http://florida.marlins.mlb.com/news/articl...sp&c_id=fla

 

"Responding to a last-minute suggestion from the Miami Arena owner that a new ballpark for the Marlins could be built on that site, Major League Baseball's president and chief operating officer told MLB.com that a shift from land that once housed the famous Orange Bowl to the projected rubble of the old downtown arena would be a major setback.

 

The $525 million deal for a retractable domed stadium in Little Havana was approved earlier this year by Miami Dade County, the City of Miami and the Marlins, who pledged a $155 million contribution. The ballpark is part of a $3 billion redevelopment project aimed at renovating one of Miami's oldest and most historic neighborhoods on the outskirts of downtown.

 

Though contracts were expected to be signed this summer, the project has been delayed by a Miami Dade County Court. No resolution is expected soon, placing an intended 2011 opening for the ballpark in peril.

 

"We've located a site that is optimal for the development of a new stadium. Building at the old arena site would be extremely problematic," said MLB's Bob DuPuy, who, along with others, has spent hundreds of hours negotiating the current deal. "This could cost us an additional year, if not two years. Right now, time is not our ally because the Marlins' lease [at Dolphin Stadium] expires in 2010, and the arena site does not present a viable alternative to us."

 

Twenty-year-old Miami Arena, which once was home to the National Hockey League's Panthers, National Basketball Association's Heat, and University of Miami men's basketball, is now vacant. Last week, as a Miami Dade County judge delayed ruling on a lawsuit filed against the stadium project by Norman Braman, the former owner of the National Football League's Philadelphia Eagles, arena developer Glenn Straub entered the picture.

 

In a phone interview with a local television station, Straub said the interior of the arena has already been cleared out and that the structure will be imploded before the end of the month.

 

Straub reportedly said that he and his partners want to build a stadium for the Marlins on that property and that they would finance it themselves. Straub also said he wants to swap the land for the site of the demolished Orange Bowl because he has plans to develop it.

 

DuPuy said Straub's plan is impractical for numerous reasons.

 

"It is our view that the careful negotiations for the stadium were the product of literally years of work, among Baseball, Dade County and the City of Miami," DuPuy said. "We looked very hard at that [arena] site when we were looking at downtown sites. More land would have to be acquired. The general obligation bond of $50 million wouldn't be available, so even if the costs were exactly the same, we'd be short $50 million.

 

"There's difficulty there with utility buildings and power lines that would have to be relocated. There's a railroad line cutting through there that would also have to be relocated. And finally, the community is committed to developing Little Havana and the Orange Bowl site, and we want to be part of that development."

 

MLB consistently has been committed to remaining in the Miami area, and last week MLB tangibly affirmed that commitment by awarding second-round games in next year's World Baseball Classic to Dolphin Stadium.

 

In an Op-Ed piece that appeared Sunday in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Commissioner Bud Selig reiterated that it was important for Baseball that the Marlins remain in the community.

 

The Marlins, with a Major League-low $21.8 million payroll, have remained near the top of the National League East standings all season. They have never won a division title, although they claimed the NL's Wild Card berth in 1997 and 2003 and went on to win the World Series both times.

 

"The Marlins are an important part of the fabric of South Florida," Selig wrote. "If the Marlins continue on the current pace, they will draw approximately 1.5 million fans this year -- more than the combined attendance of the Dolphins and the Heat this past year. Moreover, the team's television ratings consistently rank in the top 10 of all baseball markets.

 

"How can one forget the over 500,000 fans that attended Marlins home games during the playoffs and World Series in 2003, an average of 65,000 fans per night? I believe South Florida loves the Marlins and, with the appropriate facility, they will thrive over the long term."

 

The Marlins are last this year among MLB's 30 clubs in home attendance, having drawn an average of 16,057 and 915,264 total through 57 home dates.

 

The Marlins attracted a high of 3,064,847 during their inaugural 1993 season but since then have exceeded 2 million once -- in 1997.

 

Braman's lawsuit is being heard in the Miami Dade County Court of Judge Jeri Beth Cohen, who is up for re-election later this month. The judge already has ruled against five of Braman's seven allegations and is about to rule on another, regarding whether there is a valid public purpose for the use of public funds to construct a stadium.

 

But the final assertion -- that the global development proposal needs to be brought to a public vote -- has been delayed by Judge Cohen until at least September, when the Florida Supreme Court reconvenes and can rule on a similar case, which involves Escambia County.

 

The Florida Supreme Court initially overturned almost 30 years of precedent by ruling that the use of property-tax dollars to pay off general obligation bonds has to be taken to a public vote. The state's highest court later agreed to rehear the case, which is under consideration.

 

That court is now in recess until the end of the month.

 

Thus, the clock is ticking. The Marlins have been told they must vacate Dolphin Stadium when their current lease expires at the end of the 2010 season. Because of continued court delays and a possible scuttling of the project, the team may have no place to play locally in 2011.

 

"Foregoing another year or more of the new stadium revenues, plus the losses in the old stadium and increased construction costs of the new stadium, are some things that are very troublesome and some things that are being carefully monitored," DuPuy said.

 

Sports facility projects paid either in part or in full by public funds, have often been fodder for legal tests.

 

In San Diego, for instance, the completion of PETCO Park, which opened in 2004, was delayed by more than two years because Bruce Henderson, a former San Diego City Councilmen, filed 16 separate lawsuits and appeals. The Padres ultimately shared about $150 million of the $400 million project cost, but the City Council declined to issue bonds until the final appeal was rejected.

 

In Miami, this is the third time since Jeffrey Loria and his limited partners purchased the team in 2002 that a ballpark project, involving significant private and public money, has been on the docket. The first two times it was scuttled by the State Legislature, which wouldn't vote to involve any public dollars in the project. This time, the State was out of the process. Even before that, efforts to fund a new ballpark in South Florida have been fruitless. Loria is the third Marlins owner who has tried to resolve the stadium issue since the franchise expanded into the NL in 1993."

orange bowl or bust

idk how it would cause such a delay---not like they are that far into the OB site. But It seems like from around the Marlins-MLB- and everyone in between that it is the OB site or bust.

idk how it would cause such a delay---not like they are that far into the OB site.

 

Land acquisition issues alone would delay the project. Then there is the design for a stadium on a new parcel, they'd be starting from square one in drafting the renderings for a new site. Then there is the issue of revamping infrastructure for the arena site and, oh yeah, actually demolishing the arena. And then, even if they actually decide to move, would be the time and costs of staging a construction site for a retractable roof stadium in a location without construction equipment siting. The reason the OB was picked over Gov't Ctr. was the fact that construction could be accomplished quicker with less cost.

 

All that hasn't even gotten into the issue of having to amend the financing approvals since moving to the Arena site would eliminate the $50M bond that was for OB improvements that was transfered to the OB site for a new Marlins stadium.

 

So, yeah, moving would cause many delays.

idk how it would cause such a delay---not like they are that far into the OB site.

 

Land acquisition issues alone would delay the project. Then there is the design for a stadium on a new parcel, they'd be starting from square one in drafting the renderings for a new site. Then there is the issue of revamping infrastructure for the arena site and, oh yeah, actually demolishing the arena. And then, even if they actually decide to move, would be the time and costs of staging a construction site for a retractable roof stadium in a location without construction equipment siting. The reason the OB was picked over Gov't Ctr. was the fact that construction could be accomplished quicker with less cost.

 

All that hasn't even gotten into the issue of having to amend the financing approvals since moving to the Arena site would eliminate the $50M bond that was for OB improvements that was transfered to the OB site for a new Marlins stadium.

 

So, yeah, moving would cause many delays.

thanks for all the info

Rather than focus on the negative of the site, perhaps if the Global Agreement is sent to a sure defeat by order of referendum we should look at the advantage gained by going to the arena site. The value of having the Metrorail and Metromover station infrastructure and downtown office population outside your door more than offsets the higher upfront cost. If you eliminated arena blvd and built right up to the tracks, and in the case of a retractible roof supports over the Metrorail there is more than enough space for a Minute Maid or New Twins Ballpark like acreage for a ballpark. Straub is already taking on the arena demolition costs, and perhaps if the requirement to discuss a land swap could be the request to provide a decked and continuois 10-15 acre site over the Tracks and Substation etc....Are there issues yes, but to just dismiss this as a fallback option should the OB site be tied up for years by the lawsuits and referendums is foolish. The Arena site long term is the much better location, and if Straub is willing to finance the portion beyond the Marlins contribution and the counties available bed tax non property tax contribution that is exempt from referendum and legal challenge, then the least all parties can do is listen. MLB is taking the stance as a public front to the judge and her pending decision. If the legal appeal process takes years, look for the Straub and Miami Arena site to come back into play. I for one am rooting for this since for the long term success of the ballpark and team, they need to be downown with a public transportation support system. The OB site lacks the public transportation that helps to support Urban Ballparks nationwide, and will be a huge hindrance to long term success. Unless the planned Streetcar as part of this global plan is re-aligned to reach the OB site (Which somehow has never been mentioned or explored), the Miami Arena site is much more viable as a location. I loved the Govt Center location, and the Miami Arena site offers the same benefits. As always we will have to stay tuned to the proceedings...I will take a ballpark in Biscayne Bay if it means we get a new home and long term stability. I am just pointing out that we can't disregard any and all options at this point. The legal proceedings and referendums could tie the OB option up for years. Straub wants to move at a quicker timetable. Should we not at least hear what he really has to say and is offering? :whistle

Rather than focus on the negative of the site, perhaps if the Global Agreement is sent to a sure defeat by order of referendum we should look at the advantage gained by going to the arena site. The value of having the Metrorail and Metromover station infrastructure and downtown office population outside your door more than offsets the higher upfront cost. If you eliminated arena blvd and built right up to the tracks, and in the case of a retractible roof supports over the Metrorail there is more than enough space for a Minute Maid or New Twins Ballpark like acreage for a ballpark. Straub is already taking on the arena demolition costs, and perhaps if the requirement to discuss a land swap could be the request to provide a decked and continuois 10-15 acre site over the Tracks and Substation etc....Are there issues yes, but to just dismiss this as a fallback option should the OB site be tied up for years by the lawsuits and referendums is foolish. The Arena site long term is the much better location, and if Straub is willing to finance the portion beyond the Marlins contribution and the counties available bed tax non property tax contribution that is exempt from referendum and legal challenge, then the least all parties can do is listen. MLB is taking the stance as a public front to the judge and her pending decision. If the legal appeal process takes years, look for the Straub and Miami Arena site to come back into play. I for one am rooting for this since for the long term success of the ballpark and team, they need to be downown with a public transportation support system. The OB site lacks the public transportation that helps to support Urban Ballparks nationwide, and will be a huge hindrance to long term success. Unless the planned Streetcar as part of this global plan is re-aligned to reach the OB site (Which somehow has never been mentioned or explored), the Miami Arena site is much more viable as a location. I loved the Govt Center location, and the Miami Arena site offers the same benefits. As always we will have to stay tuned to the proceedings...I will take a ballpark in Biscayne Bay if it means we get a new home and long term stability. I am just pointing out that we can't disregard any and all options at this point. The legal proceedings and referendums could tie the OB option up for years. Straub wants to move at a quicker timetable. Should we not at least hear what he really has to say and is offering? :whistle

 

 

i agree, we shud atleast listen to what straub has to offer...

 

it culd be a second option

People make it sound like demolishing the AA is some charitable event or a sign of Straub's intentions regarding baseball.

 

Let me repeat myself, the reason he's tearing it down is so he doesn't have to pay taxes on the building. He's not looking to build anything there, he's just looking to lower his carrying costs until he flips it to someone, anyone, that he makes a profit on.

People make it sound like demolishing the AA is some charitable event or a sign of Straub's intentions regarding baseball.

 

Let me repeat myself, the reason he's tearing it down is so he doesn't have to pay taxes on the building. He's not looking to build anything there, he's just looking to lower his carrying costs until he flips it to someone, anyone, that he makes a profit on.

 

Is paying taxes on a vacant lot cheaper then paying taxes on a empty, run down building? In my opinoin he is just tearing it down to make the site more vaulable to future buyers, whomever it ends up being!

Fair point on the Charity comment...My reason for inclusion of Straub's demolition action was an earlier reference to that being a possible cost to us in switching sites. I think MLB has done the job of throwing our objections out there in the public...Site too small (Which is not the case using the Arena Blvd land and a buffer up to Metrorail Tracks would be bigger than the Twins current acreage), Utility and Railroad Tracks a barrier and cost to development, Loss of the 50 Million Bond at the OB....How about we allow Straub to answer to each of these concerns and provide greater details of what he means in detail when he says he would "Finance it himself" and then on the backside answer 'What he wants in return" besides the deed on the OB land....Here is a scenario which is a possible positive to the Marlins...

 

1) Straub demolishes Arena and clears site at his own cost

2) Straub offers to trade a Buildable and decked acreage of land over the tracks and utilities to the city/county in exchange for the OB land - The Twins New Ballpark is being built over Railroad Tracks and a Freeway on an 8 acre site...Albeit this is without a roof, but the supports for a rollout of the roof at the OB site were originally rendered on two rails...These rails could jut out over the Metrorail Tracks elminating the need for extra Real Estate for the roof

3) Straub inherits the 50 Million at the OB for a park or whatever he deems as a Public good on that land

4) Straub includes the 50 Million in HIS financing offer to us therefore a wash to the Marlins, City, County

 

All of this is based on a non-educated understanding of Straub's intention and offer. All I am saying is I wish the media would provide a factual forum or open a true discussion much like we had for MLB to present the objections. This forum would allow all of us to answer the tough questions in regards to Straub's true intentions and offer of financing assistance. :cool

BTW - I am not panning the OB Deal or picking a side. I just know that the legal system moves at a snails pace, and Braman fully intends to exhaust all the legal options available to delay this for years if not able to derail it entirely. At least another more immediate option no matter how genuine or self serving at least deserves an investigation and not a quick dismissal by MLB, Marlins, City, and/or County. The legal hassles we are currently in have the potential to delay this even longer than Dupay mentioned in his article. We can't even get a Rendering from the team until the legal challenges clear up at this point. The banks will not release or finance bonds with a legal proceeding pending, and the list goes on and on for the challenges ahead with the "One Option".... :confused

People make it sound like demolishing the AA is some charitable event or a sign of Straub's intentions regarding baseball.

 

Let me repeat myself, the reason he's tearing it down is so he doesn't have to pay taxes on the building. He's not looking to build anything there, he's just looking to lower his carrying costs until he flips it to someone, anyone, that he makes a profit on.

 

Is paying taxes on a vacant lot cheaper then paying taxes on a empty, run down building? In my opinoin he is just tearing it down to make the site more vaulable to future buyers, whomever it ends up being!

 

In a word "yes".

Chanel 4 reported the other day that Glen Straub the owner of the Miami Arena property wants to swap the land to build an "equestrain center" at the Orange Bowl Site.

 

If this turns out to be a horse track for gambling you can forget about it. The Seminoles and Miccasukees won't allow it. They will also have to deal with the anti-gaming lobby too.

Chanel 4 reported the other day that Glen Straub the owner of the Miami Arena property wants to swap the land to build an "equestrain center" at the Orange Bowl Site.

 

If this turns out to be a horse track for gambling you can forget about it. The Seminoles and Miccasukees won't allow it. They will also have to deal with the anti-gaming lobby too.

 

Most of you here have now confused "equestrian center" with "horse track/thoroughbred racing." Those two are completely different things!

 

Remember, Straub is from Wellington, which is one of the word reknown equestrian centers in the world. The "horses" Straub is contemplating aren't racing for stakes, but are showhorses which compete in equestrian events (i.e., think steeplechase, dressage, etc...).

Chanel 4 reported the other day that Glen Straub the owner of the Miami Arena property wants to swap the land to build an "equestrain center" at the Orange Bowl Site.

 

If this turns out to be a horse track for gambling you can forget about it. The Seminoles and Miccasukees won't allow it. They will also have to deal with the anti-gaming lobby too.

 

Most of you here have now confused "equestrian center" with "horse track/thoroughbred racing." Those two are completely different things!

 

Remember, Straub is from Wellington, which is one of the word reknown equestrian centers in the world. The "horses" Straub is contemplating aren't racing for stakes, but are showhorses which compete in equestrian events (i.e., think steeplechase, dressage, etc...).

 

Does the center have like a course for events and such?

But will it pass the smell test?