Page 1 of 47 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 702

Thread: New Yankee Stadium - by HOK Sport

  1. #1
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default New Yankee Stadium - by HOK Sport

    Yankees plan to build new stadium

    July 29, 2004

    by Anne Michaud

    The New York Yankees plan to announce within the next two weeks that they want to build a new, $750 million stadium across the street from Yankee Stadium. The new stadium would be in McCombs Dam Park.

    According to sources close to the deal, the team will ask for $450 million in public infrastructure investment to build a hotel and conference center, a new Metro North stop, and a ferry landing, as well as three new parks elsewhere in the Bronx. Under state law, the team must replace the parkland it uses.

    The team will likely seek to finance the facility by issuing tax-exempt Industrial Development Authority bonds. Sources say revenue from the new stadium would more than pay off the bonds. The Yankees were at first looking at a design that would have increased luxury boxes to 70. But the design did not work well, and the team is now planning 50 to 52 skyboxes. A spokesman for the team says the Yankees are continuing to work out the details with the Bloomberg administration and that an announcement is expected in the coming weeks.

    According to sources, Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion played a major role in bringing the city and the Yankees together.


    Copyright 2004, Crain Communications, Inc

  2. #2

    Default

    What year would they plan on having this completed by?

  3. #3

    Default

    July 30, 2004

    Yankees Propose New Stadium, and Would Pay

    By CHARLES V. BAGLI


    The present stadium would not be demolished, and the new one would be put in Macombs Dam Park, in the foreground, across East 161st Street.

    The New York Yankees will soon unveil plans to build a new $700 million, open-air stadium across 161st Street from its present home in the Bronx, according to team executives and elected officials, and the team is willing to pay much of the cost of construction.

    The team's willingness to put up so much cash reflects a significant change from the team's earlier proposals for a new stadium during the administration of Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, when the Yankees offered to pay half the construction cost, and appears to have enhanced its prospects with the Bloomberg administration. At a City Hall meeting two weeks ago, the Yankees got a relatively positive reception from members of the Bloomberg administration.

    The team continues to tinker with the plan but intends to present a final proposal to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Governor George E. Pataki in the coming weeks. The new, slightly smaller ballpark, with about 50,000 seats and 50 luxury boxes, would be built in Macombs Dam Park, just to the north of the existing stadium, an American sports shrine.

    The city and state would probably have to spend around $100 million, officials said. Primarily, the city would be asked to create a string of ball fields and parks nearby that would lead down to the Harlem River, north of the Bronx Terminal Market, to offset the loss of parkland in the neighborhood. The state would be asked to build a Metro-North train stop along its tracks adjacent to the field.

    The existing stadium, which opened in 1923 and has been the site of 33 World Series, would not be demolished, at least not most of it. It would be converted, possibly, to a multilevel parking garage with a soccer field on top, while retaining the ball field and the most recognizable elements of the structure.

    The Yankees now lead the major leagues by drawing nearly 3.5 million fans a year at their aging, outmoded home, with ticket prices ranging from $8 to $95. The team's principal owner, George Steinbrenner, has long wanted a modern stadium with wider concourses, restaurants, more luxury boxes and club seating that would generate millions more in revenue and increase the value of the team. The efforts to get a new stadium go back at least 18 years.

    The new stadium would have about 6,000 fewer seats but 39 more luxury boxes and far better sight lines, according to executives who have seen the plans. The team also saved money from an earlier proposal by eliminating a retractable roof, a feature that could cost $200 million. The proposal dovetails with a redevelopment plan for the neighborhood sponsored by the Bronx borough president, Adolfo Carrión, which includes a site for a hotel, retail shops, commercial development, a Metro-North station, an improved ferry terminal on the Harlem River and a shopping mall at the Bronx Terminal Market.

    Neither the Yankees nor city officials were willing to comment publicly yesterday on the details of the proposal, but the Yankees showed their plans to city officials earlier this month, and the team conceded that a proposal was in the works.

    "The Yankees are continuing to plan for a new stadium," said Randy Levine, president of the Yankees. "We're speaking with many people in government and in the community, but we don't have anything to present yet."

    Mr. Carrión, who was in Boston for the Democratic National Convention, said he would soon release a comprehensive plan for the area surrounding Yankee Stadium.

    "We've been talking to the Yankees for two years," he said. "There's some pretty serious planning brewing here. We'll be able to give a full-blown presentation pretty soon."

    The Yankees' latest proposal is a remarkable turnabout for a legendary ball club that once threatened to abandon the Bronx for New Jersey unless the city and state helped it build a $1 billion stadium on the West Side of Manhattan. It seems to take into account new political realities and the public's distaste for government subsidies for sports buildings.

    At the same time, the team's plan is likely to provoke greater scrutiny of plans for the city and state to provide a $600 million subsidy for a $1.4 billion, 75,000-seat football stadium for the Jets and to do $187.7 million in road and rail yard work for the proposed $435 million Nets basketball arena in Brooklyn.

    "The most recent proposal from the Yankees indicates a sea change in their thinking, recognizing that the public doesn't want to subsidize stadiums given the city's other more pressing needs," said Harvey Robins, a former aide to Mayors Edward I. Koch and David N. Dinkins. "As the Yankees put more on the table, I'd like to see comparable concessions from the Jets and the Nets."

    If the Yankees proposal is adopted, the team's $700 million investment in the stadium would make it both the most expensive baseball park and the largest such investment by a professional baseball team. In recent years, as economists questioned the wisdom of public investment in stadiums that mostly enrich the owners, sports teams have increasingly been forced to pay a larger share of the stadium costs once borne gladly by cities and counties.

    Four years ago, for example, the San Francisco Giants became the first team in recent years to finance its stadium privately. The St. Louis Cardinals are building a $400 million stadium that is almost entirely privately financed.

    Given New York's recent fiscal constraints, the Bloomberg and Pataki administrations declared that they would not pay for sports buildings themselves, although they would be willing to consider infrastructure improvements like roadwork and public transportation.

    At the end of his term in 2001, Mr. Giuliani tried to seal a deal to build new $800 million stadiums for both the Yankees and the Mets, in which the teams would pay half the cost. The Yankees would have built a new 47,000-seat stadium with a retractable roof in Macombs Dam Park and demolished the old stadium. Under that deal, the state was expected to spend $390 million on parking garages, highway improvements and public transportation for the stadiums.

    After Mayor Bloomberg succeeded Mr. Giuliani, inheriting a recession and a city wounded by the attack on the World Trade Center, he quickly said there was no money for stadiums.

    Since then, the city backed the plan for a Jets stadium, which would also serve as an Olympic stadium if New York wins its bid for the 2012 summer Olympic Games, and the arena proposal.

    Like the Jets and the Nets, the Yankees may also ask the city to issue tax-exempt bonds for the project. The team, however, would make the annual payments on the bonds.

    Still, the state would probably have to spend tens of millions to build the Metro-North station and extend subway platforms for the new stadium, as well as make a number of highway improvements. The team's plan envisions a large, multilevel parking garage, which could be built by the state or a private owner. The Metro-North station could, however, reduce the total number of parking spaces.

    The team has also worked with Bronx officials to map out a series of parks and ball fields to replace Macombs Dam Park and sidestep potential community opposition.

    One executive who was briefed by the Yankees said the whole project was made possible by the team's financial plan. One of the most valuable sports franchises in the world, the Yankees paid about $60 million in revenue-sharing money to Major League Baseball. The league's rules allow teams to subtract annual stadium costs from their revenue-sharing obligations. So the Yankees would pay, say, $40 million a year to repay the bonds, rather than handing it over to Major League Baseball.

    "The team can shoulder most of the costs," said one person who has seen the Yankees' plan. "The beauty of this transaction is the fact that money spent towards stadium construction is viewed as an operating cost and isn't subject to revenue sharing."

    How would the Yankees' public react to quitting the old stadium? One fan, Paul Cisco of Long Island City, Queens, was in line for a sausage sandwich in the fourth inning when he was asked. "I don't think it's a problem," he said. "It's the times. You need to have more luxury seats, and you need to have more income. George can do it, too, even though he only paid $10 million for the team."

    Dave Caldwell contributed reporting for this article.

    Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

  4. #4
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,773

    Default

    According to sources close to the deal, the team will ask for $450 million in public infrastructure investment to build a hotel and conference center, a new Metro North stop, and a ferry landing, as well as three new parks elsewhere in the Bronx. Under state law, the team must replace the parkland it uses.
    Can someone tell me how a hotel and conference center can be considered "city infrastructure"?

    Almost all of our projects we work on, the conference center is put in as a payoff to the city, not vice versa.

    Also, what are they going to do with the "other" stadium? Having the two right next to each otehr will look a little, well, silly....

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ninjahedge
    According to sources close to the deal, the team will ask for $450 million in public infrastructure investment to build a hotel and conference center, a new Metro North stop, and a ferry landing, as well as three new parks elsewhere in the Bronx. Under state law, the team must replace the parkland it uses.
    Can someone tell me how a hotel and conference center can be considered "city infrastructure"?

    Almost all of our projects we work on, the conference center is put in as a payoff to the city, not vice versa.

    Also, what are they going to do with the "other" stadium? Having the two right next to each otehr will look a little, well, silly....

    As Zippy points out below, I see now that the article says the old stadium will be turned into a parking garage. (corrected from earlier post)

    Anyway, except for the hotel and conference center (which, you are correct, is not public infrastrudture, and who is going to hold a conference in the South Bronx?), I like the sound of the plan.

  6. #6

    Default

    The situation here is reversed from the norm. The team paying for the stadium, not the city, so you would not expect a payoff to the city.

    I read "city infrastructure" as a catchphrase for investment by the city. The Metro North Station, ferry terminal, and (required by law) parkland are obvious city infrastrcture items. The hotel and conference center will be of primary benefit to the stadium, but will be city owned and, hopefully, of benefit to the area.

    In light of some of the dubious items that get landmark status, Yankee Stadium should be a national historic landmark, and left as it is.

    BPC: The article states that the stadium is not being torn down

  7. #7
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,773

    Default

    That's what I am saying. Two stadiums side by side are going to look a bit off.

    I am not for the demolition of the current stadium (god knows it needs it.. ) but maybe a reconsideration of where the Yanks build.


    Oh, and what happened to Steins earlier plans of revitalizing the entire area? have those bitten the dust?

  8. #8

    Default

    Those plans to revitalize the neighborhood existed when the city was going to pay for the stadium. That was sidetracked when Guiliani proposed a baseball stadium over the railyard, which begat the idea for an olympic/football stadium over the railyard....and here we are. :P

    I don't see a problem with the two facilities side by side. It would be interesting to see proposals for adaptive reuse.

  9. #9

    Default

    Just move the Yankees to Manhattan already. :P

  10. #10
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Is that the fate of the old stadium... a parking garage? I guess that is how it will survive. I think it is ugly anyway and it is huge. They might as well destroy it. But maybe it could work as a sport museum if they build some sort of dome or ceiling.

    Maybe new condos could go up around the stadium with shops and restaurants. That is logical for sucess on that area also which is alot of waste land.

  11. #11
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Yankees stadium a tougher sell: mayor

    July 30, 2004

    Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Friday in his weekly radio address that a new Yankees stadium in the Bronx would be a tougher sell than the arenas that have been proposed in the city for the Jets and the Nets.

    "Baseball stadiums are different," he said, noting that the proposed Jets stadium, with its retractable roof, could double as part of an expanded convention center. "They are open stadiums and so they can't be used in the winter. And in the summer when you would like to use them for a concert … there is either a baseball game there or you can't tear up the field."

    The mayor stressed that there would need to be a return to the city if the Yankees are to get public funds, and that all the stadiums will need private investment.

    Copyright 2004, Crain Communications, Inc

  12. #12

    Default

    First the Jets want a new stadium. Now the Yankees. :lol:

  13. #13

    Default

    July 31, 2004

    Bloomberg Says City Will Help the Franchise That Helps Itself

    By WINNIE HU and CHARLES V. BAGLI


    Plan for a new field across from Yankee Stadium is one among many. The mayor said he would like to replace the city's other aging stadiums.

    Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg expressed support yesterday for the New York Yankees' plan to pay for a new stadium in the Bronx, saying that he would also like to replace the city's other aging sports arenas, Shea Stadium and Madison Square Garden.

    But the mayor made clear that those sports projects would also have to be paid for primarily by the teams themselves, or through other private investments. Reiterating his earlier position on the issue, he said that city money could be counted on only for smaller improvements in infrastructure.

    "We just don't have a lot of money to pay for it," the mayor said on his weekly radio program on WABC-AM. "And so what we said from Day 1 was to build these things, it's got to be done with private money, and if there needs to be a public investment for infrastructure, there has to be a return for the city."

    Officials with the Yankees and the city said on Wednesday that the team planned to pay for much of the $700 million cost of a new open-air stadium, which would rise across 161st Street from its current home. According to the team's latest proposal, the city and state share would total roughly $300 million, which would be used in part to create public ball fields and parks to offset the loss of parkland in the neighborhood.

    Yankees' executives, who have hired PricewaterhouseCoopers to do an economic impact analysis, said they were confident that it will show that additional tax revenues from a new stadium would more than offset the cost of the infrastructure work by the state and the city.

    "We're appreciative of the mayor's views and we look forward to working with him as we finalize our plans," Randy Levine, president of the Yankees, said yesterday.

    In contrast, the city and state would pay substantially more - about $600 million in public funds - for a proposed $1.4 billion stadium for the New York Jets on the far West Side of Manhattan. The Jets would invest about $800 million in the stadium, or what the mayor calls "the biggest private contribution ever." It would also be most the expensive football stadium in the country, by far.

    In recent months, the Jets stadium has been opposed by community groups and businesses, including Cablevision, the publicly traded company that owns Madison Square Garden, the New York Knicks and the New York Rangers. But the Jets stadium remains a central part of the Bloomberg administration's $6.5 billion plan to transform the West Side: it would double as an exhibition hall and as an Olympic stadium if the city succeeds in its bid for the 2012 summer Olympics.

    Mayor Bloomberg defended the Jets proposal yesterday by pointing out that it would be used mostly as a convention center, not as a sports stadium, and that it would create a large number of jobs in the city. The Jets, the state and the city contend that the stadium will generate more than $65 million annually in state and city taxes, or $23 million more than they believe it will cost the city and state in annual debt payments.

    "Baseball stadiums are different," the mayor said. "They're basically used for baseball and not a lot else. They're open stadiums, so they can't be used in the winter, and in the summer, when you would like to use them for a concert or something, there's either a baseball game there or you can't tear up the field. So you know, you say, 'Well, it's sitting there empty.' Yeah, but you can't use it, so that's the problem."

    The mayor said a proposed $435 million arena in Brooklyn for the New Jersey Nets was part of a residential and commercial complex that would generate "enormous returns because it will bring a lot of jobs and housing to that neighborhood."

    The developer is also asking for more than $300 million in tax breaks and road and rail yard work.

    Even so, Mayor Bloomberg said that city officials were working closely with the Yankees to move ahead with the stadium proposal. In a thinly veiled swipe at Cablevision, which has financed ads against the Jets stadium, the mayor also praised the Yankees' principal owner, George Steinbrenner, for trying to find a way to pay for the stadium without relying on the city.

    "The Steinbrenner organization, they're smart, they're aggressive, and rather than just go out and yell and scream and try to stop other projects, their whole focus is in trying to get something that's viable and that works," he said. "I'm a big fan."

    Mayor Bloomberg said that he would also like to see a new Madison Square Garden built on the West Side, along with the Jets stadium. Other possibilities, he said, included building a new arena as part of the refurbishment of Penn Station, or on a vacant parcel of land on Eighth Avenue.

    Cablevision, in turn, has pointedly announced that it would renovate the Garden without asking for additional city subsidies. Officials in the Bloomberg administration say they hope Cablevision will cease its war against the Jets' project and seek the city's help in building a new Garden at another location.

    The mayor, who attended a Yankees game on Thursday night, said that he would not play favorites when it came to the city's two baseball teams. He added that city officials were also working with Fred Wilpon, the principal owner of the Mets, to come up with a way to pay for a new Shea Stadium. But the Mets, whose officials could not be reached for comment, generate far less revenue than the Yankees, the most valuable sports franchise in the country, and may not be able to offer to pay for a $700 million stadium, said one baseball official.

    "If the Steinbrenner organization comes up with money, we'll look at that; if it's right for the city, the city will help them," the mayor said. "If the Wilpon organization comes up with money for a new Shea stadium, and it's right for the city, the city will help them. I mean, I'd love to see both."

    Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

  14. #14
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Yankees' move could deck nabe


    July 31, 2004

    Though the difference would be a single city block, a Yankee Stadium move could have a big impact on the bottom line of some locals.

    "We get 75% of our business from people who get off the subway at this corner for the game," said Luis Gonzalez, 28, who works at Stan's Sports World on River Ave. across from the stadium.

    Gonzalez said he grew up playing ball at the Babe Ruth Baseball Field in Macombs Dam Park, the site of the proposed stadium.

    "It would be bad for business, and it would be sad to see Babe Ruth field go," he said.

    Wanda Rivera, 50, works at the Stadium Racquet Club, a bustling tennis center that could be crowded out for a hotel if the stadium moves. Her son, Kevin, 18, plays for the United Youth League at Macombs Dam Park.

    "My son would have to go further to play, and I'd have to find a new job," said Rivera, a neighborhood resident for 27 years.

    But many locals see no cause for concern.

    "It's just across the street for God's sake," said Margarita Hunt-Tejada, the district manager for Community Board 4, which includes the Stadium.

    Just up the block from the Stadium, storeowners who depend less on the games' crowds didn't mind if the Yankees get the signal to cross the street.

    "It doesn't affect our business," said Mitchell Goldstein, 50, who has owned Leff Prescriptions on 161st St. for 28 years. "They could play golf in there for all I care."

    David Epstein
    Originally published on July 31, 2004


    All contents © 2004 Daily News, L.P.

  15. #15
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Shea hey, we need park, too
    Mets: Don't forget us



    BY ADAM RUBIN, MICHAEL SAUL and TRACY CONNOR
    DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS

    You still gotta believe, Mets fans - your team says if the city helps the Yankees build a new stadium, it has to pitch in for the Amazin's, too.

    "I guarantee anything they get, we'll get," Mets Chief Operating Officer Jeff Wilpon told the Daily News yesterday.

    Talk of replacing 40-year-old Shea Stadium resurfaced with this week's news that the Bombers are polishing a proposal for a new home field in the Bronx.

    Under that plan, the Yanks would pay for the cost - an estimated $700 million - of building a retro-style, open-air stadium in Macombs Dam Park next to Yankee Stadium.

    Taxpayers would pick up the tab for infrastructure improvements such as a Metro-North railroad stop and a ferry landing, sources said.

    Whether that kind of deal would work for the Mets is unclear, since the Queens gang isn't as loaded as George Steinbrenner's Yankees.

    But one well-placed expert said if Wilpon scales back his ambitions - including scrapping plans for a retractable dome as the Yankees did - he should be able to afford it.

    And Wilpon indicated that as long as the city agrees to spend the same amount on both teams, a new Mets stadium might be possible.

    "We may not need as much infrastructure" as the Yankees, he said, suggesting the leftover millions could be used to underwrite stadium construction costs.

    Mayor Bloomberg sounded bullish yesterday on the idea of both baseball franchises - as well as the basketball Knicks and hockey Rangers - getting new homes. But he made it clear he doesn't think the public should subsidize the building of ballparks.

    "We need a new Yankee Stadium. As a matter of fact, we need a new Shea Stadium, and I think we need a new Madison Square Garden," Bloomberg said.

    "But in all three of those cases, we've got to find ways to do it with private money."

    He also dismissed the idea that the fates of the two baseball teams are intertwined.

    "If the Steinbrenner organization comes up with money, we'll look at that. If it's right for the city, the city will help 'em," the mayor said.

    "If the Wilpon organization comes up with money for a new Shea Stadium and it's right for the city, the city will help 'em.

    "I mean, I'd love to see both, but there does not have to be a connection between the two of them. We'll treat each of them separately."

    A Yankees announcement is likely months away, but manager Joe Torre admitted last night the idea of giving up the House That Ruth Built is bittersweet.

    "I think they've done great things with new ballparks and giving them personality, but this place especially, with all the championships and players who have come through here, you know it would lose some of the mystique that this is where it all happened," he said.

    With T.J. Quinn
    Originally published on July 31, 2004


    All contents © 2004 Daily News, L.P.

Page 1 of 47 1234511 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Randall's Island
    By billyblancoNYC in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: July 28th, 2015, 06:28 PM
  2. Javits Center Expansion (& Cancelled Jets Stadium)
    By OKoranjes in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 2960
    Last Post: November 13th, 2013, 01:22 PM
  3. Beijing Olympic Stadium (the "Bird's Nest") - by Herzog & de Meuron
    By Kris in forum World Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: April 7th, 2009, 04:59 PM
  4. Bold Stadium Designs
    By Kris in forum World Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: April 24th, 2006, 01:58 PM
  5. Proposed Jets Stadium on West Side
    By NYguy in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 245
    Last Post: March 6th, 2004, 08:15 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software