It almost seems as if they were pre - assembled and then purposely nestled in amongst a bunch of old factory buildings. This trend, I believe, started with the park they built in Baltimore a few years back, and since then several others have followed suit. Any ideas on this?
2006-10-30 12:14:21 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
TRYING TO MAKE THE MAIN PART OF THE CITY MORE POEPLE FRIENDLY AND BRING MORE POEPLE DOWN TOWN.:-)
2006-11-04 06:07:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The others are correct in that its usually the cheapest land but its also in hope that a ballpark can bring money and tourists to a previously bad neighborhood and make it the best of the best. Also to answer your other question, they do it becuase it makes the ballpark look "retro." The old parks that were built before the 1930's were built wherever there was space and were built downtown and often had wierd dimensions becuase a house or street was on the other side.
Parks built from the 1950's-1991 with a few execptions were built in the suburbs and were mutlipurpose with nfl or college football. Or they were in domed staduims which aren't very pretty to look at.
The park in baltimore was built to look timeless and classic and elements that were special to its city. All the new parks are retro parks. EVentully it becomes cliche and some parks have been done poorly. The Nats new park in Washington might break this trend.
2006-10-31 00:52:40 · answer #2 · answered by captaincarney 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's a good use of unwated space for a city. Take an area that everyone has forgotten, build a stadium in it, and watch the natural revitalization take place. The area around Camden Yards has improved greatly. Not that it is always that way. SF put their stadium where the view would be the best and Philly put theirs where the rest of the stadiums are.
2006-10-30 20:21:01 · answer #3 · answered by Leader Desslok 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mostly because land is cheaper in the old industrial areas of a city than in newer, more built-up areas. Ballparks take up a good amount of space (at least a couple dozen acres), and that much land in a built up area is prohibitively expensive.
2006-10-30 23:17:14 · answer #4 · answered by JerH1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Orioles emulated Fenway Park in building the stadium at Camden Yards. Everyone else followed suit and continues to follow suit as the anti-trust exemption places stadium building on taxpayer backs - not owners.
2006-10-31 12:21:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Busch Stadium (built after their '05 seasoned new this year) was built exactly where the old busch was located which is in downtown STL by the Arch not by a bunch of old factory buildings...other than that i don't know
2006-10-30 22:09:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
its to boost the quality of the surrounding area. they did that here in cleveland. the area where they built it was run down so they wanted to make it a place to be by building the indians and cavs homes there
2006-10-30 21:00:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
to give the feeling of a home town park
2006-11-07 05:10:40 · answer #8 · answered by sue s 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You need a large open area you can't get that in a civilian populated area.
2006-11-06 20:54:28 · answer #9 · answered by just curious 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are serious you need to find a new hobby! This can't be a real sports question. Go play checkers!!!
2006-11-07 05:00:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
they are picked by the city goverment and placed for specific reasons some of which are location,popularity and population
2006-11-06 19:04:48 · answer #11 · answered by moneyman$$ 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋