Jump to content

Shell Energy Stadium


Subdude

Recommended Posts

So do you EVER making to Downtown or Midtown? the homeless are STILL there. ordinance has made no difference.

instead of wishful thinking? i think that's what you're doing.

that pass to the real world is only available for 1 hr. act fast!

I disagree: the homeless ordinance has made a difference. You can tell because of the area I'm talking about. After an Astros game this past season, it looked like Homeless'R'Us was all across 59 from MMP. Yea, you'd still see a few scattered around, but I'd still see police pulling over to talk to them and lead them to the legal areas. The homeless population in Midtown and Downtown doesn't seem as dominant as it was when I left.

When I mentioned wishful thinking, I was referring to the MMP voting referendum back in the day. y'all remember how you saw renderings of what the area OUTSIDE MMP may look like after the stadium would be complete? (Bars, Inn at the Ballpark, revamped bridges to coincide with the park, etc.) THAT was all wishful thinking; that wasn't actually part of the same masterplan as the ballpark. Some has happened, some hasn't. All I know is that not as much is directly surrounding the ballpark as we once heard would be developed.

What I'm saying is that instead of having the new MLS ballpark be the stand-alone jewel in an area, have it be part of a masterplan with other developments around it. Have it become part of a major urban development project instead of having it becoming just an MLS stadium project. Other cities used the land around their stadiums strictly for practice fields. We could use our for residential and retail instead, and have the practice fields accomodate a school at a different location. What's so wrong about that?

Uh, drive around that land sometime - there's townhomes and lofts already sprouting up everywhere. I would probably guess that in the last year and a half at least 200-300 have been built in the area. Yes, a lot of empty lots still, but the difference between that and say, what the 4th Ward used to be, is that developers, if they so cared to can already just pop in and buy the land without having to kick anyone out. A stadium, if designed poorly, would probably just deaden that progress as you have a lot of people asking, "why would anyone want to live next to that"?

Last time I was in that area, all I saw were abandoned buildings, warehouses, and the largest homeless gathering I've ever seen in Houston. That may have changed, but I wasn't aware of it.

And if designed today, our MLS stadium would look just like everyone elses. not sure why anyone would want to live next to it, with the exception of die-hard sports fans. But if they take time to develop their fan base more, they could have the revenue to spearhead something Houston-like (best-in-the-U.S. type facility). One year in Houston is just too soon to close a stadium deal that's worth building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree: the homeless ordinance has made a difference. You can tell because of the area I'm talking about. After an Astros game this past season, it looked like Homeless'R'Us was all across 59 from MMP. Yea, you'd still see a few scattered around, but I'd still see police pulling over to talk to them and lead them to the legal areas. The homeless population in Midtown and Downtown doesn't seem as dominant as it was when I left.

What I'm saying is that instead of having the new MLS ballpark be the stand-alone jewel in an area, have it be part of a masterplan with other developments around it. Have it become part of a major urban development project instead of having it becoming just an MLS stadium project. Other cities used the land around their stadiums strictly for practice fields. We could use our for residential and retail instead, and have the practice fields accomodate a school at a different location. What's so wrong about that?

Last time I was in that area, all I saw were abandoned buildings, warehouses, and the largest homeless gathering I've ever seen in Houston. That may have changed, but I wasn't aware of it.

Well...go down to Market Square the homeless situation has worsened. last week i walked 1.5 blocks and got stopped three times by people asking for money. That's pretty bad when it is supposed to be illegal period. someone else mentioned another incident with a knife and the homeless. go look under the pierce elevated near crawford, they are there. Go ride the train they are there.

As to your what's wrong with that? Harris County can't pay for the last new stadiums via the hotel/motel/car rental taxes and has had to float a loan from the toll road authority. Where is the money to buy the land, build the new stadium going to come from? The city can't pay for policemen now which is something we NEED! much of our basic infrastructure needs improvement which is something we NEED to do.

When our needs are met, then we can think about the feel good projects.

Edited by musicman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not have the City of Houston purchase the land across 59 from GRB, and donate enough of that land to Dynamo. Then we have Dynamo pay 100% of the stadium's building and material costs, with Houston giving the team tax breaks. Have the City of Houston use the other lots around it for other crazy developments with investors and new businesses (like Houston Pavilions), and we get money back from the taxes and lease of the land. We'd make the money back, the stadium would be worth a lot, and Dynamo/soccer would have a better chance to grow.

Doesn't the city (or the Sports Authority) already own that land (where the surface parking lots are)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to your what's wrong with that? Harris County can't pay for the last new stadiums via the hotel/motel/car rental taxes and has had to float a loan from the toll road authority. Where is the money to buy the land, build the new stadium going to come from? The city can't pay for policemen now which is something we NEED! much of our basic infrastructure needs improvement which is something we NEED to do.

When our needs are met, then we can think about the feel good projects.

Where in those last stadium deals did we get profit? How did those stadium deals make money back for the city which the city could use to pay for more police? We both agree that the answer is n/a.

Now, what if there were a way to use this new stadium for MLS to profit the city of Houston? There's no rich owners here threatening us. Why do we have to assume that all stadium deals have to be ones where the city has to lose? It doesn't have to be that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in those last stadium deals did we get profit? How did those stadium deals make money back for the city which the city could use to pay for more police? We both agree that the answer is n/a.

Now, what if there were a way to use this new stadium for MLS to profit the city of Houston? There's no rich owners here threatening us. Why do we have to assume that all stadium deals have to be ones where the city has to lose? It doesn't have to be that way.

The NYMets stadium deal seems like a good go by. The Mets foot the bill for the stadium and the government entities do the necessary infrastructure improvements (roads, subway lines etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about just build it somewhere in Uptown? I think it be a great market for a soccer stadium. Alot of tourist attraction. The Galleria, Uptown Park, River Oaks, etc, and downtown not that far away.

That would be REALLY cool! I could see high attendance there. Only question is where Uptown? Is there a lot there with enough space for a stadium? It already looks developed to the brink...

The NYMets stadium deal seems like a good go by. The Mets foot the bill for the stadium and the government entities do the necessary infrastructure improvements (roads, subway lines etc.).

Los Angeles and Green Bay also have good deals.

L.A.'s future football team's stadium is being paid for by the NFL, with the city of Los Angeles paying for the roads and developments around it.

Green Bay BOUGHT their team, and paid for the improvement to the stadium that their city also owns. Of course, the city gets the revenue the owner would probably get. Imagine how much more they would recieve if their stadium sold it's naming rights? Not saying they should, but instead of that money going to another person, that money would go right back to the city...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in those last stadium deals did we get profit? How did those stadium deals make money back for the city which the city could use to pay for more police? We both agree that the answer is n/a.

Now, what if there were a way to use this new stadium for MLS to profit the city of Houston? There's no rich owners here threatening us. Why do we have to assume that all stadium deals have to be ones where the city has to lose? It doesn't have to be that way.

you made my point...we didn't get profit it cost us money that we don't have to pay back.

not sure what you're talking about stadium deals paying for the police department.

is building a stadium or hiring new police officers more important to the citizens of houston?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not sure what you're talking about stadium deals paying for the police department.

is building a stadium or hiring new police officers more important to the citizens of houston?

What I'm saying is this: What if there were a stadium deal where the city made more out of it then it spent, and we were able to use that revenue for our public services vua police, education, etc.? We could have both and not have to substitute one for the other. Why does the sports team have to get 100% of the stadium profit? And why does the team have to get 100% of the stadium naming rights revenue, too? Houston could use that money, yo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What stadium profit do you speak of? Stadiums dont make money, they soak up taxpayers money.

Oliver Luck has a great idea. Build a stadium in an area that could use such a facility. Let them split the cost and let them use it for other activities.

Yes, attendance would suffer, but its a calculated risk. And they need to start planning now since the lease at Robertson only has 2 more years left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm saying is this: What if there were a stadium deal where the city made more out of it then it spent, and we were able to use that revenue for our public services vua police, education, etc.? We could have both and not have to substitute one for the other. Why does the sports team have to get 100% of the stadium profit? And why does the team have to get 100% of the stadium naming rights revenue, too? Houston could use that money, yo.

i gave you 2 chances for the free pass to the real world......i think you just missed the boarding call.

Edited by musicman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about just build it somewhere in Uptown? I think it be a great market for a soccer stadium. Alot of tourist attraction. The Galleria, Uptown Park, River Oaks, etc, and downtown not that far away.

There's no space in Uptown. Keep in mind that a soccer field is bigger than a football field. A soccer stadium is no small structure like a basketball arena is. You've got to have empty space or unused space that can be claimed. I don't think you'd find any such space near Uptown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no space in Uptown. Keep in mind that a soccer field is bigger than a football field. A soccer stadium is no small structure like a basketball arena is. You've got to have empty space or unused space that can be claimed. I don't think you'd find any such space near Uptown.

Not to mention parking and access. DelMar is a huge parcel in a very accessable location. I hope they are still considering it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Following the FC Dallas model for the Houston Dynamo will be the death knell for a squad with a pretty promising future here. At least in Dallas ALL of the suburbs are on the North side of town. You can build a successfule suburban soccer club there. They try that here they will be lucky to have 5000 fans in there for a game in years where the team does not win. The school district would probably draw more fans for high school football.

The "Frisco" model works in Dallas because all of DFW's suburban areas are concentrated on the north side of the metroplex. The people who are furthest from Frisco are actually just south of downtown Dallas and in Fort Worth. Downtown to Frisco is 30 miles. Fort Worth probably has very few fans who make the trip because its 50 miles, but again almost all of Forth Worths suburbs are on the northeast side of Forth Worth and are closer to Frisco (Southlake, Grapevine, Flower Mound, etc).

In Houston, you have Sugarland/Missouri City/etc, Katy, The Woodlands/Conroe, Clear Lake/League City, the Cypress-Fairbanks area, Humble/Kingwood, and the Pearland/Friendswood areas and ALL are located on different radial directions from downtown Houston.

If you build in downtown, that means you are building the stadium in 1)the city with the largest number of fans. and 2) the only location within 30 miles of all of the following...Cy-Fair, Katy, The Woodlands, League City, Pearland, Sugarland, Tomball, Humble, Spring, Kingwood, Clear Lake, etc, etc, etc.

If you build in Katy...Houston is now 30 miles away instead of smaller Katy only being 30 miles away. Pearland is 45 miles away. League City is 60 miles away. The Woodlands is 50 miles away.

The same works for any suburban type location, your'e cutting your suburban fan base in half by excluding the suburbs on the far side of town, while also placing your urban fans at a longer distance. And unlike suburban fans who are used to driving into town for entertainment venues, I doubt urban fans are going to make the reverse commute when they have other options in town.

Downtown makes sense. You can probably have a base of 15,000 fans within 10 miles of the stadium in downtown Houston while still pulling a few thousand from the 30 mile range in all directions.

You build somewhere like Cypress (to use an example, you could also sub in Pearland, Sugarland, etc her and change up the example a bit and it would be the same), and you'll probably find only 5000 or fewer fans within 10 miles, a handful from Katy, Woodlands and Sugarland, and you'll probably drop the Houston fans who hardly ever drive out to the burbs down significantly. Plus youve all but killed all the suburban fans on the southwest side...they arent likely going to be making a hour and half trek across the Houston Metro area on a regular basis. If you build somewhere like Sealy (that cant be a real option) you can kiss this team goodbye, they'll be folding up shop within 5 years.

Dallas is different. We cant use their model.

The worst case drive, if it were built centrally, wouldnt even be as bad as 30 miles, it would be closer to 20-25. That is pretty good for most people, it isnt too far for those who live outwards. I think my drive to downtown from the bay area is something like 22 miles. No matter where you put it, if it were in some outlying area, half of the outlying people would have to drive 45 miles or so. That would be a lot of people who would likely not make the games because of the drive.

I wish they would put it in that huge minute maid parkin lot outside of 59. That would make for a pretty intense scene downtown, as far as large covnention and stadiums go.

If you build a soccer stadium anywhere outside of Houston, you end up being just another Dallas. You will NOT have a genuine Houston team just as Dallas does NOT have genuine football and baseball teams-they don't play in or generate revenue for Dallas. They suck off the Dallas label while generating revenue for Irving and Arlington-and now for Frisco.

I'd prefer to have our Houston teams play IN Houston. The benefits for the city far out-weigh any other option.

And once again, is DelMar off the table?

Houston would probably not have that problem because it is so huge. Even if it is placed outwards, chances are you are still in Houston. But, yes, it would still suck because of what I said above.

Put it in next to the 59 elevated next to Minute Maid!!!! That's my vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worst case drive, if it were built centrally, wouldnt even be as bad as 30 miles, it would be closer to 20-25. That is pretty good for most people, it isnt too far for those who live outwards. I think my drive to downtown from the bay area is something like 22 miles. No matter where you put it, if it were in some outlying area, half of the outlying people would have to drive 45 miles or so. That would be a lot of people who would likely not make the games because of the drive.

I wish they would put it in that huge minute maid parkin lot outside of 59. That would make for a pretty intense scene downtown, as far as large covnention and stadiums go.

Houston would probably not have that problem because it is so huge. Even if it is placed outwards, chances are you are still in Houston. But, yes, it would still suck because of what I said above.

Put it in next to the 59 elevated next to Minute Maid!!!! That's my vote.

I agree 100%.

Also, if it wouldn't work for the Texans, Rockets, or Astros to build in the boondocks instead of the popular central locations of Relaint or Downtown, it definately woulnd't work for Dynamo. Just common sense. They don't have the luxury of taking a risk of losing fans when they currently average less than 25,000 in attendance. They claim to be a professional franchise; here's their chance to prove it. They need to develop the market. If they wanna take a financial risk, Dynamo should invest lots of money into youth leagues and getting more people involved. When Robertson starts selling out, they then should look into stadium locations...

Edited by DJ V Lawrence
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hell with the Dynamo...when is the City of Houston gonna build a brand new shiny stadium for its HOUSTON COUGARS?!?!?

71063552.zrnWYdYs._I4Q6365.jpg

photo by Stephen Pinchback: http://www.pbase.com/carboncopy

Universities don't get new stadiums. They just expand their existing stadiums. Not to mention that this was only the 2nd or 3rd sellout in years. If Art Briles stays on for another year or two though, maybe we can see some consistent sellouts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worst case drive, if it were built centrally, wouldnt even be as bad as 30 miles, it would be closer to 20-25. That is pretty good for most people, it isnt too far for those who live outwards. I think my drive to downtown from the bay area is something like 22 miles. No matter where you put it, if it were in some outlying area, half of the outlying people would have to drive 45 miles or so. That would be a lot of people who would likely not make the games because of the drive.

I wish they would put it in that huge minute maid parkin lot outside of 59. That would make for a pretty intense scene downtown, as far as large covnention and stadiums go.

Houston would probably not have that problem because it is so huge. Even if it is placed outwards, chances are you are still in Houston. But, yes, it would still suck because of what I said above.

Put it in next to the 59 elevated next to Minute Maid!!!! That's my vote.

Well said. I totally agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Universities don't get new stadiums. They just expand their existing stadiums. Not to mention that this was only the 2nd or 3rd sellout in years. If Art Briles stays on for another year or two though, maybe we can see some consistent sellouts.

Well, the Dynamo had exactly ZERO sellouts...why do they merit a new stadium? Especially one that would be footed by taxpayers?

The Dynamo's best-attended game was their first game: 25,462. They drew 23,107 for the conference final.

UH had 3 games this year with better attendance than any Dynamo game:

Grambling State - 27,302

Oklahoma State - 28,260

Southern Miss - 31,818

And we do that without all the free press that the Houston Dynamo garners from the Chronicle and local TV and radio. [/cranky Coog fan mad at the media]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

College teams playing in relatively new stadiums (last decade or so) or building new right now...

Louisville (42,000 PapaJohn's Cardinal Stadium)

Pittsburgh (65,000 Heinz Field built in collaboration with the Steelers)

Rutgers (41,500 Rutgers Stadium)

UConn (40,000 Rentschler Field built between campus and Hartford)

Minnesota (currently building a 55,000 seat stadium on campus)

Central Florida (opening a 45,000 seat stadium next season)

SMU (32,000 Ford Stadium)

Stanford (50,000 seat stadium opened this year on former site of old bowl)

Utah (45,017 Rice Stadium)

Troy (30,000 Movie Gallery Stadium)

Florida Int'l (building new on campus)

It would be cheaper for UH to tear down and build new than to renovate the current Roberston Stadium because of issues with the ADA. That is why the most recent expansion build structures that were not connected to the old structure (both new endzones as well as the new concession stands are free standing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

College teams playing in relatively new stadiums (last decade or so) or building new right now...

Louisville (42,000 PapaJohn's Cardinal Stadium)

Pittsburgh (65,000 Heinz Field built in collaboration with the Steelers)

Rutgers (41,500 Rutgers Stadium)

UConn (40,000 Rentschler Field built between campus and Hartford)

Minnesota (currently building a 55,000 seat stadium on campus)

Central Florida (opening a 45,000 seat stadium next season)

SMU (32,000 Ford Stadium)

Stanford (50,000 seat stadium opened this year on former site of old bowl)

Utah (45,017 Rice Stadium)

Troy (30,000 Movie Gallery Stadium)

Florida Int'l (building new on campus)

It would be cheaper for UH to tear down and build new than to renovate the current Roberston Stadium because of issues with the ADA. That is why the most recent expansion build structures that were not connected to the old structure (both new endzones as well as the new concession stands are free standing).

Interesting. When were those projects completed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Dynamo had exactly ZERO sellouts...why do they merit a new stadium? Especially one that would be footed by taxpayers?

The Dynamo's best-attended game was their first game: 25,462. They drew 23,107 for the conference final.

UH had 3 games this year with better attendance than any Dynamo game:

Grambling State - 27,302

Oklahoma State - 28,260

Southern Miss - 31,818

And we do that without all the free press that the Houston Dynamo garners from the Chronicle and local TV and radio. [/cranky Coog fan mad at the media]

I thought universities paid for their own new stadiums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...