New Mets Stadium (CitiField)

[Stern]

Daily News:

New Mets stadium plan touted

BY MICHAEL SAUL and LISA L. COLANGELO

NYC2012 officials released yesterday the first drawings of what a new Mets ballpark could look like - all dressed up for the Olympics.

The $600 million stadium, which could be ready for the Mets in 2009, looks like an old-time ballpark, but is outfitted with 80,000 seats and state-of-the-art track-and-field facilities.

The new entrances are depicted with old-fashioned awnings, somewhat resembling the drawings the Mets touted in 1998 when they announced plans for a retro ballpark fashioned after Ebbets Field.

But planners emphasized the renderings released yesterday could change, and are simply meant to give the International Olympic Committee an idea of how a 45,000-seat ballpark could be transformed into an 80,000-seat Olympic stadium.

"We focused on the technical details for the athletic stadium," said NYC2012 planning director Andrew Winters. "Everybody in the stadium has to be able to see the competition."

After the Olympics, the extra seats would be removed and installed at Icahn Stadium on Randalls Island.

"This would help fulfill New York's legacy for track and field," said NYC2012 spokesman Laz Benitez.

The drawings were made public two weeks after the city announced plans to put the Olympic stadium in Queens amid the nixing of the proposed West Side stadium.

The Mets would pay for their ballpark, but the state and city would pay about $100 million of the cost to convert it into an Olympic stadium.

The release of the renderings came as New York officials geared up for a push leading to the selection of the host city July 6 in Singapore.

Today, NYC2012, the city's bid committee, plans to release the names of the athletes who will be traveling to Singapore as part of the city's delegation. Tomorrow, Secretary of State Rice will join Mayor Bloomberg and Gov. Pataki to headline a kickoff event at City Hall Park.

Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff, the founder of the city's bid, said New York still has a "terrific chance" of beating Paris, London, Madrid and Moscow and hosting the 2012 Games.

He said he doesn't believe the city's stumble over an Olympic stadium - with the sudden transfer from Manhattan to Queens - will prove fatal.

"It all happened so quickly, people's heads are spinning a little bit," Doctoroff conceded. "But I think the overriding impression that people have had is, 'Wow, if they can do this in three days, imagine what they could do in seven years.'"

http://www.nydailynews.com/ips_rich_content/833-stadium.JPG

[krulltime]

oh why cant they make something that has a new architectual character...

These stadiums designs are so old fashion looking.

[BigMac]

Larger drawing from Newsday:

http://www.nynewsday.com/media/photo/2005-06/18204148.jpg

[Citytect]

Before this prelim. design was released, I told myself "if all you can say is it's better than Shea, something's wrong."

I didn't expect anything better, but this is a wasted opportunity. I hope this design doesn't work out.

[NYatKNIGHT]

The biggest problem with Shea is its location; it sucks - stuck under the flight path, far away from the urban core and no neighborhood in sight. They can put the prettiest stadium in the world there and it wouldn't matter.

[NewYorkYankee]

Perhaps with the revitilization of the Iron Triangle, and the development of Willets point, this area would become more attractive?

[BrooklynRider]

Honestly, the flight pattern and noise is a big drag.

[dtolman]

I'm going to miss those Neon figures... no matter what you say about it during the day, Shea Stadium at night,when those neon figures are lit up, is still a wonder to behold.

[billyblancoNYC]

The biggest problem with Shea is its location; it sucks - stuck under the flight path, far away from the urban core and no neighborhood in sight. They can put the prettiest stadium in the world there and it wouldn't matter.

True, but the plans seem to be to really try and connect Corona and Flushing and make it one, compleate area. Plans to develop Willet's Point, the Flushing River, and DT Flushing are moving along pretty rapidly. By 2009, there should be some good movement, and not too terrribly far after, the entire area would be VESTLY different and quite prime.

[NYatKNIGHT]

You're right, at least I hope so. I acknowledge my assessment is a bit harsh - the stadium will be an improvement upon what's there. My complaints go much deeper, but I digress....

[cNYnorth]

Too bad the Westside Stadium is dead.

[billyblancoNYC]

You're right, at least I hope so. I acknowledge my assessment is a bit harsh - the stadium will be an improvement upon what's there. My complaints go much deeper, but I digress....

I understand where you're coming from. What would be the best thing, I'd say, is for either underground parking or a parking structure with ground floor retail. The parking lot "sea" is a big barrier and should be addressed in these ambitious plans. They should make this area Queens' Wrigleyville, not Comiskyland.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Empire State Development News

Press Office
(212) 803-3740

FOR RELEASE: IMMEDIATE
1/18/2006

CHAIRMAN GARGANO ANNOUNCES ESDC BOARD APPROVAL FOR NEW YANKEE AND SHEA STADIUMS’ INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS

Empire State Development Corporation Chairman Charles A. Gargano today announced ESDC Board approval to adopt the General Project Plans for the Yankees and Mets Redevelopment Plans. The plans call for significant infrastructure improvements for the new Mets Stadium, and the construction of new structured parking spaces for the new Yankee Stadium. The Yankees and Mets will privately finance their new facilities with the State contributing to infrastructure upgrades for Shea Stadium, including surface parking; and the construction of new parking facilities for Yankee Stadium. The City will be contributing toward necessary infrastructure improvements at both Shea and Yankee Stadiums, and toward parkland replacement for the Yankee Stadium area.

"The State and City are making an economic development investment that not only will assist with the development of new stadiums for the Yankees and Mets, but will result in significant infrastructure improvements for the surrounding communities,” said Empire State Development Chairman Charles A. Gargano. “This smart investment will create thousands of temporary and permanent jobs and yield hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue in the coming years. Gov. Pataki thanks the New York Yankees and New York Mets for their commitment to New York and its future.”

“We are very appreciative to Charles Gargano and the Empire State Development’s board for their support for this project,” said Randy Levine, president of the New York Yankees. “It’s the largest private investment in the history of sports in the United States and most certainly in the Bronx. This will be a first class destination for Yankee fans, visitors and residents of the Bronx and New York City to enjoy for the next generation.”

"We are pleased with The Empire State Development Corporation's approval of our new ballpark development plans, which will be the linchpin of the revitalization of the area surrounding current Shea Stadium," said Jeff Wilpon, COO, New York Mets. "We remain committed to our ongoing dialogue with Borough, City and State officials to build our new, privately-financed ballpark within the property lines of our current facility. We are confident the ballpark will be an entertainment destination and attraction of which Queens and all of New York City and New York State will be proud."

The ESDC Directors action does not constitute final approval for the Project. The next step is to seek public hearing and comment for the General Project Plan. After full public comment, the Project will remain subject to final Directors’ approval at a later date.

BACKGROUND


SHEA STADIUM AREA REVITALIZATION PLAN:

* An open-air, seven-level stadium with 42,500 seats, and standing room for 1,600 fans, with approximately 50-60 suites
* Approximately 1.26 million square feet of space, including food and beverage service facilities, retail space, a corporate business center, function space and facilities for the media, concourses, restaurants, back of the house spaces, players’ facilities, and other amenities; and
* 8,800 parking spaces on-site and adjacent to the Project Site.

The total project costs are estimated at $600 million. The approximately $444.4 million New Stadium will be financed by tax-exempt and taxable bonds to be issued by the City’s IDA. The City will contribute approximately $85 million in Fiscal 2006 Capital Budget funds for necessary infrastructure improvements and an additional $4.7 million in capital reserve for the new Stadium. ESDC will contribute $70 million for the construction of the infrastructure improvements and $4.7 million in capital reserve for the stadium from bond proceeds. The total infrastructure improvement costs are estimated at $177.2 million. The Mets will be responsible for the construction of the New Stadium and related infrastructure improvements.

The Mets will enter into a Non-Relocation Agreement which would require the Mets Team to play its 81 home games at the New Stadium and prohibit the Team from relocating to another city for up to 35 years. Construction will begin by spring of 2006 and be completed by 2009 for the Team’s 2009 Major League Baseball season.

The project will generate approximately 3,532 direct construction jobs. The construction fiscal benefit (sales taxes and personal income taxes) is estimated to be $17.1 million for New York City and $26.3 million New York State. Incremental permanent direct employment from stadium operations is estimated to be 453 new direct jobs. A total incremental fiscal benefit from the stadium operations and visitor spending is estimated to be $76.8 million for New York City and $86 million for New York State on a present value basis. This includes sales tax for spending by visitors, sales tax from income spending, personal income tax of direct, indirect and induced jobs plus parking tax and other miscellaneous taxes.

[Scruffy88]

Looks like there is some momentum. I really thought this stadium was going to die a quiet death in the wake of the Olympics rejection.

[NYguy]

Looks like there is some momentum. I really thought this stadium was going to die a quiet death in the wake of the Olympics rejection.

It was mentioned back then that the stadium was being built regardless of the olympics.

[BPC]

The thread on the new Yankee Stadium has 172 posts. The one on the new Mets' Stadium has 15. Kind of interesting.

[antinimby]

Well, you've got to figure the community resistance in the Bronx took up a few extra posts and add in the fact that the Yanks are more popular than the Mets and there you go.

[Citytect]

The Yankees thread is a year older and more information is known about their stadium project.

[mkeit]

It still isn't clear where the Mets are building.

Originally, it was on the existing parking lots.

Later, the junk yards along College Pt Blvd. The last I saw, they wated to take over fountains and soccer fields in Flushing Meadows Park.

[Stern]

NYPOST:

February 28, 2006 -- The Mets' future ballpark will have a cozier, more old-time look — with room for 11,900 fewer fans than Shea Stadium and a red-brick façade meant to evoke "historic Ebbets Field and Hell's Gate Bridge," new documents reveal.

The triple-decker will hold 44,100 fans. Shea holds 56,000. With 42,500 seats, it will be standing room only for about 1,600 on sold-out days.

No team member was at a hearing held yesterday in Flushing by the Empire State Development Corp., the state agency helping to finance the $600 million project — but the team has promised an official unveiling within weeks.

The stadium is to go up in the parking lot beyond Shea's centerfield, and batters will face northeast. They now face east.

There will be a glass-enclosed restaurant and lounge in left field for season-ticket holders and one for all fans on the upper level behind home. Also behind home will be a 360-degree rotunda, an homage to Ebbets Field.

As for Shea, it will be razed to make way for parking. The Mets hope to begin construction this summer.

[BPC]

The stadium is to go up in the parking lot beyond Shea's centerfield, and batters will face northeast. They now face east.

Is this so the setting sun won't blind batters? Ideally, it would have been nice if the outfield opened up to the Manhattan skyline, which is otherwise visible (somewhat) from Flushing Meadows Park.

[antinimby]

The Mets need a new ballpark so much more desperately than the Yankees do. However, I don't believe in following the current trend of retro-nostalgia stadiums. Everyone's doing them and eventually when the next trend comes around, this stadium will once again look old quickly.

[Strattonport]

I agree - mimicking past areans, like Ebbets, which has nothing to do with the Mets (but the Dodgers) makes no sense. If you want to integrate retro themes, how about making some reference to Shea stadium instead?

In any case, I'm glad this project is going through.

[TranspoMan]

These are very exciting times for Mets fans - both a new stadium and a redevelopment of Willets Point. Putting two restaurants in the stadium (albeit one for season ticket holders only) adds a nice touch but I think there will be a lot of cafes, restaurants, and bars across 126th Street in Willets Point once the Iron Tringle is redeveloped. Hopefully this will entice more fans to hang out in the area before/after games. I'm not sure if we'll ever compare to Wrigleyville, but it can only get better than it is right now. As Tug McGraw would say, "Ya Gotta Believe!"

The new stadium location should be a bit more convenient for fans taking the No. 7 since the main subway entrance would be located right behind home plate (instead of right field, as it is now).

[TonyO]

The seat loss threw me a bit until I read this sort-of-related article in the Times:

March 1, 2006

Stanford Shrinking Football Stadium to Boost Ticket Sales

By JONATHAN D. GLATER

PALO ALTO, Calif. — The rationale behind Stanford University's $95 million project to shrink the campus football stadium is not intuitively obvious.

But athletic department officials think it will help the university make more money.

"It looks funny, but we hope to increase our income, twice at least," said Ray M. Purpur, senior associate athletic director at Stanford and a major fund-raiser for the project, which was begun almost immediately after Stanford played its last home football game in November. The project is to be completed for the fall season.

The idea, Mr. Purpur explained, is that shrinking the supply of seats — to 50,000 from about 85,000 — will make people buy more season tickets. That way, they can be sure they can attend the games they want, like hugely popular rivalry games against the University of California.

Consultants who advise sports teams say there is method to the Stanford plan. Reducing capacity can increase sales, said Marc Ganis, president of Sportscorp Ltd., a Chicago sports consulting firm.

"When people feel like they wouldn't be able to get a ticket to any game they want to go to, they tend to get season tickets," he said, adding that it improves attendance over all.

But at Stanford, the idea of spending more than $100 million to reduce the size of the 85-year-old stadium for the team's five or six home games drew the ire of Henry E. Riggs, a 1957 Stanford graduate and a former vice president for development at the university. The alumni magazine printed a letter from him criticizing the economics of the project and in an opinion article he wrote for The Palo Alto Weekly, he asked, "Is there no end to the foolish extravagance lavished on big-time college football?"

Few graduates have joined Mr. Riggs in arguing against the project, which was originally budgeted for between $25 million and $85 million. One was Loren D. Smith, class of 1955, of Mountainside, N.J.

"My interest in it was why," Mr. Smith said. "It's not as though it's falling apart."

But other graduates said that the stadium was not comfortable, and that the field, separated from the stands by a running track, was too far away from spectators.

"It definitely needed to be remodeled," said Dr. Robert O. Dillman, class of 1969, the medical director of the Hoag Cancer Center in Newport Beach, Calif. "I was just surprised that in doing it they were going to downsize it that much."

The university has mounted Web cameras for Stanford football fans to monitor the renovation project (stanfordstadium.com). Construction work has proceeded for 16 hours a day, to make sure that the new stadium is ready in the fall.

The project has also stirred little controversy on campus, students and faculty members said, perhaps because not many seem to attend the home football games.

"I haven't heard any" discussion of the stadium, said Leah S. Sawyer, a junior on the school's track team. She said she had not heard the price tag attached to the renovation project, either. When told the amount, she said, "I can't imagine too many students would be excited" about spending that amount of money.

But several faculty members said graduates who donate to athletics would not have given money to rebuild any other part of the university, and so there was no downside to spending so much on the stadium.

"These people, their connection to the university is much more through athletics than through the academic" side, said Roger G. Noll, an economics professor at the university, referring to the graduates whose donations were financing the stadium project. He said he had heard few complaints from colleagues about the project, while he had heard concerns about the school's business endeavors, including real estate and intellectual property holdings.

At least one other school, Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H., is weighing a similar plan to reduce stadium size. But for Dartmouth and Stanford, the example of Princeton, which reduced the size of its stadium to 27,800 from 45,000 in the 1990's, may offer a cautionary tale.

In the first seasons after the construction project in New Jersey, and after the price of a ticket was cut to $5, attendance soared, rising to more than 20,000 people a game from fewer than 10,000 a game in the old stadium, said Jerry Price, associate athletic director at the school.

By last season, attendance had fallen nearly to its old levels, he said.

"We had bad weather for a couple of games," he said.

A few Stanford graduates said low attendance at games — about 36,000 people attended each game last season, on average — will not be cured by a renovation. Last year the team won five games and lost six, and that is the problem, they say.

As Mr. Smith put it, "It's what's on the field that makes a difference."

[lofter1]

The seat loss threw me a bit until I read this sort-of-related article in the Times:

..."It looks funny, but we hope to increase our income, twice at least," said Ray M. Purpur, senior associate athletic director at Stanford and a major fund-raiser for the project...

The idea, Mr. Purpur explained, is that shrinking the supply of seats — to 50,000 from about 85,000 — will make people buy more season tickets.

Great for people with deep pockets .. sucks if you're one of those who only goes a few times a season.

[JCMAN320]

Mets can picture this
Unveil final rendering of new park
http://www.nydailynews.com/ips_rich_content/165-mets_stadium.JPG

BY ADAM RUBIN
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Latest depiction of Mets' stadium, which is slated for 2009 and will include an Ebbets Field-like rotunda at its entrance.

VERO BEACH, Fla. - The exterior will bring back memories of Ebbets Field. Capacity will be 45,000 spectators.
And now there are pictures of the new Mets stadium, too. Page 39 of the Mets' new media guide includes the first glimpses of the final version of the state-of-the-art, open-air stadium, scheduled to open in 2009.

Groundbreaking for the estimated $609 million project is planned for this summer in the parking lot behind Shea's outfield picnic area.

"It kind of looks like Camden Yards," Mets infielder Chris Woodward said.

Said outfielder Victor Diaz, who said the pictures reminded him of Cincinnati's new park: "It looks nice. I hope I'll be playing in it. The first year it opens it will give us good memories, and hopefully we can win a championship one year in the new ballpark."

According to a plan submitted to the Empire State Development Corp., the exterior will be reddish-brown brick and limestone, with concrete arches and exposed steel included to resemble bridges. The stadium would open to provide a view of the northern end of Willets Point.

A restaurant in left field, enclosed with glass, will be available for season-ticket holders, while a second restaurant will be located in the upper level behind home plate. Plans also call for the three-deck stadium to include suites behind home plate, below the main concourse.

Among the other features touted by the Mets:

Wider seats angled toward the infield, and more leg room.

A main concourse that encircles the stadium.

A rotunda at the entrance reminiscent of Ebbets Field, the home of the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Shea Stadium is expected to be demolished after the new stadium's construction. It opened April 17, 1964, with the Pirates beating the Mets, 4-3. Only Fenway Park (1912), Wrigley Field (1914), Yankee Stadium (1923) and Dodger Stadium (1962) are older.

Originally published on March 18, 2006

[alonzo-ny]

Bigger image anyone?

[antinimby]

"It kind of looks like Camden Yards," Mets infielder Chris Woodward said.

Said outfielder Victor Diaz, who said the pictures reminded him of Cincinnati's new park: "It looks nice. I hope I'll be playing in it. The first year it opens it will give us good memories, and hopefully we can win a championship one year in the new ballpark."I know it's just a ballpark but it really is indicative of what this city has become. From being at the forefront of everything and a trendsetter, it is now a follower and of all places, Baltimore and Cincinnati! Not only that, but also well over a decade behind as well. Just amazing. Couldn't they come up with something more innovative than another cookie-cutter retro-themed ballpark?

[antinimby]

and hopefully we can win a championship one year in the new ballpark." Such lofty aspirations. Instead of hoping for multiple championships, they'll settle for just one. Says so much about the organisation.

[Bob]

Given Shea Stadium's location -- adjacent to the Fair Grounds -- I would suggest the new stadium incorporate an art deco theme based on the 1939 fair. There is a treasure trove of fascinating art deco/art moderne concepts from which to choose from that fair. This art deco stadium could also take some architectural clues from the Marine Air Terminal at nearby LGA. Personally, I think the Trylon and Perisphere should be reconstructed, too, but hey -- that's just a crazy idea even though it would be (again) one heckuva icon for NYC. And the Mets.

[ablarc]

^ Good thoughts.

[lofter1]

I think the Trylon and Perisphere should be reconstructed, too....
YES!!

[TranspoMan]

Given Shea Stadium's location -- adjacent to the Fair Grounds -- I would suggest the new stadium incorporate an art deco theme based on the 1939 fair...Personally, I think the Trylon and Perisphere should be reconstructed.

Why should the Mets incorporate a theme from the 1939 World's Fair if the team didn't come into existence until 1962? If anything, the Mets have more of a connection to the Unisphere because they wore commerative uniform patches showing it in the 1964 and 1965 seasons to help promote the neighboring Fair. The Dodgers, Giants, and Yankees all wore patches with the Trylon and Perisphere in the 1938 season to promote the upcoming 1939 World's Fair.

I think it's great that the Mets are modeling the exterior of the stadium after Ebbets Field. To keep with tradition, hopefully another part of the stadium was modeled after the Polo Grounds, much like the Mets uniform is based on the colors of the Brooklyn Dodgers (blue) and New York Giants (orange).

About two years ago, the Mets redid many of the directional signs within the stadium that show original images of Mr. Met from the 1960's era. Maybe they will continue this theme in the new stadium.

[antinimby]

So I guess it's safe to say that with this redesign of the Mets stadium, the chances of the city re-entering the 2016 Olympics sweepstakes is null.
What a shame. :(
What makes it so much more disappointing is the fact that the city's odds of getting awarded for 2016 would be so much better than for 2012 simply because the cycle is back to a North American city.

[Teno]

There are other potential sites for a stadium.

I think another Olympic bid would have to go one or the other extreme. The US Olympic committee tells NYC to not even bother trying to bid again anytime soon.

Or the US Olympic committee feels NYC has a great change and feels our government could not possibly be that incompetent to so thoroughly screw up another bid.

[antinimby]

Sadly, I don't think just having available sites is enough.
You'd really need a "partner" such as a Mets or a Jets, but those two teams now have plans of their own.
So it looks like no Olympics in the city.
Hard to imagine that 2012 was our only shot.:(

[YKJ]

So I guess it's safe to say that with this redesign of the Mets stadium, the chances of the city re-entering the 2016 Olympics sweepstakes is null.
What a shame. :(
What makes it so much more disappointing is the fact that the city's odds of getting awarded for 2016 would be so much better than for 2012 simply because the cycle is back to a North American city.

Is it safe to say that it can't be expanded as an Olympic Stadium?

Has the design changed that drastically?

[antinimby]

There's no official word, but that in itself tells us that the Olympics aren't in the plans since if it were, you'd hear about it. Plus, why else would they redesign it now? That's just my logic but let's hope that's not the case.

The city should try again for the 2016 Olympics with the new Mets stadium as the site. This could be a grand cap to the would-be-then rebuilt and rejuvenated Willets Point area. A win-win situation for the city.

[Teno]

With the information available it appears any deal with a sports team is dead for a future Olympic stadium.

The options would be to build a temporary Olympic Stadium. Not sure if the IOC would be too pleased about this, as they want venues to go on and serve the host community.

Or look to other large venue events to keep the stadium busy. Such as college football, national basketball tournaments, international soccer tournaments, international track and field, cricket, field hockey and so on. Many cities have large stadiums and don't have regular national teams in competition.

Most all large stadiums around the world are largely used for soccer.

[YKJ]

Odd, on account of:

CITY MAY TOSS HAT IN OLYMPIC RINGS AGAIN
By TOM TOPOUSIS

February 2, 2006 -- New York could be going for the gold again.


Just seven months after the city's bid to host the 2012 Olympics fell flat, a key booster of the effort has opened the door to a scramble for the 2016 games — statements that fly in the face of previous comments by Mayor Bloomberg and other city officials.

"We are still giving serious thought to bidding for the games in 2016 for New York, so it's important to keep touching the IOC [International Olympic Committee] bases," Roland Betts told the Yale Daily News.

Betts, who was the White House representative to the city's bid for the 2012 Olympics, was asked to join a presidential delegation to the Winter Games, which begin Feb. 10 in Turin, Italy.

Betts will host and attend events that also will be attended by IOC officials.


Betts told the newspaper that contact with Olympic officials in Turin would be valuable for a 2016 New York bid.

News that the city could try again differs greatly from comments by Bloomberg and the city's chief Olympic booster, Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff, in the aftermath of the IOC's vote last summer.

After London beat New York for the Olympics, Doctoroff said a 2016 bid was "very difficult to foresee any more."
And Bloomberg said the timing for 2012 was right, with land needed to host the games unlikely to be available four years later.

[NewYork2016]

There's no official word, but that in itself tells us that the Olympics aren't in the plans since if it were, you'd hear about it. Plus, why else would they redesign it now? That's just my logic but let's hope that's not the case.

The city should try again for the 2016 Olympics with the new Mets stadium as the site. This could be a grand cap to the would-be-then rebuilt and rejuvenated Willets Point area. A win-win situation for the city.

A redesign of the new Shea Stadium wouldn't affect the a 2016 bid if the City still plans to use Shea as the Olympic Stadium. Since the proposal for 2012 was to build the new Shea, then reconstruct it to be used for the Olympics, then reconstruct it again to baseball configuration, it won't be hard for them to that.

Add to that, they still have the stadium facing Northeast. Meaning, that if you're looking at the stadium from the top, it's on an L shape. So it will be easy to retrofit the stadium.

There have been a lot of positive developments to think that NYC would bid again. Continuing the construction of the facilities proposed for the games, plus Roland Betts (NYC2012 Board Member) and Mayor Guilianni's appointments to the Presidential Delegation, together with what I've heard, a strong New York contingent in the Turin Games (I believe it's not just a tour of the sites and snow there). Then Mayor Guilianni added after he represented the President, that NYC is perfect for the 2016 Summer Games.

If some of you would remember Mayor Bloomberg's remarks on his radio program on WABC last year after the loss, he said that we should try to maintain the momentum in reconstructing a lot of facilities in the city which we are doing now. And then hopefully, next time, our bid will work.

If all goes through, we could have almost all of our facilities in the city, with the new Meadowlands Stadium, and the Nassau Coliseum, the ones outside the city. Even soccer events, which are usually held in stadiums scattered miles away from the host city, an NYC games would have it only 20 miles away from the olympic stadium, and less than 10 miles from Times Square.

Contrary to what many may think, an 2016 NYC bid is in a perfect timing as we're still continuing our momentum in building, and hopefully, will get the support of most New Yorkers now than before. The signs are everywhere. The questions that need to be answered now will be if the City Government is willing to pursue another bid and who'll lead it. And if the USOC will put forward a bid for 2016.

[antinimby]

I hope you're right.

But I have a few questions.

- What necessitated them to do this latest redesign of the new Mets Stadium (I don't think calling it the new Shea is appropriate since it'll probably be called something else)?

- And did HOK (the design firm) redesigned it with a possible Olympics stadium conversion in mind?

- I read somewhere that the site in LIC where the Olympics Village was supposed to be built, have now gone on with proposals for residentials. With that in mind, where would they build the Olympics Village this time around?
I'm thinking Willets Point, which would be so ideal because it would be right there!

[NewYork2016]

I hope you're right.

But I have a few questions.

- What necessitated them to do this latest redesign of the new Mets Stadium (I don't think calling it the new Shea is appropriate since it'll probably be called something else)?

- And did HOK (the design firm) redesigned it with a possible Olympics stadium conversion in mind?

- I read somewhere that the site in LIC where the Olympics Village was supposed to be built, have now gone on with proposals for residentials. With that in mind, where would they build the Olympics Village this time around?
I'm thinking Willets Point, which would be so ideal because it would be right there!

I'm not so familiar with the redesign but from what I've heard, they want to evoke Ebbets Field which was on the original proposed design. And when Mets Officials recently visited PNC Park in Pittsburgh, they want to incorporate the fan friendly atmosphere of the said park into the new Mets Stadium. But still, the positioning and shape of the stadium is perfectly fit for a reconstruction to an athletics stadium. And, the Yankees and the Mets had an MOU (A Memo of Understanding), that they'll share Yankee Stadium when the Mets Stadium is reconstructed for the games. The MOU doesn't have a date specified on when will NYC host the olympics, which could very well open it up for 2016.

The LIC site for the Olympic Village is too small in the first place. Since the Ceremonies would be in the new Mets, when NYC gets the games, it would be perfect to put it in Willet Point, or maybe the old Flushing Airport complex. The Airport complex is owned by the city and approvals for financing and using the land won't be as hard when you will need State approvals.

[antinimby]

Willets Point would be a good place for the Village and since it'll take a few years just to clean it up, the extra four years might actually be a good thing, but that means the city has to get working on it ASAP. Btw, welcome to the site and are you involved with the NYC2012 in some form or another? Because it would be nice if we had an "insider" to keep us informed.

[NewYork2016]

Willets Point would be a good place for the Village and since it'll take a few years just to clean it up, the extra four years might actually be a good thing, but that means the city has to get working on it ASAP. Btw, welcome to the site and are you involved with the NYC2012 in some form or another? Because it would be nice if we had an "insider" to keep us informed.

Thanks for the welcome :) . I've been trying to look for sites that where I could find some of New Yorkers that would support another Summer Games bid from NYC. I've been lurking on this site for a while now and I've been a regular on GamesBids.com. I'm not an NYC2012 insider though and I've never worked with them. I was a registered volunteer though, but I wasn't able to go to most of the events for the bid. :(

We have lots of time on our hands. And since construction for most of the venues would start in a few months or years, most venues would either be brand new or faily new or recently renovated well ahead for the 2016 Summer Games. I really believe our biggest problem would be the Olympic Village site.

And there were news for redeveloping Willets Point. They've actually chosen some developers already to submit proposals for the site, and one of them is Bruce Ratner! Most of them are proposing building office buildings in the area, perfect for the games' international press center. Brian Hatch of newyorkgames.org has been suggesting the Old Flushing Airport complex for the Olympic Village, which IMO, he's right. It's perfect as it's less than 2 miles away from the Flushing Meadows Sports Complex (Shea, National Tennis Center, etc).

I think Mayor Bloomberg broke ground already for a new olympic-sized pool in the same sports park, in replacement of the ice skating rink or adjacent to it, I just can't remember where it would be exactly built, but it will be in the same complex.

The signs are really everywhere. New facilities being built everywhere. All we're waiting is the decision from the USOC if they'll pursue 2016. Then NYC can decide if we'll bid. But IMO, it's perfect timing as Guilianni had put it too.

And with some big cities from different countries like Tokyo, Rome, Rio, New Delhi, Madrid, Moscow, Capetown etc, the USOC must not choose another 2nd city for the USA like LA, Chicago or SF. They have to go with their best, and right now, IMO, the most prepared in the US to host is either LA or NYC. Now, which one are you going to choose? :)

[antinimby]

Hey, I was thinking we should continue this discussion on the Olympics thread (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2896&page=19). In fact, I'm going to quote your post above and put it in there. :)

[NewYork2016]

Hey, I was thinking we should continue this discussion on the Olympics thread (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2896&page=18). In fact, I'm going to quote your post above and put it in there. :)

Yeah. Let's do that. I think we, New Yorkers, should push through for another bid from NYC. It's the best for NYC.

[lofter1]

And with some big cities from different countries like Tokyo, Rome, Rio, New Delhi, Madrid, Moscow, Capetown etc, the USOC must not choose another 2nd city for the USA like LA, Chicago or SF. They have to go with their best, and right now, IMO, the most prepared in the US to host is either LA or NYC. Now, which one are you going to choose? :)
NYC doesn't stand a chance unless is really ups its design game ...

Take a look at the London plan: MILES + YEARS ahead of NYC's proposal.

Start HERE (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=69590) and enjoy!

[NewYork2016]

NYC doesn't stand a chance unless is really ups its design game ...

Take a look at the London plan: MILES + YEARS ahead of NYC's proposal.

Start HERE (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=69590) and enjoy!

Its the way the US builds its stadiums. No city in the United States would build a stadium without any use after the games (white-elephant). NYC would build a stadium that would be used by the Mets after an Olympic Reconfiguration. It will work in other countries as the government will spend their money on building stadiums, most of the time, even without a firm commitments on its after-use, the USA is not the same case. We don't want "white-elephants".

Granting we'll have a better chance if we apply the same thing or at least emulate the London plan, which city interested in bidding for 2016, do you think has a plan like London's at least similar to it when it comes to its design?

[Ninjahedge]

Well the DD bid set (a weird combination) is due out the end of next month, so we will see what happens.

[lofter1]

Its the way the US builds its stadiums.
Show me an uglier, less intriguing new stadium (comparable to the 80' high "shoe box" that NYC2012 was trying to foist upon the city) and maybe we can talk more on this subject ...

[NewYork2016]

Show me an uglier, less intriguing new stadium (comparable to the 80' high "shoe box" that NYC2012 was trying to foist upon the city) and maybe we can talk more on this subject ...

Better way, show me a stadium proposed by the interested cities for 2016, that's going to be better than the one proposed by NYC2012 for the new Shea in Queens.

I think you're dwelling on the ugliness of the shoebox stadium on the West Side of Manhattan. Wake up, it's dead!

[lofter1]

NYC2012 is dead as well.

If there is a proposal for a new stadium at the "new" Shea I haven't seen it.

A link from you would be great ...

[Teno]

For the new Mets stadium to work it would have to be designed from the beginning for the conversion. The design of seating, concourses, entryways, sightlines. One half of the park would have to be temporary and bare of permanent amenities.

Even though this was done with the Turner Field in Atlanta. There have been significant renovations to the stadium that make it a better baseball park and conversion back to an Olympic stadium is impossible without major demolition of several of the parks amenities.

[NewYork2016]

NYC2012 is dead as well.

If there is a proposal for a new stadium at the "new" Shea I haven't seen it.

A link from you would be great ...

As of now, we don't have anything cemented from the city officials and everything is pure speculation. But, which city has a cemented plan for 2016 anyway? At least, we have something to look back and base our speculations upon.

But showing how you dislike a possible bid from NYC again just shows how pessimistic you are on NYC's chances. I respect that and I welcome that. I just believe you're on the wrong side of the history NYC is trying to write for itself.

[alonzo-ny]

With the information available it appears any deal with a sports team is dead for a future Olympic stadium.

The options would be to build a temporary Olympic Stadium. Not sure if the IOC would be too pleased about this, as they want venues to go on and serve the host community.

Or look to other large venue events to keep the stadium busy. Such as college football, national basketball tournaments, international soccer tournaments, international track and field, cricket, field hockey and so on. Many cities have large stadiums and don't have regular national teams in competition.

Most all large stadiums around the world are largely used for soccer.

ie new wembley stadium used for only the england football team and concerts and the fa cup final

[Kris]

April 2, 2006
Urban Tactics
Home, Sweet Homer: The New Mets Stadium
By JEFF VANDAM

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/04/02/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/mets450.jpg
The planned Mets stadium.

WITH all the rancor in the City Council last week over plans for a new Yankee Stadium, New Yorkers may forget that the city actually has two baseball teams that intend to open new ballparks by 2009.

Last week at City Hall, Mr. October himself, the former Yankee Reggie Jackson, defended the Yankees' plans to Councilwoman Helen Diane Foster of the Bronx, among other critics. Yet very little attention has been paid to the details of the planned Mets stadium, which were disclosed last month in the team's media guide and have been reprinted in at least one newspaper, The Queens Chronicle. Construction of Shea II is slated to start in a few months.

The Mets say they will not discuss the new stadium until they make an official announcement, which they say will be soon. But at least as described in the media guide, the new Shea, which will be built in the eastern parking lot of the current stadium, will depart sharply from the giant blue bowl that Mets loyalists have filled since 1964.

For example, Shea II features a clear tip of the hat to Brooklyn's late beloved Ebbets Field in its exterior brick facade. According to the Mets media guide, there will also be a ring of steel supports around the proposed stadium that are meant to evoke the city's bridges as well as the team's connection to the five boroughs.

The team promises that the new arena will include more bathrooms and more hot-dog stands than does Shea (exactly how many more is not clear), as well as wider seats and more legroom.

The stadium is scheduled to be ready for Opening Day 2009, and it will take shape as the Mets play their next three seasons. Although parking may be a concern during construction, one other potential worry can be put to rest. With the new stadium, which will benefit from subsidies from New York City and New York State, the Mets will agree to stay in Queens for at least 35 more years.

'Polo Grounds,' Perhaps?

For Mets fans, Shea II offers many topics to ponder, from field dimensions to seating capacity. High feelings surround one issue in particular — its name.

"Let's name the stadium appropriately either after the team or after an individual," Andrew Cardona, a lifelong Flushing resident, said at a public hearing about the plan held in Flushing this year. "But I hope it's not going to be called the Citigroup Field."

Edward Kennedy, a computer operator and Mets season-ticket holder who lives in Rockaway Beach, Queens, likes the old name just fine. "Look at all those fields — 'Tropicana Field?' " he said as he wandered around the Mets store near Bryant Park last week. "I don't think they should change the name Shea."

On the Mets Web site, some fans suggested that Met Life, the insurance company, would surely be an apt stadium sponsor, but when other fans suggested naming the field for Jackie Robinson, reaction was swift.

"The Mets have their own history," wrote a user named izzygone, who pointed out that Robinson, the Dodger, never wore the blue and orange. "I'd rather name it Gil Hodges Stadium."

Another online fan, named caliboi, added a dose of reality. "Face it, guys," he wrote. "The stadium will not be named after a person." But he acknowledged that there was one person — and a son of Queens at that — who could pull it off. "Trump Field, or Trump Park," caliboi wrote. "His name is everywhere."

Pray for Sun

Most fans seem to approve of the field's overall design — most of it, anyway.

John Pasterick, wearing a Mets windbreaker as he made his way home to Old Bridge, N.J., from Midtown last week, said he was too young to remember Ebbets Field and could not compare it with designs for the new park. But what he liked about earlier plans for the new Shea, he said, was its retractable roof, a detail missing from the current renderings. "You can get all excited about the weather on Opening Day," he said, "but the next week it could be 40 degrees and raining."

Others chafed at the fact that the new Shea will have 11,500 fewer seats than the old one. "If they intend to build a franchise that will compete every year," asked donmorf1, on the fan forum, "why are they going to provide fewer seats in the largest and probably most baseball-intense metropolitan area in the country?"

Gene Kelty, chairman of Community Board 7 in Flushing, questioned the accuracy of the plan's estimated 8,800 parking spots, and the reasonableness of their location. A lot at the Van Wyck Expressway Viaduct, Mr. Kelty said, is "so far remote that the people parking there should go instead shopping at the Home Depot. They are a lot closer to that site than the stadium."

Eric Okurowski, a resident of Babylon, N.Y., who operates a stadium-analysis site, www.stadiumpage.com, favors a bay view beyond the outfield instead of the scene of Willets Point and Northern Boulevard that fans of the new stadium will see.

But he knows this is a pipe dream. "My two favorites are PNC Park in Pittsburgh and AT&T Park in San Francisco partially because of the view of the water beyond the outfield fences," he wrote in an e-mail message. "Sadly, that's just about impossible in Flushing unless they move the Whitestone Expressway!"

More practically, Mr. Kennedy of Rockaway Beach noted that the orientation of the new park's outfield and the opening behind it could have another drawback: fans without tickets will no longer be able to glimpse the games from the exit platform of the No. 7 train.

Goodbye and Good Luck

Most fans were willing to say goodbye to, and even to deride, the Mets' longtime home.

"It's a dump," said Mr. Pasterick, the fan from Old Bridge. Asked if the old park should be torn down, he gave a sympathetic smile. "It's time," he said, as if bidding a last farewell to a friend.

Others were more descriptive. "Today, Shea's interior is a dark, damp, smelly dungeon full of confusing ramps and escalators that don't work half the time," mitchesq, another online user, wrote last week.

Some admitted to the prospect of shedding a tear when Shea meets the wrecking ball. Others were already thinking of what they might claim.

"I'd want a seat," Mr. Pasterick said, with a smile. "I'd put it in my backyard." Is there a color he would prefer? "Either orange or blue," he said, perhaps not coincidentally picking some of the best seats in the house.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[antinimby]

It's clearer now. The stadium doesn't appear to be expandable to accommodate an Olympics.

[TranspoMan]

It's a bit easier to see some of the architectural details in the photo from the Times. The design of the steel lattice below the upper deck roof definitely resembles a suspension bridge, a prominent element in the Mets' logo. This adds a nice feature, much like the Yankee Stadium frieze.

[ramvid01]

I must say that this rendering of the new Shea looks very nice.

[ablarc]

Can you believe the riot of wheelchair spaces at the left of the rendering? Is there any way to keep from wasting land on parking lots? Worse still: parking lots that are empty most of the time.

[BrooklynRider]

It ought to all go underground. Give the land to people and recraational uses and reduce the parking footprint all together.

[ramvid01]

Can you believe the riot of wheelchair spaces at the left of the rendering? Is there any way to keep from wasting land on parking lots? Worse still: parking lots that are empty most of the time.

Underground parking wouldn't be a bad idea, but it would probably make the cost of the stadium skyrocket, just consider the security risk of having undergournd parking. I think a better solution would be a parking garage, but of course these things tend to be ugly looking, so that wouldnt happen either.

[ablarc]

Where I live in Sunbelt Suburbia, a new building type is emerging. It's an aboveground multistory parking deck wrapped on two, three or four sides by some other function (usually residential, office or retail, or a combination of these).

To get efficiently shared parking for a stadium you'd have to wrap the deck in something that has no need for parking during games, and that's a taller order for baseball than it would be for football. If there were no weekday daytime games, office space would work. Or you could wrap the deck in retail that had a lease provision mandating hours that excluded times when there was a game. I think something like this was proposed for Xanadu/Meadowlands, right?

[Teno]

Its the way the US builds its stadiums. No city in the United States would build a stadium without any use after the games (white-elephant).

So you plan uses for the stadium after the Olympics. A city of over 8 million people in a 303 square mile area can support a large venue stadium. New York is the only city of its size and world stature that does not have its own large venue stadium.

Los Angeles county spreads out over 4000 square miles and has nearly 10 million people, Los Angeles city has just under 4 million people. Los Angeles has a much less diverse immigrant population than New York with the overwhelming majority being Mexican or South American. The Los Angeles metro area has three major stadiums: The Home Depot Center in Carson California which seats 27,000, The Rose Bowl in Pasadena with 92,500 seating capacity, and the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum near downtown which seats 92,000. There is also talk of building another 70,000 seat stadium for a possible expansion NFL team in Anaheim California.

The Home Depot Center is primarily used for Soccer and home for the US national soccer team. The Center has played host to the women's World Cup, major league Lacrosse, and various US major league soccer events. The center is also used for motor-cross and X Games.

The Rose Bowl is used primarily as home for UCLA Bruins Football and the Rose Bowl Football Tournament. But has also been host to the men's and women's World Cup, The US Major League Soccer Cup, and The Super Bowl.

The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum today is primarily used as the home of the USC Trojan Football and mostly sits empty the rest of the year. In the past the Coliseum has been used for widely various events: pro NFL teams, The 1934 and 1984 Olympics, The 1959 World Series that drew 92,000 fans, The Super Bowl, and a mass by Pope John Paul II. The Coliseum has plans for a major renovation. The renovation is largely targeted at luring a new NFL team but could happen even with no NFL team.

At this point Los Angeles has no major NFL teams, three large outdoor stadiums with two of the largest stadiums in the country. All three stadiums are at some point functioning and busy enough to at least pay for themselves. From what I could tell none are a major money drain on their communities.

New York City currently has nothing that can accommodate most of the events these stadiums have hosted. A 80,000 seat retractable dome stadium at Willets Point could attract The World Cup, The Super Bowl, The Final Four, annual College Football Bowl, Final Four regional tournaments, International Soccer tournaments, International Track and Field meets. Amongst other events that require a large venue for an audience of tens of thousands.

City leaders can look at the option of building college football in New York. College sports in many ways are bigger than pro sports and can earn pro level media contracts. College football has a much more rabid fan base and college football games require much larger stadiums to accommodate that fan base.

The city could look into negotiating with NYU and Columbia in building division 1A college football programs if the city provides a state of the art stadium. Both schools certainly have the economic resources to do such.

Columbia has a football team, but doesn't put much into the program or recruiting good players. I suppose what would be looked at as Columbia's weakness is its academic focus and its post graduate class is three times larger than its undergraduate class. Post graduates are less likely to be as interested in school sports than undergrads. In reality though a big college football game is filled more with alumni and local city residents than actual students from the school.

NYU has no football team but does have a 39,000 strong student body. NYU has probably never really had the option of a football team. Where could they build a stadium in the village.

[czsz]

NYU had a football team until the 50s I believe. It used to have a large campus in the Bronx.

Columbia built a new stadium in the 1980s. It's in quite an inconvenient location for students, which explains why so few attend games, and hence why the football program is so undersupported...a giant New York municipal stadium in an outer borough would be even worse for attendance and alumni participation.

Anyway, the real money in college football isn't in the Ivy League or NYU-type schools. It's in giant Big 10 state schools, the closest of which to New York are Syracuse or Penn State...

[Teno]

A google search shows you are right NYU did have a football team for 69 years.

They played at Yankee Stadium from the 20's through the 40's.

NYU and Fordham were rivals and nationally top ranked teams. The two schools had an annual Manhattan subway classic.

Looks like the program was cancelled in 1942 because it was costing the school too much money. Long before multimillion dollar television contracts.

[STT757]

This would be awesome if it were in Coney Island, and incorporated in the area's entertainment.

In the middle of Queens it's just alright, nothing like Camden Yards or 3Com Park (or whatever it's called today).

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/04/02/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/mets450.jpg

[vc10]

Syracuse is a private university, not a state school. New York's state university is unusual in that it was widely dispersed, so to date it has yet to result in stereotypical giant state campus/football team units.

http://www.suny.edu/student/campuses_map.cfm


Anyway, the real money in college football isn't in the Ivy League or NYU-type schools. It's in giant Big 10 state schools, the closest of which to New York are Syracuse or Penn State...

[NY_Yankees_1979]

I like the Ebbets Field replica but I think they should also consider combining the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field replica that would be the best ballpark for the Mets. For the Yankees, the pre-renovation Yankee Stadium would be great. It's too bad that the Yankees can't play at Shea for a few seasons while a new stadium was being built on the same exact site where current Yankee Stadium stands now.

[JCMAN320]

I agree with you NYYankee, I'm a hug Yankee fan. While the new stadium will look great and harkin back to the old one, I just wish it was still being built on the same site as the current one.

With regards to the Mets, I love this new stadium, big improvement over Shea. I love how it stll will have the chincee Home Run Big Apple coming out of the hat in center field. Now the Mets were brought to NY actually to replace the Dodgers, even though they use the NY Giants old interlocking NY on the hat to represent the Giants, the hat being blue represent the Dodgers cap. Look at the Mets home uniforms with the cursive script of the word "Mets" is very similar to the style the Dodgers used for their home uniform with the word "Dodgers" in cursive script along with the number on the lower right of the jersey is a Dodger feature. The Mets away uniforms were style after that of the old New York Giants away uniform. So you can take your pick because the team used elements in their unifrom of both teams, but they were given to us to replace the Dodgers. Lol sorry guys I just love history.

http://mlb.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pMLB2-1667145reg.jpg http://mlb.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pMLB2-1847509reg.jpg
http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/productimages/GI51R24_W.jpg http://mlb.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pMLB2-1847529reg.jpg

[Scruffy88]

thats a hot stadium for the mets. its it sill going to be built over the iron triangle or is going to take out part of flushing meadows?

[Teno]

Anyway, the real money in college football isn't in the Ivy League or NYU-type schools.

USC is a private research University much like NYU and has a successful football team.

[TranspoMan]

Now the Mets were brought to NY actually to replace the Dodgers, even though they use the NY Giants old interlocking NY on the hat to represent the Giants, the hat being blue represent the Dodgers cap. Look at the Mets home uniforms with the cursive script of the word "Mets" is very similar to the style the Dodgers used for their home uniform with the word "Dodgers" in cursive script along with the number on the lower right of the jersey is a Dodger feature. The Mets away uniforms were style after that of the old New York Giants away uniform. So you can take your pick because the team used elements in their unifrom of both teams, but they were given to us to replace the Dodgers.

The Mets weren't just meant to replace the Dodgers, they were meant to return the National League to New York after the loss of both the Dodgers and Giants (see official club history below). The beginnings of the Mets franchise can really be traced back to William Shea, the attorney who the stadium is named after. Shea wanted to return baseball back to New York, and proposed the formation of a new league (the Continental League) with franchises in Atlanta, Buffalo, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Houston, Minneapolis, New York, and Toronto. This league was dissolved without ever playing a game under the promise that two teams would be accepted into the American League and two teams would be accepted into the National League (effectively pressuring Major League Baseball into expansion.)

from: http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/history/timeline1.jsp
November 16, 1961 - The circular Mets logo, designed by sports cartoonist Ray Gatto, was unveiled. It has gone virtually unchanged throughout the history of the club. The shape of the insignia, with its orange stitching, represents a baseball, and the bridge in the foreground symbolizes that the Mets, in bringing back the National League to New York, represent all five boroughs. It's not just a skyline in the background, but has a special meaning. At the left is a church spire, symbolic of Brooklyn, the borough of churches. The second building from the left is the Williamsburg Savings Bank, the tallest building in Brooklyn. Next is the Woolworth Building. After a general skyline view of midtown comes the Empire State Building. At the far right is the United Nations Building. The Mets' colors are Dodger blue and Giant orange, symbolic of the return of National League baseball to New York after the Dodgers and Giants moved to California. Blue and Orange are also the official colors of New York State.

[Bob]

At first glance, this new park looks pleasant, but it's nothing to WOW over. I've seen this kind of corporate fun elsewhere, and it's just as corporately boring after about 15 minutes. I guess it will be better than Shea, but with LESS seats? I don't see how that is an "improvement." As for Shea, with its allegedly broken escalators and dingy restrooms, I have to wonder if Shea wouldn't have lived up to its potential if it were properly managed and maintained. And I suspect I'll miss Shea Stadium, too, if nothing else than for the fact that the Beatles played there (for about 25 minutes or so). OK, so my art deco/world's fair theme for the new park (earlier post this thread) underwhelmed just about everybody. I can live with that. I guess I can also live with the pending corporate fun...even though it's closer to LGA and the departure routes off runway 13. I don't suspect the FAA will be changing the Standard Instrument Departure off that runway to accommodate the new stadium. Alas.

[NY_Yankees_1979]

Exactly I love where Yankee Stadium is now, the sights outside the old stadium such as the courthouse and some of the other south Bronx buildings will have different views and thats what I'm worried about, to me the courthouse is a Yankee Stadium landmark as far as the view goes.

Getting back to the Mets, taking the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field would revoke not only the first ballpark the Mets called home but also there awesome Ebbets Field stadium.

If the Mets are building this new ballpark in the east parking lot of Shea Stadium, I would like to see a redeveloped Willets Point with a mix of shopping, residential and parks. As well as redoing the area between the 7 train and the tennis stadium.

[TranspoMan]

If the Mets are building this new ballpark in the east parking lot of Shea Stadium, I would like to see a redeveloped Willets Point with a mix of shopping, residential and parks. As well as redoing the area between the 7 train and the tennis stadium.

The City has a plan to redevelop the Willets Point area to the east of the proposed stadium into a new mixed-use development. Most people appear to be very much in support of this idea, except some elected officials have expressed concerns about providing a relocation plan for the existing junkyard and auto body businesses.

The area between the No. 7 train and the National Tennis Center is currently occupied by a Shea parking lot, the Corona subway yard, a MTA bus depot, and the LIRR station. I would have to imagine that anything built here would have to be built on a deck and would have a very expensive price tag. Therefore, don't expect to see anything happening here.

[NY_Yankees_1979]

The City has a plan to redevelop the Willets Point area to the east of the proposed stadium into a new mixed-use development. Most people appear to be very much in support of this idea, except some elected officials have expressed concerns about providing a relocation plan for the existing junkyard and auto body businesses.

The area between the No. 7 train and the National Tennis Center is currently occupied by a Shea parking lot, the Corona subway yard, a MTA bus depot, and the LIRR station. I would have to imagine that anything built here would have to be built on a deck and would have a very expensive price tag. Therefore, don't expect to see anything happening here. Redeveloping Willets Point would be awesome, there are several areas where the junkyard could relocate most likely somewhere else in Queens or Brooklyn I would say.

As for the area between the 7 train and the Nationals Tennis Center, a deck would be nice but the problem like you said is the price tag. Maybe they have something in plan.

[Derek2k3]

New Mets Ballpark (http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/ballpark/newpark_overview.jsp)

[BronxBoy]

New York's state university is unusual in that it was widely dispersed, so to date it has yet to result in stereotypical giant state campus/football team units.

http://www.suny.edu/student/campuses_map.cfm

I go to the University at Buffalo which has 27,000 students, two campuses, and a Division 1 football team (which just so happens to lose every game they place).

Maybe if our football team was better UB would have more recognition.

http://www.buffalo.edu

[Kris]

April 7, 2006
Wilpon Is Walking Again Through Ebbets Rotunda
By RICHARD SANDOMIR

Slide Show: The Mets' New Home (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2006/04/06/sports/20060407_STADIUM_SS_1.html)

Eight years after they displayed a model of a stadium that echoed the look of Ebbets Field, the Mets showed off a 21st-century version of the design yesterday amid hopes that they can start building in June and take the field in the corporate-named ballpark at the start of the 2009 season.

The new version of the 45,000-seat stadium has fewer seats and luxury suites (58, down from 78) than the first plan and lacks a retractable roof that was jettisoned because of the $150 million to $200 million price tag.

But the alterations have done nothing to reduce the vivid emotional attachment of Fred Wilpon, the Mets' principal owner and a Brooklyn native, to the now-sainted Ebbets, the Brooklyn Dodgers' long-dead home. In the current design, fans will enter the ballpark through an Ebbets-like rotunda with 65-foot-high ceilings.

"When I look at the designs, as I often do," Wilpon said during a news conference at 42-year-old Shea Stadium, which, when it is demolished, is not likely to evoke architectural reveries, "I almost feel like I'm walking through the rotunda, 8 or 9 years old, holding my dad's hand."

Here, his voice broke, before he was able to speak again.

The estimated $765 million project — up to $600 million from the team for the stadium and $165 million from the city and state for infrastructure, site preparation and other costs — has prompted little of the community opposition that the Yankees have encountered.

The Mets have avoided major resistance because they are building their new stadium east of Shea, in their parking lot, not displacing parkland, as the Yankees are by building on 22 acres in Macomb's Dam and Mullaly Parks.

The City Council approved construction of the Yankees' new stadium on Wednesday, a product of the team's agreement with Bronx officials to contribute $50 million over 20 years to local community groups. The Council was expected to review the Mets' stadium financing plan on Monday along with the financing plan for the Yankees' new stadium.

But Councilman Hiram Monserrate, whose district includes Shea, persuaded Council members to delay the review of the Mets' plan until the team agrees to provide benefits to the local community.

"If the residents of the Bronx benefited from an agreement with the New York Yankees, why shouldn't the residents of Queens benefit from an agreement with the New York Mets?" Monserrate said.

The prospect of community groups demanding a Yankee-like benefits deal from the Mets angered Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. "Every development project in this city is not just going to be a horn of plenty for everybody that wants to grab something," he said at the news conference. New development, he said, should not be a rush to "line up to get some ransom."

The deal was put together last June after plans to construct an Olympic stadium on Manhattan's West Side were killed. Bloomberg made a commitment to help the Mets build a ballpark that would have been the centerpiece for the 2012 Games in an 11th-hour plan to salvage the city's bid.

In planning a smaller stadium than the one they are leaving, the Mets are following a baseball trend. The 45,000 seats is 12,000 fewer than capacity at Shea, which only occasionally sells out. The baseball-only design (Shea was built for the Mets and the Jets) and seating angled toward the infield are intended to increase the intimacy of attending a game.

The design reflects Ebbets's grip on Wilpon and the ballparks built since the 1990's like Oriole Park at Camden Yards, PNC Park in Pittsburgh and Keyspan Park, where the Brooklyn Cyclones, the Mets' Class A team, play.

It will have a brick and limestone exterior, accented with archways and exposed steel; a section of the right-field seats will hang over the field (at Ebbets Field, the outfield seats were in left and center); and its wide concourses will let fans circle the stadium without obstacles to watching the game. Like Shea, it will have pitcher-friendly dimensions.

"I happen to like Pittsburgh a lot," said Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' chief operating officer, whose love of bridges, like Hell Gate Bridge over the East River, is seen in the design. "I've seen things in San Diego that are very nice. Then you take something at Cleveland and Camden."

The architect, HOK Sport, has designed many of the new stadiums in baseball, including the new Yankee ballpark. "Fred's passion is the rotunda and the experience," said Mike Sabatini, the HOK designer of the Mets' park. "Jeff is more in tune with what's going on in other ballparks."

There was a time when the Mets and the Yankees believed public money should pay for most or all of their stadiums. In 2001, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani made a nonbinding agreement with the teams to finance half the cost of two $800 million ballparks, a deal that Bloomberg scotched as unaffordable soon after he took office early the next year.

Now, both teams are paying to build their stadiums, with the city and state helping with associated costs.

The Mets will pay no rent at the new stadium and will have their rent reduced by $15 million until they leave Shea, as part of their state deal. The Yankees also have a rent-free deal. The teams now pay rent, but the city absorbs the costs of maintaining their stadiums.

The Mets and Yankees will also be able to reduce the revenues they share with other major league teams by the amount of debt payments they are making.

The stadiums are expected to generate substantially more revenues from tickets, luxury suites, club seats and naming rights like the $6 million that Minute Maid pays each year to be attached to the Houston Astro's ballpark.

Winnie Hu contributed reporting for this article.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[Teno]

Corporate naming rights are a travesty.

NY fans are going to totally revolt against calling the new Mets stadium AT&T Park or what ever it may be.

I suppose though Met Life Field could work.

[Transic]

http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/Mets_make_a_deal/2255.html

Mets make a deal
by patrick arden / metro new york
APR 26, 2006

MANHATTAN — An 11th hour deal with the Mets yesterday clears the way for the City Council to approve more than $528 million in tax-exempt financing today for the team’s new ballpark.

Queens Council members had threatened to thwart the Mets’ plans unless the team came up with a community partnership agreement similar to the one Bronx officials hammered out with the Yankees.

“Three weeks ago, when we began this debate, there was nothing on the table,” said Councilman Hiram Monserrate, D-Queens, who represents the area around Shea Stadium. “Today we have a community partnership agreement, and we have commitments from the administration. We’re getting it from both ends.”

The pact with the Mets — negotiated by Monserrate, City Council Queens delegation chair Leroy Comrie and Speaker Christine Quinn — calls for 25 percent of all construction contracts to be awarded to Queens firms and 25 percent to go to minority- or women-owned firms.
“It’s the same for construction jobs, 25 percent for Queens residents and 25 percent for minorities and women,” Monserrate said. “A pre-apprenticeship program is part of a project labor agreement. And when the stadium is built, Queens residents will make up 25 percent of the workforce.”

The Mets will also fund the “beautification” of Roosevelt Avenue between 114th and 126th streets and Northern Boulevard between 114th Street and Willets Point Boulevard. The plan calls for new lighting, sidewalks, trees and trashcans.

In a letter to Comrie, deputy mayor Daniel Doctoroff promised the city will work on traffic mitigation, road repair and landscaping, as well as provide shuttle bus service from the Long Island Rail Road. The city will also ask the MTA to fund the rehabilitation of the Willets Point LIRR station and the Roosevelt Avenue El. The Parks Dept. will hire four new officers in June and expand parking lots in Flushing Meadows Corona Park. The city will start a Business Improvement District on Junction Boulevard and spend $50 million to replace the Roosevelt Avenue Bridge in 2009.

The final provision calls for the Mets to set aside 25 percent of its charitable giving for Queens, including local scholarships, senior citizen programs and Little League and high school teams. “The Mets claims they gave $2 million last year,” Monserrate said. “If you do the math, that’s $500,000 a year. If their donations go up in the future, that could go higher. We want them to be good neighbor.”

Waiting on the IRS

• Today the City Council is also expected to approve $866 million in tax-exempt bonds for a new Yankee Stadium. The Independent Budget Office concluded the financing schemes for both stadiums depend on “an aggressive interpretation” of the law. The city has asked the IRS to rule on the plans. In a letter yesterday, Good Jobs New York asked Finance Committee Chair David Weprin, D-Queens, to postpone the vote.

[BPC]

Corporate naming rights are a travesty.

NY fans are going to totally revolt against calling the new Mets stadium AT&T Park or what ever it may be.

I suppose though Met Life Field could work.


Your average Met fan has no idea who William Shea was. Even the man's law firm, Shea & Gould, is now defunct. I doubt a revolution is forthcoming.

[ZippyTheChimp]

It's not the same thing.

Shea Stadium is not named after the law firm. The original name Flushing Meadow Park was changed to Shea to honor the man who was instrumental in bringing NL baseball back to New York.

Enron paid for naming rights to the Houston stadium. The issue had to go to court when Enron went bankrupt. It is now called Minute Maid Park. How lame is that? Let's hope there is never a juice scandal.

I'm sure many Cubs fans don't realize that their field isn't named after gum.

[Thethinkingman]

Corporate naming rights are a travesty.

NY fans are going to totally revolt against calling the new Mets stadium AT&T Park or what ever it may be.

I suppose though Met Life Field could work.

Yeah I'm not crazy about having the corporate naming rights. Giants fans must not really care what thei stadium is called. Since it opened it's doors in 2000 the SanFran Giants stadium has changed names 3 times. It opened as PacBell, then it became SBC, and now it's AT&T.

[Transic]

http://www.qgazette.com/news/2006/0517/features/018.html

Council Aids Board 7 With New Mets Stadium
BY RICHARD GENTILVISO

With new ballparks for the Mets and Yankees by 2009 a reality, it's easy to forget this all came about when just a year ago New York City was trying hard to lock up a bid for the 2012 summer Olympic Games and Mayor Michael Bloomberg was lobbying hard to build a new football stadium for the Jets in Manhattan.

But when the West Side Stadium, which was also the centerpiece for the 2012 Olympics was sacked late in the game by the opposition, the mayor turned to his bullpen to try to save the day (to use a mixed sports metaphor).

After spending years and millions saying an Olympic Stadium couldn't be built in Queens, the mayor brought in the Mets, who quickly agreed to build a new ballpark just to the east of Shea Stadium that could be retrofitted into an 80,000-seat facility for the Olympics.

A new Yankee Stadium, to be built in Macombs Dam Park, just north of the current Yankee Stadium, would also be approved as long as the Yankees agreed to double up with the Mets in their park for the 2012 season.

But less than a month later, in July 2005, the city lost its bid for the 2012 Olympic Games. Even so, the Mets and Yankees had both won their long desired new homes and the Jets are permanently moving to New Jersey.

"The city moved very, very quickly," Councilmember John Liu said at the May 8 meeting of Community Board 7 in Flushing. By votes of 48 to 1 for the Mets' Stadium and 46 to 3 (one abstention) for the Yankees' Stadium, the city council approved the financing plans on April 26. The city will issue taxexempt bonds in the amount of $632 million for the Mets and $930 million for the Yankees, to be paid back to the city by the teams.

Liu said there was concern by members of the Queens City Council delegation that the local community had been left out of the process. "That's why many of my colleagues, and I stepped up and said although we all want a new stadium, something has to be given to the community."

In response, the Mets have agreed to designate at least 25 percent of construction jobs to companies from Queens, 25 percent of jobs to Queens residents and 25 percent of all contracts to women and minority businesses and workers. The Mets will also donate $500,000 to community groups and Little League teams in the borough.

There is also a commitment by the Bloomberg administration to improve infrastructure around the stadium, including the complete reconstruction of the Roosevelt Avenue Bridge, Liu said.

"We appreciate the work that went in from the council," said Board 7 First Vice Chair Chuck Apelian. Citing failed efforts to reach out to the Mets, Apelian said a lapse in communication between the team and the board had occurred. With high hopes the Mets will resume their place as a good neighbor, Apelian said the team would be an organization "we can be even prouder of than we are now." Apelian said the Mets intend to begin construction soon, after the current home stand.

One week after the final approval for the new Mets' and Yankees' ballparks, Bloomberg said the city had no plans to bid for another Olympics. "I do not believe that the opportunities that we had when the 2012 bid was put together will exist for a 2016 bid", according to a report in the May 5 New York Times.

Noting the recent passing of long-time board member and Transportation Committee Chair Victor Ross, Apelian said Ross was a terrific human being who always looked out for the community. "Victor, we're going to miss you," he said.

[Transic]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-sphokweb0609,0,7719527.story?coll=ny-sports-mezz

Brains behind new Mets, Yanks stadiums

BY NEIL BEST
Newsday Staff Correspondent

June 9, 2006

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- By the end of the decade, baseball fans in New York should be munching on peanuts and CrackerJack in two new ballparks full of modern amenities as well as nostalgic nods to the past.

It will be a seminal moment in Big Town for the sport still closest to its collective heart.

Strangely, though, the buildings took shape a half-continent away from Times Square, in this town that sees itself – not rival St. Louis – as the easternmost edge of the American West. It happened at the offices of HOK Sport, the biggest name in a field it helped invent.

Why Kansas City? It's a long, mostly serendipitous story of a group of young architects in Kansas City who fell into the specialty because of a love of sports and struck gold in the form of a building boom that continues to this day.

HOK's corporate roots go back to the 1970s and Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City and later to Giants Stadium. But the firm in its current form opened for business in 1983 as a sports branch of a large St. Louis outfit. Quickly, the partners noted the era of the previous generation of stadiums, many of them multi-use and hideous, was coming to an end.

The firm designed Joe Robbie Stadium in south Florida, which opened in 1987, in the process inventing club seats. But its most influential innovation came with the 1988 opening of minor league Pilot Field in Buffalo, the first of the throwback, downtown, new baseball stadiums.

That, in turn, begat Baltimore's Camden Yards in 1992, which solidified HOK's status.

Later, its list of new or renovated buildings grew to include baseball stadiums in Anaheim, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Diego and San Francisco and football facilities in Baltimore, Charlotte, Cleveland, Foxboro, Houston, Jacksonville, Landover, Md., Nashville, Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Tampa.

The firm also has designed numerous basketball, hockey, soccer, collegiate, minor league and spring training facilities.

For more than a year, HOK has been working on two of its most high profile jobs yet – new buildings for each of New York's baseball teams.

Why HOK? Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' senior executive vice president, said the team initially was attracted by its work on the Norfolk stadium that houses the Mets' farm team there.

"It's the vast experience they have," he said. "Other companies have sort of broken off or splintered off over the years, but HOK is the only one that's really stayed together."

Some have accused HOK of being overly traditional and risk-averse, but both the Mets and Yankees sought traditional looks with modern twists, and believe HOK has provided that.

A few years ago, HOK designed the Staten Island Yankees' home, and it designed the Devils' arena in Newark, currently under construction.

The Giants and Jets are not using the firm for their new jointly owned stadium, set to open in 2010. They are using 360Architecture, one of two other major firms in Kansas City that have done sports work.

Dennis Wellner, one of HOK's founders, said a Midwestern ethos helped shape the company as it has evolved. "There is a work ethic we see in our people and a commitment to projects that has overridden the business issues," he said.

Indeed, a day spent at HOK's downtown Kansas City headquarters – it recently moved to a glistening new building that, naturally, it designed itself – was a study in mid-American industriousness.

Designers work in pods under signs indicating various stadium projects, miniature versions of future behemoths gradually taking shape on their computer screens.

The possibilities are endless, and the market is in no danger of dwindling.

"It amazes me every day," Wellner said. "We thought when we were sitting there (after first opening) and that if we ever got to 25 employees, wouldn't that be phenomenal? It didn't take long."

They are up to about 350 now.

Steve Carver, another founder, recalled that in 1983, he participated in a study of New York-area sports facilities that identified a need for new venues.

"I look back at that and very little has been done," he said. "While the rest of the country has gone crazy in building these facilities, New York has kind of stood still."

Not anymore.

[Transic]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-limets0625,0,6433070.story?coll=ny-top-headlines

MTA pressed to create shortcut to Shea

BY SAMUEL BRUCHEY
Newsday Staff Writer

June 24, 2006, 6:59 PM EDT

With the sizzling Mets drawing big summer crowds to home games and construction set to begin on a new ballpark for the team, transit officials are urging the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to explore new ways for Long Islanders to get to Shea Stadium without having to drive.

MTA spokesman Tim O'Brien said over the last two months the agency has been looking into the feasibility of building a Long Island Rail Road station on the main line at Shea and could announce its findings as soon as June 28 when the MTA board meets.

Right now, Mets fans who take the railroad to Shea -- about 25 percent of Mets tickets are purchased by Long Islanders -- must get off at Woodside, Queens. From there, they take the Port Washington LIRR train, which goes to the stadium, or the number 7 subway.

"It shouldn't be so difficult to see a game," said MTA board member Mitchell Pally.

It is not lost on Mets fans that the MTA has said it will spend $40 million on a new Metro-North station at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx. In April, Pally wrote a letter to MTA Executive Director Katherine Lapp asking that the Mets receive equal treatment to their crosstown rivals.

"The lack of direct rail services [to Shea] for a large portion of the Long Island population forces them to use their automobiles to and from the stadium, causing substantial traffic congestion," Pally's letter states.

Complicating access to Shea via train is that parking at every stop along the Port Washington line is reserved for residents only. So a fan who wants to drive to a stop along that line and take the train directly to Shea isn't able to park.

Mets fan Helen Germanakos, 44, said her husband, Lou, and sons, Peter, 15, and Dean, 19, drive to several games each season, always leaving homes several hours before the first pitch.

"I would be more willing to put my younger son on the train if I knew he didn't have to take the subway," said Germanakos, of Syosset. "It would make life much easier, just to get on and be able to go directly there."

The Mets are in first place in the National League East and attendance at Shea is up about 15 percent, with the team on pace to draw more than 3 million fans this season. Last year's attendance was 2.8 million. Approximately 4 to 5 percent of those fans take the LIRR.

When construction begins this summer on the new stadium, parking will become an even bigger problem. By August, as many as 2,000 parking spots -- about 25 percent of the available ones -- will be lost, said Dave Howard, executive vice president of business operations for the Mets. The new stadium is scheduled to open in 2009.

Many of the lost spots will be temporarily replaced, Howard said. But the replacement spots will be farther from the stadium, requiring fans to walk several minutes or take a free shuttle service provided by the Mets organization, Howard said.

"We're going to try to minimize most of the inconvenience," Howard said.
For some fans, that inconvenience is well worth a new stadium -- not to mention having a winning team.

"Who cares if there's no place to park, we're getting a new stadium!" said Scott Resnik, 32, of Mastic. "And, we're in first place. It's all fine by me."

[lofter1]

Total BS ^^

Take the 7 train.

Quit crying ;)

[TranspoMan]

MTA spokesman Tim O'Brien said over the last two months the agency has been looking into the feasibility of building a Long Island Rail Road station on the main line at Shea and could announce its findings as soon as June 28 when the MTA board meets.
Is anyone else puzzled by this sentence? I don't see how a new station could be built near Shea because the main line doesn't run anywhere close to the stadium. I'm thinking maybe this was meant to say that the MTA was looking into running trains from the main line (say Jamaica) to the Port Washington branch (Shea Stadium) without passengers having to switch trains, although I'm not sure how this could be accomplished without trains reversing directions and switching tracks.

By the way, SportsNet New York has been running promos during Mets telecasts all season long urging fans to take mass transit (possibly hinting at the traffic and parking mess that will soon unfold). This video clip can be also viewed on the Mets' website:
http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/ballpark/directions.jsp

[Transic]

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16885789&BRD=2731&PAG=461&dept_id=574902&rfi=6

http://img483.imageshack.us/img483/3581/24997f1575tw.jpg
(Liz Rhoades) Preliminary test pilings occupy part of the Shea Stadium parking lot prior to starting construction on the new ballfield.

Early Stadium Work Removes 800 Spots
by Liz Rhoades (LizR@qchron.com), Managing Editor
07/06/2006

Groundbreaking for the new Mets stadium hasn’t even begun and fans have already lost 800 parking spots.

But once work gets in full swing, that number will jump to a total of 2,000 fewer parking spaces. And fans shouldn’t expect any relief until the new facility is finished in time for the 2009 season.

That’s the latest word from David Newman, senior vice president of marketing for the Mets, who spoke at a breakfast last Thursday in Flushing. He would not be pinned down on when the official groundbreaking marking the beginning of construction would begin.

Originally, plans called for work to begin in late spring, then it was moved to summer. Whenever it actually does start, Newman said the 2009 completion date would hold.

He urged game goers to take public transportation and added that a ferry might be added as another way for fans to get to Shea Stadium.

The Mets have held meetings with the city and Parks Department to provide some replacement parking on the perimeters of the park, such as is done during the yearly U.S. Open at the nearby USTA Tennis Center in Flushing Meadows Park. But it will be farther away from the stadium and not as convenient.

The Mets organization will provide $550 million for the project, with the city and state contributing another $150 million for infrastructure improvements.

“We are excited about the ballpark,” Newman said. “It bridges the glorious past with the future.”

The stadium has been designed to reflect Ebbets Field where the Brooklyn Dodgers played. It is expected to create over 6,000 construction jobs and maintain the 1,000 full time jobs currently at Shea.

There will be 45,000 seats, a decrease from the current 57,333, but officials say they will be roomier and offer better views of the playing field. The new stadium will feature an open main concourse and two restaurants.

The current Shea Stadium is considered outdated. It was built in 1964 and opened the same time as the adjacent World’s Fair in Flushing Meadows. It was named after William Shea, an attorney who was instrumental in the city acquiring the new baseball team. The new stadium is expected to have a corporate name.

[nycla3]

While all Met fans rejoice at a long awaited and desperately needed new venue, I am still dogged by it's location...still within eye and earsore of Laguardia's traffic. We've all lived with it for so long that it became part of the "experience" and taken for granted that it was what it was. But now that there is an opportunity to start anew, it seems like a waste not to be able to move the stadium away from the air traffic pollution.

Small potatoes when it comes to politics, real estate and the caish, I imagine, but sitting at Shea last night--I couldn't help but consider the options not considered.

Lets go Mets, anyway (sigh)

[Anarchy77]

I know that a lot of people consider shea to be a dump, but if you started watching Met baseball back in the days of Seaver, Koosman, Jones, Agee, Staub:), etc, it's hard to block out the memorable associations. I'll also miss those old bread and cupcake factories in the brick buildings near the park-a slice of old nyc. Have they been knocked down? Last ball game I saw at shea--2003--It looked like they were done away with:(.

[nycla3]

This is the Shea to be nostalgic about...with kitschy orange and blue squares and rectangles, bright and shiny exterior...."...at 3:17 o'clock on a cool and often sunny afternoon..." that ended it's 6th year of existence. :) (thanks to Joseph Durso) http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2045&stc=1&d=1152396188 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2045&stc=1&d=1152396188)

[Strattonport]

If a ferry is indeed run to the area, where would it dock?

As for the surrounding area, the city is pursuing firms to develop general plans for how they'd redevelop Willets Point. Unsurprisingly, local businesses in the area are crying out, saying their businesses are at stake (nevermind the massive environmental damage...).

[ramvid01]

the ferry would probably dock to the north of shea, since there is a waterway there (flushing basin/river?).

[Transic]

While all Met fans rejoice at a long awaited and desperately needed new venue, I am still dogged by it's location...still within eye and earsore of Laguardia's traffic. We've all lived with it for so long that it became part of the "experience" and taken for granted that it was what it was. But now that there is an opportunity to start anew, it seems like a waste not to be able to move the stadium away from the air traffic pollution.


Yes, the area of the parking surface lot by Shea is the worst possible location to build the new Mets ballpark in Queens...except for all the other possible locations in the borough. It isn't just a political problem from the Mets' standpoint. Any realistic locations in Queens would either: not be as accessible as the current Shea location; would require purchasing several private lots; owned by a quasi-governmental agency or entity for functions deemed too important to discontinue (i.e. JFK and LaGuardia); located in areas zoned for only residential; be located in areas not served well by subway/bus. At least one of those factors come into play the minute you start looking away from Shea.

It may look like an eyesore but it's the best place available, unless they'd be willing to entertain locations outside the borough. Sunnyside railyards has the space but you need to build a platform over it, which makes it too expensive. Long Island City near the 59th Street Bridge could work but I don't think that area could handle the traffic and it's hard to get there, anyway. Also, the city wants residential development there. And forget about taking away any more parkland from Flushing Meadows. The Shea area is convenient in terms of access from different areas of the city, with roads on its perimeters, NYC Transit and LIRR. Finally and, perhaps most importantly, the city set aside that space there for the very purpose of attracting major league sporting events into the city. It just so happens that it's inconveniently located underneath a designated flight path (except for when the U.S. Open is in town - I marvel at how these people can make that happen ;)).

[peterd]

Normally I'm a big fan of the retro look in stadiums - Coors Field, Camden Yards, and whatever the name of where the SF Giants play are all delightful places to watch a game.

However, I think it's all wrong for the new Mets stadium. It's all context. The other examples I mentioned are well-integrated into the surrounding neighborhoods. If the new Mets stadium were in downtown Flushing or downtown Jamaica or downtown Long Island City (or heaven forbid, downtown Brooklyn :-) , then I'd say the Ebbets-field design would be perfect. As it is, it's surrounded by highways - people don't walk up to it, people drive by at 50 miles an hour (or fly over it at 150 miles an hour). *That's* the place for a grand Gehry or Calatrava statement.

But that's just my probably minority opinion. And I think downtown Jamaica would be a better place for the stadium, too.

[Transic]

http://www.queenstribune.com/news/1152869169.html

Mets Stadium Finances Get OK From City IDA

By JEFF FEINMAN

The New York Mets had their city funded financial assistance approved on Tuesday by the New York City Industrial Development Agency, and the beginning of construction on their new stadium came a step closer.

Both the Mets and Yankees new stadium projects are expected to bring in more than $1.5 billion in private investment to the Bronx and Flushing, and will relieve the city from very high maintenance and capital repair costs.

“The new stadium for the Mets will give a tremendous boost to the local economy of Flushing and will be a major New York City attraction for a long time to come,” said Interim IDA Chairman Joshua Sirefman. “I’m pleased that today’s board approval set the stage for this project to move forward so the team can start building the stadium.”

For the Mets $600 million stadium, the IDA will issue about $528 million in tax-exempt bonds and $104 million in taxable bonds. The taxable bonds will be payable through the team’s rent payments.

According to City Council Finance Committee Chairman David Weprin (D-Hollis), the new stadium is expected to create more than 3,500 direct jobs and a total of more than 6,000 jobs through direct and indirect employment.
The new 44,000 seat stadium, slated to open in 2009, will mimic the brick façade of the legendary Ebbets Field and will offer many state-of-the-art amenities, such as a left-field restaurant and a spacious interactive media center.

The deal is now contingent upon the Internal Revenue Service approving the issuance of tax-exempt bonds for most of the financing, considered by insiders to merely be a formality. Site preparation has already begun in Shea Stadium’s parking lot.

[nycla3]

So the Mets are going to be stuck with it's current location within a foul ball of the LaGuardia flightpaths. Then why turn the stadium on its homeplate-centerfield axis 45 degrees to the north so the open face in the outfield provides even more invasive views and sounds of take-off's?

I'm going to presume that someone has thought this through and made a concious decision to do this, but there has got to be a better way to limit the air traffic's intrusion to players and fans alike.http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2067&stc=1&d=1152963393

[Strattonport]

Hmm, the new stadium is closer to the junkyards. They better get rid of them by the time construction is complete.

[BPC]

Normally I'm a big fan of the retro look in stadiums - Coors Field, Camden Yards, and whatever the name of where the SF Giants play are all delightful places to watch a game.

However, I think it's all wrong for the new Mets stadium. It's all context. The other examples I mentioned are well-integrated into the surrounding neighborhoods. If the new Mets stadium were in downtown Flushing or downtown Jamaica or downtown Long Island City (or heaven forbid, downtown Brooklyn :-) , then I'd say the Ebbets-field design would be perfect. As it is, it's surrounded by highways - people don't walk up to it, people drive by at 50 miles an hour (or fly over it at 150 miles an hour). *That's* the place for a grand Gehry or Calatrava statement.

But that's just my probably minority opinion. And I think downtown Jamaica would be a better place for the stadium, too.

I agree. Love it or hate it, contextualism is all about CONTEXT. The context here is a bunch of highways. Retro does not work on this site.

[Ninjahedge]

I agree. Love it or hate it, contextualism is all about CONTEXT. The context here is a bunch of highways. Retro does not work on this site.

So you are suggesting a mini-mall motif? :rolleyes:

[lofter1]

Forget "retro" ... I'd say let's go for something more along these lines ...

LINK (http://www.danda.be/outdata/?dreview=96&category)

THREAD (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3756&highlight=herzog+beijing)

http://www.danda.be/data/reviews/96/1.jpg

[pianoman11686]

This is why a stadium like that could never be built here in the states:

Calculated on a construction cost of $325 million, which is in itself about a tenth of what it would cost if it was built in the West...

Could you imagine the kind of uproar that would be caused if a city wanted to build a 3.25 billion-dollar stadium? I don't know any team that would be able to afford even half of that. And that's probably still far less than what it would cost to build in New York. Think closer to 4 billion.

[mkeit]

Foundation work is well under way-over a hundred piles have been driven with a lot more located on site.

[Ninjahedge]

Forget "retro" ... I'd say let's go for something more along these lines ...

LINK (http://www.danda.be/outdata/?dreview=96&category)

THREAD (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3756&highlight=herzog+beijing)

http://www.danda.be/data/reviews/96/1.jpg

There are engineers here at the office that are wincing at that design even as we speak Loft...


To me, it reminds me of that orange 1969 spun glass lamp my grandmother used to have in teh living room.... :P

(sorry, just not my pref!)

[TallGuy]

Forget "retro" ... I'd say let's go for something more along these lines ...

LINK (http://www.danda.be/outdata/?dreview=96&category)

THREAD (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3756&highlight=herzog+beijing)

http://www.danda.be/data/reviews/96/1.jpg


What a piece of crap. I am a huge baseball fan, and when I go to a park, I want a true baseball park experience, not something designed by some drunken frenchman or Daniel Libeskind. The shadows that would be cast by the birdsnest roof upon the field would also be unnacceptable.

[Ninjahedge]

TG, it's a soccer stadium..... ;)

[TallGuy]

TG, it's a soccer stadium..... ;)


AHA! More reasons to prefer baseball! :)

[nycla3]

The comments about the stadium being put into the context of the site were very interesting (I was at Wrigley on Sunday for the first time in ages....talk about context...one of the best places on earth!), and I've already squawked about the air traffic at the Shea site, but since I'm a glass-half-full sorta guy, I'll take anything over that dog-food bowl we play in now.

I'll ask for one contextual item, though:

I hope the architects and engineeers are paying close attention to the...ya know...little things...like enough square footage in the restrooms to accomodate a stadium full...I was delighted by Wrigley's very conventional and traditional solution...troughs instead of individual urinals...made for a very agreeable and quick "event"....ya know...in context. :)

[ablarc]

I was delighted by Wrigley's very conventional and traditional solution...troughs instead of individual urinals...made for a very agreeable and quick "event"....ya know...in context. :)
Not everyone's cup of tea...er, I mean, pee...

[Transic]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601089&sid=akwbRqfxcDeM&refer=home

New York Gets IRS Approval on Baseball Stadium Bonds (Update1)

July 19 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Internal Revenue Service ruled in favor of New York City's plan to issue $1.5 billion of tax-exempt bonds for baseball's Yankees and Mets to build new stadiums.

The long-anticipated ruling follows the approval of the financing package by the New York City Industrial Development Agency July 11 and clears the way for the city to sell the debt next month.

"I'm glad the IRS confirmed we could help make these projects happen by authorizing tax-exempt bonds, the result of which actually will mean increased tax revenue for New York City,'' Joshua J. Sirefman, the development agency's interim chairman said in a statement.

The U.S. tax code limits the amount of tax-exempt bonds states and local governments may issue for private purposes. In its ruling, the IRS permitted the teams to pay off the bonds by making payments in lieu of taxes, or PILOT's, which are structured to resemble a city property tax.

The Yankees will get about $920 million in low-interest tax-exempt bonds and $25 million in taxable bonds to build its new stadium in the Bronx just north of the existing Yankee Stadium. The project will create about 9,700 construc