Stadium Discussion

Where Do You Want The Stadium?

  • Manhattan

    Votes: 54 16.7%
  • Queens

    Votes: 99 30.6%
  • Brooklyn

    Votes: 19 5.9%
  • Staten Island

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Westchester

    Votes: 18 5.6%
  • The Bronx

    Votes: 113 34.9%
  • Long Island

    Votes: 6 1.9%
  • Dual-Boroughs

    Votes: 3 0.9%
  • Etihad Island

    Votes: 5 1.5%

  • Total voters
    324
One question I have about all this involves the open parking lots on the river between the roads right off Exit 6. These seem to be a great spot for developing nice public space for the community to access and enjoy the river. The area directly to the south is the Children's Museum and some park space. This could be an extension of that park.

Was this addressed in the meeting? I note that the space is marked in yellow on the picture below, but it's not clear what that designates.

The other issue is getting access to that space from the other side of the Degan and the Metro North tracks. Given that both the 153rd St ramp and the Metro North Overpass will likely need moving or adjusting to fit the Stadium, there should be ample opportunity to upgrade to something that allows pedestrians to cross the tracks on both sides of the Stadium.

index.php

View attachment 10440
Hmm in urban planning, yellow typically means residential.
 
How would we all feel if they announce a stadium that is not in New York City proper, but because it will be 2050 and instant matter teleportation will exist, you can get to the stadium via portals at all major transportation hubs?

1572621954359.gif
 
How would we all feel if they announce a stadium that is not in New York City proper, but because it will be 2050 and instant matter teleportation will exist, you can get to the stadium via portals at all major transportation hubs?

View attachment 10442
People will take it more positively if you remind them that people wearing red shirts never survive those trips.
 
How would we all feel if they announce a stadium that is not in New York City proper, but because it will be 2050 and instant matter teleportation will exist, you can get to the stadium via portals at all major transportation hubs?

View attachment 10442

People would hate it cause it would increase matter stream congestion in sub-space. Who wants to deal with that on game day? Not me.
 
One question I have about all this involves the open parking lots on the river between the roads right off Exit 6. These seem to be a great spot for developing nice public space for the community to access and enjoy the river. The area directly to the south is the Children's Museum and some park space. This could be an extension of that park.

Was this addressed in the meeting? I note that the space is marked in yellow on the picture below, but it's not clear what that designates.

The other issue is getting access to that space from the other side of the Degan and the Metro North tracks. Given that both the 153rd St ramp and the Metro North Overpass will likely need moving or adjusting to fit the Stadium, there should be ample opportunity to upgrade to something that allows pedestrians to cross the tracks on both sides of the Stadium.

index.php

View attachment 10440
Apparently a walking bridge is a big push for the community board from what I’ve read.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert and JayH
People will take it more positively if you remind them that people wearing red shirts never survive those trips.
Redshirts. Great read.
 
One question I have about all this involves the open parking lots on the river between the roads right off Exit 6. These seem to be a great spot for developing nice public space for the community to access and enjoy the river. The area directly to the south is the Children's Museum and some park space. This could be an extension of that park.

Was this addressed in the meeting? I note that the space is marked in yellow on the picture below, but it's not clear what that designates.

The other issue is getting access to that space from the other side of the Degan and the Metro North tracks. Given that both the 153rd St ramp and the Metro North Overpass will likely need moving or adjusting to fit the Stadium, there should be ample opportunity to upgrade to something that allows pedestrians to cross the tracks on both sides of the Stadium.

index.php

View attachment 10440
So the area in the image that is yellow, they have identified that as a potential "anchor development", but don't have anything specific tied to it. My understanding of an anchor development, is it's something that on it's own, should attract individuals. The other yellow one at the bottom is an anchor development, and that is the Hip Hop Museum.

Regards to just below that, they are looking for an extension to the park.
 
How would we all feel if they announce a stadium that is not in New York City proper, but because it will be 2050 and instant matter teleportation will exist, you can get to the stadium via portals at all major transportation hubs?

View attachment 10442

there’s a reason Bones hates the transporter. The doctor understands what it really is. Hard pass for me. But I’ll take a shuttlecraft.
 
Where are the anti-trust laws when you need them?
Intellectual property has a general exemption to antitrust, because the whole point of IP is to create a monopoly over the sale and distribution of inventions, creative works, etc. So the Yankees can probably do whatever they want to restrict the sale of goods with the Yankee logo and other trademark-protected stuff. I don't think it makes a difference that they do it at the behest of Nike.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert and sundance
Intellectual property has a general exemption to antitrust, because the whole point of IP is to create a monopoly over the sale and distribution of inventions, creative works, etc. So the Yankees can probably do whatever they want to restrict the sale of goods with the Yankee logo and other trademark-protected stuff. I don't think it makes a difference that they do it at the behest of Nike.
I don't think this is really an IP issue - they aren't refusing to license the logo or apparel. They are limiting the sale of a good to certain retail outlets and not others for what appear to be anti-competitive reasons.
 
I don't think this is really an IP issue - they aren't refusing to license the logo or apparel. They are limiting the sale of a good to certain retail outlets and not others for what appear to be anti-competitive reasons.
Isn’t that all distribution networks?
 
I don't think this is really an IP issue - they aren't refusing to license the logo or apparel. They are limiting the sale of a good to certain retail outlets and not others for what appear to be anti-competitive reasons.
IP is inherently anti-competitive. Geographic restrictions are part of IP rights and you can restrict not just manufacturing but where things are sold. Some academic types are arguing that IP should be narrowed from its traditional scope but they're not getting much traction.
 
Could a school be an anchor property?
You mean like a soccer academy?

Typically an anchor property is an entity that will be a focal point of the development in the largest space providing the biggest rent opportunity to the owners while also being a draw for smaller businesses to congregate around. Like Wegmans, Bestbuy, or Home Depot, or for smaller blocks a Duane Reade.

A regular Dept of Ed school may be since doing so probably give a ton of tax breaks to the development as an offset to no leased revenue, or a private school would pay the lease, so a hypothetical soccer academy possibly could also, but we know that the money paid in will 100% be more sports washing/laundering.