- 60% of residents favor construction of the ballpark village
- 69% of residents have a favorable opinion of the A's
- 18% have an unfavorable opinion of the A's
Margin of error was ±5%. Perhaps some were swayed by the various charitable efforts the A's have done in the area (Eckersley Field renovation, attendance at numerous area events). Or maybe people are simply excited. Whatever the case, it's good to know that the populace is at the very least open-minded about the concept. That's all we can ask for.
16 comments:
ML or anyone else out there, help me out here.
I guess we now begin the lengthy review process for the ballpark/village. I assume Lew and Keith Wolff will not simply be sitting in their office waiting for the development application to be approved. What are some of the things they will be doing over the next 12-18 months?
1) Can 360 start with the actual nuts and bolts design of the ballpark?
2) How about the design of the retail portion of the village?
3) When do they start to look for tenants to fill the village?
4) When does the Fremont Building Department start looking at the specs for the project? I have to believe that a city the size of Fremont will have to bring in consultants to assist them in the review and approval process.
I noticed that the development application did list a number of contractors and consultants. I'm assuming a lot of work is already being done behind the scene.
R.M.,
Playing devils advocate, would the results of the survey be effected if the A's were asking Fremont for a public subsidy? Not that a subsidy will be required (we think)...just asking.
I'll try to answer these questions:
1. I'm certain they already have. They've been working from many different variations of the same theme.
2. The streetscape illustrations are a clue. I haven't seen renderings yet, but they must have those too.
3. Often there's a retail/commercial strategist involved that knows everything right down to where the stores should be placed. I think one is listed in the contributors roll.
4. It kind of depends on how everything gets phased in. While the ballpark and immediately associated retail will come first, everything else will be built over a period years. That leaves wiggle room for change. Santana Row went through that twice - once because of a devastating construction fire. The CSP has much of the specs in there: streetscapes, building heights, densities, unit sizes.
Tony - I think you already know the answer to that question.
One of LW's many investment groups , I'll just call it " ACC " , already owns power centers throughout many states ,such as Gilroy Crossings . Believe me, they and their consultants can do shopping / entertainment center planning ,development, tenant mix for any income demographic target in their sleep.
Thanks for your responses.
I guess I was look at more meat and potatoes stuff - structural and mechanical designs. The A's will want to break ground as soon as they receive approval from Fremont. I assume at that point much of the construction design will have to be completed. Does the 12-18 months include review by the building department? Or does that review start after the application is approved.
Not sure about the validity of this survey.
Hey, seems like you censure alot of comments here. So much for differing points of view.
No, only the inflammatory ones.
As far as the validity of the survey, the margin for error gives an idea that it is at least scientific. I just wonder how random the sample size is.
For what it's worth, it has been my experience that my friends who live in Fremont have been in favor of the move. But they are also A's fans and baseball fans, etc.
Polls like this always pose more questions then they answer in my mind.
Surveys need to have at least 1,000 participants to be stastically relevant. And with the +/- this stands at a 55% "approval" rate. Not exactly a mandate to get things done.
I can believe this if you can cite a study that points to 1,000 as "statistically relevant." Based on what? Count of adult population? Number of registered voters in Fremont?
That's crap. There is no magic minimum number for all surveys. What if your universe is 500 people? There is a minimal percentage of the total population to make it statistically relavant based on confidence level and confidence interval. 400 is absolutely relevant for the population of Fremont for a 95% confidence level and a margin of error of +/- 5%. Try again.
This is why these discussions frustrate me.
Is there anyone out there who reads this blog who started out against the A's moving to Fremont?
And if so, have you changed your mind after ML's fine work and analysis? My guess is that the answer is very few, if not none at all.
It's one thing to have issues with parts of the proposal(as I do with public transit). But if someone is philosophically opposed to the entire concept of the A's being in Fremont, then nothing is going to change their mind and they'll likely find fault with anything
you put out there, Rhamesis.
As I suspect is the case with whoever is questioning the "statistical relevance" of the poll.
It's Rob! Hey R.M., the crickets have been deafning on this blog since Lew Wolff submitted the Dev. App. What the heck is going on?! When can we expect more news, developments regarding Cisco Field?
I'm not opposed to the A's moving to Fremont, only opposed to the location since it is not close to public transportation. This is a big, big problem.
That's actually a misconception. It is very close to both ACE and Capital Corridor. And they've said it will have some form of link direct or otherwise to BART. Don't know how much more connected it can be unless they extend Caltrain across the bay. Not to mention the existing and expanded bus service and the TWO freeways in the vicinity.
Post a Comment