Rays proposed stadium 3-d video

I've been waiting patiently to share this with you all. And finally, it's here.

The city of St. Petersburg has a new, 45 second, 3-d video model showing the Tampa Bay Rays proposed waterfront stadium in its proposed downtown surroundings. Check it out. My hunch is that this video will support the opinions of both people for and against the waterfront stadium.

Big thank you to the city and specifically Julie Weston for helping us get copy of this video.

Comments

[Thomas]

"My hunch is that this video will support the opinions of both people for and against the waterfront stadium"

Aaron, you rock! That is hilarious.

[Lakeland Guy]

The stadium looks great. It's hard to believe such a beautiful design and location is getting so much negative attention for a lot of the wrong reasons (not all of the reasons are wrong). St Pete is a beautiful city and I only think the stadium will add to it.

[Thomas]

I do not support the funding plan - but I think the stadium looks sweet.

The Rays really need to step up and present a fair financing plan that would benefit the city and not just the team.

[Ray F]

I like how Aaron put that line in the video... priceless.

Looks great. I wonder about the accuracy of the curvature of the Earth in the background though. It would seem St Pete is almost the size of Europe. hahahahaha

Should spark both sides. This is what should be on this blog- not links between the uhurus and the stadium.

[Dave in St Pete]

Good Lord that this is almost as big as the whole of down town! Completely out of scale with the area.

[Ray F]

dave,

how is it out of scale with the other 20-30 story buildings downtown???

sorry, dude, downtown is not going to be just the Barnett Tower anymore. (old school)

[jeff gilbert]

I don't get it. Its on the edge of downtown anyway. IF this was such a problem, why do we have so many high rises going up everywhere? It just seems very disingenuous to suggest this park would be out of place. I don't know, maybe I'm not old enough to "get it."

[Thomas]

St. Pete is going New Skool.

That 3D vid doesnt even inlcude the new Derek Zoolander Center For Kids Who Can't Read Good And Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too

[Thomas]

Kazmir v Lackey in about 40mins.

This could be a preview of Game 1 of the ALCS.

I hope you all got your TiVo's queued up...

[Paul]

Kind of looks like a circus tent to me. A big circus tent. Wonder how the view will be from all those fancy condo's with the tent deployed. I'm calling it a tent, because that's what it is... a 'sail' to me, implies a boat... or a fancy word to offset the ugliness of the word tent.

The fact that there's video now is good. I think there should be more including a 3-D physical model we can go look at somewhere public.

[Ray F]

thomas,

games not televised man...

bummer.

[Rays]

I want to see a video with the sail down since if it's not raining that will be the main perceived vantage point.

[get-smart]

The stadium reminds me of a Star Trek (old dudes) adventure. The monster was a cone shaped object that resembles the stadium. It ate up anything in its path. It was so huge it ate planets. Of coarse, our waterfront earth bound monster just eats our tax dollars.

The only thing that would kill it was reverse logic. Maybe, there is a lesson to be learned.

[Rick K]

Another HOME RUN by Aaron.

Great video.

Thanks to Aaron, the Times, the Rays, the City, and Al Gore (for inventing the internet)!!

[Thomas]

Ray, there's ways around that.

Shoot me an email at tbraysin2008@gmail.com

I'll hook you up - no BS

[Ray F]

yeah, get-smart-

the lesson that should be learned was written centuries ago by an ancient chinese philosopher

Confucius Say:

"Man who quote Star Trek in stadium debate destined to lose all credibility in future."

[Ray F]

hey Thomas- check your email.

[John]

Just my opinion, but that is the ugliest thing I've ever seen. It looks like a 20 story igloo. I realize this igloo is a "convertible", but you still have a 30 story tall piling always there, with 20-30 sdspension cables exposed.

Let's call it the St. Pete Igloo

Hey Rick K, cat got your tongue? You never responded on my other thread about the Red Cross....change of heart?

[Native]

Paul, please enlighten the rest of us regarding the fancy condos? Bayfront Towers is the only Condo that has any view of the stadium

[Not looking good for the Rays on other blogs....]

Wow...I just leaped over to BNN's website to see what the folks are saying over there. Looks like the Rays don't have a PR shill on that site.

100% against. Every single comment. And there's close to 100 comments.

And the story they're commenting on is whether we should extend the bed tax for the Rays.

That St Pete Times Poll may in fact be innacurate after all, looking at other blogs from other sites, the oppositi
on is more like 85-90% against.

http://www.baynews9.com/Chat.cfm?event=evtListThreadsbyContentId&ThreadTypeId=1&ContentId=355986

Same goes for TBO stories, even the one about the reporter that spent an afternoon sitting in Al Lang to gauge the heat. They lambasted him on the comments!!

[get-smart]

Native -

You are right. The Bayfront Towers south building condo residents have a view. The city should charge them a special stadium viewing fee equivalent to a season ticket. If they sit outside on their terrace in the heat and watch the game, they will be charged at nose bleed season pass rates. If they are in a/c, they will be charged luxury suite season rates.

The stadium will have a wonderful sound funnel effect up Beach Dr. For all those that can hear all the stadium goin' ons for free, priceless.

The mass of it will probably raise the local bay temperature by 5*.

Cheers!

[Paul]

Native, to elaborate on my condo/view comment. Sure Bayfront is obvious, as is the new Signature Place. I was also talking about anyone who could see the sailboat / circus tent thing from their windows... the people at Vinoy condos and the condos above Park Shore Grill and the soon to open condo's at 400 Beach Drive... not to mention the yet to open Ovation condo's on 2nd Ave NE.

They will look out their windows.... see the nice open water, some sailboats, parks .... and this monster tent thing, not to mention the lights at night games. I don't live in any of the those places... but I'm thinking it may be less appealing of a view than it is now. I wouldn't want to have bought a nice water/city view and then have that stadium plunked in the middle of it. Just my hunch, but what do I know, I'm not a million dollar condo commando.

[Don in St. Pete]

I'd like to see the same 360 degree view from ground level but the effect is definitely horrid. If the biuld the monstrosity will all the people sell their condos when they get tired of all the noise and lights when games go to extra innings?

[Micah Mills]

I want to see a video of the dome on the waterfront.

www.movethedome.com

[Stop whinning]

The sail is down most of the time anyway. Unless your a bird of one of the lucky few to live in a 20 plus story condo your not seeing it from that angle.

I personally would love to watch baseball from my balcony. Chicago builds bleachers on top of their adjacent buildings.

[Bobby Fenton]

In response to "Not looking good for the Rays on other blogs", who posted that Joe Henderson's column on the pleasantness of a recent outdoor evening at Al Lang was getting "lambasted". That couldn't be further from the truth. I just went over there and read the comments, and most of them are in fact lauding Henderson's column and ripping the people who complain about the heat and their "A/C or bust" attitude. There was also a much heavier slant regarding putting the stadium in Tampa on that comment board (I happen to agree, but that's not what's on the table, at least currently).

I also found it kind of surprising that there was such a discrepancy between the commenters on the two papers' sites. I know one paper is St. Pete based and one is Tampa based, but I didn't think the readerships necessarily were. I figured people in the area read both. In fact, I live in Tampa and prefer the Times. I never thought it was a St. Pete/Tampa thing.

[To Bobby Fenton]

Bobby,

So let's make it even harder to access for the Tampons, by putting it further downtown. Great idea?

I still think if attendance is the issue, the current suggested location is ridiculous. Silverman doesn't "get-it" that this is a car-based market. We have no alternatives. PSTA? LOL!!

A more central location, please.

[Edward]

Very deceiving. Imagine what this looks like from ground level (where, last I checked, most of us live). Imagine this thing from, say, the grass to the immediate north of the PAC. YIKES.

[Edward]

I love the idea of an open air venue. Baseball should be played outdoors (heat and sun do not scare me, I choose to live here and I *love* this place). But not at this location. Not with the lightning rod holding up the sail. Not without parking. Not with destroying the vista at the marina. This is SO ridiculous. I'm happy to fork over my taxpayer share of whatever infrastructure is needed to support a better place for the Rays to play. But NOT AT THIS LOCATION. This is a *BAD* idea.

[Bobby Fenton]

Listen, I completely understand the location issue. I am one of those people who chooses to acknowledge it instead of simply ripping Tampa people for not driving. I live in South Tampa and go quite often, but it is a pain in the @ss and I'd go even more if it were in Tampa.

My only point is that the current offer has nothing to do with Tampa. It still could at one point. But as of now, I worry that this may be the area's best shot at a stadium anywhere, and I like the location itself, even if it is the same drive. As far as being even further away, we're only talking about another few minutes, which I'll gladly trade to not have a beautful park with scenery.

But I don't disagree with you, poster two spots above me, I believe a more central location is the best scenario too.

[To Bobby]

Bobby,

Whether or not you agree, consider the mindset of most lazy, a/c dependent Tampa Bay residents. Most haven't even prepared for a hurricane yet, much less a trip to downtown St. Pete.

If I lived in Tampa (used to), the idea of driving to I-175, exiting the interstate, turning left and parking for free at the Trop, is a lot easier "on the mind" than, driving to downtown St. Pete, circling the downtown "one way grid" while guys in orange vests yell at us to park here for 10 bucks, and then walking 5-10 blocks, regardless of the weather, only to repeat the process, with 5-8k other cars after the game, remembering where you parked after a few beers and where the on ramp was. Average Joe that doesn't read these blogs agree, I assure you. Ask them. I have.

[get-smart]

10:05 Post:

Silverman does get it. This whole exercise is about pumping the team value and then dumping it on a new buyer. If they can get a separate contract on the parking they will probable keep that contract. That's free money.

When this deal falls through, how long do you think Stu will stay with the team? Who knows, he may have a buyer in waiting right now.

The Yankees right now are shaking down NYC for an additional $350M to complete the project. I do have a word for all of these guys.

So the bottom line can be the Rays have a new new owner. Stu has the concession on the stadium parking. The developers have no interest in the Trop site.

Good Job City Council!

Cheers!

[rick]

Whether it looks nice or not isn't the question :the question is the cost 450 million est.and it always rises up not down.Whos going to pay for it? And also it will be needed to be replaced like all stadiums in 30-40 years.And no matter what they tell us the parking is a joke ,only the few well connected will be getting parking.The parking is a shell game and only wishful thinking.No one likes to park else where to be shuttled to a stadium.

[Sally]

My 8 year old daughter told me earlier it looked like an easy-bake oven. heh

She votes for the Trop.

[Aaron]

Last Fri was a hot day. I remember being outside running around and sweating my A-- off. well that night me and some family members decided to go to fresscos on the water during first fri. We arrived at 8:00 p.m. and I must say for a person that sweats alot, the night was perfect. The breeze coming from the water was perfect i didnt sweat one bit. To make a long story short. If the Rays was to play at 7:00 p.m. in the new downtown stadium, the myth of it being to hot is just that, a myth. The winds coming off the bay will cool you down. I know people in Atlanta, Texas, and even Chicago for that matter wish they had a natural AC like the Bay. Go rays Build the Damn staduim

[Just Slapped]

Just remember when big bucks are involved your going to get pumped. It's all a tax payer scam......

[Paul]

So for all of us weather battled people who live in Florida, I agree, we may be able to handle an outdoor event here and there.

However, its Silverman himself who was telling the TDC just yesterday that the new stadium will draw additional thousands from out of state, including those fans from other teams who find it more cost effective to come down to St Pete to see their team play against the Rays.

I have family and friends from up north who come to visit me here in St Pete. If they're here during the hot/warm time of year, they can't take the heat and humidity for very long. I think Silverman has it backwards. The fans from other teams will fly down here, sit outside and get a dose of heat and humidity and think twice about coming back.

[Joseph]

Edward - go to this link and click on the upper right photo. That is the view you say will be "horrid." Looks pretty fantastic to me.

http://www.majorleaguedowntown.com/VideoImages.aspx

[Nancy]

Just another example of the fat cats wasting taxpayers money. There is nothing wrong with the existing statdium! We have poured thousands of dollars into Tropicana, only to tear it down?? Please, there other more worthy causes for our tax dollars. Those of you who don't live in Pinellas County who think it's such a great idea, aren't paying for it, only enjoying the benefits.

[Ray F]

and Nancy,

Those of us who do live in Pinellas county get all the credit for having such a state of the art facility.

I don't charge my friends to come watch my t.v. when they didn't pay for it. When they tell me they had a great time at my house watching a game on my HD tv I feel privaledged to have hosted and made them comfortable at my house.

You don't get it. If you go to Tampa for a Lightning game, do you feel like you're duping the people of Hillsborough because they had to pay for the Times Forum???

Of course not. You think of the experience you had.

Hate it.

[Mandy]

Who payed for this video to be made and, if it was the city, how many taxpayer dollars did it cost?

[Jim]

Beautiful! What a terrific enhancement it will be to this growing city. Let's build it and the tourists will come spend money in St Pete 81 nights each year.

I am very excited about this stadium. St Pete will be showcased throughout the county. We'll host an All Star game!

Go Rays!!!

[Ray F]

Aaron,

Is there a video of what it would look like with the top down???

Preferably with the Rays kicking the you-know-what out of the Red Sux?

[MoveTheDome.com]

I agree with Micah... the dome on the water is an ideal scenario! There is a picture @ movethedome.com.

How about a video of that?

[MoveAwayFromStPete]

Anyone that thinks they should "move the dome" is a simpleton! The dome is 50% of the problem ... the other 50% is the location!

[Misterbrad]

If you ignorant anti-Baseball fans dont want the team here thats fine,don't support it,And do not complain about it.Please just allow the people who love Baseball,support it and enjoy it to get their enjoyment from it.Don't spoil everyones elses fun becouse you could care less.This is America Remember! Everyone should try and get along,and we will all be better of.

[Jon McPhee]

Misterbrad, I like your implicit idea that the giant subsidy should be paid for by only those who, as you put it, "love Baseball,support it and enjoy it to get their enjoyment from it.Don't spoil everyones elses fun becouse you could care less." You go, man -- instead of sending that "seed money" check to Rod Parsley or John Hagee as your prayer to God for prosperity, send it direct to Stu and Mr. Cold. They promise prosperity out of "simple belief," too.

Make sure it's enough to cover your full share of $500 million or $1 billion, or whatever the final number is.

But what you actually want is for the rest of us to "try and get along" by paying out the nose for your preferences. The panhandlers at our major intersections would blush at asking for "freeloading" on this scale. At least their little shabby cardboard signs have more information on them than the scammers in the Rays owners' offices are putting out. God Bless You!

[Rick K]

I want Jon McPhee and his ilk to pay us for NOT pursuing these paired redevelopment deals.

First, I want POWW to come up with $1.2 BILLION to spend on downtown construction between 2009 and 2015.

Then, I want POWW to come up with a plan to put the $1 Billion these paired redevelopment proposals will pump into the local tax coffers over the next three decades.

I want every detail of where POWW is getting that money up front. I want a guarantee that they will pay the money, too.

I want no one who favors redeveloping the Trop or redeveloping Al Lang field to have to pay one penny, either.

When POWW has come up with a plan that does all of the above, we will take their complaints about financing seriously.

These proposals aren't going to COST this region money, they are goint to MAKE us money!

[bud]

I could care less about POWW, but I'm still against this stadium nonsense.

[John McPhee]

I need my morning bran. In case you were not aware, bran is a great source of fibre.
With changing dietary fashions, the current emphasis on low-fat items - witness the vast array of 'light' and fat-reduced products lining supermarket shelves - has given dietary fibre a back seat. Although people may pay less attention to fibre, its health benefits have not vanished. Fibre remains an essential nutrient and a vital part of healthy eating for everyone, including those with diabetes. In fact, soluble forms of plant fibre may help to mute blood sugar swings.

Under the less trendy term 'roughage,' fibre enjoyed great respect among our grandparents, and during the 1970s its image was resurrected by British physician Dennis Burkett, who practised for many years in rural Africa. He attributed the rarity of ailments such as hernias, hemorrhoids, diabetes, diverticulitis (small outpunchings of the large intestine), heart disease and bowel disease in that area to native diets rich in whole grains, seeds, roots, vegetables and nuts. He blamed the high incidence of these disorders in Western countries on a lack of dietary fibre. Burkett's theories were enthusiastically adopted in the 1970s as the 'Bran Hypothesis'.

Many of us may remember the heyday of bran during the late 1970s and early 1980s with massive promotion of bran cereals and granola. Next came the oat bran craze, with oat products in all shapes and sizes flooding the market claiming to lower blood cholesterol and fight heart disease. A 1990's review of many studies examining the link between oats and health concluded that at best, oat cereals may modestly reduce blood cholesterol.

However, after a lull, oat cereals are again making headlines as the American Food and Drug Administration has permitted product labels to carry health claims that oatmeal and oat cereals may reduce the risk of heart disease - as part of a diet low in fat and cholesterol. Although oat bran may be back, most dietary experts caution that no one fibre is better than others. Neither oats nor wheat bran are the whole story. 'A spoonful of oats (or bran) a day' is no cure for many disorders. Most scientists agree that different types of fibre confer different health benefits for everyone, including seniors.

What Exactly is Fibre?
Traditionally, fibre was considered to be an inert part of food, passing undigested from mouth to anus and expelled intact in the stool. This view has been revised and the term 'fibre' now encompasses complex carbohydrates and natural polymers such as cellulose and woody plant lignin, as well as pectin and various gums (guar, arabic, agar, carageen) and psyllium, and many others not yet identified. Far from being inert, different fibres exert different bodily effects. Fibre is often divided into two broad classes: insoluble and soluble forms. Wheat bran, for instance, is an insoluble form that is a good stool-softener but a poor absorber of cholesterol, a function that the soluble form, oat bran, does better.

Insoluble fibre makes stools heavier and speeds their passage through the gut. Like a sponge, it absorbs many times its weight in water, swelling up and helping to eliminate feces and relieve constipation. Wheat bran and whole grains, as well as the skins of many fruits and vegetables, and seeds, are rich sources of insoluble fibre. High-fibre diets have replaced bland, low-residue treatments for bowel problems such as diverticular disease.

Also note that as the outer fibre layer is often removed in food processing by milling, peeling, boiling or extracting, it's wise to eat more unrefined foods to obtain insoluble fibre.

Soluble fibre includes pectin, gums (such as guar), betaglucans, some hemicellulose and other compounds and is found in oats, legumes (peas, kidney beans, lentils), some seeds, brown rice, barley, oats, fruits (such as apples), some green vegetables (such as broccoli) and potatoes. Soluble fibre breaks down as it passes though the digestive tract, forming a gel that traps some substances related to high cholesterol. There is some evidence that soluble fibre may lessen heart disease risks by reducing the absorption of cholesterol into the bloodstream. Studies find that people on high-fibre diets have lower total cholesterol levels and may be less likely to form harmful blood clots than those who consume less soluble fibre. A recent USA report found that, in sufficient amounts, fibre apparently reduced heart disease risks among men who ate more than 25 grams per day, compared to those consuming under 15 grams daily.

Benefit for Those with Diabetes
Soluble fibre in oat bran, legumes (dried beans of all kinds, peas and lentils), and pectin (from fruit, such as apples) and forms in root vegetables (such as carrots) is considered especially helpful for people with either form of diabetes. Soluble fibre may help control blood sugar by delaying gastric (stomach) emptying, retarding the entry of glucose into the bloodstream and lessening the postprandial (post-meal) rise in blood sugar. It may lessen insulin requirements in those with type 1 diabetes. Because fibre slows the digestion of foods, it can help blunt the sudden spikes in blood glucose that may occur after a low-fibre meal. Such blood sugar peaks stimulate the pancreas to pump out more insulin. Some researchers believe that a lifetime of blood glucose spikes could contribute to type 2 diabetes, which typically strikes after the age of 40, and more than doubles the risk of stroke and heart disease. The cholesterol-lowering effect of soluble fibres may also help those with diabetes by reducing heart disease risks.

How Much Fibre?
According to current guidelines, healthy adults should consume at least 26 grams of fibre - ideally 26 to 35 grams daily. The present Canadian fibre intake only averages 4.5 to 11 grams a day. Health Canada suggests increasing this amount by eating more grains and unpeeled (but well-washed) fruit and vegetables. Be sure to include both insoluble fibre and soluble types.
Another plus of a fibre-rich diet is that it provides plenty of vitamins and minerals, but it may be wise to consult a physician before greatly increasing dietary fibre intake and to ensure good nutritional status before making drastic alterations. Initially, eating large quantities of fibre may cause bloating, but this should subside in a few weeks. It is best to increase amounts gradually. Eating 26 grams of fibre daily may seem like a lot but can be obtained by having two fruits at breakfast-time (say a banana and raisins) with whole grain cereal, fruit as between-meal snacks, three to five servings of vegetables daily, and several bread and grain servings.

Note, however, that people with diabetes should watch their fruit intake.

The Benefits of Eating Fibre

Combats constipation
The most undisputed advantage of insoluble fibre is its ability to soften and expand stool volume, speeding up fecal transit and elimination.
Commercial preparations such as agar (Agarol) and psyllium (Metamucil) are effective stool bulkers.

Improves control
Soluble fibre from legumes, barley, oats, some fruit and vegetables can help regulate blood sugar swings and by lowering serum cholesterol, protect against heart disease.

Excess blood fats are possibly reduced by soluble fibres such as pectin, bean and oat gums, and the types in legumes (lentils, chickpeas, navy, pinto or kidney beans).

Heart health
May improve by diets rich in fibre, through its cholesterol lowering effects.

Possible protection against cancer
In the bowel, bacteria converts fibre into short chain fatty acids, which provide energy for the body and may help protect against cancer.

[Jon McPhee]

Hey, Rick "not not a politician," something eating at you?

Hope you learned something through your fiber research -- maybe it will help the apparent constipation, bowel and brain, that seems to afflict you.

Too bad you can't even spell my name right. I guess that goes along with the problems you seem to have with "very revealing" double negatives.

[Tom]

Alright St. Pete! Enough already! Why don't you just come out and say it? You don't support the Rays and you want them to leave! Fine! You can let Tampa take the Rays! That is where the rest of the Tampa Bay teams play! On this side of the bay we support our team! We understand that the Rays CANNOT, I Repeat CANNOT continue to be successful in that horrid DOME! You people know nothing about being a professional city! Once the Rays leave you guys will fall of the face off the National Map! No one will ever hear about you because sports teams put your city on the map and when you guys lose the Rays you will once again live in the shadow of Tampa!

Yeah I said it!

[Xenu]

Xenu gave Tom got all the "dumb" spirits. Xenu feels bad for Tom now. Xenu will ring cowbell for him. All Hail Xenu!!!

[since1962]

Tom
We will STILL welcome the throngs of HILLSBOROUGHS BEACH BOUND locals AND TOURISTS clogging Gulf to Bay
AND MAINTAIN THOSE BEACHES VITAL TO OUR ECONOMY

AND

Provide a REASONABLE solution to this ONE ELEMENT of our OVERALL ECONOMY

AND

WITHOUT giving away our WATERFRONT,"giving" Tropicana or our city parking garage revenue TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

THIS CITY WANTED MLB SO BADLY THAT IT BUILT A STADIUM BEFORE WE HAD A TEAM...

[Tom]

Last Time I checked Al Lang Field was not beach front property and Im sorry but you won't be losing that much! Your county is a freaking peninsula I think you can give up just a little land that is already being used for baseball!!!!

Exactly! You built a stadium to LURE a team to St. Pete! That is it! The Trop is not a long term solution to keeping the team in St. Pete!

People need to understand that Sternburg has done everything he said he was going to do! He has not lied about anything! So why would he now?

If you ppl are worried about the walk to the Stadium... stop being lazy! You don't know how good you have it! Other cities don't have ONSITE parking and the teams and the cities are fine! WIth the waist lines of Americans getting bigger and bigger every year it would not only be a benefit to the city but the people too!

[Don]

Beauty is the eyes of the beholder. It is obvious that some people think that a major leaque baseball stadium is so beautiful that giving up the only waterfront property in the county 'available' for such a park is a small price. I am not one of them. I am thankful that in St. Petersburg waterfront property can not be leased long term with the support of the voters.