Pages

28 January 2009

Former Fremont councilman Dutra supports A's

Today's Argus has an opinion piece by former Fremont councilman Dominic Dutra. In it he argues that a win-win solution is still possible. The crux of his argument:

The city should strive to honestly and forthrightly address these impacts while also citing the potential for growth in office, commercial, residential and other development.

While impacts are certain to exist, the A's appear to be making significant and good faith efforts to address these concerns in order to mitigate them to an extent acceptable to most reasonable people.

Of equal importance, if traditional economic development patterns hold true, this planning effort should result in ample evidence that a stadium located adjacent to vacant land, major freeways and transportation hubs (such as the proposed BART station) would lead to significant economic growth for years to come.

Parallel with this planning effort, the city should perform a financial analysis to determine what the long-term financial benefits to the city would be in terms of additional property tax, sales tax, business tax, redevelopment tax increment, etc.

These future revenue enhancements then could be weighed against the cost of increased service demands.

Whether or not either of the alternatives is certified, it wouldn't be a bad idea to revisit the economic impact report released 20 months ago. The economy has changed drastically downward in the last 6 months, and it would behoove all to see how projections may have changed in that timeframe. It would be helpful for baseball village supporters or those who may want to put a similar concept in place in the "downtown" Fremont area.

100 comments:

Jeffrey said...

sure sounds like he is rational and worrying about what city leadership should worry about.

La Boca said...

I agree Jeffrey; but study both of the sites that allow BARK access.

Jeffrey said...

Reading the only comment on the article at insidebayarea.com, it is dumbfounding to me the complete lack of regard for reality that the anti Warm Springs BART crowd has.

I can understand not wanting to have a stadium near your home, but the whole "look at where the Oakland Coliseum is" and how "similar" that area is to Warm Springs is just ridiculous. Just leave the argument at "I don't want the stadium by my house." That's enough for me.

Personally, I think the best site in Fremont is the first site. Pacific Commons is the best because of the huge potential for ancillary development which will provide an economic benefit to Fremont.

The big problem, as I see it, at Warm Springs is that there is not the same growth potential in the surrounding area. There isn't the blank canvass to create the downtown that Fremont would greatly benefit from without tearing down first, and building up second.

The Lake Elizabeth thing looks gorgeous, but I just don't think it is really plausible. In that case, the residential area isn't even across a freeway it is smack dab right there.

If I was the commissioner I would already be pushing for San Jose because all of the problems associated with any other site mentioned don't exist there. It would be the most transit friendly stadium in baseball within the next decade. there is plenty of future opportunity to redevelop in the area and other parts of San Jose to help finance the building in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Can we please put Fremont to bed? The A's are going to San Jose and that's what we need to focus on.

La Boca said...

Jeffrey,

If I heard correctly, you said "the Lake Elizabeth thing looks gorgeous." Thank you for your honest opinion on that!

For the record, the residential next to the Central Park location is higher density residential; with owner occupied condos across from the POLICE DEPARTMENT, and rental units running the rest of the way towards Mission.

The single family residences are further away that in Warm Springs.

Anonymous said...

we should put fremont and san jose to rest. the a's aren't going anywhere!

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:22

I agree with you---while I appreciate the passion of LaBoca, and can understand it, I think that if all of us step back and place ourselves in LW's shoes as a business man that the only 2 sites that made/make any sense were PC because of the huge upside in housing/retail development and San Jose with its existing transit infrastructure and downtown core.

WS would be a second colisieum--and by that I don't mean crime---but rather just a ballpark off the freeway without any atmosphere or draw beyond game day--and Central Park is rife with challenges and has no advantages to Wolff from a business perspective. I mean zero--

San Jose and PC need to come together as one---San Jose build the ballpark and PC build the housing/retail that will support the current development in place---

Win-win situation....and we keep the A's in the Bay Area!

Jeffrey said...

I guess the residential challenge at Lake Elizabeth, as I see it, is that for people to drive to that spot they would need to go through some singe family neighborhoods. The difference at Warm Springs is that the free way off ramps to the where the stadium would be steer people away from neighborhoods.

Besides the residential neighborhood thingy, there is the redevelopment around the park as a bonus challenge. Neither Lake Elizabeth nor Warm Springs are as "ready" for that as Pac Commons

I wonder if that Golf Course by Lake Elizabeth could be redeveloped into the whole Cisco Village concept?

At Pacific Commons, neither challenge really exists, though the distance from BART is seen as a huge drawback by many. I don't really think it is as a BART to Pac Co shuttle would be pretty similar to the current situation in San Francisco.

Jeffrey said...

What if.... the Earthquakes moved to Fremont and the A's to San Jose?

And people who think the A's are staying put are smoking crack.

La Boca said...

Anon 12:54 -

Thank you for the kind words and perspective.

One difference as I see it; the City of Fremont is currently in negotiations with yet another BIG developer (TMG) to develop a project on Fremont Blvd. and Capital Avenue basically the same size as Wolfs Ballpark Village Plan in PC (?).

With the projected growth for Fremont over the next twenty years of 40,000 more people (hopefully put near transit) and the amount of land that the City owns in the CBD (not to mention under the Central Park site) - i'd say there is TREMENDOUS business potential for both Wolf and the CITY!

Anonymous said...

I moved FROM the Capital Avenue /State Street location precisely because that area will NEVER get developed as Fremont's " downtown " . You won't believe how many plans have come and gone for that site where the current Fremont Bank bulding /Old Waffle House /gas station/auto parts store is located. THAT 1 city block area is PITIFUL and the only undeveloped pc of land , and if you have eyes , it's completely developed maturely all around , so what are they gonna do , move then tear down Elephant Bar, Barnes and Noble, Petsmart the busy Fremont Hub " mega strip mall " and the other strip mall businesses congrgating around Paseo/Mowry/Fremont Blvd . ? It would cost hundreds of millions just to secure that commercially developed land , never mind the $$$ lost to city tax base if they did that in the interim and replace with what -Santana Row in the lowest demographic part of Fremont as opposed to PC where that southern end of town has the multi-million dollar homes .

I'm not posting anything that LW 's people don't know . It's all about LOCATION in their biz .

Marine Layer said...

Redevelopment in the Bay Area is certainly a gamble, especially in the suburbs. The track record looks best for the smaller cities that push mega-developments like malls to their outskirts while encouraging local small business to prosper in their designated CBD's.

Mountain View put a shopping center at its edge while keeping its downtown intact. Sunnyvale ripped most of its downtown apart to insert a mall. Mt. View has both its mall and its downtown thriving, Sunnyvale has a big hole in the ground and two blocks of downtown. San Jose's fathers have poured millions to try to make a complete downtown then Santana Row stole their thunder.

OTOH, Walnut Creek managed to have both a mall and a vibrant downtown integrated. Hayward struggles to have either a mall or a downtown. Fremont has neither by some definitions. Planning is tough work.

Anonymous said...

Jeffrey said..."At Pacific Commons, neither challenge really exists, though the distance from BART is seen as a huge drawback by many. I don't really think it is as a BART to Pac Co shuttle would be pretty similar to the current situation in San Francisco."

Not sure what you mean by this Jeffrey--the situation is not even close---all of those south bay fans that MacGowan and Company said they needed to keep via territorial rights, if they chose to take mass transit, take CalTrain and walk across the street to AT&T---much like it will be in San Jose--only closer--

I doubt many east bay fans use BART to get to AT&T--too far away--but in San Jose--it will be right across the street-

At the end...agree with your conclusion---San Jose is the place to be--

Jeffrey said...

I have been to AT&T park several times via BART and then MUNI street car. And every time I have, so have several other East Bay fans.

Pleasanton station to Embarcadero to MUNI, a mile and some change later, off right outside the park.

daveinsm said...

I believe someone posted this comment earlier but I want to reiterate that if I was LW, now is the time to build. With construction and material cost so low it is the perfect time to build a ballpark village.

when I head to spring training this march, I will ask LW what are his plans for Fremont.

Anonymous said...

daveinsm- something tells me a better question for LW is how long before a shovel is in the ground in San Jose---in fact I wouldn't be suprised if Fremont is out of play by opening of Spring Training-

Anonymous said...

let's put fremont to bed ...

let's put sj out of our minds ...

a's will play in oaktown for a while then move to ...

sactown.

- sactodavey

Anonymous said...

...and the Giants will win the World Series....

daveinsm said...

sorry ML - we have made your blog into a fan vs fan comment section in articles of sites like espn and si.

feel free to no publish this :)

to Anonymous 10:42

and of course pigs will fly...

too bad the cubs are the longest to not win a world series because I think the Giants are 3rd in line for longest WS drought, other wise they can be labeled as the "lovable losers"

50 years in the Bay Area = 0 WS titles and only 3 NL pennants.

bruno said...

ANY WORD ON THE A'S MOVING TO COMCAST SPORTSNET CALIFORNIA? OR ARE WE STILL STUCK WITH WATCHING LESS THAN HALF OF THE GAMES HERE IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY?

Anonymous said...

daveinsm-you missed the point--A's staying in Oakland and than moving to Sacto is as ridiculous/has the same odds of the Giants winning the WS---

And an A's fan here and love every moment of the Giants streak!

daveinsm said...

haha...I admit I didn't want to turn this into a fantasy league spat, but I just couldn't help myself :P

thanks for letting us have some fun ML

Marine Layer said...

Not a problem. Just keep it civil.

Anonymous said...

Leave the A's in Oakland or go to San Jose because Fremont doesn't want them. WS location is next to an elementary school and residential area and the last thing we want is a huge ballpark as our new neighbor. Pacific Commons did not want the ballpark and they are close to Kohls, Costco, and Lowes. The city council is crazy to think a stadium would make it in Fremont! Wake up Wasserman and council followers. People are saving their money not spending it.It wouldn't make it. There is nothing to do in Fremont so go away A's to San Jose. We don't even have a theater for crying out loud.

Anonymous said...

I agree, Fremont is not the place for a ballpark. However, Milpitas is a wonderful place. How about the old, closed dump site, perfect. Away from residential neighborhoods and plenty of seagulls to eat the leftover trash.

Anonymous said...

Bart, Bart, Bart. The real reason why they are trying to push the WS site. Bart is falling apart. The trains are in dire need of repair. Rates are continually going up. So who cares so much about Bart. What percentage of people utilize Bart today? Most people like to take their own cars. It's cheaper especially when you can haul 4-6 people in a vehicle. Add the expense to take 4 -6 people on Bart when you can take your own car for less. It's all about money these days, saving money. BTW, Bart isn't even safe anymore, too many weird riders, forget Bart! And forget about the A's going to Fremont,sounds like they are not wanted.

Anonymous said...

The A's are showing a good faith effort to resolve the issues of WS--article in the SJ Biz Journal talked about the A's flexibility in addressing the issues as well as quoting an official from the Fremont School District who said "...we just ask the A's to build a project that fits in with the community and mitigate any traffic problems it could cause at our schools."

Now that is a reasonable approach---something tells me the NIMBY's are loud in volume but not numbers-

Fremont should just place it on a ballot asap and let the vote speak---it is the only way to drown out the NIMBY's

-WS for the ballpark while still developing PC someday for retail/housing--

Anonymous said...

Sure, put it on a ballot, but the mayor and council do not want to. Why is that? Would love to see this happen. Maybe you aren't aware of the traffic mess already in the WS area. We don't want to have to breathe all those fumes. What was wrong with the original site, Pacific Commons?

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:37- you operate only from the emotional and not the logical or rational---if the majority of Fremont residents support the ballpark at WS, and I bet they do, than you should also---doesn't mean you have to like it or go to it, but you need to step out of the way and let the democratic process speak for itself.

Anonymous said...

Ex-councilman Dutra supports the A's because he is a realtor hoping to get something out of the deal. Possibly developing new homes and making a little money from this. Do you think he would want this ballpark in his backyard in Niles? No way. He would be fighting against it, but since it is a distance away from his house he is all for it. Imagine if you lived in a quiet neighborhood for quite a few years. Then, they tell you they are going to build a huge stadium across the street from you. Would you like it? Put yourself in the shoes of some of these residents. The stadium should be built in an area that is not near a residential area. Why should they have to listen to the noise and deal with the headache that comes with a ballpark? It is not right!

Anonymous said...

That's just it. The majority of people all over Fremont don't like the idea of a ballpark. They DON'T want more traffic. Do you like traffic? Let's put it on the ballot, but as I said the council does not want to. Why is that? And what's wrong with Pacific Commons? Let me ask you this, if you lived a block away would you still want it built there? Now, be honest and really think about it. What's wrong with being emotional about this? I will not step out of the way. I've lived here for many years and will hope that SJ will take them.

Anonymous said...

Anon- across the "street" is a 8 lane freeway!! And where the ballpark will go is a run down area of industrial buildings with an auto manufacturing plant down the street--hardly a desirable area!!

If I lived in that area I would welcome a quality development to replace what is currently not too nice of an area--

Rather than fight against it why not get involved in a constructive way making sure it enhances the area-

but if your not willing to do this and the majority of Fremont residents support it than you have got to accept it and move out of the way

Anonymous said...

You made the point by saying if you lived in this area...You see you don't so you really don't have a good perspective of the area. Where do you live? You make it sound like it is a trashy area, but if you drove down here you would understand that in the opposite direction less that 1/2 a mile away there are beautiful homes surrounded by an elementary school. Actually, very desirable. I do understand what you are saying about NUMMI, but this is on the other side. Take a drive here and I will tell you what route to take and you will get it. How do think the cars will get from the freeway to the ballpark? You keep avoiding my questions what was wrong with Pacific Commons and why doesn't the council put it on a ballot? Why do you think the majority of residents support this? You don't even live here, I do and know quite the opposite. No, I will not go away and move on. You have to understand it personally effects me and my family. Also understand I really do like baseball just not here. It's way too close to home.

Anonymous said...

You make good point. No one really know exact area unless they live here. People from other area or city don't know. My friend from north Fremont does not like A's here or more traffic.

Anonymous said...

Anon--if you understand what I say about NUMMI than not sure why you are opposed---the ballpark will be on the same side as NUMMI and therefore "on the other side"---

There was nothing wrong with PC from my point of view--but corporate NIMBY's were trying to hold the A's hostage for more money.

You ignore my suggestion of constructively participating in the process and working with the A's to make sure that traffic doesn't impact your neighborhood which is "on the other side".

If you are so convinced that the people of Fremont are opposed to this than start a referendum to force it to a ballot--but you and I both know that you won't be successful-

Radrj said...

The A's, the Fremont City Council, the Fremont Chamber of Commerce, and die-hard A's fans want this to happen. The Wolff family has bent over backwards for Fremont. Fremont is a big city, the 14th largest land-wise in the USA. It's time for growth. The only REAL issue is traffic. Crime is not an issue in southern Fremont. And there would be few, if any, day games during school hours. Don't let fear win out. Bring the A's to Fremont.

Keith said...

Fremont is probably the largest city still with a "small town" government. The Wolff's just need to "convince" the 5-member city council.

Traffic is already very bad now. Please drive by the area during weekday late afternoon commute hours to see for yourself. How does it handle the extra 10,000+ cars? Crime is not an issue now, but it will be once the stadium is built. It is still debatable whether the stadium will bring positive or negative economic impact to Fremont.

The real issue is: who will benefit from this new stadium? (the A's, real estate developers) Who will suffer? (the residents, the taxpayers)

Anonymous said...

Keith- the city council needs to be convinced that the project is a good fit for Fremont and ...that the majority of Fremont residents support the ballpark.

Both of these appear to be in order---opponents, if they feel that they are in the majority, and their voice is not being heard, can always force it to a referendum but I don't believe that they would be successful.

Once again, become part of the process, work to find solutions to the traffic which seems to be your primary concern, research other new ballpark/arena areas that had the same concerns and find out what solutions they developed.

Relative to your question as to who benefits....of course both will...but I don't know too many communities that would thumb their nose at $1.5B+ of private investment with the outcome substantial improvement of an industrial area that is not in the best of condition now--

Anonymous said...

Radrj,
What do you mean there isn't crime in southern Fremont? Yes, there is. The city is already having money problems and are NOT responding to 911 calls. From personal experience, we saw a burglary in action and they never even showed up while we were on the phone with describing the vehicle and people involved. How will they handle the extra police needed to patrol a ballpark when they can't even respond now?

Anonymous said...

You still haven't answered the question, where do you live? Far enough from WS I'm sure. I am trying to get you to come take a drive to this exact area, but I guess you're not interested. As I said this would give you a better perspective. If your house was less than a 1/2 mile a way you wouldn't want the stadium there, would you? Answer this question. I can understand how some people want to live real close to a ballpark, but why should people that have lived here for years have to put up with that? At least we both agree that PC would have been a decent place to build or any other place along the bay, away from already built homes.

Radrj said...

I will address you Keith, and other residents at a future council meeting. Catellus has given no good reason to move from Pacific Commons. That's where the stadium belongs, in close proximity to the restaurants and new hotel. All I ask is for the Warm Springs community to accept the Pacific Commons site. It's a win-win answer. I don't want to alienate the highest paying taxpayers of the city (I am one of them) to appease the developer. Catellus was for this move from the beginning, and need to live with its decision. The A's deserve a state-of-the-art ballpark and so does Fremont!

Anonymous said...

Yes, you are right about the original location, but from what I understand that is out of the picture now. I think the people of Fremont are more ok with the PC site, but still realize it will be very congested and this is what they don't like about the whole idea of a ballpark. And of course the extra police force which will impact the city. If the city is out of funds how can they possibly hire new officers?

Anonymous said...

Where the NIMBY's of Fremont lose credibility is cite a variety of emotional claims- traffic, crime, pollution will all increase...we won't be able to afford a police force..but none of these arguments are supported by fact...

I will assume unless shown otherwise that the majority of the Fremont residents support a stadium in Fremont and feel that the challenges cited can all be addressed by the A's and the city of Fremont in a reasonable fashion.

Anonymous said...

From reading this thread you don't reside in this area so what do you know about facts within our city. I guess you are very UNemotional since you think everyone is too emotionally involved. How can you be emotionally involved you don't even live here. It is a well-supported fact that Fremont doesn't have a surplus to afford extra police. They tried passing utility taxes twice (Wasserman) and it failed twice. I guess you aren't aware of the need for more police officers to keep the peace and order at a stadium. This is a fact. Would the A's like to pay for them? Pollution, are you saying we don't get fumes from cars now? Fact again. BTW Where do you live, it seems you don't want to answer that question.

Anonymous said...

I blame Prologis for not move forward on the proposed A's Ballpark Village in Fremont, but not Catellus. Catellus has been wanted the A's to move to the Pacific Commons site and do not care about anything. Then Prologis wants to merge with Catellus and they are very strict about anything. They do not want A's move to Pacific Commons.

On September 15, 2005, Catellus Development Corporation was merged with and into ProLogis (NYSE: PLD) for $5.5 billion. ProLogis offers the world's largest network of distribution facilities and services

Anonymous said...

It is unimportant where I live--the question that you need to answer is whether or not the bulk of Fremont residents feel the same way that you do---

If they do than a referendum would prove that and you have nothing to worry about--if they support the stadium than you need to move from your emotional arguments that are not fact based to logical reasoning that can find reasonable solutions to your concerns.

Focusing on where I live--which is in San Jose, will not change the fact that the majority of the Fremont residents support the construction of the ballpark--

Anonymous said...

I just gave you the facts if you would read them. Try to be a little understanding Mr. Unemotional. Thanks for finally answering the question. You live in San Jose, far enough from Grimmer and WS so you won't have to hear the noise and sit in the traffic. I know SJ well. Would you like it if they built a ballpark 1/2 mile from your house so that you could hear and see the lights. You can't honestly tell me you would like it. And if you like the idea so much, I'll sell you my house if it all happens. Are you interested?

Anonymous said...

You can buy my house too because "if" they build a stadium it will be a good bargain at more than 100,000 less because we will become a less desirable area. Since Mr. Emotional thinks he knows so much can he answer question? Is there any way A's will go to San Jose? San Jose A's sounds beautiful don't you think?

BL said...

Just some stat from www.crimereports.com. These are ONLY disorderly conduct incidences (e.g., noise nuisance, intoxication in public, suspicion of homeless, etc...) that occurred in 2008 between March through November around a 0.5 mile radius surrounding AT & T Park.

Month - # of incidences reported
March - 0
April - 8
May - 72
June - 115
July - 82
Aug - 95
Sept - 21
Oct - 0
Nov - 0

Baseball season is April - Sept.

Anonymous said...

I would welcome the A's in San Jose--that's not on the table right now---and yes---I would be happy to own a urban home close to a ballpark-- and in fact--if PC went forward, would have definetely considered it--but to live in Fremont without a ballpark and nothing that creates a sense of "there"--no thanks---nothing about Fremont as it now has any interest for me--

I'll say it one more time---you can scream as loud as you want at me--I'm not who you need to worry about--I don't vote in Fremont---if you are so convinced that the majority of Fremont residents share your opinion than why have you not begun an effort to force it to a referendum?? I think we both know the answer to this--

Keith said...

Fremont city has been controlled by a small faction of politicians and real estate developers for a while. The Fremont citizens are waking up now!

Fremont citizens will welcomed a city-wide referendum. The mayor is not willing to put on ballot because he knows too well he will lose. He even said, "You elected me. I'll make decision for you." The city officials are using all the bureaucracy processes to help the A's and diregard residents voice .

Anonymous said...

Can you answer the question please? Is there any chance the A's can go to SJ? I heard that SC won't take them. Just curious. That's great, you wouldn't mind living by a ballbark, but the people that bought here didn't ask for this. Currently,if you live in a nice, quiet residential neighborhood in SJ I'm sure you wouldn't be thrilled about a ballpark disturbing your existing homes and neighbors. But, you wouldn't mind investing at another place, that makes sense. This is a choice. People that have lived here for years don't want their lives disrupted by this. Now, tell me honestly, your current home in SJ would you want a ballpark built a 1/2 mile away from your home? Be honest now. That's all I'm asking. You see you are willing to buy one at PC, but it changes the picture a little when you're talking about your own neighborhood. I'd like to know your answer on this one.
Think about your neighbors too.
Great stats, BL!

Anonymous said...

Ok--so here is my answer to your question- if I lived where you do in Fremont with 680 cutting a huge swath of separation between your home and a run down industrial area and a large auto manufacturing plant (who knows how much longer this has), and I had the opportunity to support a ballpark with some housing, retail and commercial development, that would definetely improve the current industrial area and assuming that I could actively participate in helping to address my concerns and any issues---absolutely I would support it--

You have an opportunity to help create a win-win---and if this was my neighborhood I would take that opportunity--but recognize that this area will have massive redevelopment one way or the other with BART being built to it--

Just my opinion----now relative to your comment that Santa Clara doesn't want the A's? Wolff was the one who indicated that he had no interest in going to Santa Clara--they already are committed to working with the '49ers on a football stadium--

San Jose would make a great home for the A's--but once again--that is not currently on the table as an option.

Last, I question the crime statistics above---I find it more than a coincidence that 3 of the months have been left off; that the definition of "crime" is disorderly conduct, and yet by implication and connection to Oakland crime in this blog has a much more serious definition, and that in the non-baseball months the crime stats are 0? Looking at the web site that the blogger left, the incidents of more serious types of crime are occuring regardless of whether or not it is baseball season.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Keith for clarifying the referendum issue. We also had two strong leaders (Cho-wanted to put the A's issue on the ballot) and Morrison-against the A's) competing against Wasserman in the last election. If one leader went up against Wasserman, I believe we would have had different results as he would have had the votes of both. That's politics for you. It's unfortunate and I'm sure Wasserman was quite happy to see enter Morrison enter the race to split up the vote count. I didn't vote for any of these liberal members of our council. I am proud to say that!

Marine Layer said...

It should be pointed out that former Councilman Cho supported the Pacific Commons plan, despite his desire to get a referendum on it. He also felt that the citizens of Fremont would approve the proposal at the ballot box. As for Warm Springs, ???

Anonymous said...

680 and NUMMI. Yes they are there, but as I said earlier you really need to visit and view this area to understand exactly what I am talking about. Go to Weibel School and turn left on Grimmer. Notice all the nice homes and park. Keep on going on you will see more residential homes on both sides. You will then go under the freeway and there we are. I'm thinking you must be looking at a map and until you actually come down here and visualize it you will be a bit more understanding. You still haven't answered the question about would you mind if it were put 1/2 mile from your San Jose house?

Anonymous said...

Hi Marine Layer,
I think a lot of people were in support of PC, but once it was changed to WS people became very upset because now you are involving existing homes, their homes. I can feel for them and do understand why they are not happy. I like to put myself in other people's shoes. I get it. Do you?

Marine Layer said...

No offense anon, but to even ask if others don't feel NIMBYism in their own lives is borderline insulting. Of course I understand. That's why I'm still scratching my head over the decision to include WS in the study.

BL said...

Anon 1:37pm

Three months were not included because www.crimereports.com could not provide any data for the month of Jan., Feb., and Dec. I would have love to have and include those stat.

For the three months - Mar., Oct., & Nov. - the data were 0 becasue no incidence was reported in these 3 months that are within the 1/2 mile radius of the ballpark. BTW, if you look on Google map, half of the area within the 0.5 mile radius is occupied by the ballpark itself and the harbor.

In addition, the reason to only include a half-mile radius to the baseball park, I feel that it is more relevant to the discussion. If I start to include data in the Tenderloin district or area North of 80 (but, South of Market), wouldn't that give you more chance to argue the validity of the data!?!

As for you pointing out that I have only included disorderly conduct data, although other types of crime are still committed during the months with zero incidence, YOU are CORRECT! However, if you have been on the Crime Reports website, you will see that it is difficult to obtain all these data in one simple search. Every search max out at 500 crime incidences within the area of search. It is a time-consuming process to compile the data.

Now, I have some additional data after doing more research:

Month - # of incidence
Mar. - 4
Apr. - 507
May - 493
Jun. - 288
Jul. - 444
Aug. - 374
Sept. - 161
Oct. - 1
Nov. - 13

These include crimes such as assault, weapon, theft, sexual offense, trespassing, death, etc. And, again there were no data available for Jan., Feb., and Dec. after inputing search criteria.

BTW, intention is to educate. I have been reading many comments indicating that Fremont residents' crime concern are not valid. My impression from reading these types of comments is that the authors of the comments are telling the Fremont residents that crimes around ballpark don't exist, and Fremont residents should not worry.

However, looking at the stat that I have found, residents should worry!

Keith said...

BL, great work. Are you able to pull the data for Oakland Coliseum?

Tom said...

I lived in San Jose for 55 years. I don't want A's move to San Jose. If the A's move to San Jose, I will put a lawsuit against the A's.

Lew Wolff stay in Oakland and don't bother San Jose.

Marine Layer said...

Sue based on what?

Anonymous said...

Thanks BL for your accurate data and thanks Marine Layer for understanding how WS and others feel.
PS: Marine Layer, Are you a Marine? If so thank you for keeping our country safe and for all that you have done. I appreciate you so much.

Anonymous said...

I still question the crime data and would appreciate someone with knowledge in how these stat's are compiled to provide some insight---keep in mind that since AT&T has been built the area around it has seen dramatic improvement since the stadium was built (housing, UCSF, commercial buildings---it must be darn near utopia to live there except for those darn baseball fans who create an incredible amount of crime---and once they leave---the area is once again perfect-- sorry--something is up with the interpretation of this data-

1/2 mile around AT&T is fine---but to say that little to no crime occurs when baseball games are not happening is a bit suspicious--in fact I would bet if we took these stat's at face value that the neighborhood around AT&T during the offseason is safer than WS is today!!

NIMBYism exists for all----but when you live in a democratic society you need to also live by the majority rule---and if the majority of Fremont residents want the ballpark than the ballpark will be built--

Relative to Tom saying he will sue San Jose...nothing more needs to be said about "emotional" vs. "logical" arguments.

Anonymous said...

Having a stadium built in Warm Springs does not make any sense and is a bad idea. Knowing the state our economy is in is a big enough reason to not push forward on this huge structure. This area is too close to a residential area and an elementary school. I believe there is an earthquake fault existing on or near this proposed site. There is also an endangered species, the burrowing owl.

Anonymous said...

Majority rule ? Do you really believe in that? How in the world do you come up with idea of the majority of people wanting this ballpark? Do YOU have those stats? There aren't any. And if the majority rules, well you remember Proposition 8 and the results. Well, the MAJORITY in CA said marriage is between a "man and a women" this is what the MAJORITY ruled. But, our Fremont council(they think they represent all of us, not me )was opposed to prop 8 even though the majority CA voters approved it. What a joke, bunch of liberals!

BL said...

Anon 8:36pm

I am not trying to interpret any data. I just want to post the information out for others to be well-informed.

BTW, A's has presented a pretty photo of AT&T Park when not in use in their meetings with local Fremont residents in an effort to convince the residents that residential neighborhoods around ballparks are safe. The photo showed that the area surrounding AT&T Park is uneventfull with hardly anyone on the streets when the Park is not used.

You may want to continue to challenge the validity of the data all you want, that would be your choice. Or, you may want to educate yourself by going to the website, download the crime data for each day and compile it yourself. BTW, when you go to SFPD website for research on crime data in SF, it will re-direct you to Crime Reports website.

Yes, we do live in a democratic society and being in a democratic society, majority rule applies. However, shouldn't the residents of Fremont be well-informed of all issues (risk vs. reward) in order to make their vote a meaningful vote.

My understanding is that IT IS the City Council that do not want this issue to go on a ballot, not the residents.

Anonymous said...

BL you are correct. The city council does not want it to go to ballot. They have made this perfectly clear.

BTW: Mr.Unemotional has yet to answer the question if the ballpark were to be built .05 from his SJ home would he be ok with this idea? Since he has not answered the question we can all assume he wouldn't like it!

Anonymous said...

As a resident, if you feel your voice is not heard, you can collect signatures of other registered voters who share your viewpoint and assuming that you can collect enough---can force anything to a referendum--so the question you have to ask yourself--could you get enough voters of Fremont to sign a petition to force any ballpark to a referendum and if it went to a referendum would a majority of Fremont voters oppose a ballpark at WS? I don't have any polling data that shows one way or the other--but rather a premise that the majority of Fremont residents would welcome a $1B+ investment in their city and therefore support a ballpark in Fremont. If you are convinced otherwise than I cannot understand why you have not started the referendum process.

I did review the crimereports.com site and a quick assessment made me question your numbers originally which you have since updated with different information. Statistics can be manipulated to prove any premise so I am only asking that someone with knowledge of how to interpret this data---such as a SFPD police officer, provide their opinion as to the level of "crime" around a stadium during games, as compared to games---if nothing else you are showing that as long as no game is being played that there is near zero crime at AT&T---which is around 270 days/year--and for the 81 or so days when a game is being played there is a horrible amount of crime. Conclusion I come to looking at this data without other input, is alot of baseball fans are criminals---or it is being misrepresented.

Anonymous said...

I would love to have the ballpark 1/2 mile from my home!!! I hope I have answered this once and for all!!

Anonymous said...

Thanks, I really appreciate you suggesting what we can do. I am not sure how this works. I would also appreciate any information that you have and how to go about this. How many signatures would we need to get? I know you would like a ballpark in Fremont and I believe you would prefer it to be at PC as most of us would and I'm thinking maybe you're starting to understand how those are personally effected by this do not want it to proceed. So, anything you can do to help would be great.

Anonymous said...

I don't think it is specifically the baseball fans that are criminals as you say, but face it when there are games, concerts, etc.. there is an increase in criminal activity. This may be related to alcohol, car break-ins or whatever. Typically you can read about this in the news. They may or may not be baseball fans, but just people hanging out causing trouble.

La Boca said...

Question:

If the number of people in an area, say around an URBAN Balllpark, goes up at the same exact ration as the increase in the "number" of crimes goes up - is an increase in the "crime rate"?

Maybe your just creating an opportunity -if the stadium were next to say, a Police Department? Think of that; work on Saturday's in the spring and get to go to A's game and still make your quota!

BL said...

Anon. 9:56pm

It may have to come down to forcing a referendum. However, I don't think that it is as simple as me or a bunch of Fremont residents go out on our own and collect signatures. The process is probably more complicated than that.

BTW, I am glad that you are challenging the crime stat. Not because there is anything wrong with the stat, but because you are thinking. That was my whole intention: educate and let the public think for themselves.

I am hoping that you are also challenging the pretty pictures and the inflated data that the A's are presenting as well.

If you look at A's Economic Analysis Report carefully (fine print), you will notice that the amount of spending from the residential households in the ballpark village are from folks in the "highest income quintile".

Yes, there are many high income folks in the Bay Area, but are these folks going to buy a residential townhouse/condo next to a ballpark. I don't know, maybe someone in that income bracket can tell me.

I would imagine the folks in that highest income bracket would prefer big houses in nice quiet neighborhoods.

La Boca said...

Yes, but remember the proposed condos & tYes, but remember the proposed condos & townhouses at the PC site come with free methane gas - being downwind from the dump.

And since you'll be so happy in your new condo in the "village" surrounded by box retail and coach stores - you won't have worry about the total grid-lock created by people trying to get off 880 (as well as trying to drive by on 880) due to the few off-ramp points (AND the limited "queue" length from the freeway ramps to the project site.

Where do I sign?

Anonymous said...

Those crime "stats" are a little ridiculous and counter productive to the posters argument. The reason they are skewed to the summer months is because of a heightened police presence. If there are more people in a given area at a given time, law enforcement will be increased. No one cares about a drunk at 9pm around ATT when there's no game because there's no reason to care. Get a bunch of people with their families in tow, and suddenly it's a different story. The cops are called left and right by a whole host of concerned citizens. Seems to me that if you want a larger police force, then building a stadium is exactly what you would want to do. The A's will certainly be paying the overtime during games, thereby increasing police presence in and around the park. Add a one dollar surcharge to the tickets for public safety, and suddenly the Fremont PD is going to be awash in cash and cops.

Anonymous said...

The council and school board held a meeting yesterday. The biggest issue they talked about is their lack of funds. It's a crisis. I read your view on building a stadium to get more police because that's what would be needed. More police to tackle the problems of a stadium. This makes 0 sense to me. How would the extra police be paid if the city doesn't have any money? They are talking about cutting workers and trying to find ways to make necessary cuts just to survive.

Jeffrey said...

Hey anonymous guys, get screen names.

How would more police be paid for? It was pretty clearly stated- Overtime for games directly billed to the A's. A one dollar service fee on all tickets sold for additional police.

That would be about 2.5 million dollars a year for additional police.

Anonymous said...

The best part of the deal for the citizens of Fremont is that they get to keep and use their enhanced police force through out the year. The games would have a minimal impact as far as law enforcement goes. Truth is, there just isn't that much rowdy behavior at a ballgame. The incidents that do occur mostly happen inside the stadium, which isn't going to affect residents one iota. Fact of the matter is that adding a "night life" scene to Fremont would tax police services far more heavily than a ballpark.

On the other side of the coin, by adding a surcharge to tickets sold, the residents enjoy enhanced policing services throughout the year, courtesy of the A's.

Anonymous said...

Jeff, I agree with you. I grew up in Santa Clara and know San Jose well. San Jose is definitely more A's friendly and could support them better. PC site would work better than WS because at least there are established restaurants and there is plenty of room to add other stuff, theaters, etc. I know Fremont also, (Nummi) so I can understand how the WS folks feel. It is actually a horrible location as I have witnessed the traffic mess, trying to get away during the week it is bumper to bumper already on 680. And there are nice homes located right there. I hope they end up in SJ for the sake of the people.

Anonymous said...

Hey everyone including anon... 4:29, google: Crime at Ballparks. You would not believe the data about all the crime at ballparks. It's huge. Do it and educate yourselves. If you don't have the facts don't make random statements. You're totally wrong! It's scary information, maybe you would like to live next to a ballpark, but I sure wouldn't

Anonymous said...

http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20000413_majorleague.htm Here is an example, read this about crime at a ballpark. Don't bother and try and prove me wrong on this one.

Anonymous said...

Fremont guy or gal,

Look, I hope the A's go to SJ. I've always felt that is the best option for both the A's and MLB. But there's no doubt in my mind that this is a good deal for the city of Fremont. You guys don't want it? Great. Your loss. I personally wouldn't mind living in close proximity to a brand new MLB facility, especially one that is being used to spark future residential/commercial development. I happen to think that the value of your homes would be among the first to recover in an ailing economy.

But the crime issue is a red herring. It exists everywhere, right this moment something shitty is happening in your neighborhood. You probably won't hear about it, but it goes on nonetheless. I happen to know a little bit about which I speak. You want to maintain the status quo in your area....I get that. I don't begrudge you your feelings in the matter either. But the facts are such that a new ballpark with ancillary development will bring positive financial developments to your city. Then again, I don't live in your city. So if you guys are that adamant in your opposition, I wish you the best of luck. I'll happily spend my money in downtown SJ.

Anonymous said...

anon 6:09

Completely agree--prefer the park in downtown San Jose---but have to shake my head in amazement at the Fremont Nimby's---1.5B of private investment and 3 million visitors a year spending money in your town increasing the general fund---and its a bad idea---go figure--

Downtown San Jose it is--Fremont can stay that same non-descript area that it is and always will be--

Radrj said...

People with a vision don't prefer the "status quo." The fear of crime is pointless. Move to another country if you don't want crime. The US has the highest crime rate of any nation. And don't tell the people of San Jose that south Fremont is crime ridden. Look at the stats, people. South Fremont is the safest community in the entire Bay Area! A's to Pacific Commons is a sure victory!

Anonymous said...

No kidding. I really don't get this version of NIMBY'ism. You want increased city services? Build a ballpark. You want more cops? Build a ballpark. You want to increase the value of your home? Build a ballpark. You want better schools with commensurate funding? Build a ballpark.

You want increased traffic? It's coming whether you build a ballpark or not. You want low end development and blight with its' attendant problems? Do nothing.

Anonymous said...

I have been a Fremont business owner and a Palo Alto resident for 20 years . Traffic in Palo Alto gets worse by the year because there is so much going on here - Stanford Med Ctr is starting to build a MASSIVE all new replacement hospital as well as a new Childrens Hosp just 15 years after the present Packard Childrens opened , Stanford Shopping Ctr (right next door ) just announced yet another additional 250,00 sq ft of high end hotel and street scape with high end restuarants/boutiques to grab back biz lost to Santana Row located in the present the surface parking lot area west of Neiman Marcus/Wilkes Bashford . Town and Country Village is being completely revamped from a deserted 1950s style center to a happening bustling traffic filled place -Calafiya Restaurant is already a packed local hangout after being open two weeks . And you know what ? We Palo Altans LOVE IT ! In fact , according to Zillow , homes in my particular neighborhood went UP 55 % last year -mine up $1M in the past 30 days after 5 recent cash sales within a two block radius " recomped " my house .Not boasting , but the bottom line is - having high end stores,retail,entertainment ENHANCES a town's prestige and ENHANCES home values , with traffic concerns NOT a factor in this . Anyone seen how congested Bev Hills, West LA, SF Pacific Hts , etc.,etc., are ?

Face it, anywhere you live in any modern urban area , there is griping about "traffic", so you might as well grab a $1.5-2B development ( Ballpark Village at Pacific Commons ) when that proposal is sitting on your city councils " desk " . Demographic studies show ( from Fremont Chamber of Commerce ) that south Fremont residents spend almost all their weekend discretionary dollars at Stanford , Valley Fair and Santana Row , 'cause there ain't anything higher end than Kohls and Target in town for these denizens of the multimillion dollar homes in that end of town.

Don't like traffic and congestion ? Move to Pixley or Firebaugh in the San Joaquin Valley , but watch out for the tractors on the two lane fog-bound roads .

Anonymous said...

Yes, I guess that is it guys. We like Fremont just the way it is without a ballpark. Don't want the extra visitors or traffic at least not in a residential area. It's already a mess. PC-No problem. It would help the stores, restaurants and hey maybe we'll get a theater complex. Now, that would be fun. Put it over there, that would be ideal. This is how the city can get their revenue. It's a time of uncertainty though because folks are cutting back on spending habits. This is the reality. Thank you anon.. 6:09 for understanding the situation. Finally, someone can understand the other side.
Now, the last guy doesn't really care about much except to get a ballpark in Fremont. Who cares where, just get one. The schools are already good, a ballpark won't make them better. The city council and school board can't even agree on issues. Yes, a fact. A ballpark will not increase home values especially around an existing neighborhood of expensive homes. As a matter of fact, home values decreased by 100K in certain areas (in 2000) because of a school boundary change. Unless you actually live here you don't really know what's happening. They need to update the stats about Fremont and crime, it's continually getting worse. I've lived here many years and I know. San Jose would be even more ideal. It would be great! Love Valley Fair, Santana Row and the works... Fremont is the way it is, will never be a Santana Row. Can't even get a Whole Foods...

Anonymous said...

Yea, if I could afford to live in Palo Alto I would. There is no way PA would accept a huge stadium. People would shut that down right away. It would ruin their nice, charming city. It's true, we don't have all the great stores and we never will. That's just how it is, Whole Foods, Nordstrom they want nothing to do with Fremont. So why not dump a big stadium here, no thanks. Or put it where it makes sense.

Anonymous said...

Seems to me the Fremont residents are saying that they don't mind a stadium at the original Pacific Commons site. I know the area, and it would be a good thing in my opinion. The location is near the bay and there is alot of buildable vacant land. The new site has a lot of flaws in my opinion. To disrupt an existing residential neighborhood is wrong.

Anonymous said...

Hey Anon 8:45---they do have a huge stadium in Palo Alto--called Stanford Stadium---they play football there---holds about 55,000 people and in fact was just rebuilt about 3 years ago---hosted Super Bowl in the past, as well as World Cup soccer games not to mention Stanford football games--

And of course it has been just horrible for crime etc, etc--Palo Alto is such a dump when compared to Fremont---

Recognizing that the NUMMI plant and run down industrial area is more attractive than a ballpark to most of the NIMBY's on this site confirms why I prefer to spend my dollars in Palo Alto rather than Fremont strip malls

Anonymous said...

People think Fremont is another San Leandro or Hayward -nope . Population over 200,000 , area almost 100 sq miles ( double size of SF ), bigger than Oakland . 4th largest city and pretty much self contained with for example three hospitals, 600 MDs practicing in town as well as many accting and legal firms . It's the southernmost city in Alameda County, but because of tech companies there and the commute being almost all southward to Silicon Valley, it's really "lives " more as northernmost part of Santa Clara County .
As an example of the techie wealth that has become Fremont, it ranks 10th in Bay Area for homes sold over $1M last year ( as listed in this AM's SJ Mercury News ) , and in this order: Hillsborough,Cupertino,Saratoga,Menlo Park/Atherton ,Danville/Blackhawk ,Los Altos Hills,MillValley,SF,Woodside but ahead of Los Altos and AHEAD of SanJose , whose population is 5 x greater!

BTW, in talks with PC Ballpark Village , early on Nordstrom and Whole Foods have been discussed as the retail anchors there, as studies showed south Fremont residents number one gripe is that there is no decent upscale supermarket in town and a Nordstrom would bring the type of shopper that the high end smaller retailers/restauranteurs need to "feed " them walk -by biz.
What will happen ,I fear , is that Fremont residents don't have the long view ,such as we Palo Altan residents , as many of the wealthier south end residents are recent successful immigrants in tech, and are only worried about mundane day to day issues and carry an inferiority complex of their town because they could " only" afford $2M Fremont home instead of $7M one in Saratoga or Atherton, and have no desire for their " cow town" to emulate Palo Alto's attractions because they secretly hope to be able to " upgrade " there in the future .
Then , that 200 acres in Pacific Commons will eventually be developed with generic urban sprawl fill in , so at the end of the day, there will be the same issues of traffic but signif lost prestige and tax revenues for the community.

Anonymous said...

I'm certain most people know that Stanford Stadium exists. It has been around for some time. It is part of the University. Was is built around existing homes or is it part of the college? I have no idea. You can't compare PA to Fremont. Wish I could get out of here. I don't want to stick around to see what happens.

Anonymous said...

This thread is hilarious!

Anonymous said...

You sure spend a lot of time researching Fremont even though you live in PA. Maybe you should take your business their too. Whatever your business is you may want to keep it a secret because the people I'm sure would not care for your unkind remarks about immigrants. A ballpark is fine, but on the original location. PC is bigger, more to plan for and more to do. WS is a tight area. Drive through and you'll get it. Look at the little plot of 36 acres on the left side of Grimmer. It would be a mess to build there. Too small, not enough parking area,close to residential and a school. BTW You're lucky to live in PA, it's a very nice city. I think San Jose would be a perfect spot for the A's.

Anonymous said...

Downtown San Jose is perfect. PC would be very nice. I have no desire to go to the middle of a parking lot in the middle of Warm Springs. Ick.

Anonymous said...

anon 11:42 wrote
"You sure spend a lot of time researching Fremont even though you live in PA. "

Yeah ,I live in PA but I earn my living money in Fremont as a 20+ year business owner paying my share of taxes to support Fremont services as well as my and my employees donation of time to Fremont community events and support of it's schools and local youth sports teams ..i.e., giving back to the community . Many of my business and social friends have lived in Fremont longer than that so I know about their frustrations in not having more " things to do and places to go " in a town of 200,000 . The Fremont city staff HATES seeing all those sales tax dollars being lost from Fremont residents to Santana Row,Stanford Shopping Ctr,Valley Fair - heck even to generic power centers and mid income malls in all the "little bitty" towns around it Union City ( UC Landing ) ,Newark ( Newpark Mall ) ,Milpitas ( Great Mall and McCarthy Ranch ).
The raw land at Pacific Commons would have eventually been built pou and traffic will have increased but no one in town would have cared because its "on the other side of 880 " next to a few car dealers, Costco and the now full waste dump.

Anonymous said...

Exactly, PC is away from an existing residential neighborhood. I just don't get why they have given up on it. Why don't they talk to Costco, Lowes and Kohls? There is so much land for parking so I don't get why those 3 stores are concerned about it. I think WS site is being pushed because of Bart. And yet not that many people use Bart, it's turning into an environmental issue. Bart will help traffic issues, but will it really because many people will still drive to get there. I also feel there is not enough room to have both. Too small of an area. I think it's great that you are supporting the city with your business.

Anonymous said...

With Toyota's recent financial results it is just a matter of time before NUMMI is closed and than there will be plenty of room!!

Anonymous said...

So at least you're admitting 40 acres isn't enough room for a big stadium. Point made. And how would you like to be one of the families that practically backs up to the site? Don't you feel a little bad for them or is all about you and getting a ballpark? Was at Costco (PC) today and I asked a mgr, "don't you want the A's, it would be great!"
The response was, " no,we want the parking for our patrons not the A's" Crap, so let's build it over at WS because times running out. Lew is in a hurry. I'm sorry WS people, I will help you in anyway because I wouldn't want it happening to me.