Rethinking Coliseum City with the A’s in mind

As summer drags on, the deadlines for Coliseum City continue to slip. Whether it’s the EIR or commitments from teams, the multi-billion dollar project moves further into the pipe-dream category than anything resembling real progress. Talks between Oakland, BayIG, and the Raiders (ostensibly) continue at least through October, with BayIG expected to produce real working agreements at that point.

A’s owner Lew Wolff has made himself into something of a foil of Coliseum City. He has never bought into the plans because of the enormous complexity and cost, not to mention the placement of the A’s as a Phase III addition off to the side, scheduled for 2022 or thereabouts. Now Wolff has been in talks with the JPA about an alternative to Coliseum City, which would pay off the Coliseum and Arena debt, which currently total $191 million. Presumably that would be in exchange for rights to free or discounted 120 acres of Coliseum complex land. Should Coliseum City meets in demise and Wolff be given the opportunity to develop at the Coliseum, there are numerous things that can be done to improve upon the ideas first explored with CC. The goal would be to make a more truly attractive, cohesive neighborhood, as opposed to a mega-development with every kind of building crammed into every conceivable open space.


Concourse Park as the “spine” of Coliseum City, football stadium to the left

When I first saw renderings for Coliseum City, I liked the idea of a spine running through the complex that connected the BART station to the venues and surrounding development. However, when I looked through the master plan released earlier in the spring, I noticed that the spine, or concourse, also acts as the only park in the entire complex. In the 120 acres, what you see above is the only open space. For some that’s fine given the urban context, but it’s also an odd choice given that the anchors are sports facilities. Shouldn’t there be a ballfield, basketball/tennis courts, or something else where residents (yes, there will be residents) can play? Or will everyone in Coliseum City have gym memberships? Not to mention the fact that the concourse will be 30 feet or so above the parking lot or street level. That makes accessibility tough for everyone except for people coming off BART.

Then there’s the placement of the ballpark. Off in the furthest corner of the A lot, fans would take a redone BART bridge from the station, then descend from the concourse and walk 2-3 blocks to the yard. That would miss a major opportunity to integrate the ballpark in a way that not only features the venue, but also invites people to visit.

Speaking of that redone BART bridge, that’s part of the opportunity. For decades now A’s, Raiders, and Warriors fans have gotten desensitized to the concrete-and-chainlink cage that takes them from the BART station to the venues. The biggest compliment anyone can make about the BART bridge is that it’s serviceable. Otherwise it’s generally a negative. It looks foreboding, especially the part over the railroad tracks where the chainlink completely covers you. At 20 feet wide, it’s subject to frequent foot traffic jams, usually caused by vendors taking up a third of the walkway on either side. And it ends with Joe Fan face-to-face with Mt. Davis’s hulking backside. It’s not particularly pleasant. The experience is conducive to simply walking as fast as possible. Rare is the leisurely stroll across.

The BART bridge, where the motto is "Just Keep Swimming"

The BART bridge, where the motto is “Just Keep Swimming”

Coliseum City’s infrastructure plan calls for up to $22 million to be spent on a redone BART bridge. The bridge is 800 feet long. At that length, $22 million can go a long way (hopefully not the way the Bay Bridge East Span went). The bridge will eventually be widened to prevent those large crowd traffic jams. There’s also an opportunity to make the plaza much friendlier, with places to stop along the way, see the ancillary development under construction, and appreciate the view. What view, you ask?

Two new venues on a slightly larger footprint than the original

Two new venues on a slightly larger footprint than the original

Imagine this: You’re coming to your first game at a new A’s ballpark on BART. You see the familiar lights off to the side as the train stops. The lights are a little different, somehow less distant. You take new stairs that bring you directly to the bridge, instead of having to go down then back up. The stadium lights continue to guide your way. As you get closer bits of the ballpark are revealed. First it’s the RF grandstand in the distance, then the scoreboard. Then you get little peeks inside the ballpark. You arrive at a huge, 20,000 square-foot public plaza with monuments to Dennis Eckersley, Joe Rudi, and Chief Bender. The center field gate, to your right, beckons.

But you know better. You know the history of the Coliseum. You know to keep walking along the plaza to the smaller right field gate. Immediately outside that right field gate is a huge bronze statue of Rickey. You know the pose. 939. The statue is placed exactly where third base was in the old Coliseum, only 60 feet higher, maybe because it seemed like Rickey lifted that base 60 feet in the air. That’s the gate you use. That’s the gate you teach your children to use.

When you’re inside, one old friend has returned: the Oakland Hills in left. No longer blocked by a concrete wall of suites and football seats, Leona Quarry, now partly developed, comes back into view. There’s something in front of it, though.

Mary Avenue Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge in Cupertino. Photo by R.S. Shaw

$14 million Mary Avenue Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge in Cupertino. Photo by R.S. Shaw

Somehow you missed some pretty great architecture that you were walking on. You must’ve been really excited to the see the ballpark, eh? Well, you can take in the new view of the bridge and the hills from your seat. Life’s pretty good.

P.S. – I almost forgot – there’s a football stadium too. Like the Coliseum City plan, there’s space set aside for it just as there was for a ballpark. The stadium flanks the plaza the same way the ballpark does. Some fans in either stadium will have views into the opposite venue. I can’t say how it would be financed or what size it will be, whether it will have a retractable roof, or any other details. The point is, the space is there. It’s up to Mark Davis, the NFL, and other investors to figure the rest out.

Notice in the overlay I put together that the combination of the two stadia, even with the plaza in between, is only slightly larger than the old Coliseum, which covers 20 acres (Levi’s Stadium has a 17-acre footprint) . Despite placing two stadia there, only 1100-1200 parking spaces are lost. Those could be recaptured by reclaiming space after the arena is demolished, though I would prefer to keep the arena there if there’s a way to operate it without running deeply in the red after the Warriors leave.

P.P.S. – Now I’m sure you have a lot of questions. That’s good, because I left out a lot of details. Fire away.

76 thoughts on “Rethinking Coliseum City with the A’s in mind

  1. I like the idea of a redone ramp from BART being an actual design positive leading up to the stadiums, if it ever ends up that there’s a baseball and football facility on site.

    However, I’m guessing both teams would have to play in different places during construction. Hello, A’s in AT&T, Raiders in Levi’s.

    The alternative might be to tear down the arena and build the baseball stadium there, both the A’s and Raiders sharing the existing Coliseum during construction.

    Then, as a fitting bit of revenge for the A’s being forced to literally play games while Mt. Davis was being constructed, they can demolish the Coliseum but leave the field in place, use temporary seating on one side while they build the other side, then move the fans over to the completed side while they finish the remaining half.

    The Raiders don’t draw that well anyway, so it shouldn’t be a major hassle.


    • @James V. – The arena footprint is too small to accommodate something the size of a ballpark. Even if it were it would sit right next to the Nimitz, which wouldn’t be pleasant. As for the arena, if it’s paid off, the only thing to worry about is operating costs. Even with the SF arena, I think enough events could be brought in to make it pay off. Even stuff like conventions.

      @Gojohn10 – The Coliseum City infrastructure plan already calls for those kinds of changes and more. They would be paid for via project fees and taxes, transportation grants, etc.

      • Oracle is done the second the SF arena opens. The SF arena is going to get damn near all the business that Oracle got and artists and other acts won’t play both venues because they’re too close together. Large arenas can exist and survive in SJ and SF or SJ and Oakland, but not all three.

        I could see them possibly try to do to Oracle what they did to the Forum in LA, but I’m not convinced it will work, especially when the land Oracle occupies is needed for other, more profitable development in any CC plan.

      • If three arenas stand in the Bay Area, concert promoters would go to the lowest cost arena every time, limiting profit potential at all three. One of the conditions in Detroit for the new arena for the Red Wings was that Joe Louis would be immediately torn down (to limit competition). I wouldn’t doubt that W’s would pay CC big money to tear Oracle.

        @ ML – From the picture in the original article, it looks like the ballpark would fit in the space where Oracle is now.

      • I’ve tried it. It’s a bad fit. The drawing doesn’t include the support areas behind the seating bowl. Once those are included it’s very tight.

    • Worry about u r 49ers trying to score a point first before u talk about what the Raiders draw

      • I don’t worry about preseason games as long as they’re not resulting in key players getting hurt.

  2. Does the upper level BART station exit have it’s own station agent? Who pays for it’s construction?

  3. do you really want to demolish the arena? it’s the only 15k-20k indoor facility in the city of oakland. now w’s want to build that arena across the bay in frisco so oracle could see a good amount of their events taken away but my god you’ll still get some events to oracle or whatever it’ll be called right? unless maintaining the facilities would cost more than whatever money the arena could pull in with a reduced scheduled.

    do love the idea of putting a ricky statue on the direction spot of 3b when he stole #939.

    • Unless they bring in some other pro sports team of some kind, there’s no real point to having the arena there. San Jose has the Sharks and arena football, there’s not going to be another NBA team moving to Oakland, and I don’t know what else would even make sense there. You got any ideas?

  4. If Lew Wolff is serious and willing to take care of “ALL” debt associated with the coliseum and area, Oakland should sign over all land in and around the coliseum site, to Lew Wolff for one dollar today, worry about the details in the coming months and years ahead, and tell Mark Davis “Sir, Oakland/Alameda County are no longer in the sports and entertainment business, if you have any questions, please contact Mr .Wolff”
    If Wolff (again), is serious hopefully he can accomplish this with the Raiders, if Davis either can’t accomplish his end, or really is not serious, he needs to go.
    For this to actually work, Lew Wolff needs to be in total control, we can’t even talk about this as a remote possibility (with or without the Raiders), if Lew Wolff the one person in this maddening situation, that has the experience, expertise, political capital, and resources, to actually make it off, is not in charge.

  5. i’m just talking about having an arena large enough to draw concerts, circus, ice shows and etc.

    now again the arena the w’s build across the bay may siphon some of those events away from oracle so the question is keeping the arena around for a reduced scheduled of events held there now and for much of the past decades worth it?

    what other venues are out there in the city of oakland? fox theater and the paramount have about a 3k capacity but they smaller music concerts and etc? kaiser center has a capacity of 5.5k but does it still hold events?

    • If the Mission Bay Arena gets done, Oracle becomes the equivalent of the Izod Center in NJ–a serviceable but dated arena that’s 3rd in line in the region for bookings. The question is whether or not it could generate enough revenue to meet operating costs. Take a look at the schedule for Izod, or any other tertiary arena in a big market (LA Sports Arena, Sears Center)–I imagine it’s hard to pay the bills on ~50 events a year.

      “Paid for” doesn’t mean it pays for itself. At that point, the arena space is probably more useful for something else.

      As for Coliseum City–if the City/County gave rights to ALL of land to the A’s for a one stadium/ballpark village/Santana Row lite/transit-friendly housing (at least as dense as the one going up at Cottle/85) mega-project, would that be enough to get it done? I’m as pro-A’s-to-SJ as most anyone here (living in south Santa Clara Co.), but I’d get behind that. Remake from scratch XX acres with two freeway exits and a BART stop? Could be amazing…

      • That’s about it – Oracle becomes an extra arena with no NHL or NBA tenant, like Izod (originally the Brendan Byrne Arena). They’ll get the circus, maybe Stars on Ice, a concert or two but little else.

  6. The current BART bridge to the Coliseum has that walking-to-prison look and feel about it. I like the churros vendors on it.

  7. I’ve always just been pleased with the utility and convenience of the BART tunnel – honestly, it wasn’t until this year that someone made me aware that it isn’t the prettiest thing in the world. It could certainly be a lot nicer and more welcoming.

    • I’d like to see the people selling beer from coolers and unlicensed t-shirts, etc. forced out, to be honest. They create unnecessary choke points after games that are well-attended. Getting across the ramp takes some time anyway after seeing a game at a packed house without the vendors forcing people to bunch even closer together along the way.

  8. So question is whether Keith Wolff has the same development DNA of his dad- LW is in great health but at or near 80 years old- considering there is a 5-year window for negotiations (given the lease negotiation this will easily take that long) LW would be mid-80’s and whether or not he is the leader will remain to be seen- hate to say it but signing of the 10 year lease has us back pretty much to where we were 10 years ago- and who would have thought that 10 years later no progress would have been made on a new ballpark-

    • @ GoA’s
      Not to be morbid or disrespectful, but Lew Wollf’s health is a legitimate concern, it may be part of the reason, he has reconsidered looking at Oakland (if in fact, that’s what he is doing)

  9. Chicken and egg question here: Where do the A’s play while this two-stadium solution is built? At least the Raiders have a temporary venue in SCL – are we suggesting that the A’s bunk in at China Basin for two seasons?

    • The A’s would have to play at AT&T, for what I would say would be a minimum of two years. If Mark gets his head out of his…I would assume the Raiders would have to play at Levies, that’s if Lew Wolff is willing to have the Raiders on board or if Oakland bends over far enough, to entice Wolff to allow the Raiders to be on board.

  10. While ML is able to maximize the existing footprint and squeeze 2 stadiums in there still is a lost opportunity cost to whomever the developer might be associated with the football stadium. How many condo/apt towers could go on that football site? I don’t see any incentive for LW to want to hold a spot for the Raiders unless the city of Oakland pays to do it through free or highly discounted land. And if that’s the case then if I’m LW I’m asking for the same public handout otherwise we don’t have a deal-

    • @ GoA’s
      If Wolff is willing to do what ML reports, that he is talking about doing (retiring ALL coliseum and arena debt), then Oakland Alameda County, should give him the land for free, sorry I mean for a dollar. (My earlier suggestion)

  11. Having both, a football and baseball stadium on the same footprint, while expanding that footprint minimally, is a good idea because as ML has brought up before (past postings), there is a challenge concerning the existing power grid/sower lines, which service the coliseum and arena, and the staggering cost of rerouting those services to a new venue, that’s not on the coliseum footprint.
    I would guess this idea reduces that cost greatly, which is critical because Oakland/Alameda County will probably have to come up with various ways to support infrastructure cost (AKA tax money), I think it was K, who commented several months back, about a special state sponsored funding tax, that would take care of most of, if not all of the cost for a new coliseum BART station and perhaps a walkway bridge to the coliseum, that would really help, because money is going to have to come from various governmental agencies to make this work. Lew Wolff is not going to do this, simply out of the goodness of his heart. (nor should he)
    One of the questions I would have is, will there still be enough land for Wolff to build ancillary development (with football stadium included), so he may support the cost of a new baseball only stadium?

  12. @Elmano & pjk – I’m deleting your comments because they’re irrelevant to the topic I put forward. There will be an upcoming post about Levi’s and the heat problem. You’ll be free to comment about it in there.

    • Marine Layer,

      The comment was mostly to do with Oracle Arena and Coliseum City. I don’t know what to say. I just mentioned how important the great weather in Oakland is for a stadium location compared to Levi Stadium. Climate should be at the very top when we talk about venues yet many times its an afterthought.

      • @Elmano – The original post is not about comparing Oakland with any other city. When you can learn to stop thinking so defensively about Oakland, maybe you’ll understand that.

      • this week, climate. last week, traffic. What other reactionary stance has yet to materialize? I guess we wait for the next 49ers game to be packed and hear what folks complain about…

      • @ jeffreyaugust
        OT: You are so right; it’s starting to fill like people simply want to complain about Levis, it’s as if some of them have never been to the south bay (deference in tempter), I thought everyone in the Bay Area had been to Great America, at least once.

    • Can’t wait to see that.

  13. Of Couse if the Raiders were involved in this concept, they would still have to find ways to reduce and eliminate their funding gape. I am sure naming rights for a new football stadium would be a big part of that. (Although worth much less then Levis), other cooperate sponsorships, surcharges on tickets for any even held at the venue, and it’s a long shot but Davis could sale what I think is up to 17% of his franchise value to Wolff, without losing control of the franchise, in exchange for Wolff’s financial help.
    That being said I don’t know how much of a minority owner, you can be in another sport, without giving up the privilege in baseball, but at this point just throwing stuff against the wall, to see if anything can stick.
    Still wonder if this can work, with the arena still there? (With football stadium included), if it can great, if it can’t great.

  14. BTW, ML loved your idea about the right field gate, statue of Rickey (939 pose), that would be awesome, and while Rickey is uniquely Oakland, he is also uniquely A’s, so I hope Wolff employs your idea, weather he builds at Dirdon, or the coliseum site, cool stuff.

  15. With the baseball stadium laid out in this manner, doesn’t 50% of the outfield view get dominated by the Raiders stadium? Can we turn the stadium a bit?

  16. I’m very skeptical that a development plan on the Coliseum site can really be feasible if it is to include both a MLB stadium and a NFL stadium. For one thing, I’m not so sure that the land area at the existing site is large enough to accommodate two new sports facilities, sufficient ancillary development, as well as enough parking spaces to support such a vast venue complex. It remains to be seen whether Oakland can acquire adjacent property to incorporate more land possibly needed for such a project to be successfully profitable. I’m also skeptical that the profit making potential from the ancillary development would be enough to cover the shortfall from the ROI from a limited event football stadium. This leads me to conclude that this Coliseum site project may have a better chance of coming to reality if it does not include a football stadium. That’s why I believe Wolff has to wait until Mark Davis makes a definitive decision on the permanent future home for his Raiders, even before the A’s can get serious with Oakland officials regarding the Coliseum site property. Unfortunately, knowing the way Mark Davis seems to operate, both the A’s and Raiders could very likely be sharing the old Coliseum for quite a number of years longer.

    • @ llpec
      I certainly share your concerns, “sharing the old Coliseum for quite a number of years longer.” I don’t mind if it’s longer then I would like, if I know they had a plan going forward, it would make the wait a little more bearable.

  17. I feel the A’s should build their ballpark closer to the Oracle Arena…they would have more space to develop around the also leaves the Coliseum somewhat unscathed

    • @ harry
      When you say “closer to the Oracle Arena…” not sure that may destroy the intended befit, of having both parties partly share the same footprint, but who knows you may have a point.

      • @lake.
        Don’t u think that the north west parking lot area next to Oracle would not be enough room to build a ballpark an still see the views. It would be a further walk from bart but u have bus service there or could walk

    • Can’t build closer to the arena. The sewer interceptor runs through the middle parking lots. A ballpark can’t be built on top of it.

      • Thank u ml. I didn’t know that. So the A’s ballpark would have to be near or next to the Coliseum. ..that fine.

  18. As much as I’d prefer a ballpark at JLS/Howard Terminal, I’ve resigned myself to the reality that Coliseum City is the most realistic path out of the current morass.

    This fact pains me a bit because Coliseum City simply can’t have what all of the truly great ballparks have – a distinctive sense of place. When you watch a game at PNC, Pac-Bell or Camden – even on television – you know exactly what city it is. It’s easy for a ballpark to have that sense of place with a view of the skyline, the bay or the historic brick warehouse. It’s not so easy when it’s surrounded by acres of parking or is part of a 70s-style multi-venue sports complex.

    Some multi-venue sports complexes have the advantage of being downtown. Seattle is probably the finest example of where a sports complex feeds off of and contributes to the existing energy of downtown. Pittsburg, Cincinnati and Detroit also carve out space downtown for multiple venues, but those are a bit less integrated into their surroundings. Unfortunately, Coliseum City is too far away from downtown to be like any of these.

    Instead, Coliseum City would be more like Philadelphia, Kansas City or maybe Arlington – a few venues stuck together in an industrial wasteland on a site chosen because it was available. Nothing about any of those sites is the postcard-worthy image of its city. Citizen’s Bank Park in Phili has the downtown skyline way off in the distance, but that’s about it. Coliseum City would maybe have a bit more sense of place if we recovered the view of the hills, but nobody in the rest of the country associates that view with Oakland. Let’s face it: Coliseum City is a hopeless site on which to build a truly iconic ballpark.

    Aiming lower, I think you can build a “very good” ballpark on the site. Marine Layer offers a very nice vision here. What else can we add to it? I’d love to see places to eat and drink before and after the game. It’d be great if we brought back the ice plant above the bleachers, and I’d be a sucker for a return of orange seats. Heck, I’d love the first ever throwback to the 60s/70s ballpark, just with better sightlines, concourses and amenities. Coliseum City doesn’t have the coolness of Howard Terminal’s cranes, so no one will ever write poems about it…but if we’re creative, maybe it won’t be as hopeless as I fear.

    • If you’re going to have an architectural throwback to anything, it could be to Connie Mack stadium, at least cosmetically.

    • Ugh, no on the retro 60’s/70’s… There is a reason those are all basically gone.

      However, we can agree that it would be awesome to have stuff to eat and things to do right by the stadium. It’s also the way to pay for a stadium (surrounding development) which is why the Coliseum makes sense. Plenty of room to develop.

      • ‘Stuff to eat right by the stadium,’ … Jeffrey my friend, I gather that you’ve yet to enjoy the pleasure of the Burger King on Hegenburger…

  19. @harry: I’m racist because I think the vendors on the BART ramp slow foot traffic down and don’t need to be there? Tell me another joke, and this time make it a good one.

  20. ML – Did you include the football stadium specifically because you were trying to tweak the Coliseum City idea, or because you can imagine a realistic scenario where both stadia can be built on the site? Seems like it is one or the other.

  21. Selig is at the game tonight

  22. Selig is at the game tonight.

  23. Haven’t even read it yet, but just seeing this post title and knowing the time and effort that you put in to these graphics and content, I know that getting to read it when I’m off work tonight will be the highlight of the day. Thanks for all you do with this blog ML! We are grateful.

  24. commish butt-head doing a news conference at the coliseum right now.

    94 strike
    all star game tie

    …that’s your legacy bud. deal with it.

    boy even extra incentive if the a’s were to win the world series at the coliseum this fall and you’d have 50k-55k a’s fans boo butt head into retirement.

    spineless jellyfish.

  25. The million dollar question. Will the city of Oakland\Alameda County, re-up with the Bay IG., this fall that should let us know, if this is going in the right direction or not.
    And by the right direction, I mean the JPA. negotiating with Wolff and Wolff alone ( Davis if he really wants in), the much maligned Lew Wolff (if he is serious), is the only person who can make this happen.

  26. commish butt head did his conference at the coliseum today?

    94 strike
    all star game tie

    …that’s your legacy bud spineless jellyfish.

    boy makes it want me to see the a’s win the world series this oct at the coliseum just so those 50k-55k a’s fans attending the game can boo butt-head into retirement.

  27. @ Marine Layer – This is the best deal possible. Now, will Oakland listen to this? Will Mark Davis ever have the business sense to take a look at this plan? Will Lew Wolff be the savior? Stay Tuned!!!

  28. If the A’s lose this opportunity at winning the al west and at least not making the world series…he and Mark Davis should not say SHIT about a new venue….they better beat the NY Mets.

    Again I feel the Coliseum should remain put for the Raiders while the city of Oakland an A’s can work together to fix the bridge an build a ballpark next to the Coliseum…also what happens to the cute lil ducks over in the north parking lot area

  29. Elmano re weather: The South Bay weather is actually an argument in favor of baseball for many folks. Being right by the Bay in Oakland/SF makes for 40 degree Coliseum weeknights by the sixth inning in April/May games.

    If the A ‘ s were in San Jose, night games would feel the way they do at Petco in the summer, when everyone wears shorts and T-shirts thru the 9th inning.

    The evening Bay weather doesn’t bother us diehards but the cold makes it harder to bring young kids and families (and casual fans) out to the park.

  30. Now Selig is suggesting that the San Jose/MLB lawsuit has caused the A’s ballpark situation to stall? (that will likely give San Jose even more incentive to beat MLB) – although Wolff appears to be more focused on the Coliseum property lately and San Jose not so much.

  31. Alright ML, a few questions in reply to your outstanding post:

    1. Looks like you’ve changed the orientation of home plate about 10-15 degrees…does that affect ‘the batters eye’ at all during sunset? Does your rendering conform with MLB’s recommendation for what direction home plate faces? (not a big deal, I know several current parks do not).

    2. What is largest capacity two-deck ballpark that could be built, assuming very little foul territory and luxury suites exactly as you drew them up in your post from last week?

    3. Same constraints as #2, what would be the smallest possible capacity of that of that park?

    4. Would there be any argument for (or against) retaining the colonnade that was sketched out in the original Cisco field vision, against the short-porch Autumn Parkway in DT SJ? Would you envision that a new Coliseum wo would have traditional dimensions and no quirks (high walls, 300 foot fence to RF, etc)?

    • 1. Shouldn’t be an issue. 3 or 4 ballparks in MLB have a similar orientation. The field could be rotated 15-30 degrees if necessary. It’s lined up in the manner shown so that the RF grandstand lines up with the concourse.
      2. 40,000 is doable, though the extra rows in the back probably aren’t worth the effort. It would be more efficient to build a third deck. The model shown has 35,000 seats.
      3. 25-30,000 depending on number of rows in each deck.
      4. It’s assumed that the plaza would be 30 feet above the field. It’s possible to put a colonnade along the plaza. I have a feeling that it would take away from the openness of the space. If the goal is to have a distinctive element, there will be other opportunities. It’s practically a blank slate.

  32. I would prefer that a new ballpark at the Coliseum site face north and maybe have a view of Downtown Oakland.

    • I originally had the ballpark on the other side facing north. I only chose what you see because I wanted to stay relatively true to MLB’s preferred orientation. It could easily change.

  33. ML if the current developers get an extension in Oct, where does that leave the A’s ?

    • Waiting. There’s no current working agreement between the A’s and either the JPA or the City at this point.

      • Is there any reason to believe Wolff would agree to an exclusive working agreement with the JPA (assuming they don’t extend their agreement with Bay IG), not that Bay IG has instilled any confidence toward getting anything accomplished for the Raiders, but if the JPA does not extend with them (presumable to allow Wolff to have exclusive negation rights, to be the lead developer), what would it say, if Wolff would not agree to that?, or is it something that does not really matter?
        BTW, isn’t the JPA breaking the agreement with Bay IG, by having these discussions with Wolff?

      • @ML
        I guess what I should be asking is, if the JPA does not extend with Bay IG (hopefully they will not), does it really matter if Wolff has an extensive agreement with the JPA or not? Or am I just placing too much importance on it?

      • Sorry: “exclusive agreement.”

      • Sure. Not sure they need the ENA – I think such agreements are more for show than anything else. The Coliseum City ENA originally had Forest City as a signatory, and they were swapped out (maybe not officially yet) with Colony Capital. Big deal.

  34. What are the plans, if any, with the land at the former Home Base/Malibu area?

    • It’s meant to be parking for the football stadium. Assuming that the power lines that run through the Malibu lot are buried underground, the two lots could be developed into just about anything.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.