While I was away prepping the Turkey Day feast, I had received an e-mail from the City of Fremont, advising me a City Council work session for the baseball village scheduled for this Tuesday, December 9. This is not a rescheduling of tonight’s “open house” type event, it’s an additional session to occur prior to the Council’s normally scheduled meeting. So here’s the complete schedule to avoid any confusion:

• Monday, December 8 – General Public Scoping Meeting on the Notice of Preparation for the EIR, 6:30-8:00 p.m. @ Fremont City Hall Council Chambers.
• Tuesday, December 9 – City Council Work Session for Ballpark Village Project, 6:00-7:00 p.m. @ Fremont City Hall Council Chambers.

Fremont City Hall is located at 3300 Capitol Ave.

For SVS+E, the Sharks-related company that manages HP Pavilion, ice rinks in San Jose and Fremont (very close to the Warm Springs BART station site), and the San Jose Civic Auditorium, it’s a chance to seal up the large events market in the South Bay. They’ll manage the new stadium, which may or may not have a stage to accommodate large concerts. Only Shoreline Amphitheatre, which is run by events giant Live Nation, qualifies as local competition.

The agreement appears to be a few steps removed from having SVS+E operate Cisco Field. Given that many of the business-side and money people from both the A’s and Sharks tend to rub elbows a lot, such an arrangement is a near formality. But where will that stadium be located?

Despite the recession, the Yankees are positioned to bring in an extra $200 million a year in revenue because of the new Yankee Stadium. Perhaps pinstripes will have a slimming effect on Vallejo native C.C. Sabathia.

We’ll start off with a pleasant image, courtesy Google Earth/Panoramio user Typeaux.

That’s the view east towards the Fremont Hills from what could be considered the northeast corner of the planned Warm Springs BART station. Next, a map (also from Google Earth):

Pros compared to Pacific Commons:

1. BART. Regardless of which parcel is chosen for a ballpark, it will be within a few hundred feet of the Warm Springs BART station, which is expected to start construction next year and open in June 2014. That’s two years from the planned opening of Cisco Field, but it’s better than not having BART.
2. Site relative to freeways. Sandwiched between 880 and 680, 4 different exits are available to service the area. From Oakland/Hayward, 880 South to Auto Mall Pkwy. From Tri-Valley, 680 South to Auto Mall/Durham. From Santa Clara County, either 880 North to Fremont Blvd. or 680 North to Mission Blvd.

Cons compared to Pacific Commons:

1. Insufficient area road system. 4 different freeway exits are nice until they all funnel into two narrow roads, Warm Springs Blvd. and Grimmer Blvd. Currently, Warm Springs is only a two-lane road near the BART station, which will be widened to 4 lanes in conjunction with the station’s construction. If they plan to put the parking on the Westwood parcel, it will be gridlock hell.
2. Proximity to NUMMI. That gridlock, which will probably be spelled out in the EIR, won’t make NUMMI happy. Grimmer Blvd. in particular is an important surface road that contains an entry into the plant. A NUMMI spokesman talks of a “win-win” for the plant and the team, but it’s hard to see that happening unless either major concessions are made to NUMMI or the plant itself closes down. Neither option sounds palatable or cheap.
3. Proximity to a local neighborhood. There is a reasonably well-heeled residential neighborhood just east of 680. It’s accessible from Grimmer Blvd., a potential source of gridlock. Granted, residents already have to deal with the freeway so noise shouldn’t be that big an issue. The ballpark is only going to make it worse. Light pollution from the ballpark could also be a nuisance.
4. Proximity to the Hayward Fault. The BART station is only 0.5 miles from a known active trace of the Hayward Fault. The stadium may be even closer.
5. Land cost. The Merc has a new editorial that paints the Warm Springs site as a nearly perfect place that will allow A’s fans to suddenly ditch cars. Only 15-20% currently take BART to A’s games. That means 80% or more drive. They’ll continue to drive. It’s nice to be able to take some cars off the roads, but let’s be realistic. It translates to a reduction of roughly 2,000 cars per game. An improvement, yes, but not paradigm-shifting in the least. For that 80% of fans, around 10,000 spaces will be needed. If they don’t build a single garage and rely entirely on surface parking, 78 acres will need to be acquired to accommodate the parking need. That won’t be cheap.

I must sound like a nattering nabob. It’s not intentional. I point these issues out because when you solve one problem (BART), you open up the possibility of other problems. That’s exactly what the Warm Springs site does, given the current situation.

Amidst talks between BART and the A’s is a new article by Merc scribe Denis C. Theriault (CBS 5 also picks up the trail). The focus is on a 36-acre parcel near the planned Warm Springs BART station. Being familiar with the area, I wondered which parcel they were talking about. After going through my archives, I found a few things you might want to check out.

First, my old Fremont site album from three years ago. The album has both Warm Springs and Pacific Commons in there for reference. Trust me, the area hasn’t changed much. From the album is this overhead shot:

Next up is a document from Fremont called the Warm Springs Existing Conditions Report, explaining existing and potential land use for the area surrounding the Warm Springs BART station. From that is an important map showing who’s who among area landholders (this was from 2004 and may be somewhat outdated, but I doubt it):

A tiny piece of 880 is at the bottom left corner of the map above.

The last bit comes from the good folks at OAFC, who kept parts of the old Oakland HOK study, from which came the original Fremont site study – yes it was Warm Springs.

Now about those 36 acres under consideration. Based on the information in the Existing Conditions Report, two parcels are that size: the BART station facility and the “Westwood” site, which is east of the station next to 680. The A’s couldn’t be asking for BART to give up some of its land for the cause, could they? Nah, it’s gotta be the Westwood parcel. Then again, two years ago I projected that losing the A’s fanbase would drop total BART ridership 1% per year, or $3 million. They may have some incentive to work out a deal.

The Giants are going to experiment with a new pricing scheme for select seats at AT&T Park called dynamic pricing. Prices will vary in the left field corner, upper deck sections could vary as much as $2 from published pricing based on demand. While this is not expected to make a significant difference in attendance or revenue, it’s a good way to gauge how responsive area fans are to such an initiative.

Regionally, the best analogue comes from State Highway 91 in Orange County, which has so-called “Lexus lanes,” otherwise known as high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes. The toll on the premium lanes varies depending on time of day, and is a model from which more dynamic pricing will be based. Don’t like the concept? You might want to get used to it, as it’s part of transit planning throughout the urbanized parts of the state in the future.

It’s time again for our seasonal progress report. Does it feel like the A’s are treading water, while everyone else is passing them by? In a sense, other teams are. The greatest solace A’s fans can take from the Cisco Field effort comes from the way they’re pursuing the ballpark. The three parks opening next year all involve massive amounts of public financing, taxes, or even questionable land acquisitions. Sometimes the more honest slog is the harder one.

The funding component has been downgraded due to the delay in housing-related revenues. Should we see more information on the additional commercialization of Cisco Field, the meter can move a little more to the right. The political process remains the same, even though a major milestone was passed in the form of an election. I had not originally factored the election into the equation, only the process of drafting and certifying the EIR plus the business relationship between the A’s and Fremont. Site acquisition and construction remain in stasis due to inactivity.

It looks like the Marlins have gotten the green light to proceed as Norman Braman’s lawsuit has been officially struck down, all seven counts of it. Once they get the financing, the race will be on as they’ll have about 24 months to complete a retractable roof ballpark. I mentioned earlier that the shortest construction time for such a stadium was 28 months. That stadium was Safeco Field, which you may remember opened in mid-July, 1999. Update: The Marlins announced that they will push back the opening date to 2012. They will either have to figure out a way to extend the lease at Dolphin Stadium one more year, or find another interim venue.

While I don’t like how the Twins and Hennepin County managed to get a county sales tax hike passed without it ever getting to the electorate (a feat that would be impossible in California), I love the location and how they crammed a 40,000-seat stadium into only 8 acres. I’m planning a Midwestern version of the ballpark tour I did earlier this year, and if it happens Target Field will be on the list.

Citi Field has proven to be the less controversial of the two NYC ballparks, though not quite controversy free. There is some concern that the “Citi” part may not hold up, as Citigroup has taken quite a beating recently. Surely naming rights would be appealing to JP Morgan Chase or Bank of America, right? Maybe not.

I have a sinking feeling that given the escalating costs to build the stadium and the need for additional financing, the parkland replacement promised for the neighborhood will take far longer to build due to a lack of funds. At least they’ll have the new train platform so that my friends from north in the Hudson River Valley can take the train in.

That’s the last planned update for this month, folks. See y’all in December for the community workshop.

Another 8,520 votes have been counted, and the results are:

Yes – 414,308 (66.78%)
No – 206,098 (33.22%)

The margin is now 2,112. Or rather, if 705 additional “No” votes had been registered from the current total, the measure would not pass.

9,800 votes remained to be counted as of Wednesday evening, so this new total may be “final” with a number of ballots thrown out. Opponents have indicated they may demand a recount, one that they would have to pay for.

The big interchange project isn’t completely finished, but the bulk of it is. The northbound carpool lane opened today, following onto the opening of the southbound lane earlier in the week. That brings the freeway to at least 8 through lanes, 4 in each direction, plus at least 1 auxiliary lane between exits. Between 237 and there are as many as 12 lanes. Most importantly, the carpool lanes now extend from San Leandro all the way to Milpitas.

I had the chance to drive south from Newark to San Jose at 6 p.m., and it was smooth sailing near the ballpark site. We’ll see how the northbound commute looks today now that the its widening has been completed. It’ll still be fairly congested to be certain, but there should be some alleviation. I’ll be checking 511 to note any changes.

Update: 511’s Flash-based map shows an incremental improvement in speeds through the area. At 5:30 p.m., the 880 @ Mission was moving northbound at 32 mph, compared to 19 mph yesterday. At 6:30, they were going 47 mph. Going southbound, cars were traveling at the limit or better today.

Early today, the A’s submitted their long awaited Notice of Preparation, along with a revised site plan. This time, the site plan is much shorter, as it acts mostly as an addendum to address concerns about traffic and parking:

• Parking for fans at The Fountains Business Park (north of Auto Mall Parkway) has been eliminated. Instead, the A’s aim to replace 2,600 spaces there with a similar number east of 880. Fans would access the ballpark and village via a pedestrian bridge over the freeway. The purpose is to mitigate congestion at Auto Mall. The parcels haven’t been acquired by Wolff/Fisher, instead they intend to work with area businesses and landowners to provide the spaces. The Fountains would still be used for employee parking. The plan provides scenarios in which the “East of 880” parking is used either immediately or in the long term as major development is completed.
• The three primary stadium lots would provide 10,990 spaces. This includes the “Interim Lot” immediately to the south of the ballpark. Given the likely delays in housing development, this lot may be less interim than previously planned. In addition, the “Municipal Lot” along Auto Mall near the railroad tracks is planned to have 2,500 spaces.
• Traffic routing has been designed to direct cars from specific exits to specific lots. Some of the streets would be designed or widened to include center reversible lanes, which would change direction before and after games. Electronic signage from the freeway and arteries and optimized signal timing would help control traffic management, similar to the system used for HP Pavilion.
• The A’s would staff a parking monitoring system (tire chalking) which would identify violators, including frequent ones. A sort of soft validation system would be instituted, in which repeat violators would be warned after the second offense, and towed or booted after the third (I am refraining from the obvious sports metaphor).

The deceptively eye-popping takeaway from the plan is that a project alternative will be included that decouples the ballpark from the rest of the development, placing Cisco Field near the planned Warm Springs BART station. This should not be interpreted as a preference, as the whole, contiguous plan is obviously more synergistic. Still, having the alternative should make for some interesting discussion on this site and others – I didn’t see it coming. The A’s have not bought any of the land surrounding the BART station. It is not clear that any area landowners have any interest in selling to the A’s. NUMMI, in particular, may look at the ballpark’s location and use as a threat to their operations, for reasons discussed previously.

The City of Fremont has scheduled a community workshop for Monday, December 8, from 6:30 to 8 p.m. The session will be held at the usual location, City Hall’s Council Chambers.

Interested parties can start submitting comments on the Notice of Preparation immediately, they have until December 18 at 4 p.m. to submit comments. Keep in mind that this is not the EIR. Instead the comments will help guide the Draft EIR, which may not be released until early spring.

The Merc has a piece covering the three local stadium projects: Lew Wolff’s A’s and Quakes stadia, and the 49ers’ stadium in Santa Clara. We’ve discussed at some length the impact of the economic collapse and its impact on Cisco Field. While proceeds from housing sales will have to be pushed back while the market becomes friendly again, Wolff doesn’t appear to be appreciably scaling back the vision, as he is with the Quakes’ next home. From the article:

In a bid to wait out the real estate markets, he’ll tap other sources of cash, including private investors, parking fees and naming rights. On Monday, he hired the William Morris Agency to help identify a naming rights sponsor.

Naming rights to the stadium have already been sold, so that’s not under consideration. However, just about every other piece of the stadium can be sponsored, from suite concourses to kids’ play areas to the press box and broadcast booths. Every vertical surface that could be picked up on camera could have electronic or rotating signage. It wouldn’t surprise me if the concourses had numerous interactive displays for sponsors, or a show car parked beyond the outfield fence somewhere. If you’re worried that the ballpark itself was going to go mallpark, you have reason. It’s important to keep in mind that things have already been trending in this direction for some time. The sad truth is that these days it will take these kinds of efforts to pay for construction and keep the team from carrying a massive mortgage.

It’s taking thousands of provisional ballots to do it, but Santa Clara County’s Measure B has now passed the two-thirds threshold that is required for it to pass. The current tally with 9,800 ballots remaining to be counted:

Yes – 407,932 (66.67%)
No – 203,954 (33.33%)

The margin here is 24 votes, which translates into a true difference of only 9 votes. Or rather, if 9 more voters had voted No instead of Yes, the measure would be losing. I’m starting to wonder what the fate is of my brother’s absentee ballot, which may have been rejected because he accidentally circled one of the arrows instead of drawing the line connecting an arrow. Talk about too close to call.