New Yankee Stadium - by HOK Sport

[Teno]

Where's the welfare?

The $430 million in public money.

But if we want to look at things with that logic. The master plan for the West Side stadium. For $600 million and winning the Olympic bid, NY would have won billions in new development and infrastructure throughout every bourough.

And it does appear the stadium is beginning to stir up excitment and activity in developers to take interest in the West side, which will provide the MTA even more money for the rest of the air rights over the rail yards, as well as develop the surrounding area.

I can't see how you guys think these are two totally different projects. The only difference as Schwarz has said the effects of the stadium could be a lot bigger. If the Olympics are won (I doubt we wil though) the ripple effect will cross the entire city.

[ZippyTheChimp]

You're right. The spinoff effects in the Bronx will be close to nill; the multiplier effects of a Manhattan stadium/convention complex would be huge. If the projects were being decided on merit, not politics, the West Side would be the unanimous priority.

You're making one big assumption - that the West Side actually needs the stadium to ignite development. That is simply not true.

What is happening in the Bronx is that an area that does not have an inherent value for massive development (like the West Side) is getting something the community wants and supports - the stadium is staying put. Macombs Dam and Mullaly Park are not open for development. The community gets at least an equal return in parkland, plus use of the old stadium field. The Metro North station will also benefit the community. Even the parking garages will be owned and operated by the state, not the Yankees.

The biggest thing of course, is that the public supported it. Despite some of the complaining here, the Jets stadium had no majority support in the neighborhood, the borough, the city, or statewide.

[ZippyTheChimp]

As for the Olympics,there is an illogical assumption that the stadium leads to the Olympics.

The hard facts are that the Paris bid is budgeted for $6.9 billion dollars, while NYC is $3.2 billion. Paris had a parade recently to show support for the Olympics - 1 million people showed up. Have you seen much Olympic support here?

Paris really wants it. That is why they are probably going to get it. And it is more about prestige than profits. The Olympics do not generate as much as is assumed.

The only Olympics in the US to turn a decent municipal profit was LA in 1980. The bidding went out after the 1972 Munich Olympics, and there was not much enthusiasm . LA got it dirt cheap, recycling virtually all existing venues.

[Teno]

The biggest thing of course, is that the public supported it. Despite some of the complaining here, the Jets stadium had no majority support in the neighborhood, the borough, the city, or statewide.

Yes the Yankee's stadium is a much easier pill to swallow. But I wouldn't go as far as to say the land is totally useless except for a baseball stadium.

You ask a million people their opinion you get a million answers. Bloomberg nor the Jets did a very good job at all in framing their case to the public. Much of the public attitude towards the Jets stadium was not based on concrete facts, but on perceptions of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Media manipulation is far more effective using fear than inspiration.

At times a leader has to make unpopular choices. The public doesn't always see the bigger picture or understand a larger vision. This has been true of large NY projects in the past which were unpopular on paper and in public opinion but later became a symbol of the city's greatness.

[Fabrizio]

"Paris really wants it. That is why they are probably going to get it. And it is more about prestige than profits".

Adding to that, let´s remember: Paris IS France.... New York is not the US.

[pianoman11686]

Yankees' Stadium Plans Stepping Up to the Plate

By CHARLES V. BAGLI

Published: June 15, 2005

For the second time in a week, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg will unveil plans today for a new baseball stadium in New York City: an $800 million home for the Yankees that will replicate the team's original ballpark in the Bronx, from the limestone walls and distinctive copper frieze to the placement of the bullpens.

The team plans to build an open-air stadium with 51,800 seats - although it could be expanded to 54,000 seats - and 50 to 60 luxury suites in Macombs Dam Park, across 161st Street from the team's historic home. It will be smaller than the existing stadium, which has 56,937 seats and about 18 luxury boxes.

The design, by the architectural firm of Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, would restore many of the signature features of the original 82-year-old stadium that were wiped out by the 1976 renovation, and it would retain the same field dimensions and dugouts, according to two executives who have seen the plans.

The announcement, to be made jointly by Bloomberg and George Steinbrenner, the principal owner of the Yankees, comes only three days after a similar proclamation by the mayor and the Mets concerning plans to build a new stadium in Queens for about $700 million. That stadium would also be used for the Olympics if the city wins its bid for the 2012 Games.

The Yankee Stadium project is part of a broader redevelopment plan, initiated by the Bronx borough president, Adolfo Carrión Jr., that includes a hotel, conference center and high school for sports-related careers.

"It's exciting," Carrión said yesterday. "With the plan for Jets stadium falling out of the equation, it presented an opportunity to take care of two New York teams. I'm glad the administration has stepped forward and supported the Bronx community plan. We need to create a win-win situation, and I think this will do that."

The Yankees, one of the most valuable franchises in sports, have agreed to pay all construction, operating and maintenance costs for the stadium. The city and state will spend an estimated $220 million on work related to the stadium, bringing the total cost to more than $1 billion.

The state has agreed to spend up to $75 million to build three or four parking garages, which will add up to 5,000 new spaces, and to do some road work. The team says that the cost of the garages will be more than covered by game-day parking fees.

The city is expected to spend about $140 million to replace the roughly 17 acres of Macombs Dam Park and Mullaly Park that the new stadium will occupy with a 28-acre waterfront park along the Harlem River. The Parks Department will replace the running track, soccer field and tennis, handball and basketball courts that were in the parks with new and additional fields, some of which will be atop the garages.

In their new stadium, the Yankees plan to place about 30,000 seats on the first level and 20,000 in the second level, giving more fans a closer view of the field than the current stadium provides.

Most of the current Yankee Stadium will not fall to the wrecking ball. The city plans to preserve at least the existing baseball field, the dugouts and the first level of the stands for Little League and high school use.

"I'm sure they'll have limos or vans to take the ghosts over to the new ballpark," Yankees Manager Joe Torre said.

Although the new stadium, like the old one, will go up on city-owned land, the team will not pay rent or property taxes under the terms of the deal with the city and the state. The Yankees and the Mets have existing leases with the city that are widely regarded as especially favorable to the teams. From 2000 through 2004, the Yankees paid a total of $26.43 million in rent, or a little more than $5 million a year.

To finance the construction, the city and the state would create a local development corporation that would issue tax-free bonds, which would be paid off by the Yankees. That allows the team to save an estimated $12.8 million a year in financing costs, although it reduces tax revenue.

The announcements are a remarkable postscript to Bloomberg's declaration in 2002 that the city could not afford to build sports stadiums, given more pressing municipal needs. Today, the New York area is awash in plans for stadiums and arenas, with new homes planned for the Mets, the Yankees and the Nets in New York City, and the MetroStars, the Devils, the Giants and, maybe, the Jets in New Jersey.

A 1996 report by the city comptroller estimated that professional sporting events account for only 0.7 percent of the region's economy.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[NYguy]

The press conference will be broadcast live on YES today at 4 p.m.

[NYatKNIGHT]

Rendering included with above NY Times article:


The Yankees plan to build an open-air stadium with 51,800 seats - although it could be expanded to 54,000 seats - and 50 to 60 luxury suites in Macombs Dam Park, across 161st Street from the team's historic home.

[Schadenfrau]

That rendering really looks terrific. A $100 million investment is going to have such a tremendous impact on that underutilized area.

[Teno]

The rendering looks nice. I have nothing against the new Yankee stadium, and look forward to it getting built.

The city and state will spend an estimated $220 million on work related to the stadium, bringing the total cost to more than $1 billion.

The city is expected to spend about $140 million to replace the roughly 17 acres of Macombs Dam Park and Mullaly Park that the new stadium will occupy with a 28-acre waterfront park along the Harlem River.

Although the new stadium, like the old one, will go up on city-owned land, the team will not pay rent or property taxes under the terms of the deal with the city and the state. The Yankees and the Mets have existing leases with the city that are widely regarded as especially favorable to the teams. From 2000 through 2004, the Yankees paid a total of $26.43 million in rent, or a little more than $5 million a year.

To finance the construction, the city and the state would create a local development corporation that would issue tax-free bonds, which would be paid off by the Yankees. That allows the team to save an estimated $12.8 million a year in financing costs, although it reduces tax revenue.

They are building on city owned land and will pay no rent or property taxes, and the city will spend $140 million to replace the park land.

They are doing everything they can to cut expence for this project, just like any developer would do.

[NYguy]

That's a nice rendering.

NEWSDAY

New Yankee Stadium unveiled

June 15, 2005


Like it or not, the Yankees are moving. Just not too far.

"We are staying home in the Bronx," Yankees team president Randy Levine said at today's press conference announcing the plans for a new stadium.

The new $800 million stadium, financed by the Yankees, would have about 50,800 permanent seats. It could be expanded by 3,000, and is to be built just north of the current site, which holds 57,545 fans, in Macombs Dam and Mullaly parks.

"The Yankees, not the taxpayers, will pay to construct this project," Levine said. "The Yankees, not the taxpayers, will pay to maintain it."

It is envisioned as the centerpiece of a redevelopment plan in the south Bronx neighborhood where the team has played since 1923.

The city and state will commit more than $200 million to the project, with the city preparing to spend up to $130 million, sources said yesterday, mostly for adjacent parkland and retail development that would create a setting similar to Oriole Park at Camden Yards in Baltimore.

"The Yankees are known across the world," New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. "They are America."

Bloomberg said the stadium is expected to create 3,600 construction jobs and add between 500 and 1,000 permanent jobs. He also kindly offered to throw out the first pitch in 2009, the expected date of the project's completion.

"I've already started working on my curveball," Bloomberg said.

Renderings from HOK Sport, the Kansas City architectural firm whose projects include Oriole Park, display an open-air stadium with concrete and limestone exterior that evokes the entrances and the original design by Osborne Engineering. Inside that wall would be a hall of retail shops and concourses that separate the exterior wall from the seating area, which would include at least 50 luxury suites, and the field itself, which would have the same dimensions as the current one. There would be about 30,000 seats in the lower bowl and 20,000 above.

The Yankees, who expect to fund the stadium through tax-exempt bonds, want the state and MTA to pay for parking garages for 4,000 cars, a Metro-North station, an extension of the 161st Street subway platform and an expanded ferry terminal. The city will maintain the stadium or reimburse the Yankees, which is a reversal of the Mets stadium deal that was brokered by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and NYC2012 officials last weekend.

Under one proposal, the city, which owns the existing stadium, would demolish part of it and refurbish the rest, possibly for a Hall of Fame, office space, and perhaps a hotel, as well as use the diamond for community sports teams.

_____________________________________________

[lofter1]

I watched the press conference and repeatedly heard that the old stadium would NOT be torn down but re-used as a "museum" ( and have read here that the city will own the old stadium and might use it as offices, hotel, etc.??).
So I'm curious -- everyone says that it was too expensive to refurbish the old stadium for the Yankees because it was "falling down" (Gifford Miller); the amount of "hundreds of millions" to refurbish was tossed around.
My question: what is the cost to taxpayers of making sure the old stadium is usable and is maintained in a way that is can be re-used?

[NYguy]

I watched the press conference and repeatedly heard that the old stadium would NOT be torn down but re-used as a "museum" ( and have read here that the city will own the old stadium and might use it as offices, hotel, etc.??).

It would be used for multiple purposes that might include all of the above. It would probably be partially torn down.

So I'm curious -- everyone says that it was too expensive to refurbish the old stadium for the Yankees because it was "falling down" (Gifford Miller); the amount of "hundreds of millions" to refurbish was tossed around.
My question: what is the cost to taxpayers of making sure the old stadium is usable and is maintained in a way that is can be re-used?

It leaves a distaste in my mouth that Miller was even anywhere around, but he wants to steal some of Bloomberg's stadium spotlight. Unless of course, its the one on the westside, apparently the only place where NIMBYs vote.

[NYguy]

More renderings from NEWSDAY













New York Yankees president Randy Levine points to the location of Monument Park in an architect's rendering of a proposed new $800 million Yankee Stadium.




New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, left, New York Yankees principal owner George Steinbrenner, center, and New York Governor George Pataki

[NoyokA]

I'm not going to tip toe around it, the stadium's architecture sucks. I think retro stadiums are passé but they can be successful, Petco Park in San Diego is one such example. With the new Yankee stadium they are essentially copying the current stadium where the modern clashes with the traditional, as a whole the design has no appeal. Not only does the architecture lack direction, but the new stadium will have fewer seats, sorry I don’t get it.