Sonics arena speculation: Think conventions and mass transit
Triangulate this: A new home for the NBA team will likely need to be a multipurpose facility with a strong corporate partner located near light rail. Eastside suburbs? Maybe.
What next for the Sonics and their (seemingly genuine) quest for a new arena in the Seattle area? Quite a lot of possibilities are in play now that the Legislature declined to make life easy by handing over the keys to $300 million in visitor taxes.
One of the more interesting notions is to combine the new arena with a convention center, thus tapping some other sources of rental revenue and governmental financing. The Oklahoma City group that owns the Sonics has talked to both Meydenbauer Center in Bellevue and the Washington State Convention and Trade Center in Seattle to see if there's a dance partner. So far, the dancing is pretty awkward.
Meydenbauer Center makes some sense, since it's undersized and has some expansion space kitty-corner to the southwest, between the Center and City Hall. An enlarged Meydenbauer facility, coupled to the new arena, could offer space for trade shows like the Garden Show, as well as major meetings for companies like Microsoft and Amazon, which now often have to hold these gatherings out of state. (Safeco Field, sometimes used for these mega-meetings, means poor security, outdoor temperatures, and limited technology for whiz-bang shows.) Meydenbauer-plus could compete for the regional conventions that now go to places like Boise.
Originally, the Sonics wanted this Bellevue site, but it couldn't be put together in time for the legislative session, and another Bellevue site, east of Interstate 405, was not very suitable, so the team went with the Renton alternative, far from hotels and therefore not able to offer much synergy with the convention business. The Meydenbauer site has more positives than Renton: downtown Bellevue is putting up hotels and offices and will be gaining light-rail transit.
But the city doesn't own the property in question, City Manager Steve Sarkozy reports, and it does not appear to be big enough for an arena. He says there are no current discussions with the team about this idea. Two other problems: Parking is inadequate, so the new complex might have to park cars across I-405, with people movers to shuttle people to and fro. And the expanded convention center would be competing with Spokane's just-enlarged center.
As for Seattle sites, there's clearly no room near the current Convention Center downtown and spanning Interstate 5, so where would it go? Convention Center director John Christison, not very enamored of the idea of a new conference facility to manage, admits there's a need for more exhibition space, local trade shows, and meeting rooms. But sports arenas don't configure too easily for such uses, he says. Christison confirms there has been some talk about Seattle Center as a site for a new arena-cum-convention-facility, but KeyArena would be very hard to reconfigure, since its 400,000 square feet is only about half the desired size of a modern new arena at 750,000 square feet. In addition, the "bones" of Key Arena are too close together to allow enlargement to handle hockey. What about at Memorial Stadium, at the east side of the Center? Extremely unlikely, other sources say.
The supporters of keeping the teams in Seattle are trying to find a way to get back to Olympia with more benefits and fewer taxes. The hope is to make good on the pledge that any new arena would be truly multipurpose – basketball, hockey, and exhibit space. Combining basketball and hockey has happened in a few cities, such as Denver, but typically pro sports teams want to capture every last dime from every last hot dog at these facilities, so they don't want to split revenues. The Sonics owners are also wary of putting a new arena in Seattle, because of the local political climate (just passed: a strong anti-sports initiative) and because the mood in Olympia is to do no favors for Seattle, or at least its current mayor.
But there are two wild cards in play, which might make a Sonics Convention Center suddenly come to life. One is Microsoft, which has remained very much in the background, even though the facility would be needed for company events and Microsoft is a natural major contributor for naming rights. Understandably, the company went mum after some initial enthusiasm, fearing that the Legislature would find it easy to say no to taxes and just leave it to the cash-rich mega-company to foot the bill. (No callbacks from Microsoft spokespeople on this story, either.)
The other wild card is transit. As Sound Transit lays out its new routes and looks for ridership to fill up future trains, that opens up some interesting new sites for transit-related development, built around a major attraction like a conference and sports center. "Look at where the new routes are going," says one source mysteriously, "and not necessarily the Eastside."
Comments:
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:43 a.m. inappropriate
Phoenix and Kansas City comparisons: Phoenix has 4 relatively new, separate sports palaces for basketball, hockey, baseball, and football. Kansas City has 3 basketball venues downtown and no team; plus the best baseball/football complex in America. Both places have far superior convention facilities. Seattle has a lot of catching up to do.
Posted Thu, May 3, 10:35 a.m. inappropriate
Wishful thinking is nice at Christmas, but in May??? Oklahoma City Sonics...say it 10-times and it's yours.
Up and down the line this Sonics thing has the stink of death. The legislature's breath taking (in a good way) lack of interest in putting together a funding package during the last session, the underwhelming interest on the part of Clay Bennett to fund a new arena privately, the seemingly cavalier willingness on the part of Howard Schultz to sell the team to out of towners, all add up to a trip to Bergman Luggage. See ya, team!
I had a conversation with someone in Bellevue government not that long ago, and he told me that whatever interest there was for the team to come to town was perfunctory. Going through the motions, so to speak, was necessary in order to make sure the box on the "good citizen" form was checked. But I was told that the Renton site was the only viable alternative, yet that won't work without a huge dip into the public trough.
The politicians have sensed, correctly, I might add, that the public is in no mood to be taxed in any way, shape, or form to build a playhouse for the bling bedecked to bounce balls. Heck, we're not even willing to tax the vagrants who stay in our hotels or rent our cars! We're getting creamed enough just to get from point A to point B, so let's not rub salt into an open wound.
And Microsoft? Every time a sports franchise gets in trouble and whines about leaving town unless a new playpen is provided them, Microsoft's name comes up as the inevitable white knight. Yet the knight fails to materialize. That company is in the business of making and selling software; it's not an entertainment impressario.
What...is there some sort of obligation on Mircrosoft's part to leap to the rescue simply because those who haven't the money (or won't do what's necessary to raise it in the marketplace) want to tell the company how to spend its money? I don't think so. From my admittedly disadvantaged and outsiders perch, what I see of the philanthorpic interests of Bill Gates, ponying up for a pleasure palace for pro sports would be antithetical to where he wants to put either his company's money or his foundation's money. A new arena will feed how many third world kids? Educate how many kids in America? Help prevent how many cases of AIDS around the world?
A taxpayer financed stadium accessible by taxpayer financed light rail that still charges you upwards of hundreds of dollars to watch millionaires play ball is a pretty good picture of insanity.
But I am willing to help them pack...
The Piper
Posted Thu, May 3, 11 a.m. inappropriate
Many choices still: Kansas City is an fascinating example -- three downtown basketball venues and no team? Sounds like some pretty intense wasting of public resources to me.
I agree that it would seem wise to develop a "multi-purpose" facility that actually walks that walk, either in the city or in one of the more-desirable suburban areas (sorry, Renton, but few of us who actually live here think of your downtown as a "destination", unless you like Wal Mart, strip malls, and mini-casinos). Since such a multi-purpose facility would presumably be (or at least desires to sell itself as) an economic development tool (both the construction as well as the operation), are there additional options for funding an arena / multi-purpose facility / convention center that haven't yet been seriously discussed?
Given the Port of Seattle's extensive tax base, its mission to expand economic development opportunities, and its desire to profligately throw money around on golden parachutes and housing that is unaffordable to most in King County, why aren't they able to utilize their existing revenues or bonding authority to help develop such a facility. Heck, the same folks that lobbied the Legislature for the Sonics also lobby for the Port of Seattle -- seems like it doesn't take much of an intuitive leap . . .
To me, one of the other most interesting pieces of the discussion is about the Storm vs. the Sonics. I've not heard much enthusiasm from anyone for retaining the multi-zillion dollar salaries of the lousy players from the gangsta-culture NBA. However, there seems to be substantial public and community desire to keep the Storm. As I understand it, the Storm is "just" $10 million of the overall purchase price of the Sonics/Storm sale to the Okies -- I wonder if they'd be willing to sell them to a Seattle owner? I would imagine that one or more of our local millionaires (especially based on this week's report that King County has one of the nation's highest concentrations of folks in that category) could help rescue this local jewel. Something tells me that the owners from the OK consortium that invested so heavily in the anti-gay-marriage campaign, and the general public in the notoriously homophobic heartland may not have the same demographic fan base that it takes to support (or heck, even accept) the WNBA, and certainly not in the same vociferous manner that Seattle loves the Storm and its charisma-laden squad. Add to that the fact that Lauren Jackson (by anyone's measure, one of the premier women's athletes in the world) has said she'll not play professionally anywhere but Seattle in the WNBA, and that the Key Arena's amenities seem just fine from the standpoint of the Storm's loyal fan base, and it is interesting to think what the possibilities might be of retaining them here.
Posted Thu, May 3, 11:43 a.m. inappropriate
Why WOULD The Soncis Leave?: They'll lose less money in Seattle than they will in Oklahoma City.
When they sell the team, they'll make more money here than there.
If the Sonics want to shoot themselves in the head, we unfortunately don't have corporate mental health counselors to help them out.
When I hear the words "Sound Transit" associated with the Sonics, my heart skips a beat. This would be the arranged marriage of the century between the Sonics--the D Student Corporate Welfare Prince--and Sound Transit, the Ugly Princess of Pork-Barrel Infrastructure Projects. A marriage made in Taxation Heaven. Taxpayer beware.
Posted Thu, May 3, 2:29 p.m. inappropriate
soops and ST: David Brewster,
Your source seems to suggest an arena along the weak south-first Link LRT line that will open in late 2009, extend to the airport in 2010, and will need new riders. The East Link LRT is many years away and dependent upon significant new revenue from an affirmative vote. Could an arena be sited near the ID, Royal Brougham, South Lander Street, South McClellan Street, South Henderson Street, or South 154th Street stations? The last station listed is in Tukwila and would not be subject to the recent Seattle initiative on public financial return. Or, how about a new station in Tukwila near South 133th Street that is also near Interurban Avenue South, I-5, and SR-599?
The recent Art Thiel column suggested private financing. A site would still be required. It would not necessarily be Microsoft, the corporation, or Gates, as they have more altruistic motivations, but other local billionaires (e.g., Balmer, McGaw).
Posted Thu, May 3, 2:57 p.m. inappropriate
I was staring at the ST map as I edited David's story and thought: Tacoma Dome. Tear it down and rebuild there. (I say this having no idea about the size of the site, etc.) You'll have light rail there at some point and now have heavy rail plus ST buses from all over.
North, it would have to be Lynnwood probably, or Shoreline. I have no idea what real estate might be available up there. Lynnwood would be attractive as the light-rail terminus, and also that's the confluence of I-5 and I-405.
But if you were to look only at locations along the route that will open first, I'd put my money on Tukwila or SeaTac.
Posted Fri, May 4, 1:28 a.m. inappropriate
RE: soops and ST: Here's a pie in the sky dream. Clay Bennett and Paul Allen swap teams. Then, Paul Allen chooses to build a new arena along a transit line and build the arena with 70% private financing. I for one would like to see downtown Bellevue house the team, and have the Renton site be developed for a Major League Soccer Stadium(roughly 20,000).
Posted Sat, May 5, 12:46 p.m. inappropriate
RE: soops and ST: I'm sure such a swap has been discussed many times. But last year Allen seemed to back away from off-loading the Blazers for some reason. Maybe he's sprucing up the Trailblazers for the swap, which will result in the Blazers in Oklahoma.
I like the idea of using the Renton site for soccer, but it's too far away from the Eastside and Seattle. Better would be to upgrade Memorial Stadium.
I believe that this is what will happen with the Sonics:
- Clay Bennett will continue trying to get government to build a stadium and they'll continue to say no, because it makes no economic sense.
- Clay would like to leave to Oklahoma City and go back home, but he'd lose about $100 million by doing so. So he's forced to stay, but he doesn't want to stay.
- Enter one wealthy basketball fan (or another consortium of supposed fans) who can figure out how to make the Sonics pencil. He will negotiate with Clay so that Clay can sell and leave with a nominal profit and declare victory.
- The new owner will ask for NO MONEY from the City or the County or the State. He will be deemed a HERO by the community. He will finance upgrades to Key Arena that make the place competitive with the rest of the league. (In short, he will do what Howard Shultz should have done.) That owner might still be Paul Allen. But the NBA probably wants Paul sell the Trailblazers first. You'd think that Phil Knight or some other Nike guy would want to buy them. It should be more or less a fire sale.