Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
Author Message
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 12,241
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 355
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #91
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-21-2017 10:20 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Cities hate to see unused real estate - it's bad for the tax base - but demo is expensive, especially the older and larger the structure gets (my company oversees a fair amount of this). You don't tear something down unless: 1) you have to, or 2) you have something better to put there.

This. Weren't they talking about closing Hollywood Park and building on that land for over 10 years before they actually closed it? Didn't happen until they had the deal with Kroenke. And, I assume, demolishing the structures for a race track costs a lot less than demolishing an old stadium like the Silverdome.
08-21-2017 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Brookes Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,096
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 92
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

The Parliament AwardsCrappiesDonators
Post: #92
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-21-2017 12:59 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-21-2017 10:20 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Cities hate to see unused real estate - it's bad for the tax base - but demo is expensive, especially the older and larger the structure gets (my company oversees a fair amount of this). You don't tear something down unless: 1) you have to, or 2) you have something better to put there.

This. Weren't they talking about closing Hollywood Park and building on that land for over 10 years before they actually closed it? Didn't happen until they had the deal with Kroenke. And, I assume, demolishing the structures for a race track costs a lot less than demolishing an old stadium like the Silverdome.

Correct. And the Astrodome is another example of a structure that's been frustrating politicians and bureaucrats for years. They keep bouncing from "refurbish" to "repurpose" to "demolish" but they still don't have a real plan, as far as I know.
08-21-2017 01:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,892
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 180
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #93
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-21-2017 12:59 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-21-2017 10:20 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Cities hate to see unused real estate - it's bad for the tax base - but demo is expensive, especially the older and larger the structure gets (my company oversees a fair amount of this). You don't tear something down unless: 1) you have to, or 2) you have something better to put there.

This. Weren't they talking about closing Hollywood Park and building on that land for over 10 years before they actually closed it? Didn't happen until they had the deal with Kroenke. And, I assume, demolishing the structures for a race track costs a lot less than demolishing an old stadium like the Silverdome.

Phoenix Trotting Park has been sitting empty since the 60's. It was way outside metro phoenix and development is finally giving the land enough value to make demolition worthwhile.

[Image: 350px-Goodyear-Phoenix_Trotting_Park-1965-6.jpg]
08-21-2017 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,312
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 152
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #94
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-20-2017 06:25 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Apparently, the Silverdome is still around.

You're right. How do you need to delay a demolition? They blow stuff up in Vegas every other week.
08-22-2017 12:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,892
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 180
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #95
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-22-2017 12:11 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(08-20-2017 06:25 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Apparently, the Silverdome is still around.

You're right. How do you need to delay a demolition? They blow stuff up in Vegas every other week.

Why spend money to blow it up if you don't have a use for the site?

In Vegas, they are replacing old strip casinos with shiny new ones.
08-23-2017 12:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,312
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 152
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #96
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-23-2017 12:51 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(08-22-2017 12:11 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(08-20-2017 06:25 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Apparently, the Silverdome is still around.

You're right. How do you need to delay a demolition? They blow stuff up in Vegas every other week.

Why spend money to blow it up if you don't have a use for the site?

In Vegas, they are replacing old strip casinos with shiny new ones.

Its been left in such a state of disrepair for so long that its actually a structural hazard at this point. Knocking it down and clearing the rubble would at least remove that potential hazard.
08-23-2017 02:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Brookes Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,096
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 92
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

The Parliament AwardsCrappiesDonators
Post: #97
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
They have to weigh cost of current security measures and liability (as well as likelihood) associated with theoretical collapse or potential injuries by trespassers vs the cost to demolish the structure and all its associated liabilities. The latter number, for a stadium, is going to be very large.

Keep in mind that cities don't usually demo these things; developers do. And they do so because they have something to develop that will bring in enough revenue to cover the demo costs.
08-23-2017 05:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 12,241
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 355
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #98
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-23-2017 05:29 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  They have to weigh cost of current security measures and liability (as well as likelihood) associated with theoretical collapse or potential injuries by trespassers vs the cost to demolish the structure and all its associated liabilities. The latter number, for a stadium, is going to be very large.

Keep in mind that cities don't usually demo these things; developers do. And they do so because they have something to develop that will bring in enough revenue to cover the demo costs.

You can see this from both sides in San Diego.

The city sees the stadium with no NFL team as an albatross that costs them $X million a year to maintain with no revenue flowing back to the city. They want a developer to step in and pay for the cost of demolition while ending the annual maintenance cost.

San Diego State's entire stadium strategy, on the other hand, to the extent they have one, is to rely on inertia and gumming up any possible development of the old stadium land with the goal being that the old stadium stays standing for another 20 years or more and SDSU gets to use it for almost free. It might work. The Astrodome has already stayed standing for almost 20 years since the Astros vacated it.
08-23-2017 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,312
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 152
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #99
Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-23-2017 07:13 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 05:29 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  They have to weigh cost of current security measures and liability (as well as likelihood) associated with theoretical collapse or potential injuries by trespassers vs the cost to demolish the structure and all its associated liabilities. The latter number, for a stadium, is going to be very large.

Keep in mind that cities don't usually demo these things; developers do. And they do so because they have something to develop that will bring in enough revenue to cover the demo costs.

You can see this from both sides in San Diego.

The city sees the stadium with no NFL team as an albatross that costs them $X million a year to maintain with no revenue flowing back to the city. They want a developer to step in and pay for the cost of demolition while ending the annual maintenance cost.

San Diego State's entire stadium strategy, on the other hand, to the extent they have one, is to rely on inertia and gumming up any possible development of the old stadium land with the goal being that the old stadium stays standing for another 20 years or more and SDSU gets to use it for almost free. It might work. The Astrodome has already stayed standing for almost 20 years since the Astros vacated it.

Isn't that situation more a function of SDSU being too cheap to actually buy the stadium property from the city?
08-23-2017 08:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 12,241
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 355
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #100
RE: Will the Clippers join the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood?
(08-23-2017 08:02 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 07:13 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 05:29 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  They have to weigh cost of current security measures and liability (as well as likelihood) associated with theoretical collapse or potential injuries by trespassers vs the cost to demolish the structure and all its associated liabilities. The latter number, for a stadium, is going to be very large.

Keep in mind that cities don't usually demo these things; developers do. And they do so because they have something to develop that will bring in enough revenue to cover the demo costs.

You can see this from both sides in San Diego.

The city sees the stadium with no NFL team as an albatross that costs them $X million a year to maintain with no revenue flowing back to the city. They want a developer to step in and pay for the cost of demolition while ending the annual maintenance cost.

San Diego State's entire stadium strategy, on the other hand, to the extent they have one, is to rely on inertia and gumming up any possible development of the old stadium land with the goal being that the old stadium stays standing for another 20 years or more and SDSU gets to use it for almost free. It might work. The Astrodome has already stayed standing for almost 20 years since the Astros vacated it.

Isn't that situation more a function of SDSU being too cheap to actually buy the stadium property from the city?

Yeah, if SDSU bought the land at the price a developer would pay, that would seem to solve the situation. But they either can't raise that much money or the university doesn't want to raise money for that purpose, or both. So they're left with the situation where the city wants a developer to buy the land and the university wants to prevent that.
08-23-2017 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.