Las Vegas Stadium Rendering

The Nevada State Assembly has approved plans for $750 million in public funding to help underwrite the cost of a new $1.9 billion stadium in Las Vegas for the (current) Oakland Raiders football franchise.

Governor Brian Sandoval still needs to approve the deal. And in order for the Raiders to depart Oakland, three-quarters of the National Football League’s owners will need to agree.

But in terms of the Raiders’ intent, when renderings of the proposed Las Vegas stadium were released a few months ago, “the Raiders — and their partner, the Sands Casino Group — made one thing absolutely clear: If the state of Nevada is willing to commit $750 million in public funding towards a new NFL stadium, then the stadium will get built and the Raiders will move to Vegas.”

The Raiders’ current lease for the Oakland Coliseum expires at the end of the 2016 NFL season but includes two one-year options for beyond.

And at the very least, it’s probably (past) time for the City of Oakland to re-brand the plans for a proposed 800-acre “Coliseum City” to rise upon Oakland’s existing Coliseum site and 550 acres of adjacent land on the other side of I-880.

Oakland Colisieum

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Dan Clark

    Isn’t the rendering missing a big water feature?

  2. Posted by Matt in Uptown

    That rendering is pure myth, but stupidity in the NV legislature is a real thing.

  3. Posted by EcceMorons

    I assume the Raiders will insist on having slot machines at every seat for extra revenue.

    • Posted by A Vandeley

      Their partners is the Sands Casino Group, I don’t think the Raiders need worry about trying to figure that one out. However, would it really surprise you if they did want them? The airport has them, if anything slot machines have become a design element now, just as bay windows are to the bay area.

  4. Posted by SFRealist

    I wonder if this deal will turn out as well for Nevada as the Coliseum deal turned out for Alameda and Oakland.

    • Posted by Notcom

      Actually the deal turned out pretty well: they’ve had a pro football team – well, OK at least an NFL team – for more than 20 years for an initial out lay of about $200M…that’s certainly less than the half billion or so some places have paid…ask Hamilton County (Cincy) how THEIRS turned out.

      Back to the article: is Coliseum City even an active plan anymore?? A quick google search doesn’t show anything much this year…not even silly booster PR.

      • Posted by Jake

        The actual deal was a yuge ripoff. It was $220 million back ~20 years ago and the total outlay has been $400+ million. All of which is certainly more than $0, which is what it cost every jurisdiction not Oakland or Alameda County to have them hereabouts instead of thereabouts. And “We had a team” what does that mean? Did you get a temporary ownership interest? Meanwhile, the actual owners of the Raiders got an actual subsidy to operate a profitable business because derp.

        • Posted by Notcom

          Well of course it’s a yuge ripoff; it’s just not as huge as some other places have been ripped off….or are about to be $220M (or $400M or even $600) is <<< $1.9B …at least at sub-warp speeds.

        • Posted by SFRealist

          And I would imagine that Oakland and/or Alameda could really use $400M + right about now.

          Jurisdictions which agree to pay subsidies to sports teams get what they deserve. (Looking at you, Santa Clara!)

        • Posted by JackBaker

          A yuger rip-off is the $850 M the City of Santa Clara shelled out for the 49ers crap stadium – 4 times what Oakland paid, in a city 1/4 the size of Oakland.

      • Posted by woolie

        It’s an active plan in the sense that it is the final, certified, adopted EIR and current zoning for the site. Work could start on a new stadium & mixed use development as soon as you could have designs drawn and contractors hired.

  5. Posted by Mark

    A sea of parking…good grief. Better Vegas than OAK.

    • Posted by Crones

      Seriously. That looks terrible even by Vegas standards. I find it hard to believe they still build this way.

    • Posted by AnonAnon

      Yep, the classic see of pavement – just like in Oakland. Perfect for pre-game fighting (err tailgating).

    • Posted by A Vandeley

      I mean its better than a sea of sand. I think the developers are probably looking at it as the new venue for concerts and music festivals. With all the paving they would be able to set up multiple stages at this one venue. and make money when football season is off.

  6. Posted by Tim E

    Time for Oakland to build a baseball stadium and new multipurpose arena next to Jack London Square, a new BART station nearby and or a street car connecting stadium/Jack London/downtown (Heck, if San Fran can build the transbay transit center certainly the region can add a BART station) and bulldoze this one time play to be a sports Mecca. Oakland got played to build the stadium/arena in the first place and just got played for two of its three sports teams.

    Time to put the focus near Jack London/Downtown for the A’s and entertainment offer a big piece of land for new housing that is between the two biggest pieces of transportation infrastructure in the East Bay to a serious developer with a track record of actually building.

  7. Posted by SFMichael

    The picture is hilarious. A clear, curved roof to magnify the heat and light inside. Just what you’d want in Las Vegas.

    • Posted by A Vandeley

      It’s hard to tell but I’m pretty sure it’s not going to be glass. The weight and cost of installing something like that over that span would be well over the estimated $1.9 billion. With the erratic temp changes from the hot hell of the summer to the freezing winter months, my guess is they’re planning on using ETFE, which is lighter, cheaper, durable, self cleaning, and is insulated. The water cube uses this material as their exterior and it works pretty well.

  8. Posted by Pierre smith

    No opinion on raiders leaving, but deeply annoyed that another jurisdiction has fallen for the stadium scam. Some stanford prof called it the worst agreement he’d ever seen.

    But why would the owners pay themselves when they can sucker the politicians into saddling the taxpayers (also willing) with these things?

    • Posted by Notcom

      Well now everyone’s a critic, isn’t he? Can’t they see the bigger picture…that this will put Vegas on the map.
      🙂

    • Posted by Can't Think of Cool Name

      @Pierre, my guess is that Vegas knowing that it’s “America’s playground” is betting that they utilize that site quite a bit beyond the Raiders. Not disagreeing with the study though. But if Vegas call pull off lots of non-football events, then maybe…

  9. Posted by suezz

    They are leaving. Get over it the NFL is business and they could care less about their customers.

    Their product really stinks this year and I for will not watch.

    Lets see Saint Louis, and now Oakland, wonder what city is on the rico list next.

  10. Posted by skipNclair

    Just because they have approval for a stadium, the financing and the state legislation has approved it, does not mean the raiders are leaving or coming to Nevada or Sin City ([which is] now in competition with Washington DC, and New York, for that title).

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *