Except the other rooftops nearby might sue you for obstructing their view.... :-P
Wasn't the restaurant once a Coaches, like the one in Norman? I loved eating in there as a kid.
Ballpark is having a monster truck event. I expressed concern about the field. Got a response from the Dodgers themselves stating the field was being entirely replaced for next season, so that's nice!
The dodgers are doing these events only because they are getting a new field.
On the city council docket for next week is approval of $1.879 million (!!) for a new field to come from the general obligation bond.
Hmmmmm.... gotta love the free market, huh? For such a conservative city, every other business in town runs to government to help pay the bills. But when we ask government for money for mental health care - it's not there. I actually had someone say to me, "Where's the return?" Think about that a minute. Apparently the only kind of "return" many can relate to is monetary. This, unfortunately, adds to what makes Oklahoma City, and our state, fall so behind in QOL rankings. I know that's not the topic here, and I realize it's a GO bond, but just sayin'. Should be a really, really nice field.
EDIT: I understand it's a city owned facility. I understand the need for maintenance. But the primary tenant I'm sure is having a big say in what kind of "field" they get. If I rent a house, I don't get to tell the landlord I want real hardwood floors versus laminate. Pushing $2,000,000.00 for a new field at the ballpark sounds like the landlord is being more than generous.
It's a city owned facility and the turf was due for replacement, which is why they let monster trucks on it recently.
I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect it's not just the top turf getting replaced. After all these years I'd bet there are drainage issues and sprinkler line issues and such that they'll probably rectify as part of this effort. These are things I'd expect the city to be responsible for no matter who the tenant was.
I'm no expert, but I suspect the costs related to the complete replacement of a natural, at-or-near major league quality baseball playing field is decidedly non trivial. You'll take out not only the existing sod, but likely a few inches of substrate, replace it, add or amend a drainage layer of some sort, then roll out several thousand square feet of sod - to say nothing of rolling/leveling, and (minimally) first-time fertilization. I don't suspect any of that comes cheap.
2 million to replace a field that has lasted 20 years doesn't sound bad at all really. Its not like their changing it out because its not pretty. Its being replaced because its costing more to do daily maintenance on it because of its poor substructure and irrigation system. Really saving money in the long run.
In addition to replacing the turf on the field the city really needs to buy some turf floor panels. The ballpark could be a fantastic concert venue and flooring to protect the new turf and open up additional usage of the space would be a boon to the facility.
I’m failing to see the controversy?
I'm guessing he thinks the Dodgers should pay for their own turf replacement. I guess he didn't see the situation where the KC Chiefs and the Rams were to play in Mexico City this Sunday. The turf was so bad they moved the game back to LA. The teams don't do turf, the stadium owners do.
That reminds me, I think we are a Triple A city. By that I mean that Major League Baseball has contracted with Oklahoma City to guarantee that Triple A ball will be played here. For as long as the contract term a team will be here. Even if the Dodgers move, MLB has to place a team in OKC. OKC has to maintain the stadium in a Triple A fashion.
Unlike the past, where there were local owners, the Dodgers bought our AAA franchise.
Heh....more like the Warriors. In 2010 OKC baseball was bought by a Peter Guber chaired group under one of his Mandalay xxx company names, of which he has many. By 2015 he is a big partner in the Golden State Warriors, as well as the LA Dodgers. (I don’t know which team he is a larger percentage owner of). After the Houston Astros affiliate deal with OKC expires in 2015, the Dodgers buy into OKC and make them their AAA affiliate. I have to admit the Dodger relationship with OKC has very good for our city IMO.
I have been told the only reason OKC doesn’t currently belong to the Texas Rangers is Nolan Ryan: when he became Rangers president in 2008 he moved their AAA affiliate from OKC (since 1983) to his family owned Round Rock Texas team in 2010. OKC became a Houston Astros affiliate in 2011. Around 2013 Ryan left the Rangers and went to work for the Astros. He then again insisted the Astros drop OKC for Round Rock, which happened in 2015. The Rangers were aggressive in their desire to return to OKC in 2015, and hoped to buy the team outright as soon as the Astros agreement expired. However, Guber really liked the OKC market and joined them with his Dodgers network instead of selling outright.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks