Oakland Projects and Business Development (San Jose, London: redevelopment, freeway, MBA)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by athleticsfan72737489

I think you're forgetting about plans to build a streetcar up and down Broadway.

Streetcars Might Make a Comeback in Oakland | Politics and Breaking News | Oakland, Berkeley, Bay Area & California | Seven Days

The Oakland Streetcar Plan - Home

I didn't forget about it as I mentioned a shuttle/trolley/etc.. in the first part of the post you quoted. As of right now that's a proposal/idea rather than an actual "plan" and it doesn't even go by the ballpark site. But I'm sure if the ballpark were to actually get constructed the streetcar proposal would be modified.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by borninamess

the t-line didn't exist until 2007, the stadium opened in 2003. there is a plan on the books to build a light rail right down that street. this will kick start it.

Originally Posted by Obamadon1

Stadium opened in 1999.

The N-Judah ran to the stadium from day one, since it was already the Caltrain stop. They just decided to terminate the N-Judah at Embarcadero for more runs when the T-line was added. The area has been served my muni street car for a long time. They also added game day service for the Ferry, right at the park.

[borninamess]

Originally Posted by sav858

I didn't forget about it as I mentioned a shuttle/trolley/etc.. in the first part of the post you quoted. As of right now that's a proposal/idea rather than an actual "plan" and it doesn't even go by the ballpark site. But I'm sure if the ballpark were to actually get constructed the streetcar proposal would be modified.

the proposal the planning department sent me had it going down thirds street.... i mean all of this is a proposal right now, yeah?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...d_20130115.pdf

[wooliemonster]

Originally Posted by Obamadon1

They aren't "plans" so much as "wouldn't it be cool if we brought back a streetcar." Mixed traffic streetcar, while cool, would almost certainly be a colossal waste of money.

Waste of money is open to debate. The streetcar in Portland was a smashing success; DC is building a large system; dozens of others under development; etc.

[Obamadon1]

Originally Posted by wooliemonster

Waste of money is open to debate. The streetcar in Portland was a smashing success; DC is building a large system; dozens of others under development; etc.

Cap'n Transit Rides Again: Why streetcars don't work anymore
Joseph Rose vs. the Portland Streetcar: Walking wins in showdown of city's poky commuting modes (video) | OregonLive.com

[Obamadon1]

More on the dubious value of mixed traffic streetcars:

Does Europe Build Streetcars? Not Quite – Next City
Signs of a Cargo Cult Urbanism – Next City

There's lots more elsewhere. It's hard to imagine a budget scenario for the city in which a nine figure ($) mixed traffic streetcar would be the best use of money. I guess if the feds want to pay for it

[mini_cute]

Originally Posted by jade408

The Coliseum, although great from a transit perspective, it is surrounded by parking lots and you don't have an opportunity to easily have an "experience" in the neighborhood. There isn't anything to do besides go to Walmart, and that isn't even easily connected to the Coliseum due to the fact the Oakland Airport Connecter eliminated the infill spots that were promised on the original proposal approved by voters.

If the Howard Terminal location was such a winner, then why isn't Lew Wolff into it? He said that the coliseum might even have a chance but Howard terminal is out of the question. There must be some angle that we are missing that is important (to him at least). I am thinking that it is partly because the Port of Oakland is the 5th busiest port in the nation and having the ballpark there would bring its uses into conflict with the port. If it ever came down to a hearing on who gets to do what, the port would probably win most of the time. I don't think it will be as simple as rerouting traffic.

So both locations suck, haha. But I can see your points about how ballparks these days need to be located in vibrant downtowns in order to be competitive.

[wooliemonster]

I've actually read all of those articles and engaged with the authors in some cases. I stand by my point and maybe when I have more time we can start a thread.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by mini_cute

If the Howard Terminal location was such a winner, then why isn't Lew Wolff into it? He said that the coliseum might even have a chance but Howard terminal is out of the question. There must be some angle that we are missing that is important (to him at least). I am thinking that it is partly because the Port of Oakland is the 5th busiest port in the nation and having the ballpark there would bring its uses into conflict with the port. If it ever came down to a hearing on who gets to do what, the port would probably win most of the time. I don't think it will be as simple as rerouting traffic.

So both locations suck, haha. But I can see your points about how ballparks these days need to be located in vibrant downtowns in order to be competitive.

He isn't serious about the Coliseum.. Lew Wolff doesn't want to be anywhere in Oakland period. I believe the main excuse he gave regarding HT was clean up costs and environmental concerns.

Howard Terminal is only a small part of the Port of Oakland and it's away from the bulk of operations and traffic.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by mini_cute

If the Howard Terminal location was such a winner, then why isn't Lew Wolff into it? He said that the coliseum might even have a chance but Howard terminal is out of the question. There must be some angle that we are missing that is important (to him at least). I am thinking that it is partly because the Port of Oakland is the 5th busiest port in the nation and having the ballpark there would bring its uses into conflict with the port. If it ever came down to a hearing on who gets to do what, the port would probably win most of the time. I don't think it will be as simple as rerouting traffic.

So both locations suck, haha. But I can see your points about how ballparks these days need to be located in vibrant downtowns in order to be competitive.

I don't think the co-location with the Port is a huge issue, there is a ton of road capacity in the area, and marked truck routes, better bike infrastructure, and dedicated pedestrian infrastructure could easily eliminate the conflict points that could exist. My big hesitation with site is really that it hasn't really been well earmarked for any regional plan/development. And unless a whole bunch of stuff can be queued up and kinda build the neighborhood at the same time as the park opens, it won't be an awesome experience for a few more years.

I'd like to see a corresponding area plan for that location as well, on who it will connect with downtown, Jack London Square etc. And how those gaps will get filled in to create some vibrancy.