HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > San Antonio


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2008, 7:09 PM
STLtoSA's Avatar
STLtoSA STLtoSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 333
The Future of the dome is all about how many dates can it be used. The dome used alot more than people think. Through February there are 10 major events being held at the dome over 20 days. From the time that it takes to set up for some of these events there isn't any more room to fit in other events. These events over the next few months are going to bring tens of thousands of people to SA, and millions of dollars.

When UTSA fields a football team the stadium will get at least 5 more events per year. And if UTSA is smart they will try to schedule a Texas, Texas A&M, or Tech for some home and home series.

The dome is not going to come down any time soon. Anyone who suggests that the land can be sold to developers is also wrong. The reason the dome was built there is because the land is an environmental disaster. The city spent millions of dollars to do enough cleanup to build the dome, but the site wasn't completely cleaned. No one knows how bad the environmetal damages the old foundry left on the land is, but it is bad enough to make it unsuitable, or better yet, a bad site for development.

San Antonio will probably never get an NFL franchise. It had some chances in the past, but by building a sub par (in terms of suites mainly) stadium (to NFL standards) and the fact that SA is Cowboys country, it will never happen.

St. Louis like SA built a domed stadium in the 90's that would be part of the convention center. And like SA would hopefully lure a football team to the city. One of the major differences was that SA built a dome not ready for an NFL team and STL did. Of course, there are other factors that helped STL, like a substantialy bigger metro area and a NFL history, but the main reason franchises move is because of money (stadiums).

The City has moved away from hoping that the dome will be used to lure an NFL team, and is maximizing the opperability of the stadium. SA is not out of the running, it will still get at least a regional and maybe a preliminary round event also. The Alamo dome is not a lost cause and never has been. It is an important asset of the City of San Antonio.

__________________________________________________

I do have a correction from earlier. The last improvements made to the dome included adding 14 luxury suites raising the total to 52.

__________________________________________________

"SA is out of the running. And that is OK. We don’t need college basketball to make us great. We need infrastructure, progressive living, integrated neighborhoods, and a higher quality of life. Want to keep companies like AT&T? How about a more dynamic lifestyle? Maybe better public transport? Maybe a real urban fabric? Maybe a young, creative class that is drawn to a city and therefore draws employers yearning for a young creative class…" sakyle

I agree with this statement 100%. In SA this is such an up hill battle. People like Richard Milk in community development have done great things in planningand attracting the kind of developments and quality of life that you speak of. The problem is that the city is run by developers, and they don't care about quality of life and urban fabric if it is going to affect their bottom dollar. We at the city and the state of Texas have some of the worst development codes and property laws in the country.

But none of this has anything to do with the dome.

_________________________________________________________________________

Some Statements:

-"It has generated $450 million in spending since it was built," said Michael Abingdon, director of the Alamodome. "That's nothing to sneeze at." The total cost to build it was $186 million. (2005)

-When asked why the NCAA did snub the Alamo City, Slive said the size of the Alamodome wasn't a factor. But with the Final Four moving to a larger arena configuration that allows more seats to be sold, Slive said the six-year-old Reliant Stadium — which has more than 100 more luxury suites than the Alamodome and can seat at least 5,000 more fans — was one of Houston's strongest selling points.

-"The Dallas Cowboys' new billion-dollar stadium in Arlington might be able to squeeze as many as 100,000 fans into a basketball configuration. The proposed Alamodome setup would have held between 65,000 and 70,000." Mike Finger article(Dallas' new stadium's capacity far exceeds all other possible host cities)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 4:40 AM
NBTX11 NBTX11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Posts: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
Unless there is an NFL team right there ready to move in, I doubt a stadium will be built that outshines Reliant, let alone the new Cowboys Stadium.
If SA built a stadium on par with Reliant, there would be an NFL team sniffing around right now. There are teams currently with poor stadiums or in small markets (Buffalo, Jax, etc.). The alamodome will not draw an nfl team, another stadium would have to be promised to draw a team in.

And whoever said the Alamodome has 38 suites is wrong, it has 52 currently, with capacity for 66. It did have 38 but more were added.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamodome
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 5:14 AM
oldmanshirt's Avatar
oldmanshirt oldmanshirt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SATX > KCMO > DFW
Posts: 1,170
I honestly hope SA is done chasing the NFL for awhile. Div I football should be good enough for the city for the time being. If we're gonna go after any pro sports, I'd think Arena Football or NASCAR would be a better fit. Heck, even keep trying for an MLB team. All going after the NFL does is raise people's expectations to unreasonable levels.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 6:38 AM
sirkingwilliam's Avatar
sirkingwilliam sirkingwilliam is offline
Loving SA 365 days a year
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 3,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by STLtoSA View Post
The Future of the dome is all about how many dates can it be used. The dome used alot more than people think. Through February there are 10 major events being held at the dome over 20 days. From the time that it takes to set up for some of these events there isn't any more room to fit in other events. These events over the next few months are going to bring tens of thousands of people to SA, and millions of dollars.

When UTSA fields a football team the stadium will get at least 5 more events per year. And if UTSA is smart they will try to schedule a Texas, Texas A&M, or Tech for some home and home series.

The dome is not going to come down any time soon. Anyone who suggests that the land can be sold to developers is also wrong. The reason the dome was built there is because the land is an environmental disaster. The city spent millions of dollars to do enough cleanup to build the dome, but the site wasn't completely cleaned. No one knows how bad the environmetal damages the old foundry left on the land is, but it is bad enough to make it unsuitable, or better yet, a bad site for development.

San Antonio will probably never get an NFL franchise. It had some chances in the past, but by building a sub par (in terms of suites mainly) stadium (to NFL standards) and the fact that SA is Cowboys country, it will never happen.

St. Louis like SA built a domed stadium in the 90's that would be part of the convention center. And like SA would hopefully lure a football team to the city. One of the major differences was that SA built a dome not ready for an NFL team and STL did. Of course, there are other factors that helped STL, like a substantialy bigger metro area and a NFL history, but the main reason franchises move is because of money (stadiums).

The City has moved away from hoping that the dome will be used to lure an NFL team, and is maximizing the opperability of the stadium. SA is not out of the running, it will still get at least a regional and maybe a preliminary round event also. The Alamo dome is not a lost cause and never has been. It is an important asset of the City of San Antonio.
How do you not understand that the benifits of the dome decrease every yar that goes by and it gets older and new venues are built in other places that are supremely better.

Yes, the Dome, if left erected, come 2015 will house some local stuff like trade shows and high school football and the bowl game but it won't host the national stuff, the stuff that's decided on by committees. Eventually the useful of the Dome will run it's course. Yes, it's paid off but the fact is, and I may be wrong but I think I read this, it doesn't make money anymore.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 2:34 PM
STLtoSA's Avatar
STLtoSA STLtoSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by NBTX11 View Post
If SA built a stadium on par with Reliant, there would be an NFL team sniffing around right now. There are teams currently with poor stadiums or in small markets (Buffalo, Jax, etc.). The alamodome will not draw an nfl team, another stadium would have to be promised to draw a team in.

And whoever said the Alamodome has 38 suites is wrong, it has 52 currently, with capacity for 66. It did have 38 but more were added.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamodome
You obviously didn't read the posts before posting. That correction has allready been made.

People need to understand that an NFL team is not going to come to SA anytime soon, and probably a lot longer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 3:21 PM
STLtoSA's Avatar
STLtoSA STLtoSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirkingwilliam View Post
How do you not understand that the benifits of the dome decrease every yar that goes by and it gets older and new venues are built in other places that are supremely better.

Yes, the Dome, if left erected, come 2015 will house some local stuff like trade shows and high school football and the bowl game but it won't host the national stuff, the stuff that's decided on by committees. Eventually the useful of the Dome will run it's course. Yes, it's paid off but the fact is, and I may be wrong but I think I read this, it doesn't make money anymore.
When did I or anyone else say that the dome is in perfect condition and never needs to be upgraded. The city puts money into the dome to help keep it up. in 2006 it added the remaining Luxury suites on the sidelines that were left out when originaly constructed.

We all no that the Alamo Dome cannot compete with the newer facilities, but as a host city it can and will. San Antonio will still get Final Four's. It is only going to be once every 10-15 years instead of once every 4-6 years. It will still host prelims and regionals once every four years or so. And your right the Alamo Bowl is not "national stuff".

And you are wrong about more stadiums being built that will make it harder for SA to get an event. The only team trying to get a new dome is the team that the Alamo Dome was supposed to lure, the Vikings. No other NFL franchise has is even close needing a new dome stadium. The Bills would be the closest, but playing in the elements is a staple in Buffalo and they made major renovations 9 years ago.

These are the cities that could host the Final Four and it is a static list at that: (Name - Year Built - Capacity - Suites)

1. Superdome - 1975 - 72,968 - 64
2. Metro Dome - 1982 - 64,111 - 113**
3. Georgia Dome - 1992 - 71,228 - 172
4. Alamo Dome - 1993 - 69,000 - 52
5. Edward Jones Dome - 1995 - 67,000 - 125
6. Reliant Stadium - 2002 - 71,500 - 187
7. Ford Field - 2002 - 78,000*- 140
8. U of Phoenix Stadium- 2006 - 73,719 - 88
9. Lucas Oil Stadium - 2008 - 70,000*- 137
10.Jerry World - 2009 - 93,000*- 200

*figures based on NCAA configuration estimates
**this seems hig, but couldn't find any other figure

These stadiums represent the 10 possible host cities. Jerry World and Lucas Oil Field will most likely be the only stand outs that will be in a regular rotation. There used to be only 7 possible host cities and now there are 10. But this list isn't going to grow anymore.

Oldmanshirt, "I honestly hope SA is done chasing the NFL for awhile. Div I football should be good enough for the city for the time being."

If UTSA fields a football team and works a deal with the City, dome revenue will grow drastically through advertising and additional events.

The dome wasn't built for the Final Four, and the final four doesn't keep the dome in operation. Needless to say the dome lives on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 3:23 PM
Dom"n"Converse's Avatar
Dom"n"Converse Dom"n"Converse is offline
Hmmm....
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 159
San Antonio has hosted the Final Four 3 times in the last 10 years, did it ever occur to anyone that maybe the NCAA wanted to let another city host the game so it doesn't look as if the league was playing favorites with San Antonio? Seriously, the city not hosting a basketball tournament for a weekend isn't the end of the world, the Rock and Roll Marathon can easily bring more tourist dollars since it's going to be held every year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 3:36 PM
STLtoSA's Avatar
STLtoSA STLtoSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 333
Hey, DOM. The Marathon was a huge success and is a great addition to the other events that San Antonio hosts. The fact that it will be here every year is going to be great for the tourism industry, tax base, and locally owned businesses. It is a major event not to be overlooked, but with that said it doesn't bring nearly the kind of publicity that a Final Four does to the city.

There are allready a lot of good health based events in SA, but I hope that having the marathon here annualy will help increase the number of smaller health based events.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 5:13 PM
STLtoSA's Avatar
STLtoSA STLtoSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 333
San Antonio
Cary, N.C.
Cleveland
Indianapolis
St. Louis
San Diego

Of the NCAA six "Championship Cities", only San Antonio, Indianapolis, and St. Louis are able to host the NCAA Men's Final Four. The designation does not have much to do with the ability of a city to win a Men's Final Four bid. This is still agood designation to have because it means that San Antonio will host NCAA championships in a variety of sports. All of which are good for the local economy.

In this decade SA has hosted 4 NCAA D1 National Championships. Hopefully, the new designation will increase that number during the next decade.

_____________________________________________________________________


Sorry about the multiple posts.. slow day at work.

Last edited by STLtoSA; Nov 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 5:18 PM
tgannaway89 tgannaway89 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Midland/San Antonio
Posts: 379
Does anyone know how much annual operating costs the city pays for the Alamodome? It cost $186 million to build and has undergone over $20 million in renovations in recent years. Is it it even financially breaking even or is the city losing money?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 5:41 PM
STLtoSA's Avatar
STLtoSA STLtoSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 333
No, technically I do not believe that it financially breaks even. I can check on the figures. Of course the city would like the dome to pay for itself, but fiscally it isn't there right now. I say technically because the dome has generated its cost in economic impact between 3 and 4 fold since it has been built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 6:28 PM
sakyle04's Avatar
sakyle04 sakyle04 is offline
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Frozen Swamps of Ohio
Posts: 1,369
Business Journal story implies that it will take a significant investment to lure another Final Four to the Alamodome, mentioning the Superdome's (NO, LA) post-Katrina improvements of almost $180M.

The next available spot for the Final Four is in 2017, meaning the dome will be 25 years-old. Sounds like a lose-lose prop to me.

On renovating, it makes a little more sense for New Orleans since they already have NFL football. Speaking strictly on economics, that is like having a company HQ with 100 or so employees averaging $1M-plus per year and another 200 ancillary white-collar employees. Those people have homes in the area, buy cars in the area, pay taxes in the area... The investment becomes much more attractive at that point. It becomes difficult to justify the investment on a once every 5-years type deal...
__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 7:53 PM
miaht82's Avatar
miaht82 miaht82 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Triangle
Posts: 1,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by sakyle04 View Post
Of lost events…

The city would not stand to lose many events at all in losing the dome. Yes, the Alamo Bowl would be gone. High school games as well…

I would like to hear of one concert that was in the Alamodome recently. Also, we won’t be hosting the Big 12 football championship ever again – Dallas and Houston have vastly superior venues for football and the conference likes to use cities in the Big 12 North region as well. No worries about the NCAA basketball stuff either, so scratch that off the list.

Of the Spurs…

Can we agree to never suggest that the Spurs play a game in the Alamodome again? There is a reason they moved. The Spurs make more money in the ATT Center for one game than they ever did in the Alamodome. Remember your luxury box argument? It applies here. Try divvying up all of your premium seating from the ATT to the Alamodome, which has fewer boxes and fewer truly premium seats.


Misc…

Home and Garden shows occur in other cities, even some that lack domes. Boat shows, too. And religious conferences…well, the Lord will find a way without the dome.

The football games would be lost. That is about it.

Are tourists in San Antonio because of the Alamodome? Don't think so. If they are, then guess what? They too will soon be in Houston and Dallas, where superior facilities make all the difference.

Am I saying tearing down the dome would be the greatest idea ever? No. Am I saying that the dome as it currently sits is pretty much an asset that is quickly losing all of its value? Yes.

As such, plans for the future should be explored. And sentimental ties to the dome should be severed.
Completely agreed.
The Alamodome should be thought of as a cigar butt;we should try to get every last puff out of it, but there comes a time when there will be one last puff, then it's just time for a new one.
Sure we're getting the Notre Dame/Washington St. nationally televised on NBC, and when UTSA takes the field, that will be good use as well. but those type of events are all that should be planned on while the dome is still up.
There should be a plan for a new facility, but not just because the city has its feelings hurt from not being chosen for the Final Four.
__________________
The Raleigh Connoisseur
It is the city trying to escape the consequences of being a city
while still remaining a city. It is urban society trying to eat its
cake and keep it, too.
- Harlan Douglass, The Suburban Trend, 1925
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2008, 5:56 AM
NBTX11 NBTX11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Posts: 300
I heard Nelson Wolff stating, after SA didn't get the final four, that SA would consider building another stadium if an NFL team was interested in coming to SA.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2008, 1:52 PM
miaht82's Avatar
miaht82 miaht82 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Triangle
Posts: 1,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by NBTX11 View Post
I heard Nelson Wolff stating, after SA didn't get the final four, that SA would consider building another stadium if an NFL team was interested in coming to SA.
Build-to-suit?
sure that'll sound good to someone.
__________________
The Raleigh Connoisseur
It is the city trying to escape the consequences of being a city
while still remaining a city. It is urban society trying to eat its
cake and keep it, too.
- Harlan Douglass, The Suburban Trend, 1925
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2008, 2:58 PM
sakyle04's Avatar
sakyle04 sakyle04 is offline
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Frozen Swamps of Ohio
Posts: 1,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by miaht82 View Post
Build-to-suit?
sure that'll sound good to someone.
the nfl....(sigh)

i just can't see it happening. and i can't see san antonio voters ever being ok with another stadium for a potential team.

i would think that something would have to be written in stone...
__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2008, 3:43 PM
oldmanshirt's Avatar
oldmanshirt oldmanshirt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SATX > KCMO > DFW
Posts: 1,170
If I know SAians, if, say the San Diego Chargers called up Nelson Wolff today and said "hey, we want to move to SA, can you build us a stadium?" then that thing would pretty much fall from heaven by next year's fiesta. The problem is that if the Chargers were to move, the NFL will see to it that they go to LA. Same with the Jaguars or the Saints or anyone else you want to name. In the eyes of the NFL, they can't get enough teams in LA, and moving a team to SA, even the Jaguars, would be like exchanging one Jacksonville for another.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2008, 3:55 PM
sakyle04's Avatar
sakyle04 sakyle04 is offline
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Frozen Swamps of Ohio
Posts: 1,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldmanshirt View Post
If I know SAians, if, say the San Diego Chargers called up Nelson Wolff today and said "hey, we want to move to SA, can you build us a stadium?" then that thing would pretty much fall from heaven by next year's fiesta. The problem is that if the Chargers were to move, the NFL will see to it that they go to LA. Same with the Jaguars or the Saints or anyone else you want to name. In the eyes of the NFL, they can't get enough teams in LA, and moving a team to SA, even the Jaguars, would be like exchanging one Jacksonville for another.


this is exactly right.
__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2008, 10:20 PM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldmanshirt View Post
If I know SAians, if, say the San Diego Chargers called up Nelson Wolff today and said "hey, we want to move to SA, can you build us a stadium?" then that thing would pretty much fall from heaven by next year's fiesta. The problem is that if the Chargers were to move, the NFL will see to it that they go to LA. Same with the Jaguars or the Saints or anyone else you want to name. In the eyes of the NFL, they can't get enough teams in LA, and moving a team to SA, even the Jaguars, would be like exchanging one Jacksonville for another.
Yep. I doubt the Chargers leave California. The Jags are SA's best bet, but who knows when they will move, and the Chargers will most likely still be in SD, so the Jags would be in LA.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > San Antonio
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:04 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.