Pawsox now the Provsox?? (Pawtucket, Narragansett: design, yard, park)

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by mp775

It's a terrible use for a downtown, especially a small downtown like Pawtucket where it would dominate everything else. It's a large site that's only used 70 days a year (plus the odd non-baseball game, which McCoy also hosts). Even worse, it requires acres of surface or structured parking that's only used 70 days a year (the latest plan calls for the prime riverfront land between Division Street and Festival Pier to be surface parking). I-95 gets a beautiful stadium frontage, while Main Street gets the blank rear end of a faux Green Monster.

You mean as opposed to the nearly vacant Apex site and surrounding largely empty surface lots? The foot traffic for those 70 days a year (it'll be more with programming like concerts and events plus it'll undoubtedly have some sort of conference/function space like most new parks do) will do far more for downtown than the current Apex site. Take a quick glance a google maps (or better yet, a walk through) to see just how many vacant lots and surface parking lots are in downtown Pawtucket. By the time the city has a shortage of developable land, it'll be time to replace the stadium anyway. There is no way a stadium on that site is any worse than what's already there. I'd argue it's better by a huge margin.

I do tend to agree on the wall frontage on Main St. It should be rotated so that the entrance/retail is over there. But that's not something you can't fight for, and I don't think it's a deal breaker (again, you've got a surface parking along the street as-is).

The return is a new retail and entertainment district. How is that minimal?

You're assuming that the aggravation cost to local businesses (and neighbors who have to deal with the construction) will automatically be rewarded with tenants occupying the spaces. What evidence do you have that that area would thrive as a retail/entertainment district? Do you even know if the zoning would support it? How about the neighbors? The city and state? That's contingent on so many things and about as far from a guarantee as you can get. Frankly, I don't see how that area becomes a Lansdowne-like entertainment district, and if I own a building or home downtown, I'd be pretty upset with the city for building a new retail area when downtown could use the investment.

On the other hand, you have downtown Pawtucket which has urban bones and the storefronts already in place. No need to relocate businesses and try to whip up a retail district from scratch.

And no out of town fans are going to jump on a bus to a stadium at the Apex site, either, and the new Commuter Rail station isn't close enough to be walkable and won't be scheduled around game times. No advantage to downtown over McCoy.

1)They don't need to jump on a bus since they're already in downtown Pawtucket. They can literally walk to anything there.
2)The proposed commuter rail station is 1/2 mile (or a 10 minute walk) from the Apex site.*
3)The schedule works well for games (Pawtucket would be sometime between S. Attleboro and PVD).*

*I think a small percentage of attendance would arrive via Commuter Rail so I doubt it's a big factor anyway. But highway access is important, and I-95 is right next to the Apex site.

They have gimmicks, and it doesn't take a new stadium to have gimmicks. There is certainly history. The proposed park has nothing unique - it's proposed to be a mini-Fenway, just like Portland, Greenville, and Fort Myers.

They have nothing that stands out at McCoy. Nothing. Name one thing that makes McCoy a unique minor league experience? Gimmicks? They don't have anything that nobody else does. Price? That's par for the course for AAA clubs. History? It's not old enough to stand out as a classic like Fenway, Wrigley, or Cardines and the longest game isn't big enough to make someone go out of their way to visit. It's just old like the Oakland Coliseum.

I don't disagree that the proposal needs work, but that doesn't mean that A) Downtown is a bad location for a stadium, or B) McCoy should remain the home of the team. It means work needs to be done on the proposal. And for the record, Portland (used to live next to Hadlock), Greenville and Jetblue Park are better experience than McCoy.

At the risk of repeating myself

You can repeat yourself all you want - they had a good few games this year. That doesn't negate years of falling attendance (even this year is very low on average). It's been a trend for a while for the Pawsox. See for yourself. Over the past decade they've dropped from the top of the pack, to the middle, to the bottom. That's even if you take the numbers at face value - some reports indicate that Pawtucket is inflating attendance figures by upwards of 300%.

[mp775]

Originally Posted by lrfox

You mean as opposed to the nearly vacant Apex site and surrounding largely empty surface lots? The foot traffic for those 70 days a year (it'll be more with programming like concerts and events plus it'll undoubtedly have some sort of conference/function space like most new parks do) will do far more for downtown than the current Apex site.

I'm not saying the existing suburban box store is the best use for the site, but we get that for free. Once there's a commuter rail station in Pawtucket again, there will be demand for residential and retail space that generates foot traffic for a lot more than 70 days a year. We could give out tens of millions in handouts to remake the Apex site into the six city blocks it was before 1970, or to build a megablock stadium that sits vacant most of the time.

Take a quick glance a google maps (or better yet, a walk through) to see just how many vacant lots and surface parking lots are in downtown Pawtucket. By the time the city has a shortage of developable land, it'll be time to replace the stadium anyway. There is no way a stadium on that site is any worse than what's already there. I'd argue it's better by a huge margin.

I'm well aware of Pawtucket's parking problem, and the city has already made some strides in the zoning to correct things like off-street parking minimums downtown.

You're assuming that the aggravation cost to local businesses (and neighbors who have to deal with the construction) will automatically be rewarded with tenants occupying the spaces. What evidence do you have that that area would thrive as a retail/entertainment district?

No more evidence than I do that a stadium would turn downtown Pawtucket into a thriving retail/entertainment district. The whole argument for a new stadium is that it catalyzes development. A half mile shouldn't make a difference.

Do you even know if the zoning would support it?

Of course it wouldn't; it would be a zoning change. Just like building a new stadium on the Apex site.

How about the neighbors?

I'm sure some would and some would not. Some complain to the city council about Saturday night fireworks as it is. Many don't want their property taxes to pay for a new stadium. Are you suggesting that the ancillary development around a new stadium would be undesirable to live near? How does that fit with revitalizing downtown?

The city and state?

Seem hell bent on burying $83 million under the Apex site.

That's contingent on so many things and about as far from a guarantee as you can get. Frankly, I don't see how that area becomes a Lansdowne-like entertainment district, and if I own a building or home downtown, I'd be pretty upset with the city for building a new retail area when downtown could use the investment.

On the other hand, you have downtown Pawtucket which has urban bones and the storefronts already in place. No need to relocate businesses and try to whip up a retail district from scratch.

Maybe, but I don't think the foot traffic of 70 games a year is going to support a lot of businesses. Especially when the proposed parking lot is in the opposite direction from downtown.

You can repeat yourself all you want - they had a good few games this year. That doesn't negate years of falling attendance (even this year is very low on average). It's been a trend for a while for the Pawsox. See for yourself. Over the past decade they've dropped from the top of the pack, to the middle, to the bottom.

I'm aware the numbers have been trending down over the past several years, and new parks like Charlotte show strong numbers. My point is that aside from a possible novelty factor for two or three years, a new stadium isn't a guarantee to draw people. Last year's IL attendance leader was Indianapolis, with a 22 year old stadium. The worst draw was Gwinnett, which has been in the bottom three since their park was built in 2009.

That's even if you take the numbers at face value - some reports indicate that Pawtucket is inflating attendance figures by upwards of 300%.

I may have been at that May 1 game. I wouldn't be in the pictures; I take the kids after dinner, so we usually aren't there by the second inning. I assume they count late arrivals as attending. I also see that the low temperature on May 1 was 37 degrees.

Either way, having been at Friday and Sunday's game, and watching the fireworks from outside the fence because Saturday's game was sold out, I can assure you that this weekend's numbers were not inflated.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by mp775

I'm not saying the existing suburban box store is the best use for the site, but we get that for free. Once there's a commuter rail station in Pawtucket again, there will be demand for residential and retail space that generates foot traffic for a lot more than 70 days a year. We could give out tens of millions in handouts to remake the Apex site into the six city blocks it was before 1970, or to build a megablock stadium that sits vacant most of the time.

You don't get it for free, you get it at a cost. It's an eyesore and a blight and it's a deterrent for anyone who might otherwise consider building there. It's wasted real estate alongside a highway, a river, and adjacent to downtown. The commuter rail will be a good thing for Pawtucket, but it's not going to singlehandedly renovate all of downtown. It needs help. And putting a big entertainment venue there is help. foot traffic for 70 days per year is 70 more days of foot traffic than they're already getting. Plus, it'll be more than 70 days when you factor in concerts and other events. If there was a proposal for returning the old street grid and developing the city blocks the way they used to be, I'd be all for it. But there's nothing even close to that in the works.

Stadiums have been catalysts for downtown development. There's a history of this being the case. Futhermore, having a signature entertainment venue in the city center is a marketing tool both for the city and for the downtown community.

I'm well aware of Pawtucket's parking problem, and the city has already made some strides in the zoning to correct things like off-street parking minimums downtown.

But it's going to be a LONG time before you start seeing big changes on that front. Those lots will remain for a long time after the commuter rail comes in and a long time after the stadium is built. None of that is a reason not to build a stadium.

No more evidence than I do that a stadium would turn downtown Pawtucket into a thriving retail/entertainment district. The whole argument for a new stadium is that it catalyzes development. A half mile shouldn't make a difference.

There's plenty out there. I linked to one article above. You can look into individual cases if you want, but these things usually do boost development on large and small scales. Like commuter rail, it's not a single one-size-fits-all solution, but it's a shot in the arm that will work nicely with the commuter rail station, updated zoning, focus on arts and creative economy, as well as renewed interest in the downtown. A half mile does make a difference to pedestrians. A half mile through a walkable urban landscape is 10 easy (enjoyable) minutes. A mile gets prohibitive for many. A half mile from the station to Apex is a fine walk through downtown. A mile + from the station to McCoy might as well be 100.

Of course it wouldn't; it would be a zoning change. Just like building a new stadium on the Apex site. I'm sure some would and some would not. Some complain to the city council about Saturday night fireworks as it is.

I think it's pretty obvious that forcibly relocating large distribution businesses, then rezoning the entire area adjacent to a quiet residential neighborhood for nightlife/dining/entertainment, constructing said district, AND filling the new space with tenants faces more obstacles than zoning/permitting a stadium a the Apex site.

Many don't want their property taxes to pay for a new stadium.

And that's a legit issue that I hope they weigh in on.

Are you suggesting that the ancillary development around a new stadium would be undesirable to live near? How does that fit with revitalizing downtown?

I'm suggesting that the abutters of McCoy may not be thrilled with the idea of a booming nightlife district constructed out of thin air. Especially if their taxes go to relocating businesses and construction to pave the way for it. It's not a downtown neighborhood, it's a residential neighborhood outside of the city center. Downtown redevelopment is different. For one, it's already largely commercial and setup for that type of development. 2nd, for the nightlife/dining/entertainment, you'd largely be filling existing storefronts (along Main Street) which doesn't abut much residential anyway.

Seem hell bent on burying $83 million under the Apex site.

$38 Million in city/state money. Not nothing, but certainly far less than $83 million. Taxpayers deserve the say on the government commitment, but the potential for good ROI is there. Both from an income standpoint and the contributions to improving the area.

Maybe, but I don't think the foot traffic of 70 games a year is going to support a lot of businesses. Especially when the proposed parking lot is in the opposite direction from downtown.

By itself? Maybe not. Not aside from maybe a hotel and a handful of bars/restaurants. But there is no single one-size fits all solution and just because something isn't a magic paintbrush that singlehandedly revitalizes downtown Pawtucket, it doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. It's a piece of the puzzle. The stadium is an improvement over what is currently there. Plus it comes with a public waterfront park (a 365/24/7 improvement over Apex), and potentially brings with it some new businesses. Add in commuter rail, and some zoning changes and you have a momentum builder. That's a net win.

I'm aware the numbers have been trending down over the past several years, and new parks like Charlotte show strong numbers. My point is that aside from a possible novelty factor for two or three years, a new stadium isn't a guarantee to draw people. Last year's IL attendance leader was Indianapolis, with a 22 year old stadium. The worst draw was Gwinnett, which has been in the bottom three since their park was built in 2009.

The newness of a stadium isn't a guarantee of long-term attendance, you're right. But the newness combined with other factors like a better location and modern amenities do significantly increase the likelihood of attendance increasing. McCoy is dated, and not in the cool, quirky, Fenway way (many even hate Fenway). It's poorly located for the uninitiated, and it's got little other than the game itself to make people want to go. Gwinnett is a terrible example as it's in the middle of a low density suburban residential neighborhood in a metro area (Atlanta) where the MLB club hasn't been successful in recent years and is a cheap/easy ticket to come by anyway. Unlike Fenway, Parking isn't expensive or challenging ($10-18), so the savings in terms of money or hassle for going to Gwinnett over the Braves are not really that significant.

I may have been at that May 1 game. I wouldn't be in the pictures; I take the kids after dinner, so we usually aren't there by the second inning. I assume they count late arrivals as attending. I also see that the low temperature on May 1 was 37 degrees. Either way, having been at Friday and Sunday's game, and watching the fireworks from outside the fence because Saturday's game was sold out, I can assure you that this weekend's numbers were not inflated.

I don't doubt that the inflation mentioned in the article is overstated. There are a lot of reasons people might not be in the pictures. And frankly, most teams go by tickets sold, not people through the turnstiles since it looks better (Sox got crap for this during their sellout streak in which there were many empty seats during games). I also don't doubt that this weekend's numbers were not inflated. I'm just saying that attendance is down overall and even having a competitive parent club doesn't seem to be changing that. When you look at he success of other clubs, the location and amenities of the stadium are a pretty big factor.

[MMS02760]

There is no better highway access for a new stadium than the Apex site in Pawtucket. Face it, most people drive. The site of present day McCoy is not really easily accessible to the highway. The Worcester site would be a few blocks from Rte 290 and would force drivers to navigate one of the worst intersections (Kelley Sq) in MA. The two site being looked at in Worcester were once occupied by Wyman-Gordon and may require remediation (especially one site).

[MMS02760]

I think it wrong to make the comparison of Pawtucket to Worcester. Worcester is a city that has some 115k more residents and is the hub for its metro area. Conversely Worcester will therefore come out on top in most all city metrics. The real comparison should be the Metro Worcester area versus the Metro Providence area. AAA baseball cannot survive solely on the support of the city is is located in. It must draw from the greater region. In that respect, Pawtucket being a part of Metro Providence (stadium is just 4m from Providence City Hall) , trumps Metro Worcester.



This is about markets. Just look at the facts. The much smaller city of Pawtucket has supported a very successful AAA baseball team for over 50 years. In just the last 20 years, Worcester has seen two AHL hockey teams (now replaced by a lower level team) and a baseball team (Tornados) flounder and leave. The reason is that the Paw Sox flourished because they were part of a much larger metro region.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by MMS02760

There is no better highway access for a new stadium than the Apex site in Pawtucket. Face it, most people drive. The site of present day McCoy is not really easily accessible to the highway. The Worcester site would be a few blocks from Rte 290 and would force drivers to navigate one of the worst intersections (Kelley Sq) in MA. The two site being looked at in Worcester were once occupied by Wyman-Gordon and may require remediation (especially one site).

Agreed. The commuter rail access will be nice and hopefully some people come by train, but it's all about the drivers and the Apex site is easily accessible and doesn't flood downtown with cars. It's a good location.

Originally Posted by MMS02760

I think it wrong to make the comparison of Pawtucket to Worcester. Worcester is a city that has some 115k more residents and is the hub for its metro area. Conversely Worcester will therefore come out on top in most all city metrics. The real comparison should be the Metro Worcester area versus the Metro Providence area. AAA baseball cannot survive solely on the support of the city is is located in. It must draw from the greater region. In that respect, Pawtucket being a part of Metro Providence (stadium is just 4m from Providence City Hall) , trumps Metro Worcester.


This is about markets. Just look at the facts. The much smaller city of Pawtucket has supported a very successful AAA baseball team for over 50 years. In just the last 20 years, Worcester has seen two AHL hockey teams (now replaced by a lower level team) and a baseball team (Tornados) flounder and leave. The reason is that the Paw Sox flourished because they were part of a much larger metro region.

Yeah, I don't think anyone is looking at Pawtucket and Worcester as islands. There are twice as many people in the Providence area as there are in the Worcester area. Providence is a bigger cultural and economic hub. Providence is a mere 18sq. miles (for comparison's sake, Worcester is more than twice as large at 38 square miles, Boston is 48, Fall River is 40, and Jacksonville FL is over 880 square miles) . If Providence were like most cities, Pawtucket would have been annexed a long time ago and been an urban neighborhood within the city of Providence. It's certainly not Pawtucket on its own against Worcester and I think it's very clear that Pawtucket/Providence is the stronger market.

[mp775]

Originally Posted by lrfox

You don't get it for free, you get it at a cost. It's an eyesore and a blight and it's a deterrent for anyone who might otherwise consider building there.

What I mean is no significant investment has to go to keeping it there. And I would guess a new stadium built on the site would be more of a deterrent to new development on the site than the clean slate that is there now.

foot traffic for 70 days per year is 70 more days of foot traffic than they're already getting. Plus, it'll be more than 70 days when you factor in concerts and other events. If there was a proposal for returning the old street grid and developing the city blocks the way they used to be, I'd be all for it. But there's nothing even close to that in the works.

Because the City has apparently gone all on the stadium. Even the Peregrine development on Division Street seems to have stalled now that the site is earmarked for stadium parking instead.

Stadiums have been catalysts for downtown development. There's a history of this being the case. Futhermore, having a signature entertainment venue in the city center is a marketing tool both for the city and for the downtown community. There's plenty out there. I linked to one article above. You can look into individual cases if you want, but these things usually do boost development on large and small scales.

Except pretty much all of those cities have much larger downtowns that can support a stadium and entertainment district that fit into the fabric of a downtown. Pawtucket is an individual case: the downtown isn't big enough to have a stadium as a part of it; the stadium would dominate it. There are also plenty of articles that show public investment in a new stadium isn't worth it.

Like commuter rail, it's not a single one-size-fits-all solution, but it's a shot in the arm that will work nicely with the commuter rail station, updated zoning, focus on arts and creative economy, as well as renewed interest in the downtown.

All of those still work without a new stadium.

A half mile does make a difference to pedestrians. A half mile through a walkable urban landscape is 10 easy (enjoyable) minutes. A mile gets prohibitive for many. A half mile from the station to Apex is a fine walk through downtown. A mile + from the station to McCoy might as well be 100.

Irrelevent, since commuter rail ridership to games will be negligible.

I think it's pretty obvious that forcibly relocating large distribution businesses, then rezoning the entire area adjacent to a quiet residential neighborhood for nightlife/dining/entertainment, constructing said district, AND filling the new space with tenants faces more obstacles than zoning/permitting a stadium a the Apex site.

McCoy and the Apex site are a half mile apart. It's the same neighbors either way. And there is so much underutilized space between Division Street and Armistice Boulevard that some development could happen without relocating anything.

I'm suggesting that the abutters of McCoy may not be thrilled with the idea of a booming nightlife district constructed out of thin air. Especially if their taxes go to relocating businesses and construction to pave the way for it. It's not a downtown neighborhood, it's a residential neighborhood outside of the city center.

Half a mile from the city center. IF a minor league stadium really generates "booming night life," the residents will have to deal with it either way. If it's really that thrilling an area, the apartments will soon be filled with Wrigleyville types who want to live near the action anyway.

Downtown redevelopment is different. For one, it's already largely commercial and setup for that type of development. 2nd, for the nightlife/dining/entertainment, you'd largely be filling existing storefronts (along Main Street) which doesn't abut much residential anyway.

Except five senior housing towers, with plenty of residents with nothing better to do with their evenings than protest at council meetings.

$38 Million in city/state money. Not nothing, but certainly far less than $83 million.

In the Senate version of the financing bill, and excluding borrowing costs (currently estimated at $14 million). The House version doesn't specify. And even though the team is supposed to kick in $45 million, the latest House bill guarantees they whole $83 million with my property taxes.

By itself? Maybe not. Not aside from maybe a hotel and a handful of bars/restaurants. But there is no single one-size fits all solution and just because something isn't a magic paintbrush that singlehandedly revitalizes downtown Pawtucket, it doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. It's a piece of the puzzle. The stadium is an improvement over what is currently there. Plus it comes with a public waterfront park (a 365/24/7 improvement over Apex), and potentially brings with it some new businesses. Add in commuter rail, and some zoning changes and you have a momentum builder. That's a net win.

All of those still work without a new stadium.

The newness of a stadium isn't a guarantee of long-term attendance, you're right. But the newness combined with other factors like a better location and modern amenities do significantly increase the likelihood of attendance increasing.

Not proven, and in fact, the opposite is proven by the fact McCoy has been both the oldest stadium and the league attendance leader. I'm not sure what "modern amenities" are needed to draw fans to a baseball game.

McCoy is dated, and not in the cool, quirky, Fenway way (many even hate Fenway). It's poorly located for the uninitiated, and it's got little other than the game itself to make people want to go.

It's a concrete structure with seats, and hardly a bad one at that. I was just remarking at Sunday's game how close to the action you are even from the back of the blue seats; there are no real nosebleed seats. The latest artist's rendering of the new stadium shows three decks crammed into a small grandstand.

Aside from quirky old Fenway and Wrigley, the oldest MLB park is currently Dodger Stadium. It's unremarkable, not downtown, and is currently #1 in attendance. The Dodgers' record is barely over .500.

Gwinnett is a terrible example as it's in the middle of a low density suburban residential neighborhood in a metro area (Atlanta) where the MLB club hasn't been successful in recent years and is a cheap/easy ticket to come by anyway.

Maybe so, but the move was prompted by the want of a new stadium that Richmond wouldn't give them.

Unlike Fenway, Parking isn't expensive or challenging ($10-18), so the savings in terms of money or hassle for going to Gwinnett over the Braves are not really that significant.

I don't doubt that the inflation mentioned in the article is overstated. There are a lot of reasons people might not be in the pictures. And frankly, most teams go by tickets sold, not people through the turnstiles since it looks better (Sox got crap for this during their sellout streak in which there were many empty seats during games). I also don't doubt that this weekend's numbers were not inflated. I'm just saying that attendance is down overall and even having a competitive parent club doesn't seem to be changing that. When you look at he success of other clubs, the location and amenities of the stadium are a pretty big factor.

Attendance comes and goes, and I don't think it can be attributed to any one thing. Even spending tens of millions to jump on today's novelty to boost attendance isn't going to last. Well before the stadium is paid off or there is a return on the investment, it will be another old stadium and the owners will be threatening to move without another handout. No thanks.

[mp775]

Originally Posted by MMS02760

There is no better highway access for a new stadium than the Apex site in Pawtucket. Face it, most people drive. The site of present day McCoy is not really easily accessible to the highway. The Worcester site would be a few blocks from Rte 290 and would force drivers to navigate one of the worst intersections (Kelley Sq) in MA. The two site being looked at in Worcester were once occupied by Wyman-Gordon and may require remediation (especially one site).

The current site has multiple routes to and from I-95 that are well signed if you pay attention. The Apex site essentially has one way in and one way out, and would make traffic a lot worse.

This is about markets. Just look at the facts. The much smaller city of Pawtucket has supported a very successful AAA baseball team for over 50 years. In just the last 20 years, Worcester has seen two AHL hockey teams (now replaced by a lower level team) and a baseball team (Tornados) flounder and leave. The reason is that the Paw Sox flourished because they were part of a much larger metro region.

Well, 46 years and not all of them successful . But noted nonetheless.

[ormari]

I still have problems with the Paw Sox proposal to build a stadium. While I want to see economic development in downtown Pawtucket, I do not think building a stadium is the way to do it successfully and sustainably. @mp775 has noted a lot of reasons that I'll echo by reference, but I'll add a little more.

I don't think it is appropriate to take the Apex site by eminent domain. Like it or loathe it, the Apex building is in use by its present owner. The PawSox are welcome to make them an offer to buy the property at market value. Using the state and city government to wrest the land away from the current owners for private development is not an appropriate function of government. This is probably among the reasons the PawSox want the stadium to be publicly owned, so they can shamelessly argue it is for the public good.

The design of the stadium itself says that that the proposed stadium is being built for a particular private developer and is not a public good. Anyway, I think it is a little too Mickey Mouse to build yet another Fenway replica, especially if it is to be a public stadium. If we build them a Fenway imposter and then they decide to bolt town, what other minor league team is going to want to play in a Red Sox specific park?

Regardless, I happen to like McCoy. If I were to change anything, I would makeover the slightly ugly el-cheapo tower of stairs. Otherwise, I think it is reasonably aesthetically pleasing, has reasonable facilities for a AAA club, and is a good value. I do find the location a little out of place, but it isn't enough of a gripe to build a new stadium elsewhere.

I continue to think that those who believe the threats that the Paw Sox owners will move the club to Worcester are gullible. I hate to say it, but in this age of short attention spans, baseball is seemingly a dying sport. The Paw Sox owners need a sizeable market to attract enough bodies to keep the operation profitable. I seriously doubt Metro-Worcester is a large enough market. Pawtucket/Providence metro is what they're after. If they want a new stadium, they should do it on their dime, not ours.

[KEVIN_224]

I was at the May 23rd game against Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (AAA version of Yankees vs Red Sox). I agree that the current site is less than desirable. I saw the Apex site when my friend got back on I-95. Hmmm!

What made the Providence proposal in Fox Point fail? It sure would be nice to maybe use the land freed up with relocating I-195!

As for exclusive zones? I want to say it was 35 miles for AA level teams. We here in Connecticut once had New Britain, Norwich and New Haven (really West Haven) all in the Eastern League together. Today, Norwich is the Richmond Flying Squirrels and New Haven is the New Hampshire Fishercats. Then came the ugly move of the New Britain Rock Cats to Hartford (and now known as the Yard Goats). I think if the New Britain franchise had moved to either Springfield or Holyoke, MA, we'd still have affiliated baseball. All we have now are the Bees, who are pro but play in the unaffiliated Atlantic League. They're in their third season and don't draw at all. In fact, the Bridgeport Bluefish already left and are playing this season as a "Road Warriors" team. Next year, that team will call High Point, NC home.

For New Britain to have affiliated baseball again, Hartford would have to grant permission. Clearly, they're never going to do that.