Last 2014 Cactus League Ballpark Reviews

I’ve been playing catch up in terms of news, so for the sake of consolidation I’m putting the remainder of my Cactus League ballpark write-ups in a single post. Enjoy.

Peoria

No Cactus League ballpark typifies the 90’s more than Peoria Stadium. From the color choice to materials and signage and circulation, it all feels 20 years old. Sure it feels dated the way anything a generation ago feels dated. Then again, personally, I enjoyed the 90’s. There’s nothing cool about Peoria. It isn’t old enough to be regarded in a retro-cool or ironically cool way. There is, however, plenty of good.

For decades the Padres played way out in Yuma, a 2-hour bus ride from Phoenix. The team’s move to the West Valley suburb of Peoria marked the start of consolidation within the Cactus League. They also share the Peoria Sports Complex with the Mariners, the first such arrangement when the complex opened in 1994.

Like most of the West Valley ballparks, access is a little painful. Instead of dealing with the awful I-10/I-17 weeknight traffic headache, I took the Loop 101 around North Scottsdale and Phoenix to get there. The main exit to get to the park was severely backed up, so I drove one further and found a back way to get to Peoria Sports Complex. A shopping center is adjacent to the complex. Parking costs $5, though you could probably get away with parking for free at the shopping center.

I was extremely fortunate when I got to the gate. I walked up to a table selling $8 lawn tickets. The sellers asked me if I was alone. When I replied that I was, they handed me a ticket given to them by some Giants fans (game was Giants-Padres) who had an extra. The ticket was for the upper grandstand behind the plate. I happily took the ticket for free and walked in. Later I spoke to the wonderful ladies who furnished the ticket and found out that they were from the South Bay. One of them was an A’s fan.

There’s a pronounced carnival atmosphere inside the concourse, with a kids’ field not far away and numerous food tents. The concourse is incredibly spacious, though the game can’t be seen from behind the grandstand. A full upper level includes the press box, suites, and club seats. One major demerit is the almost complete lack of a roof for shade. Day games here can be brutal when it’s very warm.

Banks of bleachers are set up down the lines, leading to the outfield berm. Food and beverage tents and trailers are set up behind the berm. Four Peaks has a beer tent with the most reasonably priced craft brews in the region at $7.50. A frybread stand is not far away. More diverse food offerings are available at Peoria than at any other Cactus League park, probably because Peoria and the M’s/Pads aren’t afraid to let independent vendors work the concourses. If you’re sick of the standard ballpark food available at many other parks, Peoria has you covered.

Prior to the start of the Cactus League season, the City of Peoria finished numerous improvements to the complex. The vast majority of those improvements focused on the team facilities. The Padres and Mariners both got upgraded administration buildings, replete with new weight rooms and other modern touches. Little was done to Peoria Stadium. The old scoreboard remains. No seating changes were made. No new buildings within the ballpark were constructed. The upper half of the grandstand, whose first row is elevated several feet above the concourse, allows for fans to stand directly in front of it without impacting the views of other fans seated behind the standees. This was preserved. That alone may make Peoria the best ballpark in the Cactus League. All of the newest parks have standing areas 25 rows back along the concourse. In Peoria it’s half that distance.

The quirkiest playing element within the Cactus League also resides at Peoria. The batter’s eye is integrated into the outfield fence, which means that a home run to center has to clear a 40-foot wall. That seems sadistic.

Peoria doesn’t attempt to mimic a Major League experience. The City and teams know what works best there, and they haven’t tried to change it much. Eventually cosmetic changes will need to be made, but those shouldn’t affect the overall feel of the ballpark. Keep it fan-friendly, keep it casual, and the winning recipe at Peoria can continue indefinitely.

Maryvale

The Brewers have spent spring training at Maryvale for seemingly forever. The neighborhood in West Phoenix is no garden spot, yet Maryvale provides a nice oasis. As a single facility with a stadium and training facility, Maryvale does the job for the Brewers reasonably well. The team has made murmurs about getting upgrades, but the City of Phoenix isn’t having any of it for now. Might as well make the best of it.

The complex is within Phoenix city limits, so it’s not way out in the sticks. Access can be a chore thanks to a single main road leading to the stadium from I-10. A good alternate route is to check the streets west of the complex, most of which allow for parking. A regular bus travels along Indian School road to within a 10 minute walk of the complex.

Maryvale received a wholesale revamp in 1998. Far more stylized than Peoria or HoHoKam, many of the design elements work well. There’s a good mix of sun and shade along the concourse. The concourse itself is fairly narrow, creating jams at all of the concession stands. The press/suite building stands on stilts above the concourse, which was necessary because space is at a premium here. A benefit of this is a 360-degree concourse with views from everywhere. From afar the press box looks like it’s floating above the rest of the ballpark. Expansion anywhere within the ballpark seems unlikely unless the Brewers or Phoenix plow a lot of money into the project.

One oddity of the ballpark is that there are only two gates, each well down the lines. It’s common to see fans looking for a gate at home plate and having to walk around much of the stadium to find a gate. The lack of an entrance or anything else besides a fence behind the plate makes the park look facadeless.

The outfield berm is split by a walkway. Many fans sit along the back berm despite being obstructed by other walking fans because trees provide shade. The lower berm extends behind the batter’s eye and around the left and right field foul poles past the bullpens. Unfortunately there are no concession stands along the berm, forcing berm attendees to travel to the main concourse to get anything besides beer. That makes the concourses even more cramped. A basic scoreboard is in left, sans video or graphics.

When I visited, the Brewers AA/AAA camp was hosting the A’s equivalent side, so I headed to the auxiliary fields to check the games out. If you’ve never watched minor league camp games, you should at least once. Few fans attend, and you can sit or stand right along the backstop. Have your minor league rosters handy, as there are no PA announcers. Sometimes you’ll see rehabbing major leaguers in short stints. It’s easy to move between the fields, and you’ll frequently share the common area with players. There are no concessions sold here, and it’s free. You can bring whatever snacks you like.

Back at the ballpark, food offerings are spartan. The expected list of Miller and Leinenkugel beers are available. The Brewers brought their trademark brats and stadium sauce. Beyond that there isn’t much. A shopping district with fast food and other restaurants sit north of the complex along Indian School.

Maryvale could use a little more space on the concourses, and more food variety. The scoreboard needs an upgrade. Other than those quibbles, the ballpark and complex perform their duties competently. Unless the Astros come to the Cactus League and partner up on yet another dual-team facility, this will be the Brewers’ home for some time to come.

—-

Tempe Diablo Stadium

There’s little to say about this place other than the word “Diablo” is appropriate. It’s a devil of a time parking near the stadium or walking along the 15-foot-wide main concourse. About the only thing good about Tempe Diablo is its relatively central location, but even that is problematic because the park is nudged up against a freeway. Visit it once and never again, unless you’re an Angels fan and you have no choice.

Port of Oakland approves ENA

10 months. In the short term, that’s what we’re looking at with the approved exclusive negotiating agreement (ENA) for a potential ballpark at Howard Terminal. 10 months to figure some things out. Not the really important things, such as the real hard/soft costs of building there. No, the $50,000 (half of Oakland Waterfront Ballpark’s deposit) available for any kind of environmental impact study won’t go much further than figuring out if the soil at HT is still contaminated. (Hint: It probably is.) Instead, 10 months will buy Oakland some time to figure out, well, what exactly are they figuring out? According to the East Bay Express:

The agreement may also shed details on the feasibility of the site for a ballpark and its costs to investors and the public.

That’s a good start, though again, $50k won’t go far. It won’t even cover the full cost of a feasibility study, which usually ranges in the $100-200k range. Now, you may think that’s pocket change to all the rich people who want this to happen, but consider that $100k is still hanging up the process with Coliseum City, almost 6 months after the timeline was put in place. Some time in the near future, the Port of Oakland and OWB will have to come to another agreement to fund a feasibility study, which will take at least 6 months to complete. Historical notes: the City Council approved $750k for Victory Court studies at the end of 2010, while a 2010 Raiders stadium study at the Coliseum cost at least $125k.

Timing is a curious thing, since 6 months from April at the very earliest puts the publishing of such a feasibility study past the date of the 2014 general election. That works out well for all of the various mayoral, city council, and port commissioner candidates, since they don’t have to be linked to anything written that details costs, and thus they can support Howard Terminal in a nicely vague, non-committal way. If Mayor Jean Quan loses, her successor can pick up the ball and modify the proposal or push it through.

The way the ENA is constructed, 10 months is the time for the Port, City, and OWB to work out the basic tenets of a ballpark deal. Presumably this would include the following:

  • A very rough estimate of site prep costs
  • Who ends up paying for site prep and infrastructure, or the identification of a funding gap (similar to Coliseum City)
  • Options that include various forms of on-site ancillary development, including a separate arena or other public facility
  • How does the Port make money from this?
  • What happens if MLB and A’s ownership go along with the plan
  • How the agreement changes if new team ownership takes over
  • A plan B if Howard Terminal is rejected by MLB

That last bullet point has led to speculation that the site could work for the Warriors, who are running into legal and regulatory difficulties with the Piers 30/32 arena project in San Francisco.

Naturally, any broad study won’t be able to get to the bottom of determining the full cost of site prep and infrastructure the way an EIR is designed to. Victory Court’s demise was forced by a number of factors, including rising land acquisition costs (not applicable with Howard Terminal), regulatory hurdles, and the death of redevelopment (very applicable). The W’s are running into the same problems now. Pursuing the W’s in this manner still looks awkward, as Let’s Go Oakland leader Doug Boxer is being paid by the W’s to work on the Piers 30/32 deal – in effect moving the W’s out of Oakland – while leading the effort to keep the A’s in town. And if W’s co-owner Joe Lacob is interested in buying the A’s, well, it’s not hard to connect the dots to figure out who’s giving Lacob advice.

Assuming that the ENA leads to a working agreement and a ballpark project, the parties can proceed to the environmental review phase, which the Port concedes could take 2-3 years. To keep this in perspective, that’s an EIR starting no earlier than 2015, and probably finishing sometime in 2017 if no legal challenges come along. We’ve already heard about neighbors looking for answers about infrastructure. That’s nothing compared to CEQA challenges, which in California are simply part of the process. Though, if the project skimps on providing infrastructure, those neighbors could easily be an early source of a CEQA challenge.

Signature Properties President and Brooklyn Basin (O29) developer Michael Ghielmetti noted the similarities between Howard Terminal and his project from a process standpoint.

Lot of the same issues, certainly not the same, but very similar regulatory frameworks and outreach process we would expect to occur. This is more complicated in many ways and less in others.

For those who care to remember, Brooklyn Basin was no slam dunk. It took 13 years to get to the recent point of groundbreaking. During that time it had an EIR certified, then thrown out, then recertified. Then-State Senate President Don Perata wrote a bill authorizing a land swap that exchanged waterfront Trust land for industrial land at the Oakland Army Base. A petition to force the project to be subject to a referendum appeared to have garnered enough signatures, then was declared invalid because of improper ballot language (like Sacramento but without the carpetbagging element). Multiple lawsuits were filed. By the time the dust settled, the recession was in full swing and the project laid dormant. The Bay Area’s economic upturn allowed Brooklyn Basin to rise like phoenix. As long as the tech sector continues to grow, it’s reasonable to expect a full buildout.

A land swap shouldn’t not be required, since a ballpark could simply be a privately-funded facility built on public, Port-owned land like AT&T Park. However there are already murmurs of legislation waiting in the wings. Bills could be limited to CEQA streamlining (so far good for the Kings, not so good for the Warriors) or extensive enough to authorize financing for the infrastructure piece.

This all promises to get good. Not immediately, but soon enough. This time the flood of information shouldn’t begin and end with an economic impact report. Fans want real info, as does the press. Don’t settle for less.

P.S. – While I was writing this I got some feedback on Twitter from Port Commissioner (and Mayor Quan’s campaign manager) Michael Colbruno. BTW, love his Twitter handle.

HoHoKam: The Once and Future Spring

Just one day before I arrived here in the Valley of the Sun, the A’s had a media reveal at HoHoKam Stadium, the new spring training home for the team starting in 2015. Reporters gathered in the parking lot of the teamless stadium and were shown images of what HoHoKam will look like next year. Saturday morning I took some time to check out the renovation’s progress.

A previous venue called HoHoKam Park (née Rendezvous Park) hosted the A’s during the 70’s. As you might imagine, the park was far more modest than many of the palatial digs of today’s Cactus League.

Rendezvous Park

The Cubs moved to HoHoKam in the 1978 and haven’t left the city since. HoHoKam was relocated to the west in 1997, yielding at the time a large, superior stadium compared to its peers. HoHoKam had a berm wrapping around the outfield, 13,000 seats, plenty of concourse space, even suites. This year the Cubs opened Cubs Park, still in Mesa but closer to the Tempe border. The A’s, who had unsuccessfully tried to work with the City of Phoenix to get improvements for Phoenix Municipal Stadium, turned their attention to Mesa and worked out a deal to be the new tenants at HoHoKam and Fitch Park, the training complex.

Piles of dirt stood in front of the entrances, evidence of trenching. The grass field has been removed, as have most of the stadium seats. Eventually the bleachers down the lines will be removed and replaced with roofed bars. The scoreboard will be replaced as well. A big change at HoHoKam will be green and gold paint and materials along the exterior. The very beige, very-90’s façade will get a major pop of color and a real sense of identity in the process. The small tower at the home plate gate will feature a big “A’s” logo.

hohokam-12-new_gate27

New look for HoHoKam comes with strong A’s colors

The existing beige clashes in a big way with green and gold, so there’s hope that the whole place will get a proper paint job that matches. If you look closely, the pic on the right shows a #27 above the entrance, a nod to the late, great Catfish Hunter. That isn’t the only tribute in store.

hohokam-11-new_gate24

Third base “24” gate as part of renovated façade

It makes sense that Rickey’s gate is outside third base, right? I’m sure that at first naming/numbering gates in this manner will sound weird from a wayfaring standpoint, but I’d love to see all of the gates treated like this. If you know HoHoKam, you know that there are two more fan gates in the left field corner and outside first base that could also be numbered. Who should get the honor?

Despite being one of the largest Cactus League ballparks, HoHokam managed to maintain a level of intimacy due to its traditional concourse design, where fans move from the concourse to the grandstand through tunnels. There’s no 360-degree view from the concourse, and no fancy detached club level. Capacity will be reduced to 10,500, making HoHoKam a middle-of-the-pack ballpark in terms of size. Other plans called for extending the outer boundary fence so that the grounds can be larger in order to accommodate food trucks. That’s a good alternative to the food tents seen at some of the other parks. The fact that the architect in charge of HoHoKam is the same one who did the Muni renovation over a decade ago is a good sign. Muni still looks as good as it can get in spite of its old bones. This gives me hope for some boldness when it comes to the A’s future stadium in the Bay Area – one that isn’t handcuffed by having to share it with a football team.

I didn’t visit Fitch Park, the other half of the A’s-Mesa deal. Most of the work there will be focused on improving the training facilities for the A’s, under-the-hood types of improvements that benefit players, not so much fans.

Sadly, the lovely view of Papago Park that came with games at Muni will not be moving to Mesa with the A’s. That said, it’ll be nice to see a bunch of fans lazing on the berm. My brother’s buying a house in Mesa, and when I stay there during the spring I’ll be able to bike from his house to HoHoKam along a canal trail. I can’t think of a better way of spending time during March.

Salt River Fields at Talking Stick

Salt River Fields at Talking Stick opened three years ago as the latest (perhaps last) two-team spring training facility in the Cactus League. It’s unique in that it sits on the western edge of the lands of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, a group of federally recognized Native American tribes. The Rockies and Diamondbacks came over after spending a stint in Tucson, formally making the Cactus League a Phoenix operation in the process.

Coming from Tempe, I found myself driving through a shopping center to get to the ballpark. In the process I avoided the $5 parking fee by parking at the shopping center. From there I followed a large crowd past a movie theater to the south entrance to the baseball complex. A gently rising path elevated above the Rockies’ practice fields. The path deposits fans at the main concourse level, high above the field. Prior to the opening of Cubs Park, Talking Stick was the most expansive ballpark in Arizona. Wide concourses open to even wider spaces. The press/suite level, with its dark metal and amber lighting, is reminiscent of a resort. Instead of bleachers, bars flank the grandstand down both lines. Team executive offices look the part.

Proximity to a mall notwithstanding, Talking Stick takes some of the lessons learned from Camelback Ranch and Goodyear Ballpark and applies them well. Camelback is too isolated and sometimes feels more like a landscape architecture exercise than a baseball experience. Goodyear is nearly devoid of character due to its cold, spartan appearance. The lighting along the main concourse at Talking Stick may be too casino resort-like at times, but get out from under the shade and the little pleasures start to take hold. Everything feels very angular and shows differently depending on the sunlight. The split roof structures don’t contour with the grandstand. Stairs and ramps leading down to the lower walkway invite fans to stop and appreciate the views of the field. At sunset a little dust kicked up to lend a little mystery. Camelback Mountain looms in the distance behind the grandstand, majestic and stark. Trees sit on the berm.

The big critique of Talking Stick is that it lacks intimacy. The different eras of spring training ballparks have proved this out. The older parks are simply closer and more geared towards watching the game than the new ones, which are designed for easily getting to the concourse for concessions. Those concessions, however, aren’t bad. The pulled pork nachos were decent.  Beer selection was poor. There’s a fry bread stand in center, and I wonder why fry bread isn’t more available throughout the Cactus League. And there are complimentary SPF 30 sunscreen dispensers along the berm. Those things should be mandatory.

As the Cactus League continues to evolve, we’re in a spot where we haven’t yet hit the net era. Cubs Park marks the end of the current era. A modified and smaller HoHoKam Stadium is a stylish refurb of a 90’s era park. Maryvale is something of a question mark for the Brewers going forward. And the two-team facilities appear to be solid, though the Mariners and Padres could choose to squeeze Peoria for upscale renovations. For now, let Cubs Park and Talking Stick be the standard-bearers for single and dual-team facilities, respectively. Long live the Cactus League.

 

Goodyear Ballpark

The circumstances that made Goodyear Ballpark possible are similar to those that built Camelback Ranch. Both opened in 2009. Both are two-team facilities involving recent Grapefruit League exiles. And both are on the West Valley outskirts, where nothing is tall and the desert is endless. That’s where the similarities end.

Goodyear’s design is contemporary and unlike Camelback, doesn’t seek to be at one with the desert. Nor is Goodyear’s complex as prettily integrated as Camelback’s, with the separate team facilities two large blocks away from the ballpark.  Much of the area immediately surrounding the ballpark is undeveloped, but could be built up when the economy is good enough to pull the trigger. Perhaps that’s what came with the much lower price tag of $108 million, $50 million less than Camelback Ranch. If Camelback tries for authentic Sonoran desert feel, Goodyear tries to be more authentically Arizonan, with human input making its own mark. Not far beyond the complex to the east is the Phoenix Goodyear airport, home to an impressive aircraft boneyard. Camelback likes to be referred to as a campus, not a complex. Goodyear has no qualms about being the latter.

Other than the green grass and seats, the prevailing color scheme at Goodyear is gray and a dark, rust red. This makes sense because both Cleveland and Cincinnati have red in their uniforms, but darker to avoid any direct association. I entered from the the first base side instead of home plate, where a lengthy gate entrance aligned with the team store leads to the single concourse. One unique element of this ballpark is that the press/suite level is some 20 feet or more above the concourse, give the whole place a much more airy feel than many other Cactus League parks. It also isn’t very extensive, making the concourse even more open. The downside is that the press level looks rather disjointed and not unified. There’s a lot of unpainted steel used here, giving the place an industrial chic look. I would say that it works, except that everything’s so scaled down here that it almost disappears. That really just leaves the baseball game being played, which I suppose is just fine for most fans. It would’ve been cool to orient the field southeast so that the boneyard would be in view, but considering Camelback’s problems with that orientation and sun/shade, the traditional arrangement is probably for the best.

Besides the outfield lawn seating, there are huge flat lawn areas on either side, great for games of catch. Then the concourse abruptly meets its outer limit. Beyond the steel fences are plain dirt with no landscaping. I went to a night game, where the lacking view was saved by some clouds providing a great sunset and moonrise. It reminded me of West Texas.

At some point other stuff will come in to surround Goodyear Ballpark. For now it’s a rather lonely place, in and out. I didn’t see any distinctive food or beer options. If you’re a Reds or Indians fan coming in the morning to watch workouts, it’ll do fine. Other than that, Goodyear is a pretty ho-hum ballpark. The good thing is that there is room for improvement.

Surprise Stadium

When considering the history of the Cactus League, it’s helpful to group the various ballparks into different eras. The classic era included Phoenix Municipal and Tempe Diablo Stadium, both dating back to the 50’s and 60’s. Inactive parks like Tucson’s Hi Corbett Field and Yuma’s Desert Sun Stadium are in this group, as well as the original Scottsdale Stadium, which hosted the A’s long ago. The first iteration of HoHoKam came in the late 70’s, followed by nothing until the 90’s. Then the new wave of ballparks was built, including the new Scottsdale, Maryvale, and Peoria parks plus Tucson Electric Park (no longer used). The latest wave includes Camelback, Goodyear, Salt River Fields, and Cubs Park.

In between the current era and the 90’s was Surprise Stadium, which opened in 2003. Not the first dual-team facility, Surprise was the first fringe locale in Phoenix. As teams started to leave Tucson and the Grapefruit League, they came to the Phoenix area eyeing undeveloped land on which they could house huge, spacious facilities. Surprise followed that trend in luring the Rangers and Royals, who had been in Florida for decades. No longer division rivals, the teams were free to each take half of a stadium and half of a sports complex.

Getting to Surprise can be an ordeal if you’re coming from anywhere east of Sky Harbor airport. It took me 1 hour, 5 minutes to get to Surprise from the Tempe/Mesa border. No main freeway runs anywhere near Surprise Stadium, with only US-60 providing somewhat direct access. As is the case at many of the western Cactus League parks, parking is free and plentiful.

Upon entering, I was immediately struck by how “minor league” the place felt. That’s not a bad thing per se, minor league denotes a sort of intimate charm that can’t be found in the majors. Architectural elements of Rangers Ballpark/Globe Life Park are present in scaled down form. The effect works around the grandstand, where the proportions scale well. The suite/administration buildings in the corners don’t work quite as well, as they appear as if someone dropped a couple of themed motels on the premises.

Permanent concession stands are along the infield part of the main grandstand, but much of the concessions elsewhere are tents, the type you’d expect to see at a fair. Cheesy at that sounds, the booths down the third base line were busy most of the night, offering state fair-type eats. A carousel sits along the first base concourse. There’s no kids field, but the outfield berm is expansive, providing plenty of room for games of catch. I walked up to get an $8 lawn ticket and sat in between the dinner porch in right and the RF fence.

Beer selection was lacking. Concession stands pushed combos at every opportunity. I spent $10 on the “Five Item Combo” which included a small hot dog, soda, popcorn, peanuts, and cookie. If that deal were available in every ballpark I would take it.

Overall, Surprise isn’t much of a surprise at all. It’s very family-friendly, comfortable, lived-in, reasonably priced, and adequate for now in terms of amenities. The presentation works considering the fanbases the park is catering to. In the coming years the teams could look to add more upscale facilities, following the prevailing trend. That would be too bad, and yet, also not a surprise at all.

Dickey and Wolff duke it out in the media

A week ago Glenn Dickey wrote this in the Examiner, among several assertions:

In late 1992, just before he stepped down as head of the group trying to buy the Giants from Lurie, Walter Shorenstein told me there would be two conditions in the new contract: 1) The Giants would have to get a new park within 10 years; 2) The Giants would then have territorial rights to all the counties down the Peninsula and into San Jose. They were looking at Silicon Valley, of course, and money from that area helped build the park.

Well, I guess we can rest assured that the late Walter Shorenstein took that to his grave. If that’s true, why did Shorenstein split from the Giants ownership because he didn’t feel that a privately financed ballpark concept would work out? Did Shorenstein get cold feet?

In any case, A’s ownership would’ve been best served not responding to Dickey, since who reads Dickey or the Examiner anyway? Yet they did. Maybe Lew Wolff felt the need to respond. Maybe PR man Bob Rose was spoiling for a fight. Here’s today’s full press release refuting Dickey:

Setting the record straight: our position

OAKLAND, CA-On March 11, San Francisco Examiner sports columnist Glenn Dickey wrote an article about Oakland A’s Owner and Managing Partner Lew Wolff entitled “A’s Owner Wolff standing in the Way of a New Stadium.” The column featured numerous and un-resourced inaccuracies that need to be clarified.For the record:

  • The Oakland A’s have paid rent to play their games at O.co Coliseum and will continue to pay rent under the current new two-year agreement with the Joint Powers Authority. The A’s are also the only team playing at the O.co Coliseum that directly pays for day of game police protection.
  • The team continues to negotiate with the JPA about a 10-year extension to continue to play at the Coliseum.   Under such an arrangement, the A’s would continue to pay rent and has offered to pay for over $10 million in major improvements to the venue including two HD video scoreboards and LED ribbon boards.
  • It is not “urban legend” that Walter Haas granted territorial rights to Giants owner Bob Lurie so he could explore possibilities in the South Bay.   It is fact and Major League Baseball or the A’s would have confirmed that if either would have been asked.
  • Mr. Wolff did not create “artificial attendance reduction” by tarping off seats in the upper deck of the Coliseum. As a point of reference, the average attendance at the Coliseum in the 10 seasons before the tarps were installed was 21,872-capacity with the tarps installed is 35,067. Attendance in 2013 averaged 22,337. On several occasions, Mr. Wolff has said the team will remove the tarps if there is consistent ticket demand that justifies it. In fact, the team did remove the tarps during the 2013 postseason once ticket sales indicated the need for a larger capacity. However, the smaller capacity with tarps has clearly created a more intimate and exciting atmosphere at the Coliseum, as noted by many of our players, media and fans.

Not sure why Dickey calls the T-rights deal an urban legend. Selig acknowledged it. As I wrote two years ago, when everyone got confused over the history of the Bay Area’s T-rights:

If Bob Lurie had not gone after the South Bay, he wouldn’t have been granted the rights by Wally Haas. After Lurie struck out in SF for the last time and threatened to move to Tampa Bay, Magowan/Shorenstein swooped in to save the Giants. Would Magowan have asked for rights to the South Bay in 1993-96 in order to finance AT&T Park, knowing that he wasn’t actually going to build there but rather in downtown SF?

Remember that in the mid-90’s, the Internet as we know it today did not exist.

As for the stadium negotiations, Wolff is willing to sign a pretty long deal, as long as the A’s aren’t locked in if the Raiders take over the Coliseum complex. That’s only fair, since Wolff needs to have some control over where the team plays. Besides, history shows that Oakland/Alameda County/JPA have bent over for the Raiders, screwing the A’s in the process. The JPA is in the position to do it to the A’s all over again.

Interestingly, there are rumors emanating from the Coliseum that Coliseum City may be too expensive to pull off for the Raiders alone, forget the multi-team/multi-venue dream project. Hmmm

Still, best to avoid Dickey and his rants.

At Howard Terminal, now the fun begins

The Port of Oakland recommended entering negotiations with ballpark proponents OWB, setting the stage for a feasibility study and EIR on the Howard Terminal site. The last few weeks have had the Port’s Board focused on entertaining maritime bids at Howard Terminal, in order to determine that there still could be potential shipping or cargo tenants. With subsequent bids rejected, the Port is entertaining the idea of a non-maritime use, a ballpark.

According to EBX’s Robert Gammon, OWB would pay $100,000 for a one-year exclusive negotiating term (option). Presumably, that $100,000 would pay for the feasibility study, with other money coming for the EIR once the Port considers the ballpark a project to be studied under CEQA law.

Ballpark proponents believe the EIR and land prep can be done quickly. My stance from the beginning has been that it will be significantly more difficult than claimed, due to the history of land use at the site, previous site contamination, and required input from the State Land Commission.

The SLC provided a hint of what’s to come, when they came out in support of a plan to revamp the now-shuttered Barnes and Noble space at Jack London Square. The building is set to become an entertainment center called Plank, which will contain a bowling alley, outdoor bocce court, arcade, and restaurant/bar. Though the scale and scope of the revamp of an existing is miles away from a brand new ballpark, it’s easy to see from the document how the SLC might react to different types of uses.

The SLC and Port of Oakland have for decades designated JLS as a mixed-use site with maritime and commercial uses. It makes sense that there is a public square, a limited amount of commercial development, ferry terminal, marina, and other water-oriented uses.

The Public Trust lands include all lands that were tide and submerged lands and beds of navigable waters at the time of California’s admission to the Union, even if these lands have since been filled. These lands are held for the benefit of all the people of the State and, therefore, must be used for statewide as opposed to purely local public purposes. And what is most pertinent to this discussion, Public Trust lands must be used for Public Trust purposes, which are generally maritime-related, including commerce, navigation, fishing, as well as water-oriented recreation, visitor-serving uses and environmental protection.

In prior analyses of trust consistency, Commission staff has given great weight to whether a proposed use enhances or facilitates the general public’s enjoyment of Public Trust lands. Likewise, Commission staff has carefully analyzed the proposed uses of the Pavilion 1 site in the context of the specific location and public’s trust needs. Although each individual component of the project can be considered as part of a project, each with varying degrees of Public Trust consistency, the primary use or purpose of a project must be in furtherance of the Public Trust. For example, a mixed-use development may be considered incompatible with the Public Trust not because it contains some non-trust elements, but because it promotes a “commercial enterprise unaffected by a public use” rather than promoting, fostering, accommodating or enhancing a Public Trust use. On the other hand, a project whose primary purpose is consistent with the Public Trust can still be considered consistent with the Public Trust despite some ancillary or incidental components that, standing alone, would otherwise be inconsistent with the Public Trust. At the same time, ancillary or incidental project components that are consistent with the Public Trust will not make a trust-inconsistent primary use permissible.

Although Howard Terminal is adjacent to Jack London Square, it has its own use covenant that is separate than the one written for JLS. To allow for Howard Terminal to be available for non-maritime use, both the SLC and the BCDC will have to get involved, as I mentioned last fall (my emphasis in bold):

Tidelands Trust Compliance

Howard Terminal is currently encumbered by the Tidelands Trust. Uses of the property are therefore generally limited to water oriented commerce, navigation, fisheries, and regional or state-wide recreational uses. Approval from the State Lands Commission would be required for any uses of the property that are not Tidelands Trust compliant. Many non-maritime activities are not considered Trust compliant uses and thus may require lengthy negotiations with the State Lands Commission, and potential legislation, before the Port could proceed with such non-Trust uses for the property.

That language came from a Port staff report on Howard Terminal. So did this:

Other Entitlement, Environmental & Regulatory Issues

Howard Terminal is subject to a complex set of regulatory permits and deed restrictions related to the hazardous materials in the soil and groundwater underlying the property. Development of new structures that penetrate the ground surface or changes in land use will require notices to regulatory agencies, and compliance with existing health, safety and soil management plans. Non-maritime uses will likely require extensive and expensive clean-up or other protective environmental measures, precluding expeditious turn-over of the property to a new rent-paying tenant. Further, non-maritime uses will likely require numerous land use entitlements including local land use permits, an amendment to the Oakland General Plan, and CEQA review. These activities could take several years to complete. 

None of this impossible to navigate. However, as we’re seeing with the Warriors’ plans in San Francisco, projects on the water have an annoying tendency to get extremely expensive and bogged down in red tape. Oakland Mayor Jean Quan and many backers of Howard Terminal believe that Howard Terminal can be done without incurring significant costs or excruciatingly lengthy review periods. How long can all of this take? Brooklyn Basin, which broke ground yesterday, took 10 years to get to yesterday’s ceremony. While some of that delay was due to the recession, much more had to do with process, lawsuits, legislation, land swaps, and negotiation. Can a ballpark at Howard Terminal defy history? Perhaps. Then again, Mayor Quan may not be around to support it a year from now.

San Jose Muni as a temporary ballpark? Come on, now

The Merc and NBC Bay Area are reporting that San Jose Municipal Stadium is being considered as a temporary ballpark site should the A’s not get a lease extension past 2015.

The idea makes zero sense.

At 4,200 seats, Muni is far too small to work as a temp park. There’s not enough space behind the old grandstand to build the extra seats and a new press box that MLB would require. Even the area beyond the outfield is limited, so little seating could be built there. Muni is set up so that the clubhouses are on the same level as the single concourse, requiring the park to be quickly emptied of fans after every game. The lack of parking and public transit at the site would make it a logistical nightmare for daily 20,000-person crowds.

About the only thing Muni has going for it is that it’s a baseball field with some seats around it. That’s not the expensive part. It’s everything else (additional seats, suites, infrastructure) that’s expensive.

Using Muni makes even less sense when you consider that the City of San Jose inked its own five-year extension with the San Jose Giants only two months ago. While the lease is quite cheap at $25,000 per year, naming rights to Muni are involved and the fact is that the City would have to break the lease to accommodate the A’s.

I understand that Lew Wolff will look at a number of sites and facilities to get a feel for what’s possible. A temporary ballpark at San Jose Muni is more than a little far-fetched.

—–

P.S. – Candlestick Park was also reported to be in the discussion, but demolition is expected later this year.