BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
the 9 acre vegas strip site wasn't even the original plan for vegas. the original plan was 50 acres and a surrounding entertainment district just like fisher wanted in oakland, first at the red rocks casino site and then the rio. they were told to f*** off by both. that's why they had to settle for the measly 9 acre site on the strip. oakland obviously isn't vegas in terms of entertainment, but a 9 acre ballpark in oakland would've meant a good chunk of land to build any entertainment/shopping district. but like i said, oakland was never an option for the A's or MLB
it absolutely is settling when you were originally wanting 50 acres AND for the public to pay for everything. instead, he's left with a 9 acre site and having to foot the bill for hundreds of millions of dollars
He was wanting 50 acres when the plan was not to be on The Strip. Once the prospect on land in the middle of The Strip became an option the size can drop since he no longer needs to build an entertainment district with it.
Also, you are wrong on both counts. He wasnt told to go screw by the Red Rock site or the Rio site. The A's chose not to build there. The Red Rock offer was for the open land behind the casino/mall and next to the current Aviators stadium, the offer was made by the land owners (The Howard Hughes Corp, not Red Rock Casino). The Rio land was offered to the A's for $1, it was the A's that said no.
Firm offers free land if Oakland A’s relocate to Summerlin
The Howard Hughes Corp. — which owns the A’s Triple-A affiliate, the Las Vegas Aviators, and their home, the Las Vegas Ballpark — says it is willing to provide the Major League Ba...
www.reviewjournal.com
A’s turned down $1 plot in resort corridor before settling on site for $1.5B Vegas stadium - The Nevada Independent
The Oakland A's sought $500 million in public financing for a new stadium near the Strip, while an alternative site was available for just $1.
thenevadaindependent.com