GMJB Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I thought some of you guys who have not heard about this might care to check it out the work isn't done yet but this makes it one step closer. http://www.king5.com/story/news/local/seattle/2015/05/07/final-environmental-impact-statement-seattle-arena/70952714/ http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/nba/nhl-nba-sodo-arena-environmental-review-finds-no-major-obstacles/ http://www.sonicsarena.com/news/article/sonics-arena-final-environmental-impact-statement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 The FEIS set a new target date of 2018 to open the arena. Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said the report was a victory for the project. "The SODO arena project has just passed another major milestone. The City has met its commitment to complete the EIS process. No major findings stand in the way of arena construction. The City will continue to work with arena developers, the Stadium District and SODO interests on the impacts that were identified during the EIS process. The City can now begin looking ahead to the street vacation and other pieces necessary to move this project forward. We're one step closer to bringing NHL hockey and NBA basketball to Seattle." notice the shift of vernacular where he said NHL before NBA? that never would have happened at the start of the project. but that new proposal for that tukwilla arena (which is a MUCH better option and timeline) clearly has the seattle mayor reeling. LMAO, the impact study was to see the impact of removing a small portion of a street to fit the arena and these were the findings: "less than 10 trucks a day use the road and that the impact would be negligible.". 2.5 years and thousands of dollars later, it turns out the study was a giant waste of time/money. Frack the seattle stadium, Tukwilla is the better option. I'm throwing my hat in the tukwilla ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMJB Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 notice the shift of vernacular where he said NHL before NBA? that never would have happened at the start of the project. but that new proposal for that tukwilla arena (which is a MUCH better option and timeline) clearly has the seattle mayor reeling. LMAO, the impact study was to see the impact of removing a small portion of a street to fit the arena and these were the findings: "less than 10 trucks a day use the road and that the impact would be negligible.". 2.5 years and thousands of dollars later, it turns out the study was a giant waste of time/money. Frack the seattle stadium, Tukwilla is the better option. I'm throwing my hat in the tukwilla ring. You make excellent points. Now it sounds like next step is financing and it sounds like Tukwila is further along in that area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 We could see another expansion era. 2016-17: LV 2017-18: QC 2018-19: Seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 We could see another expansion era. 2016-17: LV 2017-18: QC 2018-19: Seattle Quebec should be a relocation. I'm all for a 32 team league, but no more after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Quebec should be a relocation. I'm all for a 32 team league, but no more after that. Florida, Carolina, NJ, or Arizona. If it's ARZ, CBJ should move back to the West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwags Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Florida, Carolina, NJ, or Arizona. If it's ARZ, CBJ should move back to the West. Most likely Florida or Arizona, as you said. Quebec should be a relocation. I'm all for a 32 team league, but no more after that. I can't imagine a league with more than 32 teams, but then again, that's probably what fans during the Original Six era thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 A 50 team league vould be vunderbar. Keep growing to Mexico City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 A 50 team league vould be vunderbar. Keep growing to Mexico City. The teams? Anaheim, Arizona, Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Buffalo, Calgary, Carolina, Chicago, Colorado, Columbus, Dallas, Detroit, Edmonton, Florida, Hamilton, Halifax, Houston, Indianapolis, KC, LA, Las Vegas, Madison, Mexico City, Minnesota, Mississauga, Montreal, Nashville, NJ, NYI, NYR, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Portland, Quebec City, San Antonio, San Diego, San Jose, Seattle, Saskatoon, St. John's, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Toronto, Vancouver, Victoria, Washington, Winnipeg, Yellowknife. Here's how the divisions would fall out: Anaheim Arizona Indianapolis Kansas City Los Angeles Las Vegas Mexico City San Antonio San Diego San Jose St. Louis Calgary Chicago Colorado Edmonton Madison Minnesota Portland Saskatoon Vancouver Victoria Winnipeg Yellowknife Atlanta Baltimore Boston Buffalo Carolina Columbus Dallas Detroit Florida Hamilton Halifax Houston Mississauga Montreal Nashville NJ NYI NYR Ottawa Philadelphia Pittsburgh Quebec City Tampa Bay Toronto Washington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwags Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 A 50 team league vould be vunderbar. Keep growing to Mexico City. A 50 team league would be absolute gong show, a single season would be year-round, and it would an economic $&!#storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 ...Must every statement be interpreted seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 A 50 team league would be absolute gong show, a single season would be year-round, and it would an economic crapstorm. You play one team, twice for divisions, that's 64 games. Take in the extended playoffs with 24 teams instead of 16, and it could work. ...Must every statement be interpreted seriously? Yes. Yes it must. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brilac Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I live close to downtown, and an arena in SODO would be much better. Easy access, either walk or hop on the train. Tukwila is out of Seattle, but more efficient to get to for everyone else, but overall, totally awesome if Seattle got an NHL team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I live close to downtown, and an arena in SODO would be much better. Easy access, either walk or hop on the train. Tukwila is out of Seattle, but more efficient to get to for everyone else, but overall, totally awesome if Seattle got an NHL team. the proposed tukwila stadium is literally directly beside a train station and the exit to 405, which is a 1 min drive to I-5 and 167. it would be WAY easier to get to/from the games for everyone in the region that isn't in the downtown core. it's also directly beside 3 hotels and a 5 min drive from the seatac airport, so it's way more convenient for teams flying in/out as well. plus it's 100% privately funded. i feel that it's the more likely option at this point, but i just want a team anywhere in seattle at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltt Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 A 50 team league vould be vunderbar. Keep growing to Mexico City. Are you out of your mind? 50? I could see 45, 48 tops but I'd really like to hear how 50 could make any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 the proposed tukwila stadium is literally directly beside a train station and the exit to 405, which is a 1 min drive to I-5 and 167. it would be WAY easier to get to/from the games for everyone in the region that isn't in the downtown core. it's also directly beside 3 hotels and a 5 min drive from the seatac airport, so it's way more convenient for teams flying in/out as well. plus it's 100% privately funded. i feel that it's the more likely option at this point, but i just want a team anywhere in seattle at this point. I think sodo is farther ahead and the privately funded arena is not such a big deal when the city of Seattle is fighting for the arena and has competition. Look to see Seattle push this along as fast as they can and have the NHL pick sodo because a downtown location is preferable to the NHL brass. The fact that we have competition now is great and is forcing dimwit Hanson to go with the NHL first or walk away, something he would have been unwilling to do if he had an option I feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 We could see another expansion era. 2016-17: LV 2017-18: QC 2018-19: Seattle 2016: LV 2017: Seattle. Done!!! No more then 32 teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I think sodo is farther ahead and the privately funded arena is not such a big deal when the city of Seattle is fighting for the arena and has competition. Look to see Seattle push this along as fast as they can and have the NHL pick sodo because a downtown location is preferable to the NHL brass. The fact that we have competition now is great and is forcing dimwit Hanson to go with the NHL first or walk away, something he would have been unwilling to do if he had an option I feel. seattle arena has a lot of red tape to get through still, including a revised plan that has nhl first in it, and they need to find a prospective NHL owner willing to bring a team there. whereas the tukwila building has an owner who wants an nhl team and has been in constant contact with the league since failing to acquire phoenix, a clear plan in place, uses no public funds, and is in a city who is known to fast track projects like this because there is no in-fighting on their city council. tukwila seems like the most likely destination for the nhl right now, and it's still considered a seattle suburb. either one is perfectly fine with me, to be honest, but i feel like the tukwila arena would be a better choice and is probably more likely at this point. but i guess it all depends on what the NHL wants. whether they want the team to be physically in seattle, or are they fine with the better location just outside of seattle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 the proposed tukwila stadium is literally directly beside a train station and the exit to 405, which is a 1 min drive to I-5 and 167. it would be WAY easier to get to/from the games for everyone in the region that isn't in the downtown core. it's also directly beside 3 hotels and a 5 min drive from the seatac airport, so it's way more convenient for teams flying in/out as well. plus it's 100% privately funded. i feel that it's the more likely option at this point, but i just want a team anywhere in seattle at this point. Tukwila Totems....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Are you out of your mind? 50? I could see 45, 48 tops but I'd really like to hear how 50 could make any sense. why stop at 50? Expand to Europe and Asia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.