Niners bump up game plan for stadium development
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Sunday, October 9, 2005
After years of having their proposed mega-stadium-mall languish in developmental limbo, the San Francisco 49ers are contemplating something much bigger -- an entire Niner Town out at the 'Stick, complete with housing,
storefronts and even a hotel.
Niners representatives confirmed that they are looking for a "master developer'' with national credentials to help shape the plan and make it happen.
And while nobody is offering much in the way of details, 49ers spokesman
Sam Singer gave us a couple of the bold strokes: a stadium and large mall, and
mixed-use development that would include residential housing -- both
market-rate and affordable units -- as well as apartments.
"All the mayor's and Supervisor Chris Daly's initiatives would be wrapped
into the housing plan they are looking at," Singer said.
In other words, a little something for everyone -- including San
Francisco's left wing.
Pressure to ease the city's housing crunch is already bringing a wave of
development to the once-forsaken part of town -- particularly at Executive
Park, at the entrance to Candlestick from Highway 101, where hundreds of units
have been built or are on the drawing board.
If the 49ers do pursue their new-neighborhood plan, it would be a
significant shift in strategy from the stadium-mall plan hatched under former
owner Eddie DeBartolo, for which city voters narrowly approved a $100 million
bond in 1997.
That plan has turned out to be a lot more complicated and costly than its
backers ever predicted. Questions about the expense of shoring up the
flood-prone landfill at Candlestick, the site's proximity to a state park,
skepticism about the viability of a mall attached to a stadium that is used
only 10 days a year or so -- all have worked against the idea.
Plus, there's the headache of getting in and out of the area, as anyone
who has ever attended a game at Candlestick knows.
So after years of studies and false starts -- and under pressure from
Mayor Gavin Newsom to get something done before he faces re-election in 2007
-- team owners Denise DeBartolo York and husband John York assembled a new
development team of bankers, lawyers and other experts in recent months to
reignite the project.
The first sign that something was afoot came last month when the Niners
quietly opted not to renew their exclusive development agreement with Mills
Corp. -- the team's sole development partner since the stadium-mall bond
campaign eight years ago.
Sources following the deal said the Niners and Mills had been at odds over
how revenue from the mall portion of the project would be divided. At the same
time, however, they didn't rule out Mills coming back into the picture -- and
future meetings are planned.
In the meantime, the 49ers are also talking to the likes of Lennar Corp.,
developer of the old Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, and Forest City Development,
builder of the downtown Bloomingdale's.
As for the time line for a new deal getting done? That remains as elusive
as ever.
"We share the mayor's sense of urgency and want to get this done as
quickly as possible,'' Singer said. "But it's a very complex process."
The Voters Approve the Stadium Plan
Fourth-Down Conversion For Stadium
49ers not for sale, won't leave S.F.
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, September 19, 1998
The 49ers stadium plan is back on track, key figures in the troubled project said yesterday, but there are still no guarantees that the complex will ever be built. After a meeting between National Football League Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, 49ers President Larry Thrailkill, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and Board of Supervisors President Barbara Kaufman, there were also repeated pledges that the five-time Super Bowl champions are not for sale and will not move. "Every step that needs to be taken incrementally is leading to the development and building of the stadium,'' Brown said at a news conference after the meeting, which was held in his City Hall office. "Will tomorrow happen? I hope to hell it does, but I'm not guaranteeing it,'' the mayor said. In a brief interview later with The Chronicle, Brown described the hourlong meeting as "painful,'' as he sought explanations for how the team could estimate that a 75,000-seat stadium billed last year as costing $325 million could now carry a $500 million price tag. He said part of the problem is what exactly is included in the stadium's estimated costs. Brown indicated that the team had included such items as new roads and preparing an adjoining site for the mall and entertainment complex planned by Mills Corp. in the stadium package. "Give me a break,'' he said. Brown maintained that such costs should be kept separate. A source close to Brown indicated that the mayor might ask the state next year to pay for new on- and off-ramps from Highway 101 and other roads at the Candlestick Point project. That could cost tens of millions of dollars, the source said. The move might stir opposition because such spending would soak up state transportation funds that otherwise could be allocated to other local projects. The city's chances of getting that money could improve if Brown ally Gray Davis wins the governor's election in November.
CRISIS ATMOSPHERE
Yesterday's meeting took on a crisislike atmosphere after Thrailkill said two weeks ago that the team's latest estimate was that the new stadium alone would cost about $500 million, not the $325 million promised to San Francisco voters in June 1997 when they approved the plan. The entire stadium-mall project was originally supposed to cost $525 million. Whatever the total, San Francisco's share will be limited to $100 million in lease revenue bonds, with tax receipts from the mall used to cover the city's interest and principal. With a $500 million stadium price tag, Thrailkill said, the project might not proceed. Thrailkill did not speak to Brown until yesterday, an oversight for which he apologized. "I have not done as good a job at communicating with the mayor as I should have. And he and I are going to remedy this,'' Thrailkill said.
REGULAR MEETINGS WITH MAYOR
From now on, the two will meet at least twice monthly. Thrailkill, who succeeded Carmen Policy as 49ers president and stadium point man in July, said the team will soon hire a top executive solely to oversee the stadium project. Thrailkill also attempted to dispel talk that the team's hesitation about proceeding with the project and front-office turmoil spurred by owner Edward DeBartolo's legal troubles might lead to a sale or a move. "The team is not for sale. The current ownership is committed to the stadium project,'' Thrailkill said. "The San Francisco 49ers are committed to being in San Francisco,'' he said. "We're committed to building a stadium for $325 million at Candlestick Point. We committed to the mayor that we will work diligently with the city to get that accomplished.'' Tagliabue said the 49ers would have to take the stadium project "one step at a time. That's what has to happen here, with these project cost estimates.''
PATIENCE ADVISED
Tagliabue also criticized reporters for questioning the project's numbers. "It doesn't do any good to throw a bunch of numbers around like we're taking an eye exam.'' He advised people to be patient and see how the negotiations turn out. Early next week, the 49ers will give the Brown administration its detailed cost estimates and the voluminous analyses done by a host of construction consultants. Representatives from the team, the NFL and the city will then try to find a way to build the stadium-mall project at the originally projected cost. A preliminary environmental impact review should be issued shortly by the City Planning Department. It could contain more bad news on costs in mitigation measures, such as preventing bay pollution or providing public transit. Project planners can also try to bring down those costs.
OCTOBER 1999 GROUNDBREAKING
Thrailkill said that if the project gets the final go-ahead, he hopes to break ground in October 1999, right after the Giants finish their last season at 3Com Park. The baseball team is moving to its new, privately financed park at China Basin. The old stadium would remain the 49ers' home until the new stadium is finished. Tagliabue reiterated his commitment to the city to play the January 2003 Super Bowl at the new stadium. Thrailkill said, "The stadium we build will be one that you will be proud of,'' with all the modern features, including luxury suites, a stadium club, vast concession stands and lots of rest rooms.
Stadium Model Unveiled
49ers give detailed look at plans for Candlestick
Point
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Staff Writer
Hoping to jumpstart a campaign that has yet to capture the public's imagination, the San Francisco 49ers finally unveiled a model of their proposed new stadium yesterday.
The vision is of a 75,000-seat stadium with three main decks and three levels of expensive suites. The stadium will be much more comfortable for fans than 3Com Park, incorporates echoes of San Francisco landmarks and provides something unique in professional sports -- a physical link with the planned 1.7 million square-foot mall next door.
The stadium at Candlestick Point would have a canopy covering much of the upper deck facing the playing field, except in the end zones. Crisscrossing cables, sort of a tribute to the Bay Bridge and the rigging of sailing ships on the bay, would hold up the canopy.
The color of many of the stadium's seats would be International Orange, the same as the Golden Gate Bridge.
Another unique feature would be that the planned new stadium would have no soaring light standards. Instead, high-tech, low-glare lighting -- focusing directly on the field -- would be built right into the canopy, the stadium's designers said yesterday. The canopy could also be used for projection lighting of highlights or team logos.
It was plain as 49ers executives and campaign managers unveiled the design at a St. Francis Hotel press conference that they viewed the long-awaited premiere as a chance to get their lagging campaign for the June 3 election moving.
San Francisco voters will be asked to approve a $100 million lease revenue bond to help finance the $325 million stadium along with a planning measure spurring construction of the entire $525 million stadium and mall complex. The 49ers and their private partners would fi nance $425 million of the project. "We are now even more ready to go,'' said team President Carmen Policy, "because this will energize us to get the job done.''
But the opposition to Propositions D and F was not impressed by yesterday's presentation.
"Questions still remain," said campaign manager Jim Ross. "Where's the financial plan for the mall that shows we'll be able to pay off the $100 million loan for the stadium?'' he asked. Mayor Willie Brown, who has staked his prestige on the passage of Propositions D and F in June, broke away from talks aimed at settling the garbage collectors' strike to view the models -- and say a few words.
"These physical items will be much more persuasive,'' he said, referring to the renderings. "After people get a whiff of this presentation, there's no doubt people will vote yes on D and F.''
The 49ers campaign plans to haul the models around to campaign events, believing that if voters can actually see what they're being asked to vote on, they might be more supportive. The Giants successfully used the same tactic in the 1996 China Basin ballpark campaign.
The football team also hopes that by building in some quirky features to the stadium they can appeal to San Franciscans who like to think of their city and team as things apart from the run of the mill.
For instance, the south end of the proposed stadium would feature a huge football-shaped scoreboard. Seating in the end zone would be limited. Instead, an esplanade would lead to the vast entertainment and shopping complex beyond. On game days, fans could pass freely back and forth.
"We hope to create kind of a Wrigley Field feeling in that end zone,'' said Dan Meis, one of the architects from NBBJ Sports and Entertainment, the young Los Angeles-based firm hired to design the stadium.
"We're thinking of creating a club in the area. Maybe we'll call it 'Third and Three,' '' said Meis. That was the game situation when Joe Montana and Dwight Clark teamed up for The Catch, the miraculous play in 1982.
Meis said designers are also thinking of installing airport-like blinking lights around the stadium. When the 49ers score a touchdown, "They'd go off, down into the mall, down to the bay. Then fireworks would go off.''
Meis and co-designer Ron Turner said they want as few end-zone seats as possible. All seats in the stadium would be wider than those at 3Com -- a minimum of 20 inches vs. 19 inches today -- and there would be lots more knee room.
All but 27,000 of the seats in the new 75,000-seat stadium would be below the upper deck. "We are pushing sideline seating,'' said Meis. "We feel it is better to be a couple of rows higher on the 50- yard line than a few rows lower in the end zone.''
He said that the lower decks would be a little steeper than at 3Com Park, because of design considerations.
Another architectural firm, DIAQ of Boston, is working on the mall design with the Mills Corp., the developer that would manage the mall along with DeBartolo Entertainment and Simon-DeBartolo Inc.
The team hoped for an earthquake of news coverage yesterday, but in a campaign where things often haven't gone quite right, the garbage strike and news of recriminations in Oakland over the bungled financing of the Raiders' return stole some of the thunder.
Brown was asked about the Oakland situation.
"Oakland had to beg, borrow and bribe to get the Raiders to come back,'' said the mayor, who bristles at comparisons between the 49ers and Raiders deals.
"How ill-equipped the Oakland people must have been when they negotiated this vs. the talent that's been demonstrated here,'' he said.
A LOOK INSIDE THE 49ERS PROPOSED HOME
In unveiling their plans for a new stadium at Candlestick Point yesterday, the 49ers and NBBJ Sports and Entertainment presented a roster of facts and figures about the project:
-- 75,000 seats, with three main decks.
-- 200 luxury suites on three levels.
-- All but 27,000 seats would be below the upper deck.
-- In the southern end zone, a broad esplanade would attach the stadium to
the 1.7 million square foot mall beyond.
-- A canopy would cover part of the upper deck. The stadium's lights would be built into the canopy.
-- The 1.7 million square-foot mall would include a food court.
STADIUM-MALL PLAN HIGHLIGHTS:
TOTAL COST: $525 million, with the stadium costing $325 million and the mall $200 million.
WHAT SAN FRANCISCO VOTERS WILL DECIDE: Proposition D calls for a maximum $100 million lease revenue bond issue to help pay for the stadium. Repayment would come from taxes generated at the mall and stadium and from existing hotel tax revenues.
The 49ers and their partners would finance $425 million of the project.
Proposition F calls for an expedited planning process for the project.
PROJECT BENEFITS: Supporters claim the stadium and 1.7 million square foot mall would create 6,500 permanent jobs and up to 3,000 seasonal jobs. They forecast $400 million in annual sales at the mall.
WHAT THE CRITICS SAY: Opponents worry the mall could fizzle, requiring the city to dip into its general fund to pay off the bonds. They also ask why taxpayers are being asked to subsidize the 49ers' rich owner.
OWNERSHIP OF 49ERS GOES TO YORK, PLEDGE MADE FOR NEW STADIUM
August 5, 1999
Copyright 1999 MediaVentures
Denise DeBartolo York and her husband John say a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers is needed, but they stopped short of giving unqualified support for the current plan. York has acquired the team from her brother, Edward DeBartolo, after a contentious fight landed the siblings in court.
In an agreement that still must be approved by an Ohio court, York gets the team, three race tracks and the company's name. DeBartolo gets real estate, stock and other holdings along with the resolution of his $94 million debt to the company.
DeBartolo was suspended by the NFL as operator of the team when he was targeted as part of a criminal investigation into a gaming license he acquired in Louisiana. York then took over management. DeBartolo later entered a guilty plea in exchange for testimony and the NFL continued the suspension. York and DeBartolo battled over money DeBartolo reportedly owed the family's company and the team. After trading lawsuits, a judge suggested they work out their problems privately rather than dragging them into court. The deal is a result of those negotiations.
The Yorks have said they are committed to keeping the team in San Francisco and completing the stadium project, but did not insist that it be the same plan originally proposed. York stopped construction on the project shortly after taking over last year when the cost of building supports climbed well above estimates. Since then she has been considering options, including a rumored renovation of 3Com Park where the team now plays and where it has a lease through 2006. The work stoppage also cost the city the 2002 Super Bowl which had been promised once the new stadium was built.
The original plan called for a 72,000-seat stadium to be built adjacent to a 1.4 million square foot shopping and entertainment mall. Voters narrowly approved $100 million in funding as part of the $325 million stadium and $200 million mall project. The team now estimates the total cost of the project to be $725 million.
The city's money would be repaid by taxes generated by the shopping mall, which would have been developed by the Mills Corp. The new stadium is to feature three levels of luxury suites, a private club-seating area and restaurants.
While the 49ers' internal battle may have been resolved, another conflict is shaping up on the public front. As Mayor Willie Brown moves into an election, opponent Clint Reilly has promised to kill the taxpayers' subsidy if elected. Brown has been an avid supporter of the stadium/mall project, but even he does not favor increasing the subsidy to the project.
The proposal was approved in 1997 by voters by a very narrow margin and if the plan changes considerably, including the removal of the mall proposal, it's likely to have to go before voters again. Observers say they expect the stadium to be redesigned and John York confirmed that changes are likely with construction to resume no sooner than next year.
49ERS STADIUM TAB AT $450 MILLION
September 23, 1999
Copyright 1999 MediaVentures
If the San Francisco 49ers decide to go ahead with plans for a new stadium, the cost will be an estimated $450 million - up by $125 million from the original estimate. The
cost does not include an adjacent shopping center which will provide the sales tax revenue the city needs for its $100 million contribution to the project. The mall adds another
$200 million to the expense.
Team officials acknowledge the price is well beyond what they expected and what they believe they can afford. The 49ers are continuing to review the project for ways to cut down the cost, including the possibility of renovating 3Com Park where the team now plays. Officials say no decision will be made on the project until the feud between Denise DeBartolo York, who now operates the team, and her bother, Edward DeBartolo Jr, is resolved. DeBartolo is willing to turn control of the team over to his sister, but the two are still working out terms of the deal.
October 7, 1999
Copyright 1999 MediaVentures
A state Court of Appeals in California has rejected an initiative petition to repeal a 1997 public vote that approved funds for a new San Francisco 49ers stadium. The court said the petition contained misrepresenatations and supported a lower court decision. The opponents said they would likely appeal the issue to the Supreme Court. The 49ers have stopped work on the project because of excalating costs.
SAN FRANCISCO OUTLINES CANDLESTICK PLANS
October 23, 2008
Copyright 2008 MediaVentures
San Francisco, Calif. - A $2 billion remake of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard and nearby
Candlestick Point includes generous incentives to the 49ers to stay in their namesake city. The
team is considering plans to move to Santa Clara.
San Francisco voters approved the expenditure in June and city officials are beginning to
release plans on how the money would be spent.
The finance plan puts flesh on the bones of a plan approved by 61 percent of voters. It predicts
an infusion of $618 million from Lennar and its development partners and an additional $1.4
billion raised mainly through tax-exempt government bonds.
Under the proposal, if the 49ers decide to stay in the city, they would lease the land for $1 a
year and receive $100 million from Lennar to help build a stadium at the shipyard.
Some of the finance plan's details are likely to change before it is presented to the Board of
Supervisors and other city commissions for approval. It will be presented as part of a binding
development contract as early as fall 2009.
City leaders and Lennar have portrayed the project as a means of revitalizing the impoverished
southeastern corner of San Francisco and as the best chance for holding onto the 49ers, who want
to move to Santa Clara.
Aside from the $100 million from the developers, the 49ers would be responsible for the costs of
building, operating and maintaining the stadium. Environmental work would begin on the site
next year and construction could be completed by 2013, Lennar has said.
Team spokesperson Lisa Lang said the 49ers had not seen the financial report and that Santa
Clara remains the team's first choice for a new home, even though a deal there is not assured.
If the 49ers decide against San Francisco, Lennar and the city plan to expand the retail and
commercial development component of the new development.
The real estate downturn raised questions about Lennar's ability to complete the project. The
past six weeks - as mortgage problems have escalated, banking giants have foundered and credit
markets remained tight - have heightened those concerns.
Michael Cohen, director of the city's Office of Economic Development, said Lennar added
several equity partners to its development team during the summer, helping to ensure that the
project could go forward on schedule. (San Francisco Chronicle)
ECONOMY TRIMS BAY-AREA STADIUM PLANS
November 20, 2008
Copyright 2008 MediaVentures
Officials in Santa Clara, where the 49ers have spent months in financing talks for a new
stadium, have begun using the word "cautious" when discussing the project. Two of the city's main
sources for funding its proposed share - redevelopment money and revenue from future
development near the site - now look questionable.
Though officials for all three teams (A's, 49ers and Quakes) remain optimistic, some economists are less charitable.
"Things have not been this bad since the 1930s," said Andrew Zimbalist, a Smith College
professor and pointed critic of municipal stadium subsidies. "It's likely to be much more difficult" to build stadiums without hefty public subsidies - subsidies that aren't likely to come.
The ultramodern 49ers stadium sought for Santa Clara will avoid the largest obstacle looming
over Wolff's projects: In a tanking real estate market, its funding plan includes not one cent of
revenue from residential development.
Rather, the plan relies on private money from team ownership and a hoped-for cash infusion
from the National Football League, as well as a still-undetermined subsidy from Santa Clara.
The size of that subsidy has been among the main sticking points in talks between the team
and city - talks not scheduled to end until February, months after initially planned. The city has held fast to an offer of $136 million, tens of millions lower than the 49ers have requested.
Now, amid the stalling economy, even that offer might prove too rich for the city's blood. Santa
Clara is re-examining its financial picture, Deputy City Manager Carol McCarthy confirmed.
Those findings, expected to be made public within weeks, will then become part of the
negotiations.
Among the major factors the city must weigh are the impact of the state's $2 million take-away
of redevelopment funds - part of an effort to solve California's own intractable budget woes - and the likelihood the state will take even more money next year as its deficit widens. Repeated grabs of redevelopment cash could limit the city's contribution to a stadium.
The fate of future development near the stadium also is a concern. A big chunk of the city's offer - $65 million raised from bond sales - is based on the assumption that new projects, including a proposed campus for beleaguered Internet firm Yahoo, will eventually lift tax revenue enough to pay those bonds back.
In the meantime, team officials are keeping their focus on future milestones: February, when
the formal financing agreement is expected to be ready; fall 2009, when an environmental review
of the stadium is scheduled to finish and when voters will probably be asked to weigh in; and 2010, the earliest that shovels would hit dirt.
"It's just too early to tell," said Pete Hillan, a spokesman for the 49ers. "Anytime you think
about building something, it's really not real until you have a bid."
So what would happen if any of these stadium proposals really did implode?
The 49ers would find themselves precisely where they are now, playing out their lease in
decaying Candlestick Park.
From there, it's less clear. San Francisco has offered to include a new stadium as part of a
renewed Hunters Point shipyard, but that plan also relies heavily on residential development and
has been pooh-poohed by the 49ers as flawed. The team has said it would consider leaving for
another market if a deal can't be hashed out in the Bay Area. (San Jose Mercury News)
GOODELL CONFIRMS LEAGUE STADIUM FUND IS DEAD
December 18, 2008
Copyright 2008 MediaVentures
Oakland, Calif. - NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell offered no hope on the California stadium
front during a visit to Oakland Coliseum, despite meet-and-greets with Raiders owner Al Davis,
chief executive Amy Trask and assorted members of the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Joint
Powers Authority, the Oakland City Council and Alameda County Supervisors.
The once-flush NFL no longer has its stadium financing fund, the G3 Program, which
franchises could tap for low-cost construction loans. It's a reality Goodell has been preaching for more than a year. Those loans typically were repaid with visiting teams' share of club-seat revenue once the projects were finished.
Goodell reiterated there are no plans - especially in light of the current economic downturn and
worldwide credit crisis - to replenish or replace the G3 fund. Which means the league no longer is in the money-lending business.
That's a blow for the 49ers' current stadium project, which must receive NFL funding assistance
whether it's located in Santa Clara, San Francisco or Fresno. And because the 49ers posted up long before anyone in the East Bay, it's a virtual death knell to any fantasies that the 42-year-old Oakland Coliseum will be replaced by something resembling a modern facility
"First, the G3 fund expired just over a year ago, so that funding is not available right now,"
Goodell said during a halftime meeting with the media. "Clearly, in this economic environment, it
makes building anything more challenging. And we obviously, as you know, have issues on the
labor side in which we're trying to look at our labor costs, and the increased risks in building
stadiums like this.
"We're probably building a stadium in New York that's going to be about $1.8 billion."
The Giants and Jets were proactive enough years ago to tap the G3 Fund for about $300 million
to help replace the current Meadowlands facility with a new shared stadium set to open in 2010.
Construction began in 2007 and building costs have risen from $1 billion to $1.8 billion in just
more than a year.
Other franchises got in line before the lending fund was depleted, well ahead of the California
teams. Before it dried, the NFL granted the Cowboys $76.5 million for their new stadium, which
opens in Arlington, Texas, next season. The Colts procured $34 million to help construct Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis. The Chiefs also received $42.5 million to help renovate Kansas City's Arrowhead Stadium.
What does this mean for the 49ers' proposed stadium project? It means the York family better
get creative with financing, because the league office won't step in to help.
The NFL - which recently announced plans to lay off 150 employees between now and the
Super Bowl on Feb. 1 - is hunkering down on several fronts. The current worldwide financial
meltdown is affecting everything from sponsorship, broadcast partnerships and ticket buying, as
well as a possible loss of revenue stream that will result if the owners and players can't agree to extend their Collective Bargaining Agreement once it expires following the 2010 season.
Is the NFL concerned that either the 49ers or Raiders might try to bolt to Los Angeles?
"We're worried about the California market in general. If you look at our stadium situations -
San Diego is trying to address (its) stadium situation, San Francisco, the Oakland Raiders ... I think collectively we have to try to address these matters on a statewide level as well as in the local communities," Goodell said.
A common stadium facility in the Bay Area would be an ideal long-term solution Goodell said,
but given the history between the 49ers and Raiders and their respective fan bases, it's unlikely. (San Francisco Chronicle)
49ERS SAY THEY AREN'T CONSIDERING SHARED STADIUM
January 15, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
San Francisco, Calif. - The San Francisco 49ers on acknowledged that the battered economy
likely will slow down their plans to build a new stadium in Santa Clara, but they dispute reports
that they are considering sharing a new home with their cross-bay rival, the Raiders.
"Although our opening day target may need to be adjusted as part of the term sheet, the 49ers
ownership group continues to remain committed to building a new NFL stadium in Santa Clara
and is spending significant resources to make this goal a reality," the team said in a statement.
Will the 49ers share the stadium with another professional sports team?
"This is not something we are focused on. If at some point it makes sense to share the stadium
with another professional sports team and a workable option emerges, we would be willing to
consider it. But that is not our current objective."
Combining resources with the Oakland Raiders - as the New York Jets and Giants have done
on a new $1.6 billion stadium - may be the only way for the 49ers to overcome frozen financial
markets to fund a new stadium, NFL insiders and sports economists say.
Given the disruption of the bond markets and the 49ers' continuing impasse with the Ohio
company that controls the land where the 68,000-seat stadium would be built, the team's plan to
begin construction next year for a 2012 opening is almost certainly defunct, the San Jose Mercury
News reported. Santa Clara Mayor Patricia Mahan said the recession could force Santa Clara to
pare back its financial investment of up to $136 million in redevelopment money in the project.
Considering the dramatic run-up in stadium construction costs in recent years, the 49ers' plan
to finance a stadium alone, with a smaller government subsidy than many NFL teams have
received for stadiums which cost much less, was always a difficult project.
But the economic collapse of the last six months has pushed that plan to the brink of
impossibility - at least temporarily, say investment bankers who have financed NFL stadiums,
sports economists who study the league's finances, and NFL team officials who spoke on condition
of anonymity.
The 49ers are contending with many obstacles: the effect of the recession on big corporations
that would buy naming rights and luxury suites, uncertainty over the future of the NFL's stadium
finance program, and the fact that almost every team outside California has already built a new
stadium.
"There is no question that new stadium projects are difficult to accomplish in California and the
current economic climate creates new wrinkles that we have to work through," said Lisa Lang, a 49ers spokeswoman. "But we have an ownership group that is spending significant resources each
month to make this goal a reality, and we are pushing forward despite the economic factors."
The good news, Lang said, is that the 49ers are focused on environmental studies and
negotiating a deal with Santa Clara now, and are not yet seeking financing.
"Our hope is that once we begin the financing phase, the credit markets will have recovered
and we will be able to finance our project," she said.
But for now, the 49ers face the worst financial climate many stadium experts have ever seen.
"Sorry to be so negative, but I wouldn't be sanguine if I was those guys," said Robert Tilliss,
chief executive of Inner Circle Sports, a New York investment banker who has worked on
numerous stadium deals, including AT&T Park in San Francisco.
Tilliss called the current market for long-term financing of a stadium project "crippled."
Raiders CEO Amy Trask declined to comment about the possibility of sharing a stadium with
the 49ers, other than to say, "We enjoy our relationship with the 49er organization and wish it the best with its stadium endeavors."
Also looming is a stalemate between the 49ers and Cedar Fair Entertainment, the Ohio
amusement park company that owns Great America. Over the past six months, "there's been no
progress in that area," Lang said.
A Cedar Fair spokeswoman, Stacy Frole, said the company is still willing to sell its interest in
Great America to the 49ers, clearing a path to build the stadium on Great America's main parking
lot, but she agreed there has been no significant progress. (San Jose Mercury News, 49ers)
49ERS RECONSIDER SAN FRANCISCO
February 26, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
San Francisco, Calif. - New 49ers president Jed York and his crew are working the corridors of
City Hall in what may signal a renewed push to keep the team in San Francisco.
And maybe even bring the Raiders to the party as well.
Among the ideas on the table:
* An $8 million to $10 million upgrade of aged Candlestick Park, to be done within two
years - complete with a glassed-in club seating area off the south end zone.
* A much more extensive, $500 million make over of the 'Stick, with new luxury box
seating and a new concourse with restaurants and other amenities.
* Or even a brand new, $900 million-plus stadium at the old Hunters Point Naval
Shipyard, as the city's Candlestick development plan envisions.
York and company met briefly recently with the mayor's chief development director, Michael
Cohen, and hinted that after two years of focusing on building a new stadium in Santa Clara, the
Niners were ready to start talking more seriously about their options in San Francisco.
York reportedly has told city officials that the team will have more to say on all three fronts
when he meets with Mayor Gavin Newsom next week. That tete-a-tete might thaw the deep freeze
that developed between the mayor's office and the team when Jed's dad, John York, was in charge.
In the meantime, the 49ers say the National Football League has asked San Francisco to expand the
scope of the proposed Hunters Point stadium to accommodate both the 49ers and the Oakland Raiders, who also are searching for a new home. The NFL has asked Santa Clara to do the same.
The league has made it clear that sharing a site may be the only way to privately finance a new
stadium in the Bay Area.
In addition to sitting down with Cohen, Jed York had breakfast with Supervisor Sean Elsbernd
and met with both new board President David Chiu and Supervisor Carmen Chu.
And while the team is still hoping to make a deal in Santa Clara, "our main goal is to stay in the San Francisco Bay Area," said Niners spokeswoman Lisa Lang. "The more options to make that
happen, the better it is for the team, the fans and the community." (San Francisco Chronicle)
SANTA CLARA FAIRGROUNDS MAY PROVE NEW SITE FOR 49ERS
March 5, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
San Jose, Calif. - In yet another twist to the epic journey to develop the Santa Clara County
fairgrounds, newly elected Supervisor George Shirakawa Jr. says he will pursue a radical
departure from years of planning: wooing an NFL football stadium instead of the residential-retail center that is in the early stages.
Turning the fairgrounds site from a dust bowl into a money-generating community hub is a
priority for supervisors, who have only one major piece of land to develop - the 150 acres off Tully Road - as a revenue source for the county's cash-starved social services.
But amid the global recession, the developer selected by the county, Catellus, is now facing
hard times, slashing business by as much as one-quarter and halting all new developments.
That's prompted Shirakawa, a former high school football coach and unabashed sports
enthusiast, to pursue other options for the property that sits a mile from his home. Shirakawa met with San Francisco 49ers Chief Financial Officer Larry MacNeil and Vice President of
Communications Lisa Lang over a carnitas lunch.
The 49ers are wrapping up lengthy negotiations with the city of Santa Clara to build a new
stadium close to the Great America amusement park, but Shirakawa's office notes the deal could
still fall apart. Such was the case earlier this week, when another stadium-building plan for the
Oakland A's baseball team collapsed after lengthy dealings with Fremont city officials.
"Anyone with $1 billion that wants to come into your community, you talk to them," Shirakawa
said. "If those negotiations in Santa Clara fall through, I want them to know that Santa Clara
County has open arms for them."
Shirakawa, who represents one of the county's most impoverished districts, said if traffic woes
were adequately addressed, a football stadium could generate income while creating jobs and even
fostering self-esteem in surrounding neighborhoods. Kids look up to sports figures, he noted.
Lang said the 49ers' goal is to stay in the Bay Area, and at present the chosen site is Santa
Clara. "But in the event that that is not workable, we absolutely want to make sure we have more
options to achieve our goal," she said. "So if we can add the fairgrounds as a potential area to
consider, then that helps us to move this project forward."
Shirakawa hasn't yet approached the Oakland Raiders, who have been in conversation with the
49ers about a possible shared stadium in Santa Clara, but he did not rule that out.
Shirakawa also said he is concerned that Catellus' parent company, ProLogis, is "under water."
In November, Denver-based ProLogis announced a sweeping global workforce and spending
reduction of 20 to 25 percent. Referring to "the tough economic climate" that has only become
tougher since then, the company announced it was halting all new development, "pending
improved market conditions."
Santa Clara County officials are well aware of the dismal state of construction nationwide, but a
growing number are beginning to register particular concerns about Catellus. The developer was
selected in large part because of its deep pockets and ability - above all other bidders - to finance a project of this magnitude, estimated to exceed $1 billion in costs.
Acting County Executive Gary Graves said he learned last month that the company's Bay Area
offices had shrunk and that the county's lead contact there, Aidan Barry, had been laid off.
Barry, a vice president responsible for Northern California, has not been replaced.
Asked whether the halt to future development applied to Santa Clara County, ProLogis
spokeswoman Jessica Crow said: "It applies, but it doesn't necessarily apply." Crow said the
projects more likely to be affected involved more immediate plans to "invest capital and move dirt." Because Santa Clara County's project is in the early stages, "it's business as usual," she said. (San Jose Mercury News)
SALE OF AMUSEMENT PARK MAY HELP 49ERS
March 12, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - In a development that could lower one roadblock to the 49ers' stadium
plans in Santa Clara, the Ohio company that owns Great America said it plans to raise cash by
selling a number of its properties, including the amusement park adjacent to the stadium site.
The 49ers said they are still talking to Cedar Fair Entertainment about buying the park but are
focused first on finalizing a deal with the city of Santa Clara to finance the stadium.
Cedar Fair had vetoed the 49ers' original proposal to build the stadium on Great America's
main parking lot on Tasman Drive, one of the biggest obstacles to the 49ers' stadium ambitions in
Silicon Valley.
Although the 49ers moved their stadium plan to an overflow lot, Cedar Fair said the stadium
would damage Great America's revenue on game days and demanded to be compensated by the
team. Sources familiar with the talks said the 49ers had discussed paying the company more than
$1 million a year to close Great America on game days.
A publicly traded partnership based in Sandusky, Ohio, Cedar Fair announced that it would
slash the distribution it pays to investors nearly in half and would seek to sell excess land or theme parks in Toronto, Cleveland, Kansas City and Minnesota, as well as continue discussions with the 49ers about the potential sale of Great America.
Cedar Fair first said it would be willing to sell Great America to the 49ers in October 2007.
While team and Cedar Fair officials have met several times, both in Santa Clara and Ohio, no deal
appears imminent. Cedar Fair said it would not discuss potential asking prices for its properties, or the timing of those sales.
49ers officials confirmed they are talking to Cedar Fair about buying the park. But the team
said it is focused on completing a deal with Santa Clara about the financial contribution, through redevelopment funds and a special tax on area hotels, the city would make to the stadium.
Santa Clara officials and the 49ers continue to meet for negotiating sessions every week, with
both sides saying they are making progress. A resolution could still be weeks off - or longer.
"Patience is critical in all big deals," 49ers President Jed York said. "We're getting close."
The full project, estimated at $916 million last year before the full brunt of the recession hit - potentially reducing those costs - would also be financed by the NFL, the sale of stadium naming rights and sponsorships, as well as seat licenses bought by fans.
Given the weakness of the economy and the disarray of the credit markets, NFL Commissioner
Roger Goodell has been pushing the 49ers and the Raiders to consider sharing a new stadium,
along the lines of the venue being built by the New York Giants and New York Jets.
The park's market value is unclear. While Cedar Fair claimed in tax appeals last year that the
park was worth about $44 million, the county's assessment appeals board set the park's value at
about $104 million. Cedar Fair bought Great America from Paramount Parks in 2006 as part of a
package of five parks, in a $1.24 billion transaction. (San Jose Mercury News)
49ERS SAID TO BE CLOSE TO STADIUM DEAL
April 2, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The San Francisco 49ers and the city of Santa Clara are on the brink of
finalizing a stadium deal.
With terms significantly more favorable to the South Bay city than those discussed last year,
both the 49ers ownership and city officials agreed that most negotiating hurdles have been cleared and that a deal is at hand - if Santa Clara voters agree - to build a 68,500-seat stadium that would open for the 2013 NFL season.
The concessions by both sides, which sources familiar with the talks said include the 49ers
paying Santa Clara to use city-owned land near Great America for the stadium, and a significantly
smaller subsidy from the city's Redevelopment Agency, came through more than a year of steady
negotiations. With the nation plunging into a serious recession, the deal appears to have been
shaped by the political reality of winning taxpayer financing for a stadium in tough times. It would move the 49ers a big step closer to leaving San Francisco after seven decades and five Super Bowl titles.
"Until we get the deal done, we're not going to confirm any of the things that are out there,"
49ers President Jed York said, when asked about the concessions. "But I think we are getting
pretty close to getting a deal done."
York, who has been increasingly positive about finalizing a deal with Santa Clara in his public
statements in recent weeks, added: "I'd be disappointed if (the City Council vote) wasn't by June."
Santa Clara Mayor Patricia Mahan, who also declined to discuss the concessions in detail until
a deal is finalized, said a turning point in the talks came in January. That's when city officials realized that the economic downturn would sap redevelopment agency revenue available for the stadium project, but the 49ers signaled they would accept a smaller stadium subsidy.
"At that point in time, I was fearful it could all fall apart," Mahan said of the talks.
"Realistically, we all knew we were not going to have that kind of money to invest in the project, and they were willing to accept less as a direct investment from the city, and search for ways to still make the project work. I think we are inches away from getting the best possible deal we can get for Santa Clara."
While any deal must be ratified by voters - probably in March 2010 - the good news to the city
of Santa Clara includes reduction in the city's subsidy of the project and additional rent payments for use of city land. And the city still must solve the problem of appeasing the owners of the Great America theme park located right next to the proposed stadium.
But Mahan is so confident that a deal is near that she said the City Council could sign off on
the outlines of a deal within a week - although a council vote could be several weeks off. The
mayor also said a recent negotiating visit by City Manager Jennifer Sparacino to Ohio to meet with the corporate owners of Great America could mean an end to the theme park's opposition to use of its parking lots to build the $900 million stadium.
Last year, when the city entered into negotiations with the 49ers, it proposed allocating $109
million in redevelopment money and hotel tax receipts toward construction of the stadium. The city also would pay to move an electrical substation and to build a parking garage on Tasman Drive previously approved by the voters. But following the economic meltdown, the 49ers have agreed to a significantly smaller contribution from the city, one that would amount to less than $90 million from redevelopment and hotel tax receipts, sources close to the talks said.
In making concessions, the 49ers may be gauging the strength of voter support during a serious
recession. The team will now be able to argue to voters that its commitment to the South Bay is so strong it is willing to accept tens of millions of dollars less than the $160 million the 49ers had sought in 2007, and that the contribution by Santa Clara taxpayers would be a smaller percentage than for other contemporary NFL stadium deals.
Mahan predicted voters would support the $900 million project when specifics are revealed.
Among the concessions the team has agreed to in principle:
* The 49ers would make a rent payment to the city for the use of city-owned land now
leased for Great America's parking lots for the stadium site. The city manager had
objected that the original stadium package proposed by the 49ers included no direct
payment to the city's general fund.
* The 49ers would agree to cover construction cost overruns through 2013. While the team
had already made those guarantees through 2012, the stadium now is not expected to
open until the 2013 NFL season.
* While the city would own the stadium, the 49ers would agree to pay for its demolition at
the end of its useful life, perhaps 40 years from now.
* The team would agree to cover losses for unprofitable non-NFL events at the stadium.
York said a resolution of talks with Santa Clara appears to be so close that the main factor
dictating the timing of a ballot vote is the state-mandated environmental impact report, which he said may not be completed until after November, the next possible date for a ballot vote. State law requires a completed EIR before a binding ballot vote.
"We can go in November," York said of the vote, "but we want to make sure it's a binding ballot."
Politically, waiting until 2010 might also be more advantageous for the 49ers, allowing time for
an economic recovery to take hold.
It also would allow time for a deal between the 49ers and Cedar Fair to jell Ñ perhaps the team
would buy the theme park. Sandusky, Ohio-based Cedar Fair recently announced that it is eager to
sell properties across North America to cut its corporate debt. While there were deep questions
about how the recession could affect prospects to build an NFL stadium, the downturn may end up
strengthening the case Mahan and other proponents make for the project.
The stadium would be one of the biggest private construction projects "this county has ever
seen," the mayor said. "The initial construction phase is really going to be a boost for the economy, and having the stadium here is going to stimulate things further because I think we will see other development arise because of the stadium location - hotels, restaurants, other entertainment venues, those kind of things." (San Jose Mercury News)
Silicon Valley Meets Notre Dame in Proposed 49ers Stadium Design
By Mike Swift
San Jose Mercury News
June 15, 2009
It would bring more of the regular fans closer to the field, offer "party decks" to watch the game in an outdoor sports bar atmosphere, and feature field-level club seats where high-rollers could see players sprint past onto the turf.
There would be a half-acre of solar panels, a "green roof" made of living plants, and office space for a Silicon Valley company that wants a high-visibility address. The technology could let fans order food or watch replays through their smart phones, and the open, "airy" construction would be unlike the retro brick ballparks and metallic domes that have dominated recent sports architecture.
The new 49ers stadium in Santa Clara is still five years from reality — if it happens at all. But in the two years that the city and the team were figuring out how to finance the $937 million project, a building that tries to blend a Northern California tech/environmental ethic with a classic football experience has been taking shape on architects' computers.
One way to think about the evolving stadium design, as described by architects with HNTB, the Kansas City firm designing the 49ers stadium, is Silicon Valley meets Notre Dame football.
"From the very beginning working with the Yorks, they had some different ideas," said Tim Cahill, the national director of design for HNTB. "There was never really a lot of discussion of, 'I have to have this many luxury suites to make this amount of money.' It was about increasing the fan experience of every fan, and giving them a lot of options."
Given that 49ers President Jed York and his father John York attended Notre Dame, it's not surprising the owners asked HNTB to evoke the "ambience" of the Fighting Irish's iconic college stadium. The result was a lower seating bowl that would hold most of the Santa Clara stadium's 68,500 seats.
But the architects say the stadium, a project already registered with the U.S. Green Building Council, would be a creature of Silicon Valley. The team expects to present its design at a July 14 City Council meeting.
The Yorks told the architects "to make sure we think about the future; make sure we think about this being the first of a new generation, not the last of a past generation of stadiums," said Joe Diesko, project director for HNTB.
The architects say refinement of the structural system allowed them to make the stadium's outer surface more open, by replacing more massive supports with thinner cables and rods.
One of the design's unique features is that most of the 170 or so luxury suites and 8,000 to 9,000 club seats would be enclosed in an eight-level tower on the west side of the stadium, rather than wrapped around the bowl as in most stadiums. The structure would be topped by solar panels and a plant-covered living roof, similar to the new California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco, to help cool the tower.
The stadium also would feature new ways for fans to experience an NFL game. The 49ers are still working out the details for how that would happen, but the team plans to have club seats adjacent to the players' entrance, where fans could watch players take the field at close range. The architects also are working on ways to allow fans in selected stadium sections to go on the field before a game. And if those fans get too rowdy, there will be a cell right there in the stadium for police to lock up scofflaws, said Santa Clara Police Chief Stephen Lodge.
Cisco Systems is among the companies developing technology that would allow a smart phone or other mobile Internet device to be not only the "ticket" that gets a fan into the stadium, but a tool to select customized replays, call up player stats or buy a beer from your seat.
No one knows yet what the state of that fast-changing technology will be in 2014, when the stadium would open if Santa Clara voters approve a public subsidy of $114 million. The 49ers "want, soup to nuts, the connectivity" between fans, concessions and electronic marketing, said Santa Clara Assistant City Manager Ron Garratt.
A modern stadium is all about making more money. Revenue produced by a new stadium typically adds hundreds of millions of dollars to the value of an NFL franchise, and the term sheet approved June 2 by Santa Clara's City Council suggests connections between stadium design and income for both the 49ers and the city.
The city-run stadium authority would get the money from selling rights to name the stadium, but the 49ers kept the right to sell sponsorships of all gates, levels, plazas and concession areas.
Santa Clara also negotiated a moneymaking opportunity that architects said is rare for an NFL stadium — street-level office space.
"It was a way to drive some more revenue to the city," Garratt said. "It will probably be folks who are looking for presence and a recognition factor."
The environmental features, and the availability of indoor spaces to be rented as an annex of the nearby Santa Clara Convention Center, are part of designing a "community-oriented" stadium, the architects said.
"That's appropriate to a civic building," Cahill said, "as opposed to saying it's just a football stadium."
49ERS, SANTA CLARA COME TO TERMS
May 21, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - It appears that the San Francisco 49ers and Santa Clara city officials have
agreed on terms for a new $900 million stadium. A public hearing on the issue is scheduled for
June 2. A public election could be held next year with a possible opening in 2013.
The discussions have taken place behind closed doors, but both sides have indicated that a deal
is pending.
The team must also close a deal with Great America about use of parking lots needed for the
stadium. The amusement park has previous objected to the plans, but its parent firm has put assets,
including Great America, up for sale and may be more willing to bargain.
In general, the 49ers plan to finance much of the roughly $900 million project with stadium
revenues, including sale of the stadium's name and seat licenses sold to fans. The city would own
the stadium, and would provide a subsidy for its construction. City officials declined to say what
the amount of the subsidy will be, but it is expected to be significantly below the $109 million
subsidy the two sides were discussing last year and maybe below $90 million.
One sticking point in recent weeks has been the number of police and firefighters needed for
NFL games, and especially how to pay for those emergency personnel through stadium revenues.
Among the concessions the team has agreed to include paying rent for the use of city-owned
land, to cover construction cost overruns through 2013, and to pay for demolition of the stadium at
the end of its useful life.
Reports also say the team accepted surcharges or fees on some stadium events and those
revenues will go into a fund to provide a firewall for the city's general fund, should stadium
revenues fall short.
49ERS SEAL DEAL WITH SANTA CLARA
June 4, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The San Francisco 49ers and Santa Clara officials have reached an
agreement on a new stadium that increases the amount of money the team will invest in the $937
million stadium and reduces the price for taxpayers.
If the plan comes to fruition, the 68,500-seat stadium would open in 2014 adjacent to Great
America theme park. The two venues would be part of an expanded entertainment district.
Despite the vote, there are many hurdles that still face the team. The first could be a legal
challenge from Cedar Fair, owners of Great America, which asked the city to delay its vote. Cedar
Fair has an agreement with the city for park space on land adjacent to the park and it believes the
stadium could hinder that.
An environmental report will also be completed this fall just before new city elections, then the
public will weigh in on whether it approves of the deal, probably next March.
Before the Santa Clara City Council took its vote, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom urged
them not to do it and suggested that the city could spend its money on more worthwhile things.
Newson wants to keep the team in San Francisco as part of the Hunters Point Shipyard
development. He also suggested he might sue Santa Clara if the team continues to use San
Francisco in its name.
In a significant change from the financial plan the two sides initially studied in 2007, the
proposed term sheet promises revenue directly to the city's general fund. It also includes the
possibility of the city receiving a refund on a large part of its investment if the stadium lands a
second NFL team, such as the Raiders, something city officials described as "a fairly high
possibility."
Funding from the team and league would total $493 million, although it has not been disclosed
how that expense would be divided.
The public portion - $114 million - will come from a new tax on hotel rooms, redevelopment
money and utility funds. A public vote would be required on the issue.
If Santa Clara were successful in luring a second NFL team to share the stadium, the 49ers
would return all of the $42 million invested by the city's redevelopment agency.
City officials and the 49ers peg Santa Clara's contribution at $79 million, saying the proposed 2
percent hotel tax could be termed a private contribution, although the city would form the district
that would collect it. The term sheet includes language that would appear to insulate city taxpayers
from revenue shortfalls or cost overruns in both the stadium's construction or operations - meaning
the 49ers and the NFL would be exposed to paying even more than $493 million.
Surcharges levied on stadium tickets would bankroll a $250,000-a-year fund for city parks,
libraries and youth and senior programs, and other surcharges are a second potential revenue
source for the general fund.
A proposed city stadium authority, a public agency that would build and own the facility, would
have to raise enough money through the sale of naming rights, corporate sponsorships, seat
licenses and ticket surcharges to finance $330 million, or 35 percent, of the project cost.
Because a majority of the rent Santa Clara's general fund would receive from the stadium is
performance-based during the first decade of the 40-year deal, the authority would also have to be
successful in booking college football games, international soccer matches, concerts and other
non-NFL events. Otherwise, Santa Clara might see only a fraction of the more than $2 million
projected return to the general fund in the stadium's first year.
49ERS BEGIN DESIGN WORK ON NEW STADIUM
June 18, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The San Francisco 49ers are considering putting an estimated 170 luxury
suites and up to 9,000 club seats in an eight-level tower on their proposed stadium's west side.
While the team has not finalized its plans for a new venue, it has begun working on potential
designs with HNTB, the team's architects.
In addition to the placement of premium seating, the 49ers have also set a goal of equipping
the venue with solar panels and possibly a green, plant-covered roof.
The team is also looking at new technologies for the venue, including electronic ticketing.
Some teams have been exploring the option, to be used in conjunction with cell phones, as a way
of controlling after-market ticket sales.
The 49ers are still working with the city on final plans for the $937 million stadium. A public
vote will likely be necessary. Opening day is not expected for about five years.
49ERS SHOW STADIUM DESIGNS
July 16, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The San Francisco 49ers have released preliminary designs by HNTB
Architecture for the new 68,500-seat stadium the team hopes to build in Santa Clara. Whether the
$937 million project goes forward depends on the decision Santa Clara voters make in early 2010.
One of the unique aspects of the stadium is its roof-top solar panels and a ÒvegetatedÓ roof of
California native plants. The plans include the use of recycled water and a program to have more
than a quarter of fans arrive on public transportation.
The council has approved up to $600,000 in legal fees, and up to $250,000 for economic
consulting fees as talks about a detailed development agreement continue between the city and the
49ers. The city's redevelopment agency would be reimbursed for those costs.
The stadium is not scheduled to open until 2014, pending approval from Santa Clara voters
next year to use $114 million in public money. That opening date gives team officials several years before having to decide on artificial or natural turf, which is one of the issues still undecided.
One of the design's unique features is that most of the 170 or so luxury suites and 8,000 to 9,000 club seats would be enclosed in an eight-level tower on the west side of the stadium, rather than wrapped around the bowl as in most stadiums.
The architects told council members that the stadium is being designed so it would not be a
single-purpose building, but instead would incorporate office space for a Silicon Valley company
that wants a high-visibility address on Tasman Drive.
The design also includes large terraced stadium entrances that will form amphitheaters open to
the public during the week for socializing or small public events.
The architects said the design would also feature one of the largest lower bowls in the NFL,
bringing more of the regular fans closer to the field. The latest design would include the ability to add temporary seating to accommodate up to 75,000 people to allow the stadium to host a Super Bowl or World Cup soccer match.
CEDAR FAIR WANTS INFO ON 49ERS STADIUM PLANS
July 30, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - Cedar Fair Entertainment says it wants more information on the city's plan
to deal with traffic and parking at the site where a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers is
planned and suggests it will go to court if its needs are not met.
"Cedar Fair must protect Great America and our substantial investment in that park and we will
do that," Richard Kinzel, Cedar Fair CEO, wrote in a letter to the city. "Cedar Fair will also devote the time and resources necessary to thoroughly pursue good faith negotiations with the city and the 49ers in an attempt to resolve the difficulties presented by the stadium proposal in an attempt to avoid the need for a more formal defense of our legal rights."
Santa Clara voters are expected to decide early next year whether up to $114 million in
redevelopment financing and hotel tax revenue should be earmarked for the stadium project,
allowing the new stadium to be built for the 2014 NFL season. A completed environmental impact
report, approved by the City Council, is a prerequisite to the binding vote. That report is due this week.
The city, which receives more than $5 million in revenue each year from leasing the land under
Great America to Cedar Fair, wants to resume talks, officials said. They believe the traffic and
parking issues can be solved.
The city wants to build the stadium either on the land the amusement park is leasing from the
city or on another tract nearby. Either location is expected to impact the amusement park.
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ON 49ERS STADIUM RELEASED
August 6, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - Santa Clara officials say they are encouraged by the results of an
environmental study of a proposed new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers in their community.
The report points out potential problems with noise, traffic and air pollution, but it says there
are minimal concerns about how the facility would impact wildlife, local businesses and the
nearby Mineta San Jose International Airport, even if the Oakland Raiders decide to share the
venue.
Stadium opponents say the report highlights many likely problems including traffic,
particularly for a weeknight event. They argue that projections that one in five fans in Silicon
Valley would arrive by train, bus or light rail are unrealistic.
The report was assembled by consultants hired and directed by the city, although the 49ers
will pay the bill - a price tag that could top $1 million.
Two of the organizations most affected by the report - the 49ers and Cedar Fair
Entertainment, the owner of Great America amusement park, - declined to comment, saying it
will take awhile to plow through a report that runs thousands of pages.
The release of the report starts a 45-day clock during which the public can submit written
comments. Ultimately, Santa Clara's City Council and Planning Commission will hold public
meetings on the report.
Among the impacts outlined in the report:
* Air pollution would exceed regional standards.
* Substantial increase in ambient noise due to events 46 times a year.
* On weekdays, substantial increase in traffic at 17 intersections in Santa Clara, San
Jose, Sunnyvale and Milpitas about eight times a year due to NFL games, as well as
concerts and other events.
* While 19 percent of fans would use transit in Santa Clara compared with just 8
percent who go to 49ers games at Candlestick Park in San Francisco, 49ers games at
the new stadium would generate a net increase of 421 tons of carbon dioxide a year.
That is equivalent to the amount of the greenhouse gas emitted by one year of energy
use by about 38 homes, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The Santa Clara Council must approve the report before the issue goes to the voters for a
binding decision next year.
49ERS AGREE TO MAKE UP FOR STATE FUNDS
August 13, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
San Francisco, Calif. - California's financial crisis has led the San Francisco 49ers to reportedly agree to pick up $114 million in costs for the team's proposed new $937 million stadium in Santa Clara that would have been paid by state redevelopment funds.
California has cut nearly $2 billion from redevelopment agencies, including money intended for
Santa Clara. The city planned to use the money for its investment in the stadium.
Team officials reportedly say they are prepared to put up the cash with the hope of being repaid
from future redevelopment monies.
The team hopes to put the stadium project before voters next year with the goal of opening the
venue in 2014.
LEGISLATURE ADVANCES BILL ON 49ERS STADIUM
September 10, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The California Assembly has approved a bill that would allow the San
Francisco 49ers to select its own contractor to build a proposed new stadium and avoid other state
laws that require competitive bidding.
The bill says any public dollars spent on the stadium would still require competitive bidding
and will likely be performed by subcontractors, who will do the majority of the construction jobs.
The 49ers organization wants to select its own contractor to oversee stadium construction,
because, team officials said, there are only a few in the country qualified to build an NFL-standard
stadium. The team has said it will pay any cost overruns.
Santa Clara recently appointed a charter review committee to decide whether to recommend to
the City Council that the charter be amended so the stadium would be exempt from a public
bidding process - a move that would require a citywide vote. Even if the legislation becomes law,
the city could still decide to go forward with a citywide vote.
SB 43 must still go through a Senate committee hearing and a final vote before the Senate
before it heads to the governor.
GREAT AMERICA BALKS AT STADIUM PLAN
September 17, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - Cedar Fair Entertainment has told Santa Clara officials that they donÕt
believe the latest plans for building a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers sufficiently protects
them from possible business losses and they could formally oppose the project if an agreement is
not reached.
In addition, the letter accuses city officials of failing to disclose the potential additional cost to
taxpayers if Great America suffers greater-than-expected financial losses connected to the stadium.
Great America leases its property from Santa Clara, providing the city about $5 million in revenue
each year.
"Cedar Fair does not believe that the proposed stadium and Great America can coexist without
overcoming significant legal and operational issues," attorney Geoffrey Etnire wrote to Santa Clara
City Manager Jennifer Sparacino. "However, Cedar Fair will come to the table in good faith to
explore possible resolution of this conflict."
In the letter, Cedar Fair officials focus on concerns that the construction of the stadium and
shutdowns on game days could deteriorate Great America's business beyond what the team has
offered to offset any lost profits, and cut off chances to expand. The letter expresses particular
concern if the stadium ultimately houses the Oakland Raiders as well as the 49ers, which has been
raised as a possibility and would double the number of game days.
In addition, the letter says the city and team have been proceeding with the stadium proposal
despite what Cedar Fair considers unanswered legal questions about the right to build the stadium
on Great America's parking lots. The letter raises the prospect of a lawsuit, arguing that building
the stadium could violate the terms of the park's lease with the city.
The letter is the latest in Cedar Fair's back-and-forth public posturing over the proposed
stadium comes as the city is nearing a crucial point in pushing the deal toward a ballot measure.
The deadline for public comment on the draft environmental impact report released this summer
on the stadium is scheduled for Sept. 28, which would set the stage for public hearings in October.
Santa Clara voters are expected some time next year to decide whether to approve as much as
$114 million in redevelopment financing and hotel tax revenue for the stadium project, which
would be built on Great America parking lots for the 2014 NFL season.
City officials and 49ers representatives downplayed the most recent letter from Cedar Fair,
which comes after another missive in July warning the city it wants more information on the impact
of the stadium. Cedar Fair officials have expressed various opinions on the stadium proposal in the
past two years, ranging from outright opposition to support, as well as indicating the company
might be willing to sell the park to the team.
Lisa Lang, spokeswoman for the 49ers, said the team had no comment on the letter, adding that
it was a matter between the city and Cedar Fair. However, Lang expressed frustration with the fact
that the park owners appeared more interested in sending threats than negotiating.
"Unfortunately, they have declined to participate every step of the way," Lang said. "The team
is mystified why Cedar Fair's attorney would choose to send a letter like this instead of pulling up a
seat at the table."
GREAT AMERICA RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT 49ERS STADIUM
October 1, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - Cedar Fair Entertainment, owner of the Great America theme park
adjacent to where city officials want to build a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers, says it has
major concerns about a study done of the project.
The study "wrongly concludes that the project is compatible with surrounding land uses,
because (it) fails to acknowledge that the project could have a major adverse impact on operations
and attendance at the Great America theme park," wrote Cedar Fair officials.
In addition, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, in a written response to the report,
cautioned that far more investigation must be done to evaluate the impact of NFL games on public
transit.
VTA officials warned increased demand from stadium events could "require a significant
resource allocation beyond the normal levels," making it possible VTA would need funding from a
"third party" to pay for increased service and upgrades.
The letters are were sent to Santa Clara planning officials before the deadline for reactions to
the draft environmental impact report, a study released in July that outlines how a 68,500-seat
stadium will affect surrounding neighborhoods, air quality, habitats and traffic.
Santa Clara will now address the concerns and comments in a final report that must ultimately
be approved by the City Council, a crucial hurdle in pushing the stadium plan onto the ballot next
year for a citywide vote.
City officials are hoping to get a final version of the environmental impact report to the city
planning commission by Thanksgiving, and on to the City Council by Christmas, if all goes well.
Cedar Fair said in its letter that the city's refusal to release many public documents related to
the project has made it impossible to fully evaluate the draft study.
Cedar Fair has threatened to sue to obtain those records, as well as warning recently that it
might oppose the stadium deal altogether if the city and team don't address its concerns about the
impact on Great America.
Meanwhile, the VTA, in its letter to Santa Clara, said the project "offers an excellent
opportunity" to build on existing public transit in the area. But the VTA also said the study didn't
explore all possible ways fans would use light rail in the area on game days, and a "rail operating
plan" is necessary.
The letter also pointed out the study doesn't adequately address public transit for fans coming
from Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, a particular issue if the Oakland Raiders also wind up in
the stadium.
October 15, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
The San Francisco 49ers were given a gift
by the state with the approval and signing of a bill that would allow the team to handle bidding on
a new stadium proposed for Santa Clara. State law would require the city to take competitive bids.
The law allows the team to select a construction firm on its own since it is responsible for cost
overruns. The bill allows Santa Clara to give permission to the team to pick its own contractor. City
officials say theyÕll also allow voters to decide if they want the stadium at all.
SANTA CLARA SUPPORTS NO BIDS FOR STADIUM CONSTRUCTION
October 29, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The Santa Clara City Council has voted to allow the San Francisco 49ers to
pick its own construction firm without formal bidding if voters agree to support the project next
year.
The vote was necessary after the California legislature approved a measure to exempt the
project from bidding. The city still had the final say on whether bids would be required.
The 49ers have maintained that it's imperative the team select its own general contractor to
build the stadium because only a few firms in the country specialize in such projects. The team,
meanwhile, has committed to pay any construction cost overruns.
Under Santa Clara's charter, virtually any city building project must go through open
competitive bidding, with the job going to the lowest responsible bidder.
Most of the work on the stadium is expected to be performed and competitively bid by
subcontractors. The 49ers have been working with a joint venture of Turner Construction of New York
and Devcon Construction of Milpitas. HNTB, a Missouri architectural design firm, designed the project.
MAJOR VOTE LOOMS FOR SANTA CLARA COUNCIL
November 19, 2009
Copyright 2009 MediaVentures
Santa Clara, Calif. - The Santa Clara City Council is expected to decide Dec. 8 whether to ask
voters if they should help finance a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers. This week the cityÕs
planning commission began working through a large environmental report. If the work takes
longer than expected, the City Council vote could be delayed until Dec. 15.
The report identifies a host of issues, including nearly 20,000 cars pouring into the area on
game days and the likelihood there would be some fallout in terms of traffic congestion, noise, air
pollution and parking frustrations. A city planning staff report projects 40 large events overall per
year at the stadium, including NFL games, concerts and other events.
The staff report identified several unavoidable impacts in a "worst case scenario," such as a
"substantial increase in ambient noise" in nearby neighborhoods during games and a "significant
impact" on at least 17 traffic intersections from Sunnyvale to San Jose.
The environmental impact report, however, generally concludes that all of the potential
problems are manageable and acceptable trade-offs for approving the $937 million stadium project,
which includes a package of public contributions totaling about $114 million.
The report does leave a number of questions unanswered, notably in the public transportation
and parking areas, which city officials concede will remain speculative until the true measure of an
NFL game on the Silicon Valley city can be evaluated in the future.
