in life, and the city of Oakland has been in the underdog for years, always in the shadow of SF, and now SJ. The city’s been through so much, in the news for so many things lately, and it;s been more negative than positive. This Occupy thing may of set back the downtown Renaissance 10 years. That’s tough. News of losing the team would be another blow. I’m hoping BS and LW realize it but they don;t really care. It’s all about the money nowadays.

  44. The Coliseum site is not a good one for baseball.

    Baseball needs to be in a downtown area much like SF, LA, SD, Seattle, I can go on for days.

    No one builds in a parking lot anymore. That is a thing of the past.

    The A’s like San Jose because of a downtown site.

    The problem with Oakland is Jerry Brown sold out Uptown years ago that handcuffed the team. Uptown was the last undeveloped downtown site that would have been perfect for baseball.

    People would go to Uptown for a game. But now in this day and age, there is no way the Coliseum site would work for baseball…Football, yes.

    My theory has been Selig delayed because he was trying to “exhaust all options” before letting the A’s into San Jose…he prefers a 1-team market because he does not want 2 privately financed parks in one market. That is BS logic all day long.

    Selig has no choice but to open San Jose up and he signaled that Wolff because the land sale options tell you that clearly.

    That writer seems to be on point because I have been saying the Dodgers come first, then the CBA, then the A’s…in that order.

    Lets see what happens…

  45. @Sid–Selig built the new Miller Park in the same non-dowtown site as the old park just 10 years ago, and it’s been a big success (more so since his daughter sold). Downtown Milwaukee could of used a shot in the arm with a new park, but there was money to be made for Selig with the big parking lots, which is popular with the tailgating culture of Brewer fans.
    BTW, LA doesn’t have a DT park.

  46. “A Rickey,Stew or Haas statue at Cisco wouldn’t be the same as in the O.” Well said, jk. It will take a lot of getting used to, that’s for sure. I truly wonder how Oaklanders will react to this move if it happens.

  47. Don’t forget: Oakland’s “legacy” also includes mostly bottom-feeder attendance.

  48. @eb–how did “Oaklanders” respond to the Fremont move…collective yawn….how many “Oaklanders” are season tix holders? A’s are either second or 1st lowest when it comes to season tix–you guys care—but doesn’t seem that alot of other “Oaklanders” do–

  49. i think the majority of a’s fans here will be happy that they’ll finally have a new park somewhere in the bay area that they still can go to after spending the last 15 or so seasons in a football stadium essentially with the park 90% of the time not even half filled.

  50. @pjk–and how bout them Giants attendance numbers bewteen 68- and 99. Bottom feeders too and not very good. The A’s beat them more years than not.

  51. Sigh…Giants had lousy attendance when playing in an inaccessible, windswept ice box. A’s had horrible attendance even when the Coliseum was considered a fine ballpark for its time, with perfect weather and its own BART stop.

  52. @pjk – “Don’t forget: Oakland’s “legacy” also includes mostly bottom-feeder attendance.” We’re back to this yet again? So you’re possibly going to get our team and you are going to say that our “legacy” has to do with attendance, nevermind the championships? Kick a man while he’s down already? Do you not think that is an insult to the die-hard fans from the east bay? That’s nice to know, dude. If I was getting someone else’s team I’d be humble about it.

  53. Someone else’s team? It’s MY team, too. Oakland had plenty of time to do something for the A’s but chose to do nothing. Thankfully, San Jose is stepping in…

  54. think i saw today where cisco’s stock has gone up 40% in the last three months.

  55. @pjk – I don’t disagree about Oakland having plenty of time. I’m also not disagreeing about it being your team as well. But why rub salt in a wound by saying our “legacy” will be attendance? Really? If that’s the attitude that will be in SJ then I want no part of it. This is where I think jk-usa is spot-on about the Oakland history being displayed at a new park in SJ. If they want to start from scratch and ignore the past because of “attendance” fine. I couldn’t care any less. But the A’s won’t be getting my money period but I’m sure you don’t care either. That’s o.k. with me. In fact, change the name from A’s to something else IF that will be the attitude.

  56. @GoA’s They still would have been the Oakland A’s in Fremont and still in Alameda County. I don’t get why you need to insult Oakland residents. I didn’t insult San Jose, Wolff, anybody. I merely speculated on what people in Oakland will think about their team throwing away their city’s name. Why the hostility? It’s a valid question.

  57. were they gonna still be the oakland a’s had the moved to fremont, think speculation was that they were gonna go the laa route and call themselves the sj a’s of fremont.

    at this point, oaklanders need to worry whether the raiders will keep their “oakland” name if/when they move into that santa clara stadium rather than speculate how we’ll feel when the a’s most likely move to sj.

  58. @letsgoas – Santa Clara Raiders? San Jose Raiders? Silicon Valley Raiders? I don’t think so. You guys are hilarious.

  59. @eb–where is the hostility–I pointed out some very valid points and you are incorrect that they would have been the Oakland A’s in Fremont–Wolff indicated he would rename the team–most likely San Jose—so why the sensitivity—

  60. Silicon Valley Raiders sounds like something out of a weird Tron spinoff football league.

  61. although it does sound better than LA Raiders—which if I was a betting man…where they end up

  62. @GoA’s Really? Look, I’m not going to get into a bickering match about semantics. I expressed myself and that’s that. As for the Oakland Raiders, they’re in first place. Just win, baby.

  63. @eb–no worries man—expressed myself too—sorry you disagree—and I am completely indifferent to the raiders—prefer they stay in the area–just don’t see it happening

  64. They built an eternal flame for Al Davis at The Coliseum. Just Win Baby!

  65. They should have an eternal flame for Walter Haas, the best owner EVER in bay area sports.
    Eddie Debartolo is a close second, then Franklin Mieuli at 3rd.

  66. The Los Angeles/Oakland Raiders of Silicon Valley. Catchy!

  67. …let’s just hope the greatest owner ever’s decision to concede Santa Clara County to the Giants doesn’t force the A’s out of the Bay Area. The Giants claimed 6 counties and Haas only asked for 2. Thus the mess we are in now.

  68. Not to belittle WH, but Eddie D. has 5 super bowls during his tenureship and could of / should of had more. He spent an inordinate amount of money on the Niners (since you’re so bent up on how much owners spend) luring free agents and making SF the NFL’s “Hollywood” spot. He also sustained this over 2 decades, so he unquestionably the best EVA , EVA, EVER owner in the Bay Area….Go Niners…

  69. @jk The fact Miller Field was built where it was is a travesty. How could you possibly advocate for that?

  70. @bartleby -http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIL/attend.shtml

    what’s good for the goose (selig) …

  71. A little late, but Tony D’s comment about Wolff and Neukom being at the same Japanese baseball event makes me envision a scene from the movie “My Girl” where the old folks are playing bingo: One guy can’t hear and gets into an argument with another guy, who then says “If you weren’t 200 years old, I’d kick your wrinkled ass!”

    Here’s hoping Wolff did the ass-kicking

  72. @David Another non-sequitur. The fact that a new ballpark in a one-team market increased attendance is not news. I never said suburban locations could not be economically viable (in fact, I’ve vigorously argued to the contrary). I just said, “why would you wish for that?”
    .
    Also can’t help but notice that the folks who tout the Coli as a site are the same ones who vilify Fremont…

  73. @bartleby–Fremont just doesn’t cut it,bro. Suburbia to the max. The Coliseum’s gritty hood is fine with me. I’m use to it for the last 40 years I’ve been going there. Just put a new baseball only park there and it would be cool. Bart is a big plus too. Development in the area will happen eventually, be it years away.

  74. You are so blinded by zip code. The illogic is just stunning.

  75. @jk “Development in the area will happen eventually, be it years away.”
    .
    You mean, similar to the way that area has developed over the last 40+ years? You don’t find it telling that a location with, not one, not two, but three major sports teams and a host of ancillary arena events has not managed to attract a single on-site sports bar or restaurant in all these years?
    .
    Even if development did somehow occur at one of the least appealing spots for such development in the Bay Area, as someone who purports to love the City of Oakland this is NOT something you should be wishing for. A major new entertainment district at the Coli site would struggle itself, but still forever hurt downtown Oakland the same way Santana Row has permanently damaged downtown SJ’s chances for attracting retail.
    .
    Ancillary development would occur much more quickly and easily at Fremont than at the Coli site. And Fremont has no downtown to adversely impact.
    .
    You might prefer an ugly, industrial, blighted neighborhood to a bland suburb, but I can assure you you are a tiny minority. And part of the point is building a project that actually has a chance of succeeding.

  76. ^^ hate oakland.org

  77. Thanks, David, you took the words right out of my mouth. I really didn’t want to respond to yet another bartleby slam on everything Oakland.

  78. @David/jk
    .
    To sum up your response [fingers in ears, eyes closed]: “Neener neener neener neener neener neener neener neener neener neener neener neener neener ….” [Repeat to infinity].
    .
    Yes, of course, you both make yet another logically compelling argument. Anyone who notices that the Coliseum sits in a blighted industrial neighborhood must, in fact, hate the City of Oakland.
    .
    And of course, in a logical extension of your argument, the fact that I thought Santana Row was a bad idea must also mean I hate the City of San Jose.

  79. Santana Row has even taken away hotel business from downtown. At least some of the visiting teams coming in to play the Sharks are now staying at Santana Row and presumably busing to the arena instead of staying at the downtown hotels within walking distance of the rink. Santana Row is becoming quite an attraction; downtown San Jose is not, except for the rink and a couple of museums.

  80. I know during last year’s playoffs, the “scratches” and minor league “just in case” players from the other team were walking to the Arena from the downtown direction.

  81. @pjk–that’s a shame, because SJ does have a couple nice hotels DT. At least the money still stays in SJ being at Santana Row, but DT could really use the extra biz. All teams that play the A’s stay in SF, the big city with all the shopping, eateries, attractions, etc.. They use to stay at the Oak Airport Hilton back in the 80’s/early 90’s i recall. Detroit a few years ago I read stayed at the Waterfront Hotel at JLS. They’re suppose to build a 4 Star Hotel at JLS but that’s had trouble getting going. That would be very close to the VC park.

  82. @pjk Downtown San Jose still has a very lively entertainment district; lots of bars, nightclubs, restaurants; several live performance venues; the Improv; the Arena; stuff going on at San Jose State. But I do think Santana Row has killed the dream of retail downtown for the foreseeable future. And it works against getting the critical mass which would help fill up all those luxury condo towers they’ve built.
    .
    Now, of course, Cisco Field would help a lot…

    • @all – There is ZERO chance of downtown SJ’s rebirth as a retail hub. The “Transit Mall” concept turned quickly into a “Transient Mall”, especially with a major nexus being Santa Clara Street and 1st/2nd. I remember one prominent South Bay developer called that intersection the “anus” of the system. If light rail had been driven underground as it should’ve been there would’ve been a better chance for downtown. At least Santana Row didn’t require hundreds of millions in RDA subsidies.

  83. Remember the San Jose Retail Pavilion? Failed. (Although one prominent local businessman criticized the place for being “built inside out.”) Downtown’s parking situation is too much of a hassle, even if there is some validation available for free parking. With Santana Row and Valley Faiir a mile and a half away, downtown San Jose doesn’t stand a chance. Now if they put a ballpark down there, there would be opportunities for lots of restaurants, small stores, etc. But BestBuy? Nordstrom’s? Macys? That ship has sailed.

  84. @pjk The parking situation at Santana Row/Valley Fair is actually a far worse hassle than downtown SJ. However, I think this is one of those “perception trumps reality” things.
    .
    The San Jose Retail Pavilion failed because they tried to build retail before housing. The smart way to do it is the other way around. If they ever managed to fill those luxury towers with people, downtown could support a certain amount of retail.
    .
    Best Buy/Macy’s was probably never going to happen because of Valley Fair. And Santana Row was probably the death knell for a high-end, shoppertainment type district downtown.

  85. @bartleby–kind of like what J.Brown was doing in Oakland, building the housing(10k program) and retail and other stuff was suppose follow. The Uptown area has really improved with the newly added condos/apts/bars/restaurants, but the rest of DT and JLS still struggles. Emeryville’s Bay St. really hurt DT Oakland’s chance to get some higher end retail just like Santana Row hurt DT SJ. The area along Auto Row on Broadway is a potential retail area as more dealerships and related services are closing or moving.

  86. So RM,
    any bets: new San Pedro Square Market..will it thrive or be another retail bust ala Pavilion Shops?

  87. …Think of how downtown Oakland could have skyrocketed with a new downtown ballpark but Jerry Brown would have none of it. He gave the site to housing developers. He wanted nothing to do with a ballpark. Now that there’s no place left to build one, it’s the A’s owners – and not the politicians – who get criticized

  88. According to a recent BANG article, Uptown remains one of the five poorest neighborhoods in the Bay Area. No telling if a ballpark would have changed that.

    @Tony D. – Very different goals. The Pavilion was an 80’s-style mall with no anchor, trying to offer your typical mall stores. San Pedro Square Market is mostly food and beverage, with the idea that they might try to attract businesses that might be considering opening a food truck instead. The Market will probably be a muted success.

    In other Oakland news, Deputy Mayor Sharon Cornu and legal advisor Dan Siegel have both resigned. Is Mayor Quan next?

  89. @ML–for such a supposedly poor area, Uptown has some pretty eclectic restaurants and clubs. I think a ballpark would of helped the area even more, especially on game day, but VC would sure boost the struggling JLS and help jump start Oak to 9th.
    I don’t think Quan will resign, but the polls on her aren’t very good. If the recall thing moves along well, she may bail. Being a mayor of a big city, or any city/town for that matter nowadays, is probably tougher than any public office position. It’s day to day, hands on chaos.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s