Well by reading some of these posts, it appears I'm taking a pounding.

Edcanes...

 

If you ever decide not to post your "insiders" anymore, could you at least start e-mailing them to me. I find them quite interesting. I don't take them as "Gospel", especially since you have no control over the outcome. Right or wrong, it's all good for me. Thanks...

This is where it gets tricky, it appears some want the Metro-rail going in between both, so they can take some money from the transporation fund.

ingenious!! it's a good way to milk the half-cent transportation tax for a little extra stadium money. of course, i don't know if that means that the city will then contribute less to the restoration project (thereby pocketing the county's transportation money for the city's own general fund).

 

anyways, i havent watched the commission meeting yet (i only watched the last few minutes), so i'll wait until the reruns play to see what the deal is.

 

ed, was this metrorail stuff mentioned during the meeting today? or is it new info?

In my mind edcanes is "the" man on these boards,and he and everyone else knows i've always been cool with him.

The stadium is going to be like a figure 8, with the skyboxes being connected to both stadiums. This is where it gets tricky, it appears some want the Metro-rail going in between both, so they can take some money from the transporation fund. The big thing is the skyboxes, and the money it would bring. Thats all I know......or don't know

 

 

If thats all you can contribute then youve certainly contributed more than almost anyone else can. Thats pure gold man. It certainly gives us an image at least of what they are looking at.

 

 

btw, whats ure opinion on the project?

Frankly, i like the metrorail between them so that way they aren't connected and they don't do the ghetto skybox thing.

cbs4.com has a marlins stadium report from noon today by joy purdy.

Frankly, i like the metrorail between them so that way they aren't connected and they don't do the ghetto skybox thing.

 

 

Agreed. That would probably mean better skyboxes for the Marlins.

hmm, this is better than expected. At least this is a permanent home for the Fish. Plus being able to add a roof later is a BIG advantage.

 

I have a feeling that the Marlins told Miami not to even officialy propose sharing OB with the canes. It was to complicated to work.

 

I can't picture that "tower", I would like to see some proposed architectural design, but it could be interesting. Who knows. . .

 

I agree, Metrorail should go in between no matter what.

The metrorail idea is great, what a way to avoid parking in Jose's backyard, not to mention the traffic situation

The metrorail idea is great, what a way to avoid parking in Jose's backyard, not to mention the traffic situation

the metrorail will be passing through there, regardless.

 

they've planned to extend it west through that area to connect it with the airport.

 

it's a great way to pick up more funds for the project, though.

Can someone explain to me the progress made today at the proposal meeting?

 

Also when is this deal, if at all expected to finalize? I would assume we'd have to do it rather quickly in order to put a deal out to Vlad or another "Marquee" player

The city of Miami said yes to the proposal of offering the Canes a renovated OB for football and the Marlins a new, simple ballpark next to the OB and the land. Combined price $375 million.

 

Marlins have no comment.

Id imagine it would wait for the Marlins approval and the state approving the rebate, which would have to happen regardless of if the Marlins accept or not.

Metro-rail plan is super. Great plan overall.

It is a FACT that H-Bomb is profitting off of the Marlins as a tenant.

 

Jonnylyons, it's hours after our initial debate and the subject has moved on to what transpired this afternoon but I want to clear up something we were discussing earlier.

 

I wasn't suggesting that PPS doesn't make a profit on the Marlins because they do. We are in agreement on that. The Dolphins contend that they don't want to be in the business of actively managing the property year round as they do with dual tenants. That's understandable from a business standpoint. Anyone in business would give 10% of their profit to eliminate 80% of their effort. If I said to you I'd pay you $1000 for 40 hours work or $1200 for 80 hours work you'd obviously take the former option and you'd be right in doing so.

 

Now do I believe a more favorable lease arrangement could be structured, absolutely yes. Do I think Huizenga has a moral obligation (as father of the Fish) to see them prosper, yes again. He doesn't see it that way. He sees it an obstacle to coming into compliance with the wishes of the other owners in the NFL and as such wants to be paid for the inconvenience.

 

I think he's wrong and I agree it's crippling the Marlins but its his ball and unfortunately he's calling the shots.

I've been re-reading the article from the Herald and I've seen a discrepancy, it's probably just a mis-print. But in the article posted at 5:57pm, the ballpark will be on the Southern side of the Orange Bowl. In the article posted at 7:57, the ballpark will be on the Northern side. Any opinions on which side would be better??

I've been re-reading the article from the Herald and I've seen a discrepancy, it's probably just a mis-print. But in the article posted at 5:57pm, the ballpark will be on the Southern side of the Orange Bowl. In the article posted at 7:57, the ballpark will be on the Northern side. Any opinions on which side would be better??

southern

 

i believe the buses to the bowl go by the southern side, so maybe thats a plus...

I've been re-reading the article from the Herald and I've seen a discrepancy, it's probably just a mis-print. But in the article posted at 5:57pm, the ballpark will be on the Southern side of the Orange Bowl. In the article posted at 7:57, the ballpark will be on the Northern side. Any opinions on which side would be better??

southern

 

i believe the buses to the bowl go by the southern side, so maybe thats a plus... why would the busses matter? they could always move them

Where are all the Edcanes doubters?

I've been re-reading the article from the Herald and I've seen a discrepancy, it's probably just a mis-print. But in the article posted at 5:57pm, the ballpark will be on the Southern side of the Orange Bowl.? In the article posted at 7:57, the ballpark will be on the Northern side. Any opinions on which side would be better??

southern

 

i believe the buses to the bowl go by the southern side, so maybe thats a plus... why would the busses matter? they could always move them well, now we know the "fish bowl" gonna be on the northern side, close to the river, too far for splash landings (obviously)

all i was saying about the buses before was that it would be a plus if you wouldnt have to move em

Where are all the Edcanes doubters?

judgement day is over and edcanes was right

 

looks like the marlins are down to 2 options for the future: obowl, northern virginia (forget ft laud. that joke of a proposal)

http://southflorida.bizjournals.com/southf...05/daily56.html

 

 

Orange Bowl Marlins plan: A two stadium complex

 

Alexis Muellner

 

 

It's never been done: a baseball and football stadium, conjoined by luxury boxes and concourses, all together in one big complex.

 

That's the latest plan as presented to the Miami City Commission late Thursday, which voted 5-0 to keep developing the idea. It would combine a new, 35,000-seat stadium for the Florida Marlins with a total redevelopment of the existing Orange Bowl and house the University of Miami Hurricanes, and possibly a pro soccer team.

 

Hammes Co., the city's Wisconsin-based consultant on its current Orange Bowl redevelopment, was asked to explore a dual-stadium concept last month by Miami Mayor Manny Diaz.

 

In Thursdays presentation, Hammes principal Robert Dunn told commissioners there were two options: undertake a structurally complex renovation of the Orange Bowl to add a "baseball footprint" for $250 million, but would only be temporary; or fit two stadiums on the land, adding a new Marlins ballpark where currently, the northern parking lot sits. Without a retractable roof, that would cost $375 million. A roof could be added later.

 

News media crowded the chambers, and commissioners sipped Cuban coffee as they listened to the late-afternoon presentation.

 

"Baseball belongs in Miami," Diaz said in opening remarks. "This plan can work. I believe we can make this happen and in so doing execute the vision [of a Miami Marlins stadium] at the same time, protecting and safeguarding the financial integrity of the city."

 

But Diaz said the stadium issue has been the victim of misinformation as a result of "30-second sound bites."

 

Take the $325 million price tag that has been floated, Diaz said. Add debt service, land costs, infrastructure improvements and parking, and the total cost is much higher. As for the dual stadium complex, Diaz warned it was important to be realistic of the total costs: likely to be in excess of $450 million "and more likely over half-a-billion dollars," he said.

 

Also, the $137 million reported as the Marlins pledge to the project is money which would come from stadium sales taxes and other sources over 20 years, and was also a misleading figure, Diaz said.

 

"This payment stream is not guaranteed - not really - and ultimately may have to be paid by the tax-payers of our community," he said. An independent analysis of the payment stream also showed it could be significantly less than the current figure, he said.

 

But the new plan of a shared infrastructure "makes a lot of business sense," the mayor said.

 

"In some respects, [this scenario is] a radically different idea in terms of how to take advantage of the existing infrastructure that exists," said Hammes principal Robert Dunn.

 

Stadiums aren't real efficient in their ability to generate revenue these days, he said. Most are underutilized, said Dunn, and can count their annual use in hours, as opposed to days.

 

"What we've done recently is to look for ways to take core infrastructure built to support game days, and try to find opportunities to better utilize that infrastructure and develop more revenue."

 

Hammes is suggesting that the city "marry to the Orange Bowl" the new baseball park. When a similar scenario was first floated a few years ago, it involved acquisition of 32 properties. This plan does not.

 

The concept: in the intersection of the two buildings would be a zone to locate all shared infrastructure: locker rooms, food service, storage, locker rooms and mechanical "back of the house" elements - a set up with operational cost advantages, he said. In the upper reaches of that zone, to be built vertically, would be premium seating and club seats, with some of the closest on-field views of any stadium in college football. That would enhance their value and marketability, Dunn told the commissioners.

 

The University of Miami, the city's top tenant, said it was open to the plan but had some concerns about scheduling, parking, and decreased capacity of the football venue which Dunn said could be 65,000 to 70,000 under this scenario. But he said he's optimistic.

 

"We want these to be problems we can help find positive solutions to," said Paul Dee, director of inter-collegiate athletics at the University of Miami.

 

Exact financing scenarios were not presented.

 

The presentation was short on exact financing scenarios.

 

"Where's the beef?" said Commissioner Arthur Teele, suggesting the plan was resembling a poker game that had seen its pot get too large. "Too rich for my blood," he said.

 

But city manager Joe Arriola said that the University of Miami's role as a partner would mean more favorable bond financing and opens up other financing avenues that didn't exist for a baseball-only stadium.

 

The facility might be managed by the Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority, Diaz told commissioners - which would essentially be the complex owner.

 

Hammes was responsible for a major redevelopment project at Lambeau Field in Green Bay, and is working with Giants Stadium in New Jersey and others.

 

 

This is a rather strange plan. I have no idea whether the Marlins would accept it as it and we know it won't have a retractable roof right away but at least they should tweak the design a bit so that it would be a more decent ballpark. I would like to see a "Teal Monster" behind left field (if they could bring that thing over from PPS).

Frankly, i like the metrorail between them so that way they aren't connected and they don't do the ghetto skybox thing.

The point of sharing skyboxes is to share an entire side of each stadium so you only have to build one set of concession stands and bathrooms on that side.

 

I question if a retractable roof would really be possible with the skybox plan as it is. Or atleast without major inconvenience to the UM football squad for the year the Marlins plan to add it. Even then it may not be perfect.

 

 

 

Also can someone explain to me why the city is doing so much for UM? I thought they were a private university. It'd be a nice gesture for the city to help a small bit, but this much for 6-7 games of college football?

I've been re-reading the article from the Herald and I've seen a discrepancy, it's probably just a mis-print. But in the article posted at 5:57pm, the ballpark will be on the Southern side of the Orange Bowl.? In the article posted at 7:57, the ballpark will be on the Northern side. Any opinions on which side would be better??

southern

 

i believe the buses to the bowl go by the southern side, so maybe thats a plus... why would the busses matter? they could always move them well, now we know the "fish bowl" gonna be on the northern side, close to the river, too far for splash landings (obviously)

all i was saying about the buses before was that it would be a plus if you wouldnt have to move em If you think moving buses is going to be the biggest problem during this construction you're in for it.

I've been re-reading the article from the Herald and I've seen a discrepancy, it's probably just a mis-print. But in the article posted at 5:57pm, the ballpark will be on the Southern side of the Orange Bowl. In the article posted at 7:57, the ballpark will be on the Northern side. Any opinions on which side would be better??

i think i has to be the north side - more room on that side