Braves ditching The Ted for suburbs

Who owns the area around Turner Field? Why couldn't the Braves have developed it themselves? Why wasn't that thought of when the stadium was built, as it was in Cleveland and other places?

 

It always amazes me the areas of even Gwinnett County that really were quite rural even in the mid-90s when I lived there and that are just swarmed with people now. Up where they built the Mall of Georgia, there was absolutely f-all. Now there's a high school in Hoschton -- HOSCHTON -- that has 3700 students.

You know they opened one in Turner this year?

 

The city of Atlanta, which has shown no interest in developing the land around the stadium.

 

They put a Texadelphia in the Triple-A ballpark at Round Rock five years ago and it was awesome.

 

It's not that they're "too big," per se. It's that they grew almost completely dependent on the automobile as the primary means of transportation, and grew out instead of up, or at least some combo of the two. Some of the cities you mentioned are adding mass transit options, but they are woeful compared with more established cities such as Chicago, New York, Boston or Philadelphia.

 

According to the Marietta Daily Journal article, B.F. Saul Company of Maryland.

 

Better call Saul.

 

Atlanta tells the Braves to fuck off:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9965245/turner-field-demolished-atlanta-braves-leave-new-stadium-2017-mayor-says

 

I asked because given the proximity to the two interstates that the land could not be developed for something more than a baseball park. The problem with using ballparks as anchors is that a baseball stadium is only used 81 days a year. Given that the football stadium is domed and I don't see many other events going in to the baseball stadium. So it is hard for surrounding businesses who are relying on the baseball fans to make their rent. Let's use a Waffle House as an example. On game nights you would need a huge facility becasue you would be swamped. But you could fire cannons off on any other night in the dining room.

I have been following the Sacramento Kings saga. The financial numbers keep shifting but originally the deal was that the city would pay 225M and the owners 150M. But the city is throwing in some parking lots and vacant land that could be redeveloped. Basically the city is giving the ownership group land to defray their cost. I was wondering if the same thing was going on in Cobb County.

From afar I think the move is economic madness. I think that the land would have been eventually developed and go on the tax base while the baseball stadium will not. Cobb County is evidently the most affluent county in Atlanta metro and the schools have a good reputation but cuts are being made to education I think that Cobb County would be wider investing in the schools. How many of us on this board pay extra for a house in a good district? How many of us buy a house to be close to a baseball stadium? And this board is generally a self selected group of rabid sports fans. not the general population.

 

Can't dispute your overall point Lancey, but Waffle House is probably a bad example. Waffle House with proximity to an interstate in Georgia = license to print money.

 

Who approved this move from a government standpoint? Who in Cobb County agreed to this? Whoever that is must have a good reason, and hopefully beyond simply having the team there for ego's sake.

 

Turns out Michael's "sweeping generalizations" were pretty spot-on:

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/12/cobb-gop-chairman-concerned-about-those-people-com/