MLB has told the brewers that they need to make stadium repairs

[brooks_quichenick]

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/82977/prospectus-feature-will-mlbs-stadium-renovation-tour-ever-leave-space-for-expansion/

Some good analysis related to this, with quotes about Manfred's trip to Milwaukee and his/MLB's comments.

[Jopal78]

The funny thing is , the stadium cost 391 million to build, even using inflation per the Dept of Labor website they comes out to 570 million dollars. 
 

The study the Brewers had done and MLB apparently is relying calls for some 480 million dollars in repairs.

Wouldnt they simply be better off asking for a new facility than sticking that amount of money to repair one that is 20-25 years old. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

40 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

The funny thing is , the stadium cost 391 million to build, even using inflation per the Dept of Labor website they comes out to 570 million dollars. 
 

The study the Brewers had done and MLB apparently is relying calls for some 480 million dollars in repairs.

Wouldnt they simply be better off asking for a new facility than sticking that amount of money to repair one that is 20-25 years old. 

The problem is the inflation figure the Dept of Labor (along with most other gov't agencies) dramatically underestimates how much more things cost to build now compared to years ago just based on the rates/figures they use to calculate general cost estimates.

Had the Brewers built the existing Amfam Field now compared to ~25 years ago, the price tag would be much closer if not well over $1B, The Braves' newer digs cost roughly $800M to build and it doesn't have a retractable roof.  I believe the Rangers' new stadium that does have a roof (which looks awful aesthetically) cost 1.1B.  While not exactly accurate, the average construction labor rate for TX/GA hovers around $15/hr, while WI's is roughly $20/hr - those rates tend to scale accordingly for skilled labor/operator charges as well.  Basically add 20% to the bills on the Braves and Rangers ballpark to get the cost range for a brand new Brewers stadium right about now...and I doubt that even covers the cost of demo-ing the existing stadium.

Given the limitations both the Brewers and the public entity who owns the Stadium and property it's on have at the moment, the only thing that makes sense is to sort out an agreement to renovate the existing structure.  I think what ultimately needs to happen is the Brewers wind up purchasing the land the stadium sits on and then privately financing a new ballpark/entertainment district...as much as I like what Mark A. has brought to the Brewers as their owner, he and the current ownership group don't have deep enough pockets to make that happen in the near future.

 

[MrTPlush]

On 5/25/2023 at 9:29 AM, homer said:

They are trying. Need Brewers to sign off.

https://www.fox6now.com/news/beer-district-american-family-field-entertainment-district

Sounds like the county just wants to open the door to make it feasible from a zoning standpoint....I don't see anywhere where someone was running to put money up to help build it. Which is....kind of necessary.

The problem with this theory is the fact the location sucks. AmFam is the entire areas personality. It would make more sense if the casino and something like the HD museum were right next to AmFam. It would need other year-round attractions around it. I don't mind where the stadium is, but good luck finding a billion-dollar stadium district feasible. I am sure there are endless better locations to invest that kind of money location wise. 

As far as Mnafred's comments, he is saying them purely because he knows there is a stadium situation with the lease agreement. All he is doing is vouching for the Brewers and trying to put some pressure on the district/state. Just basic negotiation type garbage. They aren't going to get a dollar if they just shrug their shoulder and say, "I don't know, just send us what you want."

[Fear The Chorizo]

59 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

Sounds like the county just wants to open the door to make it feasible from a zoning standpoint....I don't see anywhere where someone was running to put money up to help build it. Which is....kind of necessary.

The problem with this theory is the fact the location sucks. AmFam is the entire areas personality. It would make more sense if the casino and something like the HD museum were right next to AmFam. It would need other year-round attractions around it. I don't mind where the stadium is, but good luck finding a billion-dollar stadium district feasible. I am sure there are endless better locations to invest that kind of money location wise. 

As far as Mnafred's comments, he is saying them purely because he knows there is a stadium situation with the lease agreement. All he is doing is vouching for the Brewers and trying to put some pressure on the district/state. Just basic negotiation type garbage. They aren't going to get a dollar if they just shrug their shoulder and say, "I don't know, just send us what you want."

The only reason the Bucks have the deer district is because there was ample real estate readily available after they tore down an unused highway that occupied the space.

I disagree that the location sucks - the current property use predominantly as paved parking could be repurposed in a way that maintains parking capacity and tailgaiting options....probably by preserving the eastern lots and lots north of I-94 for tailgaiting as-is, and then converting the lots immediately northwest of the stadium into more of a mixed commercial/parking area with a multi-level parking structure and restaurants/shops.  60+ acres of that area can fit much more interesting and revenue-generating stuff than ground surface parking lots.  It would take the Brewers owning that land outright in order for that to happen, though.

[homer]

The idea of developing the land around Am Fam is not new. Interesting article about that:

https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2022/06/08/murphys-law-about-that-brewers-entertainment-district/

Almost none of the ideas have come from the Brewers though they did float a "what-if" to the city back in 2011/12:

Quote

It was sometime after this that Mayor Tom Barrett and then chief of staff Patrick Curley were asked to meet with Brewers officials, as Curley recalls: “There was a discussion about the Brewers building a hotel and a theme park, they floated a ‘what if’ scenario.”

Barrett wasn’t clear what the Brewers were asking for, but explained the city couldn’t help financially, Curley recalls, because it didn’t create TIF (tax incremental financing) districts for hotels, and there would be no way to repay the TIF since the Brewers’ land was exempt from property taxes

 

[jerichoholicninja]

I must be wrong but I thought the Brewers bought some of the property around the parking lots about a decade ago and were going to develop it.

[MrTPlush]

11 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

The only reason the Bucks have the deer district is because there was ample real estate readily available after they tore down an unused highway that occupied the space.

I disagree that the location sucks - the current property use predominantly as paved parking could be repurposed in a way that maintains parking capacity and tailgaiting options....probably by preserving the eastern lots and lots north of I-94 for tailgaiting as-is, and then converting the lots immediately northwest of the stadium into more of a mixed commercial/parking area with a multi-level parking structure and restaurants/shops.  60+ acres of that area can fit much more interesting and revenue-generating stuff than ground surface parking lots.  It would take the Brewers owning that land outright in order for that to happen, though.

And who is going to develop that? Who wants to develop in an area that is dead 50% of the year? There is some residential around it, sure, but it isn’t very wealthy. I wouldn’t call it ghetto…but it isn’t super affluent either that is going to grasp some fancy/trendy district either.

I can’t see the Brewers investing hundreds of millions into a project that is dead half the year.

[homer]

10 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

And who is going to develop that? Who wants to develop in an area that is dead 50% of the year? There is some residential around it, sure, but it isn’t very wealthy. I wouldn’t call it ghetto…but it isn’t super affluent either that is going to grasp some fancy/trendy district either.

I can’t see the Brewers investing hundreds of millions into a project that is dead half the year.

I think the idea is to develop the land so it is used year round. Titletown is a mix of hotels, offices, bars, restaurants, and residential (with a football field in the middle). 

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, homer said:

I think the idea is to develop the land so it is used year round. Titletown is a mix of hotels, offices, bars, restaurants, and residential (with a football field in the middle). 

We’ll see how Titletown District does post Aaron Rodgers. To have an entertainment district you need a successful team to generate interest; if the Packers regularly get their head kicked in the desire for those $300 a night hotel rooms with a two night minimum is gonna disappear pretty quick.  
 

likewise, if the Brewers go back to winning only 70+ games a year, history shows they will likely only be drawing about 14,000 fans a night and there will be zero interest in an entertainment District

[homer]

2 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

We’ll see how Titletown District does post Aaron Rodgers. To have an entertainment district you need a successful team to generate interest; if the Packers regularly get their head kicked in the desire for those $300 a night hotel rooms with a two night minimum is gonna disappear pretty quick.  
 

likewise, if the Brewers win and 70+ games a year the only be dry in about 14,000 fans tonight and they will be zero interested in entertainment District

The whole point is to make it a year-round destination. Titletown has something like 150 apartments and 50 townhomes. Those aren't going empty if the Packers start losing.

Quote

Ed Policy, Packers chief operating officer, said the residences are a new kind of product for the market and the Packers want to discourage speculators.  

"This wasn’t designed for a few people to buy them and come in and make money off them. This was designed to bring a new, year-round, vibrant neighborhood to our community," Policy said. "We will not have done a very good job of planning if there is an immediate secondary market for flipping these."

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

13 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

And who is going to develop that? Who wants to develop in an area that is dead 50% of the year? There is some residential around it, sure, but it isn’t very wealthy. I wouldn’t call it ghetto…but it isn’t super affluent either that is going to grasp some fancy/trendy district either.

I can’t see the Brewers investing hundreds of millions into a project that is dead half the year.

Fancy/trendy districts tend to get their start from being development armpits, so there would be plenty of demand for mixed residential/commercial space there if it was done right - and the reason it's dead half the year right now is because it isn't developed at all.  Put something there that is a good supplement to the main draw in Brewers games and offseason concerts/events that visitors and residents want to use/spend money at and the outlying hotel/new residential/commercial developments hunt for nearby lots in short order.

The biggest limitation to building further out beyond the property the stadium and existing parking lots sit on is the large cemetery complex to the west - but there is plent of land that's already part of the stadium/lot area to develop something as a desireable standalone district no matter what's around it.  The Lambeau/Titletown district area totals about 100-125 acres in size - by comparison, the Amfam stadium parking lots total closer to 200 acres.  

I do agree the Brewers won't (and frankly can't) invest hundreds of millions of dollars to develop land they don't own - but I think they would if the Brewers do own it...wondering what (if any) mechanisms there may be for the state/gov't to donate that land to the Brewers as part of an agreement for it to be added to the property tax base and for the Brewers to to develop it as they see fit privately (significant stadium repairs/build a new stadium/mixed use entertainment district/etc).  

[Jopal78]

2 hours ago, homer said:

The whole point is to make it a year-round destination. Titletown has something like 150 apartments and 50 townhomes. Those aren't going empty if the Packers start losing.

 

I can’t tell you for sure, but I’d bet most those condos and townhomes are used as rentals or Air BnB. It’s not as though Green Bay is a bursting metropolis with a shortage of housing stock. 

[homer]

11 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

I can’t tell you for sure, but I’d bet most those condos and townhomes are used as rentals or Air BnB. It’s not as though Green Bay is a bursting metropolis with a shortage of housing stock. 

From post above:

3 hours ago, homer said:

"This wasn’t designed for a few people to buy them and come in and make money off them. This was designed to bring a new, year-round, vibrant neighborhood to our community," Policy said. "We will not have done a very good job of planning if there is an immediate secondary market for flipping these."

They can't be leased for less than a month at a time.

[Jopal78]

8 minutes ago, homer said:

From post above:

They can't be leased for less than a month at a time.

No, For example: ACME Co., bought a condo, nobody lives there permanently. ACME Co., then rents out the condo they own on Air BnB for the 8-9 weeks during football season.
 

The rent money for those 8-9 weeks exceeds the cost of the mortgage payment (assuming there is one) and as long as demand stays up for accommodations near Lambeau they’ve got a nice little money maker. 

It’s not as though folks at the paper mill or Bellin Health are relocating to Titletown en masse. 

[homer]

21 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

No, For example: ACME Co., bought a condo, nobody lives there permanently. ACME Co., then rents out the condo they own on Air BnB for the 8-9 weeks during football season.
 

The rent money for those 8-9 weeks exceeds the cost of the mortgage payment (assuming there is one) and as long as demand stays up for accommodations near Lambeau they’ve got a nice little money maker. 

It’s not as though folks at the paper mill or Bellin Health are relocating to Titletown en masse. 

"You will not be able to lease these out for less than 31 days. You can do a month-long lease, but you can’t do a ... weekend lease," he said.

Some homeowners might treat them like their cabin up north, using them only on weekends, but Policy expects many to be living there year-round."

https://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/story/news/2019/12/12/packers-titletown-district-prices-set-townhouses-expect-first-occupancy/4354799002/

There are currently no Air BnB listings for any of the Titletown apartments or townhomes for the game against New Orleans on Sept 24th. Ed Policy states quite clearly in that article they want it to be a year-round destination. The next phase is more entertainment (bars, restaurants, etc.). They know that won't work if the place is empty in the summer.

 

[Axman59]

Quote

Prices range from just under $700,000 for some on the south side of Brookwood Drive, to $1.2 million on the ends of the clusters adjacent to the Titletown District playgrounds and football field.

Who is buying these if they can't use them for revenue generating rental properties? I'd be shocked if Green Bay has the kind of residents who will pony up $700,000 to $1.2 mil for a condo.

But I wish them luck...

[Jopal78]

3 hours ago, homer said:

"You will not be able to lease these out for less than 31 days. You can do a month-long lease, but you can’t do a ... weekend lease," he said.

Some homeowners might treat them like their cabin up north, using them only on weekends, but Policy expects many to be living there year-round."

https://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/story/news/2019/12/12/packers-titletown-district-prices-set-townhouses-expect-first-occupancy/4354799002/

There are currently no Air BnB listings for any of the Titletown apartments or townhomes for the game against New Orleans on Sept 24th. Ed Policy states quite clearly in that article they want it to be a year-round destination. The next phase is more entertainment (bars, restaurants, etc.). They know that won't work if the place is empty in the summer.

 

It is already a ghost town around there in the offseason outside of Hinterland, 

All I’m saying is the interest/financial viability in those districts is directly tied to the fortunes of the team that bring them in.

If they sell some suckers condos when the team is winning, the Packers already got their money. They don’t really care, or have a say, what the people do after the sale.

To the extent people live there year round, they are even less likely than tourists to pour their money into the jacked up prices at the neighborhood spots as opposed to the old stalwarts Los Banditos, Kroll’s and Merricks.  

[torts]

On 5/27/2023 at 11:27 PM, MrTPlush said:

And who is going to develop that? Who wants to develop in an area that is dead 50% of the year? There is some residential around it, sure, but it isn’t very wealthy. I wouldn’t call it ghetto…but it isn’t super affluent either that is going to grasp some fancy/trendy district either.

I can’t see the Brewers investing hundreds of millions into a project that is dead half the year.

Pittsburgh developed the north shore around pnc park with corporate offices, hotels, restaurants and music venues while still preserving the tailgating atmosphere.  

[JosephC]

The Brewers are such a financial windfall to the city of Milwaukee that-

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2023/06/22/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-proposed-sales-tax-in-milwaukee/70341845007/

So we constantly get beat over the head that the last stimulus package put Wisconsin 7 billion in the black.  But the UW system gets 130 million less than they requested in funding that may grow after the political side-shows are done, the city of Milwaukee acts like they are in dire straits with their finances...and sure as anything, the only thing to debate now is how much north of 360 million the free handout will be to billionaire Attanasio and MLB.

Don't extend this current lease.  Let it expire....and let the chips fall where they may.  Completely done with these bloodsucking pro sports leagues claiming "partnerships" are needed when all they are interested in are free public handouts to line their pockets with even more money.

[Axman59]

4 hours ago, JosephC said:

The Brewers are such a financial windfall to the city of Milwaukee that-

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2023/06/22/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-proposed-sales-tax-in-milwaukee/70341845007/

So we constantly get beat over the head that the last stimulus package put Wisconsin 7 billion in the black.  But the UW system gets 130 million less than they requested in funding that may grow after the political side-shows are done, the city of Milwaukee acts like they are in dire straits with their finances...and sure as anything, the only thing to debate now is how much north of 360 million the free handout will be to billionaire Attanasio and MLB.

Don't extend this current lease.  Let it expire....and let the chips fall where they may.  Completely done with these bloodsucking pro sports leagues claiming "partnerships" are needed when all they are interested in are free public handouts to line their pockets with even more money.

I'm glad I don't buy anything in Milwaukee.

[Jim Goulart]

 

[nate82]

Quote

"Back in 2001, when the public built this stadium for the Brewers, the Brewers were worth about $200 million. They’re worth about $1.6 billion right now," said Clancy. "What I’d like to see is the Brewers re-investing some of that massive increase back into the stadium and back into the community.

Sigh I see people still don't understand what equity is. 

[owbc]

1 hour ago, nate82 said:

Sigh I see people still don't understand what equity is. 

There are several different ways to raise enough capital for stadium improvements with that valuation. 

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, nate82 said:

Sigh I see people still don't understand what equity is. 

True...but Evers already wanted to fund the stadium, the GOP didn't NOT want to give them money, they thought the money should come with a longer lease agreement.

So to oversimplify the situation, it seems like both sides agree on funding it, but...they each gotta win. If nothing else, it suggests to me this will get solved eventually when both sides can claim a victory. 

 

Just wish John Menard was a big baseball fan rather than racing. Get us a guy worth 10-20 billion and this wouldn't be an issue. Hell, we could extend Burnes, Woodruff...I was thinking Ohtani as well, but doubt he wants to give away half his total net worth on one player!