"If we build it, they will come and find parking...."

[Sean Miller Fan]

SMF - it is naive to think that if Pitt had the $$, boom! this would happen. One of my close friends spouse used to be the CEO of GE's real estate arm. We talked about this very scenario and he actually laughed - pointing to the politics that would hold this up. The City of Pittsburgh has NEVER "played nice" with Pitt. Suddenly they are going to agree to wide scale Oakland development without infrastructure change? And some of this land is owned by the City. They are just going to roll over and sell it? I'm sure Paco could address this in more detail, but it took YEARS for Pitt to acquire the land for the Athletic Fields behind Cost. YEARS. And that is just a fraction of the space we're looking at.

And several hundred million would just cover the construction, not land acquisition. Off the top of my head, I'd put a price tag of over $600-700 Million and at least 10 years (and that's only IF Pitt could jump all the political hurdles) for all of this.

Pitt bought the land that those new fields sit on from the county so of course that would be a challenge. But, eventually they did buy it, winning over private bids from real estate developers.

And the land Pitt would buy would be privately owned. Buying up some Oakland buildings would cost about $100 million. New stadium construction about $300 million. This is Oakland we are talking about, not Manhattan.

And you are kidding yourself if you dont think the city would agree to a revenue-generating stadium that they dont have to pay for. City governments LOVE stadiums, especially when they are free.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Pitt bought the land that those new fields sit on from the county so of course that would be a challenge. But, eventually they did buy it, winning over private bids from real estate developers.

And the land Pitt would buy would be privately owned. Buying up some Oakland buildings would cost about $100 million. New stadium construction about $300 million. This is Oakland we are talking about, not Manhattan.

And you are kidding yourself if you dont think the city would agree to a revenue-generating stadium that they dont have to pay for. City governments LOVE stadiums, especially when they are free.

Saying revenue-generating stadium is an oxymoron.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Saying revenue-generating stadium is an oxymoron.

I mean from the city's perspective. If $400 million fell from the sky and Pitt told the city it was footing the bill for it, any tax dollars generated are more than the city had without it.

 

[eastcoasthoops]

I mean from the city's perspective. If $400 million fell from the sky and Pitt told the city it was footing the bill for it, any tax dollars generated are more than the city had without it.

There is as much of a chance that $400M falls from the sky LITERALLY as it does figuratively. Sean, you and Z should get out your buckets...I'm sure it will start raining Ben Franklins any second.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

any tax dollars generated are more than the city had without it.

Tax dollars generated from Pitt football games at New Pitt Stadium in Oakland are tax dollars that are not being generated by Pitt Football at Heinz Field. Tax dollars generated from concerts at New Pitt Stadium are tax dollars not being generated from concerts at Heinz Field and PNC Park. The only new tax dollars to the City are tax dollars that wouldn't get generated elsewhere without New Pitt Stadium. The City isn't going to be in favor of a plan that merely moves where tax dollars get generated to someplace else, they would want actual new tax dollars generated. Where, exactly, are those going to be coming from?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Pitt bought the land that those new fields sit on from the county so of course that would be a challenge. But, eventually they did buy it, winning over private bids from real estate developers.

By offering significantly more money than everyone else and agreeing to pay for things that have nothing at all to do with the University or the property they wanted to acquire.

If Pitt had to overpay for land for a Stadium by the same amount they had to overpay for the land for the Olympic sports complex the $100 million number that you like to throw out would come up laughably short of the real number.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

I mean from the city's perspective. If $400 million fell from the sky and Pitt told the city it was footing the bill for it, any tax dollars generated are more than the city had without it.

And that's still wrong .
Didn't you say you have an MBA ? You didn't take any economics courses?

 

[ZetaZetaBeta]

SMF - it is naive to think that if Pitt had the $$, boom! this would happen. One of my close friends spouse used to be the CEO of GE's real estate arm. We talked about this very scenario and he actually laughed - pointing to the politics that would hold this up. The City of Pittsburgh has NEVER "played nice" with Pitt. Suddenly they are going to agree to wide scale Oakland development without infrastructure change? And some of this land is owned by the City. They are just going to roll over and sell it? I'm sure Paco could address this in more detail, but it took YEARS for Pitt to acquire the land for the Athletic Fields behind Cost. YEARS. And that is just a fraction of the space we're looking at.

And several hundred million would just cover the construction, not land acquisition. Off the top of my head, I'd put a price tag of over $600-700 Million and at least 10 years (and that's only IF Pitt could jump all the political hurdles) for all of this.

I am truly sorry, but you have no clue on this development project. After building the Pete and the Athletic fields, you are wrong about Pitt having "City" problems with regards to building anything. Obviously, if the Rooney's protest a great deal about a New Pitt Stadium they can cause a great deal of "political" problems. But do they really care about 6 football dates for a college team at THEIR stadium?

The former GE real estate person, who by the way almost bankrupted the company in real estate in 2008, is laughable to admit he worked at GE. Typical yinz appeal to an authority of failure.

AS FOR THE NEW PITT STADIUM, there is NO LAND ACQUISITION COST TO BUILDING ON THE OC LOT BECAUSE PITT OWNS IT. THERE IS NO REAL DEMOLITION COSTS. THERE MAY BE LITTLE EXCAVATION COST. A NEW 40-50k STADIUM WILL COST BETWEEN 150-200m.

 

[ZetaZetaBeta]

And that's still wrong .
Didn't you say you have an MBA ? You didn't take any economics courses?

Does a sports writer have any credibility? LOLOL The adults need to talk about this development. Not the Smiziks or Cooks of the world.

 

[ZetaZetaBeta]

By offering significantly more money than everyone else and agreeing to pay for things that have nothing at all to do with the University or the property they wanted to acquire.

If Pitt had to overpay for land for a Stadium by the same amount they had to overpay for the land for the Olympic sports complex the $100 million number that you like to throw out would come up laughably short of the real number.

150 to 200 Million to build The New Pitt Stadium. Read the website to gather some credible information. www.newpittstadium.com

 

[Delpanther]

Please stop pontificating about city planning or commercial development . You aren't a DeBartolo nor a city planner. Wait for the professionals at Populous to create the Pitt Athletic Facilities Master Plan. The problem is you will not understand most of it.

He's a chemist who puts pills in a bottle and fancies himself a businessman...amusing.

 

[mvk112]

You can't build anything of note in this city for $150m, let alone a stadium fit for a major college program. Try double that, and you'll approach what the University of Minnesota and Baylor built ( Populous was architect on both). Populous doesn't do erector set cheap stuff like at UCF, Tulane, and Houston.

 

[Swervin27]

so in summary, we (we being the collective pitt program) will just have to make due in a less than appealing situation which is Heinz field.. So now what can we argue about?

 

[Old School1]

If PITT were to engage the proper companies/resources to plan and sell the benefits of a multi - use stadium in the Oakland area that would benefit PITT and the surrounding communities it will be done.
This has to include a group that has the capability to relate and sell a project like this to residents, city planners and politicians.
I've been part of a team like this on multiple occaisions whose responsibility selling the construction of a manufacturing plant to reluctant city residents and planners.
It takes time but with the right team it can be done!
Smart planners can solve the parking issue which seems to be a sticking point.
As far sponsors go take a page out of the car racing book and sell advertising space wherever space its available. If you can get a major sponsor all the better in addition to selling space throughout the stadium.
What better place than put an advertisement above the urinal in the mens restroom or on the inside of the stall door in the ladies room???
The problem with PITT people is everyone thinks small! Think big people! If it was up to a lot of posters in this thread we'd still be driving around in horse carriages.
Think big and we'll be sitting in Oakland watching PITT football!

 

[mvk112]

This is incorrect. We've discussed land acquisition on here before and based on recent Oakland land purchases, the cost for that aspect would likely be under $100M if Pitt owned none of the land that needed to be acquired.

Possibly, but once they start acquiring parcels, the remaining parcels will shoot up exponentially in value.

Site prep would be pretty costly too, with demolition and excavation (unless you purchase and demo everything in the Bates/South Bouquet/Forbes/Halket boundary, you're excavating and building on a hill).

A stadium in Oakland could happen, but it's not happening for a $150m-$200m price tag. Double just to build the stadium, probably triple when you include acquisition, demolition, and excavation.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Possibly, but once they start acquiring parcels, the remaining parcels will shoot up exponentially in value.

Site prep would be pretty costly too, with demolition and excavation (unless you purchase and demo everything in the Bates/South Bouquet/Forbes/Halket boundary, you're excavating and building on a hill).

A stadium in Oakland could happen, but it's not happening for a $150m-$200m price tag. Double just to build the stadium, probably triple when you include acquisition, demolition, and excavation.

I think they could build a stadium for about $200M and spend about $100M in land acquisition and prep. The former estimate is based on the cost of newer stadiums like Houston's ($128M) and Baylor's ($266). Pitt would want something in between those, imo. The acquisition costs depend on various factors, one of which is how much of the acquired land Pitt would already own, so that aspect could actually be surprisingly low or very high.

The make or break part of a potential Oakland stadium is how much Pitt could get in mega donations. I don't believe they have any intent in pursuing the possibilities here.

 

[mvk112]

I think they could build a stadium for about $200M and spend about $100M in land acquisition and prep. The former estimate is based on the cost of newer stadiums like Houston's ($128M) and Baylor's ($266). Pitt would want something in between those, imo. The acquisition costs depend on various factors, one of which is how much of the acquired land Pitt would already own, so that aspect could actually be surprisingly low or very high.

The make or break part of a potential Oakland stadium is how much Pitt could get in mega donations. I don't believe they have any intent in pursuing the possibilities here.

Populous isn't building a stadium on the scale of UCF, Tulane, or Houston. They're building in the scale of Minnesota and Baylor (2 of their projects). It would take at least $300m to build a similar stadium in Pittsburgh at this point.

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

No takers on my teleport plan?

Buncha small-minded thinkers

 

[HailtoPitt]

Populous isn't building a stadium on the scale of UCF, Tulane, or Houston. They're building in the scale of Minnesota and Baylor (2 of their projects). It would take at least $300m to build a similar stadium in Pittsburgh at this point.

They've also built an 8,000 seat Division III stadium recently, so I'm confused why they would have to build something on the scale of Minnesota? Why would we need a Baylor or Minnesota scale stadium? A slightly larger version of Houston's stadium seems appropriate.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

And that's still wrong .
Didn't you say you have an MBA ? You didn't take any economics courses?

Yes. You can call me Adam Smith.

I mean that a new stadium, smaller and cozier gives the city a chance to bring in Major League Lacrosse or Major League Soccer franchises (much less likely) or play host to USMNT matches, international friendlies, etc. Heinz is too big for those events.

There are other opportunities for the city to generate revenue from a smaller stadium as well.

I am not saying that a new stadium will make the city tons of money. I'm saying that its existence would make the city more than it would cost them if Pitt funded it entirely themselves and therefore, the city would not stand on its way.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

150 to 200 Million to build The New Pitt Stadium. Read the website to gather some credible information. www.newpittstadium.com

There is no such thing as creditable information on that third grader's Web site, no matter how many times you post a link to it.

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

They've also built an 8,000 seat Division III stadium recently, so I'm confused why they would have to build something on the scale of Minnesota? Why would we need a Baylor or Minnesota scale stadium? A slightly larger version of Houston's stadium seems appropriate.

I mean, I'd hope it's on the scale of Baylor or Minnesota. Or, hell, the recent Stanford Stadium renovation. Otherwise, it's a pretty drastic downgrade from Heinz. I'm just being honest here. I'd be all for it if it was definitely of $300M+ scale of architecture. But,those Houston, UCF and UConn on campus stadiums seem like crap made on cheap. Like high school stadiums but just much bigger.

 

[cbpitt2]

I mean, I'd hope it's on the scale of Baylor or Minnesota. Or, hell, the recent Stanford Stadium renovation. Otherwise, it's a pretty drastic downgrade from Heinz. I'm just being honest here. I'd be all for it if it was definitely of $300M+ scale of architecture. But,those Houston, UCF and UConn on campus stadiums seem like crap made on cheap. Like high school stadiums but just much bigger.

You've been to Houston, UCF's and UConn's stadiums?

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

Come on, man.
UCF

Minnesota

 

[NTOP]

Yes. You can call me Adam Smith.

I mean that a new stadium, smaller and cozier gives the city a chance to bring in Major League Lacrosse or Major League Soccer franchises (much less likely) or play host to USMNT matches, international friendlies, etc. Heinz is too big for those events.

There are other opportunities for the city to generate revenue from a smaller stadium as well.

I am not saying that a new stadium will make the city tons of money. I'm saying that its existence would make the city more than it would cost them if Pitt funded it entirely themselves and therefore, the city would not stand on its way.

The city is run by morons. So, there's a chance they'd go along with this nonsense. Because only morons think it makes sense.

 

[NTOP]

Come on, man.
UCF

Minnesota

Acres and acres of flat land. I'll bet that the schools already owned what was needed. I think both are 50K capacity?

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

Acres and acres of flat land. I'll bet that the schools already owned what was needed. I think both are 50K capacity?

I'm not disagreeing with you. And, I'm saying if Pitt does it, it better be at least within par of what Power 5 schools like Stanford (renovation), TCU (renovation), Baylor (new) and Minnesota (new) did. Otherwise, really? At the very least it should be Houston's or better. And, that one, housing only 40K, still costs $130M+ and didn't involve land acquisition.

I'm NOT in the group that wants an on campus stadium on cheap just for the sake of having a stadium. Especially, even with it being a bit too large for Pitt, Heinz is far better with amenities, nearby restaurants, commute, etc. than any even an exceptional college stadium. Other than the students, I'm not certain who an on campus stadium benefits. If you're not currently living in Oakland, Heinz is better in every way.

 

[NTOP]

I'm not disagreeing with you. And, I'm saying if Pitt does it, it better be at least within par of what Power 5 schools like Stanford (renovation), TCU (renovation), Baylor (new) and Minnesota (new) did. Otherwise, really? At the very least it should be Houston's or better. And, that one, housing only 40K, still costs $130M+ and didn't involve land acquisition.

I'm NOT in the group that wants an on campus stadium on cheap just for the sake of having a stadium. Especially, even with it being a bit too large for Pitt, Heinz is far better with amenities, nearby restaurants, commute, etc. than any even an exceptional college stadium. Other than the students, I'm not certain who an on campus stadium benefits. If you're not currently living in Oakland, Heinz is better in every way.

My guess is Zeta Beta Metta Jetta expects to be awarded a hefty contract to help with the design. If he gets it, he'll replace his Commodore 64 with an Apple IIE and Sim City floppy.

 

[Las Panteras]

I am not a Pitt alum. I live in Western PA and follow all local teams. I call Pitt football my favorite local team because CFB is my favorite sport.

With that said......

no matter what is rumored to be someday built in Oakland....it will NEVER be as convenient as what is in place at Heinz Field.

I have no interest in college tradition.....pageantry.......giving students a game day experience. I simply dont care. All I want is Pitt to win........and Heinz Field will miraculously become the shrine that many of you fools want to build in Oakland.....

So....for those of you that are pining for an on campus stadium....and simply refuse to accept the inevitable....i remind you that the target market that I am part of is far.....far greater than the loud minority of you dopes that actually think wasting millions on this is a smart move.

And this Populous company is going to confirm this by recommending no stadium be built.

 

[pitt-girl]

I am truly sorry, but you have no clue on this development project. After building the Pete and the Athletic fields, you are wrong about Pitt having "City" problems with regards to building anything. Obviously, if the Rooney's protest a great deal about a New Pitt Stadium they can cause a great deal of "political" problems. But do they really care about 6 football dates for a college team at THEIR stadium?

The former GE real estate person, who by the way almost bankrupted the company in real estate in 2008, is laughable to admit he worked at GE. Typical yinz appeal to an authority of failure.

AS FOR THE NEW PITT STADIUM, there is NO LAND ACQUISITION COST TO BUILDING ON THE OC LOT BECAUSE PITT OWNS IT. THERE IS NO REAL DEMOLITION COSTS. THERE MAY BE LITTLE EXCAVATION COST. A NEW 40-50k STADIUM WILL COST BETWEEN 150-200m.

First off, who said he was at Echo in 2008 and YOU have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about.

Second, I blame only myself for getting lulled into another one of these new stadium threads. But it's so hard not to respond to insanity.

 

[Swervin27]

First off, who said he was at Echo in 2008 and YOU have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about.

Second, I blame only myself for getting lulled into another one of these new stadium threads. But it's so hard not to respond to insanity.

LOL, they are so hard not to get into, these stadium threads.. I'll read one, promise myself not to post then i'll read some more, post some non-feasible, hypothetical "what if" scenario, very light hearted on campus stadium post and 20 posts later, im pissed off and insulting Heinz field and old people that bitch about traffic

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I'm not disagreeing with you. And, I'm saying if Pitt does it, it better be at least within par of what Power 5 schools like Stanford (renovation), TCU (renovation), Baylor (new) and Minnesota (new) did. Otherwise, really? At the very least it should be Houston's or better. And, that one, housing only 40K, still costs $130M+ and didn't involve land acquisition.

I agree. If the stadium isnt going to be first-class, at the level of Baylor or Minnesota, I'd rather stay at Heinz.

 

[pittmeister]

First off, who said he was at Echo in 2008 and YOU have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about.

Second, I blame only myself for getting lulled into another one of these new stadium threads. But it's so hard not to respond to insanity.

POST OF THE DAY!

I don't understand the constant drum beating for a stadium on a message board. Little can be done here.

Zeta: Take your message to the big donors and administration.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Does a sports writer have any credibility? LOLOL The adults need to talk about this development. Not the Smiziks or Cooks of the world.

I don't read them either .
Economics studies, sure .