Breakdance Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 For $2.00 - http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/news/2013/09/05/buffalos-outer-harbor-in-hands-of-new.html Quote The state parks office will create a 170-acre park that includes Gallagher Beach and 1,016-slip Small Boat Harbor. The Erie Canal Harbor Development Corp. will take control of 130 acres of Outer Harbor property to the north. First step towards a new stadium?
Kkspike Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Yeah,after 50 years the nfta releases the choke hold on the downtown waterfront.the funniest part about the whole thing is the nfta signed a contract stating that who ever buys the land has to develop it in so many months or they get the land back. Let the 15 year study group begin.i can't wait to ride over the new peace bridge to the new stadium.
bbb Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 I thought the NFTA IS a state agency? At least when I worked for those chumps for summer jobs, I thought I was a state employee.
K D Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 $2 eh? I'll double it and then offer it up to the Bills new owner for free so we can finally have our downtown stadium
Just Jack Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 10:56 AM, kdiggz said: $2 eh? I'll double it and then offer it up to the Bills new owner for free so we can finally have our downtown stadium Free?!?! That's crazy, you should get something in return. Maybe a coupon for a free hotdog every game you go to.
Homey D. Clown Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 ahhhhh... hope. It's amazing how much of it we have for our city despite the seemingly relentless opposition to anything new or revitalization effort there seems to be in local and state government.
simpleman Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 I just don't get the logic here. Prime waterfront land is there for the view and use of the, gasp, "water". Why would you put parking lots and stadiums here? Oh, and then you will want to dome it, since the wind and cold coming off the water during the football season will be brutal. The stadium is only used exactly one week out of 52 weeks a year. Who needs a waterfront view, the eyes are on the field, not the view. It is as silly as putting indoor museums, attractions and casinos there. A stadium goes where there is space for parking and a stadium. Not on valuable or expensive prime waterfront land. Let's use our resources wisely. The needs for a stadium are plenty of space for parking and the stadium, convenient quick and easy access by cars and mass transit to get in and out of before and after the game. Don't waste space that is valuable for reasons such as being on the waterfront.
thebandit27 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:35 PM, simpleman said: I just don't get the logic here. Prime waterfront land is there for the view and use of the, gasp, "water". Why would you put parking lots and stadiums here? Oh, and then you will want to dome it, since the wind and cold coming off the water during the football season will be brutal. The stadium is only used exactly one week out of 52 weeks a year. Who needs a waterfront view, the eyes are on the field, not the view. It is as silly as putting indoor museums, attractions and casinos there. A stadium goes where there is space for parking and a stadium. Not on valuable or expensive prime waterfront land. Let's use our resources wisely. The needs for a stadium are plenty of space for parking and the stadium, convenient quick and easy access by cars and mass transit to get in and out of before and after the game. Don't waste space that is valuable for reasons such as being on the waterfront. The obvious answer is that the stadium will be a huge draw for non-football events throughout the spring and summer. Add a retractable roof and now you still have the outdoor elements of playing in Buffalo, but can also bring in big ticket events year round...more than likely you can host a Superbowl too. All of these events bring people downtown, which increases revenue ancillary to the stadium.
Brainiac21 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:41 PM, thebandit27 said: The obvious answer is that the stadium will be a huge draw for non-football events throughout the spring and summer. Add a retractable roof and now you still have the outdoor elements of playing in Buffalo, but can also bring in big ticket events year round...more than likely you can host a Superbowl too. All of these events bring people downtown, which increases revenue ancillary to the stadium. downtown somewhere is fine, but i agree it's a waste to put it RIGHT on the waterfront. weather is worse, and can definitely be used for more outdoorsy type stuff. i could see a ballpark... which allows for views and a whole summer of nice weather days. but a football stadium up north? kind of a waste.
thebandit27 Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:48 PM, Brainiac21 said: downtown somewhere is fine, but i agree it's a waste to put it RIGHT on the waterfront. weather is worse, and can definitely be used for more outdoorsy type stuff. i could see a ballpark... which allows for views and a whole summer of nice weather days. but a football stadium up north? kind of a waste. Sure, I'd prefer behind the FNC where there's all that industrial land...all I'm saying is that a waterfront stadium offers all of those benefits as well.
BuffaloATL Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:35 PM, simpleman said: I just don't get the logic here. Prime waterfront land is there for the view and use of the, gasp, "water". Why would you put parking lots and stadiums here? Oh, and then you will want to dome it, since the wind and cold coming off the water during the football season will be brutal. The stadium is only used exactly one week out of 52 weeks a year. Who needs a waterfront view, the eyes are on the field, not the view. It is as silly as putting indoor museums, attractions and casinos there. A stadium goes where there is space for parking and a stadium. Not on valuable or expensive prime waterfront land. Let's use our resources wisely. The needs for a stadium are plenty of space for parking and the stadium, convenient quick and easy access by cars and mass transit to get in and out of before and after the game. Don't waste space that is valuable for reasons such as being on the waterfront. this.
Lurker Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 4:04 AM, Breakdance said: First step towards a new stadium? Doubtful... http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/gallagher-beach-small-boat-harbor-to-be-operated-as-a-state-park-20130903 "The new plan also appears to present a major obstacle to a group advocating construction of a new stadium for the Buffalo Bills on the site, which has so far been largely ignored by top government officials and the NFTA."
The Big Cat Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 Serious question: you suppose they paid cash?
chris heff Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 2:51 PM, The Big Cat said: Serious question: you suppose they paid cash? After a revenue bond issue.
chris heff Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:35 PM, simpleman said: I just don't get the logic here. Prime waterfront land is there for the view and use of the, gasp, "water". Why would you put parking lots and stadiums here? Oh, and then you will want to dome it, since the wind and cold coming off the water during the football season will be brutal. The stadium is only used exactly one week out of 52 weeks a year. Who needs a waterfront view, the eyes are on the field, not the view. It is as silly as putting indoor museums, attractions and casinos there. A stadium goes where there is space for parking and a stadium. Not on valuable or expensive prime waterfront land. Let's use our resources wisely. The needs for a stadium are plenty of space for parking and the stadium, convenient quick and easy access by cars and mass transit to get in and out of before and after the game. Don't waste space that is valuable for reasons such as being on the waterfront. You're right, think of all the stupid things done with waterfront property. Why is there that stretch of the Niagara Section of the Thruway right along the river? My sister lives in Hanford Bay, somebody a hundred years ago thought it was a good idea to run the railroad tracks along the lake. I don't know the outer harbor at all. Could a stadium be built close but far enough away from the water front?
MarkyMannn Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:35 PM, simpleman said: I just don't get the logic here. Prime waterfront land is there for the view and use of the, gasp, "water". Why would you put parking lots and stadiums here? Oh, and then you will want to dome it, since the wind and cold coming off the water during the football season will be brutal. The stadium is only used exactly one week out of 52 weeks a year. Who needs a waterfront view, the eyes are on the field, not the view. It is as silly as putting indoor museums, attractions and casinos there. A stadium goes where there is space for parking and a stadium. Not on valuable or expensive prime waterfront land. Let's use our resources wisely. The needs for a stadium are plenty of space for parking and the stadium, convenient quick and easy access by cars and mass transit to get in and out of before and after the game. Don't waste space that is valuable for reasons such as being on the waterfront. THIS +2 On 9/6/2013 at 3:45 PM, chris heff said: You're right, think of all the stupid things done with waterfront property. Why is there that stretch of the Niagara Section of the Thruway right along the river? My sister lives in Hanford Bay, somebody a hundred years ago thought it was a good idea to run the railroad tracks along the lake. The Thruway along the river IS a joke. Trains however resist climbing grades. Along the water is the lowest most level route. Plus the RR was probably there first
Helpmenow Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 5:02 AM, bbb said: I thought the NFTA IS a state agency? At least when I worked for those chumps for summer jobs, I thought I was a state employee. MOB owned?
Rubes Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 1:41 PM, thebandit27 said: The obvious answer is that the stadium will be a huge draw for non-football events throughout the spring and summer. Add a retractable roof and now you still have the outdoor elements of playing in Buffalo, but can also bring in big ticket events year round...more than likely you can host a Superbowl too. All of these events bring people downtown, which increases revenue ancillary to the stadium. Dude, that is just freaking hilarious.
sodbuster Posted September 6, 2013 Posted September 6, 2013 On 9/6/2013 at 2:51 PM, The Big Cat said: Serious question: you suppose they paid cash? I hope they got a receipt, just in case they want to return it.
Recommended Posts