Matt Artz again has the scoop on the Fremont process. Take a look at the comments below the blog blurb, especially the last one by FCN founder Deepak Alur. It appears that post the Warm Springs NOP, work can't move forward because the A's haven't dropped off a check to underwrite the work (which they've done on all other occasions). Money talks, right? The in-progress EIR has been rendered useless, and any new work requires the A's willingness to spend the money and time required to see the new NOP through. I would suggest that if the A's aren't going to foot the bill, that's their message to Fremont to "let me down easy."
Noticed one other thing while rummaging through some stuff in the attic.
The word "Fremont" is nowhere on the ball.
19 February 2009
Catch-22
NUMMI chimed in with their opinion about the Warm Springs Alternative.
Why won't the A's specify? Perhaps instead of explaining, I'll refer you to this wonderful clip from years past (careful, some language NSFW):
From the outset, it is hard to imagine how NUMMI could continue to operate with a ballpark immediately adjacent to it. The traffic congestion from a ballpark would seem a sure barrier to on-time delivery of parts needed for production. But the A’s may have some unique idea of how freeway off ramps/onramps could be added/improved, the stadium could be strategically situated, numerous surface streets could be widened, parking could be configured, etc. to avert that result. If that is the case, we would like to see that plan from the beginning of the planning process. The planned ingress/egress and infrastructure improvements or lack thereof could all have tremendous impact on our operations as well as all of the other businesses and residents nearby.All in all, that's about as diplomatic as NUMMI could and should be about it. They're right to ask, as everyone else is asking, what piece of land the A's intend to use for the ballpark. Even supporters of the plan want the A's to do this, if only to cut down on the rumormongering. What could be interesting is whether or not the UAW will say anything. If NUMMI views the ballpark as a threat to the plant, the UAW will probably side with NUMMI in opposition. Now that's a two front war: NUMMI/UAW literally on one side, angry residents and environmentalists on the other. The residents now think that the cancellation of the 2/24 preso is a stalling tactic done to blunt criticism of the alternative.
Why won't the A's specify? Perhaps instead of explaining, I'll refer you to this wonderful clip from years past (careful, some language NSFW):
Diridon Sample
Just a couple of notes. Ask questions and I'll answer them. Comments thread will be moderated to include only Q&A about the image.
Notes:
- Capacity is ~32,400 seats, plus 1,000 standing room
- Two decks with 40 luxury suites tucked beneath upper deck, a la Cisco Field and PNC Park.
- 2,900 field club seats. No other club level
- 40 minisuites above field club
- 4 party or large suites
- 2,000 bleacher seats in left field
- 2,000 family outfield seats in right field
- Field dimensions: 325' in the corners, 373' in the power alleys, 408' to dead center. It could be expanded by 3-5' outward in each dimension. This was done to show that despite the land's unusual shape, it could house a field with standard and symmetrical dimensions. Actual footprint of the ballpark is 9 acres.
- Bullpens are beyond the outfield walls in left and right.
- The massive blank area beneath the seating bowl is flexible space which would house on multiple levels: clubhouses, back-of-the house facilities, retail space, and team offices.
- 1,700 parking spaces in a 7-story garage to the west of the ballpark. It would also be dual-use as the facility is adjacent to Diridon Station. The garage would more than double the parking currently available in the lots between the arena and ballpark, parking which would be lost as the blocks are developed in the future.
- The Stephens Meat sign, if left in place, would be in the warning track to the right of the LF 373' sign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)