An alert reader pointed me over to the Bjarke Ingels Group’s website, where the page for the A’s project was recently updated. Many of the images are the same as what you’ve seen here and in the traditional media. There are a few new ones that I found interesting, so I grabbed them for discussion here.
First, a new view. This is is a reverse angle from what you’ve seen previously, elevated and facing east. Note that the entire Howard Terminal pier remains intact, which means the bite hasn’t been taken out of it for the turning basin.
Next is an image you’ve seen before from the ferry pier, only it’s shrouded in fog.
The camera gets pulled back for this one, with the new rounder shape. Strangely, from this angle it appears that the bowl is better suited for a baseball field to be oriented to the west.
The close-up of the facade is cool. I like the way it undulates. As this is envisioned to be part of a “ballpark within a park” I can appreciate this kind of openness. Pulling that off in practice is another matter.
What we have here is the party deck in the left field corner. I like the wood details and the Oakland logo, though I think it might look better if it was burned in instead of painted.
Lastly, we have the incline in left going up to the roof deck. It’s not known exactly how tall the roof will be. The A’s are asking for up to 150 feet building height for the ballpark, so that may provide a hint. The way to think of it is this: It should be at least as tall as the front row of the Mt. Davis upper deck.
One more thing. The description slide says that the ballpark will have 27,000 seats plus 10,000 standing room. Most of the SRO admissions will be on that roof deck. I did the party pass SRO admission at a Dallas Cowboys game a couple years ago, and I can say that once you get past three deep you have no view at all (especially for us vertically challenged folks). Same could be the case at this park, especially because the roof deck in foul territory won’t have an incline or risers. Maybe they’ll allow people to climb trees.
27,000 seats? That feels too low. I know they want to increase income and get rid of cheap seats to the degree they can, but this is too far. The Giants have shown that you can have a great park with 40,000 seats.
In 2019 I don’t think anyone builds a park with 40k seats. 35k, sure. Mostly it’s about building a third deck.
Yet another fan injury yesterday makes me hope this future A’s ballpark will have less than 15 feet of foul territory all around, bullpens beyond the OF, and commit to being the first MLB team to have netting all the way down the lines until the home fence.
You’d sacrifice a little bit of view for front row fans down the base line but you’d bring everyone in the park closer to the action and increase safety.
The other day, I saw billboards in San Jose (the digital kind, I think) on Route 880 showing the new stadium. Hope this doesn’t upset the Giants and their “territorial rights” claims. BART-to-San Jose brings the A’s to San Jose’s doorstep.
It would certainly help, and cant understood what argument the Guants would have since they have been advertising in Alameda,and Contra Costa county’s for only ever.
Not to mention a Giants team store in Walnut Creek.