Shell Energy Stadium

[Houston19514]

I've been thinking about this stadium location and just wanted to throw this out there for discussion.

As has been noted, the location given by the Chron would block the proposed Metro Southeast/East End tracks coming into downtown. I can see three possible answers to the question of "what the hell is going on here?" ;-)

(1) The Chron got the location wrong. (and betting on the Chron getting its facts wrong is usually a pretty safe bet)

(2) Mayor White has totally f'd up... This strikes me as unlikely. He seems like a pretty sharp guy with good instincts.

(3) Metros plans for that area have changed/are changing. Is it possible that we could be going subway with that line after all????

Discuss amongst yourselves. ;-)

[JJxvi]

(4) Metro and the City of Houston are separate organizations with imperfectly aligned goals who are able to operate somewhat independently of each other and quite capable of stepping on one anothers toes leaving the other to change some plans.

[roadrunner]

I'm guessing the Chron messed up. How many times just in the past year have they put the location for something wrong? It's almost like there's a better chance the land they bought is not there because that's where the Chron put it on the map.

[tigereye]

I've been thinking about this stadium location and just wanted to throw this out there for discussion.

As has been noted, the location given by the Chron would block the proposed Metro Southeast/East End tracks coming into downtown. I can see three possible answers to the question of "what the hell is going on here?" ;-)

(1) The Chron got the location wrong. (and betting on the Chron getting its facts wrong is usually a pretty safe bet)

(2) Mayor White has totally f'd up... This strikes me as unlikely. He seems like a pretty sharp guy with good instincts.

(3) Metros plans for that area have changed/are changing. Is it possible that we could be going subway with that line after all????

Discuss amongst yourselves. ;-)

Let me pose a BIG "What If" here.

"What if" the Chronicle does have the 6 block-long site slightly incorrect and the real site's boundaries are Rusk (South) Hutchins/Ballpark lofts (West) Texas (North) and St Charles (East)? This site arrangement would leave Rusk unblocked by the stadium for light rail to follow down on.

The only downside...the stadium would block Dowling right before Harrisburgh...not sure how big of an impact this would be on traffic in this area though....maybe traffic from Harrisburgh going to Dowling can be rerouted to from Dowling to St Charles, which ends at Harrisburgh anyways?

Edited January 13, 2008 by tigereye

[Houston19514]

(4) Metro and the City of Houston are separate organizations with imperfectly aligned goals who are able to operate somewhat independently of each other and quite capable of stepping on one anothers toes leaving the other to change some plans.

That would come under the (2) category (Mayor White f'd up).

Let me pose a BIG "What If" here.

"What if" the Chronicle does have the 6 block-long site slightly incorrect and the real site's boundaries are Rusk (South) Hutchins/Ballpark lofts (West) Texas (North) and St Charles (East)? This site arrangement would leave Rusk unblocked by the stadium for light rail to follow down on.

The only downside...the stadium would block Dowling right before Harrisburgh...not sure how big of an impact this would be on traffic in this area though....maybe traffic from Harrisburgh going to Dowling can be rerouted to from Dowling to St Charles, which ends at Harrisburgh anyways?

Interesting. But of course the rail line is planned for Capitol. I would think they could shift the rail line to Texas just about as easily and make the current map work as well.

[RedScare]

There is no possible way that White "forgot" the rail expansion that he himself helped push. Either the site speculated by the Chron is wrong, or there are talks to route the rail around or under the site. Running the rail down Walker, either through downtown, or once it passes under 59, is not an impossible, or even particularly difficult task. Neither is shifting the proposed site a block or two south.

[tigereye]

That would come under the (2) category (Mayor White f'd up).

Interesting. But of course the rail line is planned for Capitol. I would think they could shift the rail line to Texas just about as easily and make the current map work as well.

I seriously doubt Texas Ave would even be considered. The Astros would object to the idea of a "Main St-style" construction nightmare at the front door of Minute Maid Park for the next 3 seasons. My money is on the rail line running on Rusk or Capitol. From there it can either do the following....

1. Tunnel under the stadium

2. Turn onto St Emanuel, 1 block before it reaches the Dynamo Stadium site.

3. The Chronicle has it wrong and my "What If" theroy on the site is correct. In that case, rail can run down Rusk.

For the record, My money is on option 2 FTW. I know its the Chronic were talkin about here but i just dont see them repoting inaccurate facts on something so big and important to the city as another new downtown stadium. When breaking the stories for MMP/Reliant/TC, the Chronic got all 3 venue site's correct.

Edited January 13, 2008 by tigereye

[Houston19514]

I seriously doubt Texas Ave would even be considered. The Astros would object to the idea of a "Main St-style" construction nightmare at the front door of Minute Maid Park for the next 3 seasons. My money is on the rail line running on Rusk or Capitol. From there it can either do the following....

1. Tunnel under the stadium

2. Turn onto St Emanuel, 1 block before it reaches the Dynamo Stadium site.

3. The Chronicle has it wrong and my "What If" theroy on the site is correct. In that case, rail can run down Rusk.

For the record, My money is on option 2 FTW. I know its the Chronic were talkin about here but i just dont see them repoting inaccurate facts on something so big and important to the city as another new downtown stadium. When breaking the stories for MMP/Reliant/TC, the Chronic got all 3 venue site's correct.

But did they "break" those location stories prior to their actual announcement by the Sports Authority? In other words did they do anything beyond print the press release? Nobody denies the Chron can usually reprint a press release accurately. It's when they try to actually find some news on their own that they have trouble.

Edited January 13, 2008 by Houston19514

[TheNiche]

Nobody denies the Chron can usually reprint a press release accurately.

I might, depending upon how you precisely define "usually".

In this case, however, have they defined which blocks would be used with specificity, or are we just relying on horse reasoning and a blogger's conceptual interpretation?

Edited January 14, 2008 by TheNiche

[tigereye]

But did they "break" those location stories prior to their actual announcement by the Sports Authority? In other words did they do anything beyond print the press release? Nobody denies the Chron can usually reprint a press release accurately. It's when they try to actually find some news on their own that they have trouble.

IIRC, on all three fronts, the Chronic and various local media otlets broke those stories correctly before the sports authority released an announcement.

[Houston19514]

I might, depending upon how you precisely define "usually".

In this case, however, have they defined which blocks would be used with specificity, or are we just relying on horse reasoning and a blogger's conceptual interpretation?

They (the Chron) printed a map. Could not be more specific.

[TheNiche]

They (the Chron) printed a map. Could not be more specific.

I did not see that.

[lockmat]

I did not see that.

Neither did I. But apparently they do know the exact location deducing from what this new article says:

The blocks that officials are eyeing

Edited January 14, 2008 by lockmat

[musicman]

But local property owners who want to sell have been asking for triple or even quadruple the appraised values, as the area is seen as "hot" for development.

"I do not believe the appraisal value reflects even half of the market value," said Dan Nip, chairman of the East Downtown Redevelopment Authority. HCAD has appraised properties in the six-block area at $12.50 per square foot.

But asking prices by nearby owners have been $30 or more per square foot, Nip said. "If you have the whole square block, you can get as high as $40-$50."

looks like it could get expensive.

Edited January 14, 2008 by musicman

[TheNiche]

looks like it could get expensive.

Expensive is what happens when the City insists that stadia be built downtown. They should also bear in mind that the more scarce they cause (re)developable land to be, the higher the prices will rise for it, and the fewer other development projects will be feasible in that neighborhood.

I'm still of the mindset that they ought to be developing the MMP parking lots...if not for the stadium itself, then for something supportive atop a podium of structured parking which can be used for both stadia as well as for the new development, perhaps even with excess capacity built in that could be leased to developers looking to build projects in the vicinity that'd otherwise be challenged by the City's parking requirements.

There is a very realistic opportunity here for something that makes Post Midtown look like the insignificant drop in the bucket that it is.

[T 2 THA C]

From my understanding the city is supposed to pay for infrastructure improvements so they do not have to pay for the stadium. I wonder if tunneling LRT is part of infrastructure improvements.

[ricco67]

Well, it would be nice to have a station exclusively for the stadium on game days. On other days it would simply pass through, unless there is another event.

[Trae]

^^That is a good idea. Dallas has something like that for the AAC I think.

[Houston19514]

I don't see the point of a station exclusively for game days. There is a station planned for that neighborhood anyway. In fact, I think it is planned for right next door (or possibly under) the stadium location we've been given.

[RedScare]

Exactly. The DART station at Victory is only used on game days because there is no traffic there on non-game days. At some point in the future, that station may become a daily stop. The METRO stop already has more potential users (though admittedly not a large number) than the Victory stop.

[ricco67]

According to today's Chron article, some problems might be occurring because of the (potential) location of the stadium might cause some considerable problems for MetroRail. One significant problem would be that if they go around the stadium, then another environmental study.

Like I have mentioned in a previous post, the scheduling should be a complete nightmare. If the rail is to be any part of the dynamo footprint, the coordination and design of the structure is going to be extremely important.

Edit: A mental stutter?

Edited January 21, 2008 by ricco67

[Trae]

According to today's Chron article, some problems might be occurring because of the (potential) location of the stadium might cause some considerable problems for MetroRail. One significant problem would be that if they go around the stadium, then another environmental study.

Like I have mentioned in a previous post, the scheduling should be a complete nightmare. If the rail is to be any part of the dynamo footprint, the coordination and design of the structure is going to be extremely important.

According to today's Chron article, some problems might be occurring because of the (potential) location of the stadium might cause some considerable problems for MetroRail. One significant problem would be that if they go around the stadium, then another environmental study.

Like I have mentioned in a previous post, the scheduling should be a complete nightmare. If the rail is to be any part of the dynamo footprint, the coordination and design of the structure is going to be extremely important.

Did you post the same thing twice?

Anyway, I wonder how they are going to incorporate the rail in with the stadium. I am sure going around isn't the only option. Maybe have an indoor station and have the rail go right through the stadium somehow.

Edited January 21, 2008 by Trae

[lockmat]

The rail should be the number one priority for the city. If the stadium is going to affect the route, the location should change.

[713 To 214]

The rail should be the number one priority for the city. If the stadium is going to affect the route, the location should change.

Exactly. It's probably better NOT to plan rail around a stadium for a team that may or may not be here in 10, 15, 20 years!

[Trae]

Exactly. It's probably better NOT to plan rail around a stadium for a team that may or may not be here in 10, 15, 20 years!

Why wouldn't they be? The Dynamo have huge support in Houston and the MLS as a whole is growing.

[lockmat]

Why wouldn't they be? The Dynamo have huge support in Houston and the MLS as a whole is growing.

Whether they will still be here or not is for another thread. But regardless, I don't think the rail plans should change for anyone. The city is already doing too much for them.

I don't mind if they want to take it under the stadium, as long as the team pays for it.

[musicman]

having it at street level next to a stadium would be a pedestrian nightmare. METRO would probably close it down like they used to do during major pedestrian type events downtown.

[ricco67]

Exactly. It's probably better NOT to plan rail around a stadium for a team that may or may not be here in 10, 15, 20 years!

Why wouldn't they be? The Dynamo have huge support in Houston and the MLS as a whole is growing.

Whether they will still be here or not is for another thread. But regardless, I don't think the rail plans should change for anyone. The city is already doing too much for them.

I don't mind if they want to take it under the stadium, as long as the team pays for it.

Lockmat has some valid points on that, but mostly for different reasons. One is because another Environmental study needs to be done, which would add to the cost and delays for construction.

The other reason would have to do is the FUTURE of the stadium. While MLS *IS* growing, the stadium itself might be replaced, demolished, or whatever in future years. If the route took a slight alteration to just off to the side, this would help with almost any scenario that could occur. If the Stadium seizes to exist, then the station itself could be demolished.

[Trae]

But we are talking 30+ years down the road, AFTER the stadium is complete.

[lockmat]

The City Council considered a plan Wednesday to buy 80 acres in south Houston for an amateur sports complex, but delayed the vote for one week.

The complex, a long-awaited home for youth and adult soccer teams, will probably include 18 playing fields, Mayor Bill White said. The council will need to approve the land purchase for $6.42 million.

Councilwomen Anne Clutterbuck and Melissa Noriega placed a one-week hold on the item. Clutterbuck said the administration did not give council members enough time before the Wednesday vote to review the details of the purchase.

The property is just northwest of the intersection of Almeda-Genoa and Texas 288.

White said the complex would include parking, but added that not all fields would be used for soccer.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/5480508.html

LOCATION:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Houston,+TX,...p;z=15&om=0

Also worth noting: White reiterated his position that the stadium itself be privately constructed. He also said that if the deal with the Dynamo falls through, the city would find another use for the land or sell it.