Kori Ellis
08-08-2006, 10:49 PM
Spurs balk at coliseum proposals
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/stories/MYSA080906.1H.SS.ColiseumRoundup.e994c0.html
Web Posted: 08/08/2006 07:00 PM CDT
Michelle Mondo
Express-News Staff Writer
The Spurs will not support either of the two Bexar County Arena Master Plans for Freeman Coliseum as presented in a series of public meetings.
Moreover, a San Antonio Stock Show & Rodeo official said fine-tuning of either plan is a must.
"The Spurs won't be endorsing either of these two plans," said Leo Gomez, vice president of external affairs for the Spurs. "We hope other options become available."
That statement came at the public meeting for Precinct 3, which was held July 26 at Shavano Park City Hall.
Gomez said in a later interview after the meeting that "neither of these are the ultimate answer."
The two plans proposed by the Bexar County Commissioners Court focus either on the renovation of the coliseum or demolition of the building except for its facade. Plan A, at a cost of about $130 million, would renovate the coliseum and build a new, 204,800-square-foot exhibit hall. Plan B, at a cost of approximately $143 million, would tear down the coliseum and build a new, 214,400-square-foot exhibit hall closer to the AT&T Center, where the Spurs and the stock show/rodeo are tenants.
Keith Martin, executive director and chief executive officer of the San Antonio Stock Show & Rodeo, said he supports development of the area and said the plans are a good start but need more work before construction begins. However, he said the organization has not taken a stand on whether the coliseum should stay or go.
Martin also said community input is crucial in the decision-making process.
"I think there is a lot left in each plan to do to make it work," he said. "What I understood was happening now is they're taking these ideas to the public to see what the public's feeling was. Remodel the coliseum or take it all down and put in a whole new exhibition hall?"
For Gomez, the exhibit hall is not located close enough to the AT&T Center in either plan.
"I'm encouraged by the court's action in looking for plans to redevelop the property," Gomez said. "We think these two plans have come a long way in coming up with the answer. We just don't think it's the ultimate answer yet."
Henry Muņoz III and his associates at KellMuņoz Architects worked on the plans and have presented the information at all of the public meetings. Those presentations offered pros and cons.
The pros of Plan A include a lower first-time cost for the renovation and the area keeping a building some call "iconic." Cons of the plan include more expensive maintenance in the future and the lack of a close connection between the exhibit hall and the AT&T Center.
Plan B pros include a new structure built adjacent to the AT&T Center and a better flow of pedestrian traffic. The cons include a more expensive first-time cost and, of course, the razing of the coliseum.
As for the public, plenty of residents spoke out against tearing down the coliseum at the Precinct 4 meeting held July 31. Nearly 80 people packed the Claude Black Center to see the presentation by Muņoz and listen to comments from County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson and District 2 City Councilwoman Sheila McNeil.
Adkisson said more than once he supports keeping the coliseum.
"When we promoted the AT&T Center, we told people then we would not tear down the coliseum, and I'm duty-bound to keep that promise," Adkisson said to applause at the July 31 meeting.
Either way, the plans need to consider the entire site and the city property next to the coliseum, like the Willow Springs Golf Course area, McNeil said in her opening statement.
"We need to look at the most usable opportunity for this property," she said. "How will these projects connect?"
When residents had their chance to speak, they definitely were opinionated.
Tommy Calvert Jr. read a statement on behalf of the Neighborhood First Alliance, pressing the county to consider local businesses and the infrastructure that currently steers traffic out of the neighborhood and away from side streets.
"The community, businesses, have to have more input," Calvert said.
He also talked about what he termed the unfair monopoly of allowing one or two sports franchises to dominate the market.
Resident Linda Tippins told the crowd that the master plan should include input from citizens.
"Whatever comes over here for the East Side, residents are a part of the whole scenario," she said.
Requests to keep the coliseum and make sure the community gets a slice of the financial pie were met with applause.
That same sentiment was expressed during the Precinct 3 public meeting. It had a turnout of less than 20 people, but they were just as vocal.
That group also held strong opinions. Most who spoke didn't agree with the more expensive option of tearing down the coliseum, and some said no development should be done without knowing exactly where the county is getting funds.
"Who's paying for it and who's getting the money out of it?" asked resident Ron Van Kirk.
Jody Williams, a representative from the San Antonio Conservation Society, read a statement condemning any plans that would call for tearing down the coliseum. The group believes the building is a piece of history that should be preserved, not razed.
For others, the situation was purely practical.
Bruce Schneider, executive director of pupil personnel services for North East Independent School District, spoke at the Precinct 3 and 4 meetings. He said the district is concerned that without the coliseum, the graduation cycle will last too long.
"If we don't have the coliseum, that means nine schools need to go to the Alamodome, and that puts us into two weeks," Schneider said. "No one wants to wait that long to graduate from high school."
In the end, Precinct 3 County Commissioner Lyle Larson said the whole point was to get community feedback. Larson said even the commissioners themselves couldn't fully agree. He said some want the exhibit space to be used for consumer shows, while he wants to focus on equine events and competitions.
Without enough money, nothing will happen, he added.
"We're struggling with financing and looking at additional avenues," Larson said. "One option is to take it back to the voters."
David Marquez, director of economic development and special programs for the county, also was present at all five public meetings.
At the Precinct 2 meeting, Marquez said residents questioned whether the new exhibit space could be used for evacuations in emergencies, which is something that had not been discussed at other meetings.
Another tidbit to consider, the residents said, is the park and ride facilities and whether there should be more public transportation to the area.
Marquez said the comments will be compiled and presented to the court, but maybe not for another six to eight weeks. He said once the commissioners court votes on the plan, they then will have the task of putting that plan into action.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/stories/MYSA080906.1H.SS.ColiseumRoundup.e994c0.html
Web Posted: 08/08/2006 07:00 PM CDT
Michelle Mondo
Express-News Staff Writer
The Spurs will not support either of the two Bexar County Arena Master Plans for Freeman Coliseum as presented in a series of public meetings.
Moreover, a San Antonio Stock Show & Rodeo official said fine-tuning of either plan is a must.
"The Spurs won't be endorsing either of these two plans," said Leo Gomez, vice president of external affairs for the Spurs. "We hope other options become available."
That statement came at the public meeting for Precinct 3, which was held July 26 at Shavano Park City Hall.
Gomez said in a later interview after the meeting that "neither of these are the ultimate answer."
The two plans proposed by the Bexar County Commissioners Court focus either on the renovation of the coliseum or demolition of the building except for its facade. Plan A, at a cost of about $130 million, would renovate the coliseum and build a new, 204,800-square-foot exhibit hall. Plan B, at a cost of approximately $143 million, would tear down the coliseum and build a new, 214,400-square-foot exhibit hall closer to the AT&T Center, where the Spurs and the stock show/rodeo are tenants.
Keith Martin, executive director and chief executive officer of the San Antonio Stock Show & Rodeo, said he supports development of the area and said the plans are a good start but need more work before construction begins. However, he said the organization has not taken a stand on whether the coliseum should stay or go.
Martin also said community input is crucial in the decision-making process.
"I think there is a lot left in each plan to do to make it work," he said. "What I understood was happening now is they're taking these ideas to the public to see what the public's feeling was. Remodel the coliseum or take it all down and put in a whole new exhibition hall?"
For Gomez, the exhibit hall is not located close enough to the AT&T Center in either plan.
"I'm encouraged by the court's action in looking for plans to redevelop the property," Gomez said. "We think these two plans have come a long way in coming up with the answer. We just don't think it's the ultimate answer yet."
Henry Muņoz III and his associates at KellMuņoz Architects worked on the plans and have presented the information at all of the public meetings. Those presentations offered pros and cons.
The pros of Plan A include a lower first-time cost for the renovation and the area keeping a building some call "iconic." Cons of the plan include more expensive maintenance in the future and the lack of a close connection between the exhibit hall and the AT&T Center.
Plan B pros include a new structure built adjacent to the AT&T Center and a better flow of pedestrian traffic. The cons include a more expensive first-time cost and, of course, the razing of the coliseum.
As for the public, plenty of residents spoke out against tearing down the coliseum at the Precinct 4 meeting held July 31. Nearly 80 people packed the Claude Black Center to see the presentation by Muņoz and listen to comments from County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson and District 2 City Councilwoman Sheila McNeil.
Adkisson said more than once he supports keeping the coliseum.
"When we promoted the AT&T Center, we told people then we would not tear down the coliseum, and I'm duty-bound to keep that promise," Adkisson said to applause at the July 31 meeting.
Either way, the plans need to consider the entire site and the city property next to the coliseum, like the Willow Springs Golf Course area, McNeil said in her opening statement.
"We need to look at the most usable opportunity for this property," she said. "How will these projects connect?"
When residents had their chance to speak, they definitely were opinionated.
Tommy Calvert Jr. read a statement on behalf of the Neighborhood First Alliance, pressing the county to consider local businesses and the infrastructure that currently steers traffic out of the neighborhood and away from side streets.
"The community, businesses, have to have more input," Calvert said.
He also talked about what he termed the unfair monopoly of allowing one or two sports franchises to dominate the market.
Resident Linda Tippins told the crowd that the master plan should include input from citizens.
"Whatever comes over here for the East Side, residents are a part of the whole scenario," she said.
Requests to keep the coliseum and make sure the community gets a slice of the financial pie were met with applause.
That same sentiment was expressed during the Precinct 3 public meeting. It had a turnout of less than 20 people, but they were just as vocal.
That group also held strong opinions. Most who spoke didn't agree with the more expensive option of tearing down the coliseum, and some said no development should be done without knowing exactly where the county is getting funds.
"Who's paying for it and who's getting the money out of it?" asked resident Ron Van Kirk.
Jody Williams, a representative from the San Antonio Conservation Society, read a statement condemning any plans that would call for tearing down the coliseum. The group believes the building is a piece of history that should be preserved, not razed.
For others, the situation was purely practical.
Bruce Schneider, executive director of pupil personnel services for North East Independent School District, spoke at the Precinct 3 and 4 meetings. He said the district is concerned that without the coliseum, the graduation cycle will last too long.
"If we don't have the coliseum, that means nine schools need to go to the Alamodome, and that puts us into two weeks," Schneider said. "No one wants to wait that long to graduate from high school."
In the end, Precinct 3 County Commissioner Lyle Larson said the whole point was to get community feedback. Larson said even the commissioners themselves couldn't fully agree. He said some want the exhibit space to be used for consumer shows, while he wants to focus on equine events and competitions.
Without enough money, nothing will happen, he added.
"We're struggling with financing and looking at additional avenues," Larson said. "One option is to take it back to the voters."
David Marquez, director of economic development and special programs for the county, also was present at all five public meetings.
At the Precinct 2 meeting, Marquez said residents questioned whether the new exhibit space could be used for evacuations in emergencies, which is something that had not been discussed at other meetings.
Another tidbit to consider, the residents said, is the park and ride facilities and whether there should be more public transportation to the area.
Marquez said the comments will be compiled and presented to the court, but maybe not for another six to eight weeks. He said once the commissioners court votes on the plan, they then will have the task of putting that plan into action.