Skip to content

Atlanta has two options for Falcons stadium footprint

Falcons

By August 1, Atlanta must pick a specific site for the Falcons’ new football stadium.  As explained by NBC 11, the options have narrowed to two.

One possible location requires the city and a local church to bridge a $9 million gap regarding the value of the property to be vacated.  And despite the suggestion that the stadium will be reconfigured in a way that merely abuts the church property, the other choice entails a different location, farther from the nearest commuter rail line.

While the “south” site (which requires a deal with the church) is logistically better than the “north” site, Mayor Kasim Reed says he’s fine with either one.

“The thing about the stadium is, either solution is fine.  The stadium is going to be built,” Reed said.

If a deal isn’t struck with Friendship Baptist Church by August 1, the “north” site becomes the default location.  But the city doesn’t plan to put the squeeze on the church in order to acquire the “south” site.

“There isn’t going to be any pressure applied to get this deal done,” Reed said.  “We’re either going to do it under favorable terms, on the south site where people leave feeling like it’s a win-win, or we’ll go to the north site.”

Ultimately, the question becomes whether enough cash can be compiled to allow the building that resembles a change purse to be built in the desired spot.

Permalink 22 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Atlanta Falcons, Home, Rumor Mill
22 Responses to “Atlanta has two options for Falcons stadium footprint”
  1. noring4youstill says: Jul 17, 2013 11:16 AM

    A factory of sadness for the 21st century.

  2. barbeaux says: Jul 17, 2013 11:20 AM

    Just do it like the cowboys did… Put it far, far away from any public transit so you can charged 80 a game/event for parking

  3. icdogg says: Jul 17, 2013 12:05 PM

    I’d say it resembles a camera shutter more than a change purse.

  4. keylimelight says: Jul 17, 2013 12:14 PM

    So the North site is less desirable because the MARTA transit line is a half mile farther away. You are about to build a gajillion dollar, state of the art, fancy football house, just have MARTA develop a shuttle route for game days. No biggie.

  5. mybrunoblog says: Jul 17, 2013 12:18 PM

    Man that thing looks ugly. Who designs these things? Why not go with a classic oval stadium look? Some architect obviously thinks he’s The next Frank Lloyd Wright.

  6. wwttww says: Jul 17, 2013 12:36 PM

    Where is Daniel Plainview when you need him?

  7. kane337 says: Jul 17, 2013 12:42 PM

    mybrunoblog | Jul 17, 2013, 12:18 PM EDT
    Man that thing looks ugly. Who designs these things? Why not go with a classic oval stadium look? Some architect obviously thinks he’s The next Frank Lloyd Wright.
    ———————————————————————
    360 Architecture designed it.
    Past projects they have completed include:
    Met Life stadium
    Safeco Field
    American Airlines arena

    Another project they are working on is the new stadium for the Oakland A’s (Cisco Field)

  8. NoHomeTeam says: Jul 17, 2013 12:49 PM

    I know nothing about Atlanta’s official position on mass transit, but most other major cities I’m familiar with strongly advocate public transportation over private vehicles (whether those city governments actually put their money where their mouths are is an entirely different issue).

    If Atlanta wants to encourage people to use mass transit, then it makes sense to ensure the easiest public transport access to the new stadium. So this should be a simple question: What costs more — meeting the church’s price, or extending the light rail line in question?

  9. rjg427 says: Jul 17, 2013 12:55 PM

    Just give the pastor season tickets

  10. thefox61 says: Jul 17, 2013 1:05 PM

    The Mothership

  11. kpf1981 says: Jul 17, 2013 1:09 PM

    this is a serious question? what is wrong with the Georgia Dome? it’s only 22 yrs old. it cost 219 million to build and another 300 million were used to renovate in 2007 and 2010. the taxpayers shelled out 519 million over 20 yrs and now they want a new stadium built. this doesn’t make any sense.

    i’ve never been to the Georgia Dome, but it can’t be that bad, can it?

  12. thestrategyexpert says: Jul 17, 2013 1:14 PM

    This is a hideous looking design. If they are planning to change the team to the Tokyo Ninja Stars, then I think it’s pretty darn sweat.

    But I’m more interested in what is inside of the stadium than the exterior. It’s all about doing a good job with technology and innovation with the guts and infrastructure. I don’t think there is one stadium in the NFL that is an impressive facility, so I’m hoping that some team finally comes up with something fantastic to push the rest of the teams to consider trying to one-up them and do something better. Hopefully the Falcons have some neat things planned for the inside. The game of football needs an injection from construction design visionaries that are thinking about something that fits with the future.

  13. ravensbob says: Jul 17, 2013 1:24 PM

    Stadiums used to last 50 years. What a waste of money.

  14. mrlaloosh says: Jul 17, 2013 1:48 PM

    A stadium that looks like a sphincter. Perfect for Atlanta.

  15. cobrala2 says: Jul 17, 2013 2:20 PM

    A change purse? Lame.

  16. cobrala2 says: Jul 17, 2013 2:21 PM

    kpf1981, as a transplant and Eagles fan, there’s nothing wrong with the Georgia Dome at all (except that it’s not making rich men rich enough).

  17. jmk921 says: Jul 17, 2013 3:20 PM

    @kpf1981
    GA Dome is not in terrible shape but it still needs renovating. The falcons have a lease on the GA Dome which is about to expire and the GA World Congress center isn’t willing to give the money needed to renovate it. The falcons don’t receive any revenue from events in the GA Dome, such as the final four, SEC title game, etc. Arthur Blank wants to build his own stadium that the falcons operate and they can receive revenue for the major events such as SEC game, final four, future SB, etc. Blank is willing to pay for 80% of the stadium as opposed to the GA Dome which was paid for by the state of GA and operated by the state

  18. blspears says: Jul 17, 2013 6:39 PM

    From what I have read the site that the church is close to conflicts with an alcohol sales being atleast 100 feet from church locations. I think they could just change the law through the legislature also.

  19. snakeman40 says: Jul 17, 2013 9:14 PM

    Sounds like the church is playing a little game of chicken. Let’s see who blinks first……

  20. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: Jul 18, 2013 8:23 AM

    I would say the Rev. at Friendship Baptist, is holding out for some luxury seats with lots of booze.

  21. benatlanta says: Jul 19, 2013 3:54 AM

    Let’s tear down a perfectly good stadium and then, to top it off, tear down an historic 150 year old church. Then Americans complain they live in a country with no history…you will never have a history if you keep doing this! I know it’s a big word, but ever heard of “conservation”?

  22. Uptown Murf says: Jul 31, 2013 10:33 AM

    They need to be real. Most of us season ticket holders live on the north side of Atlanta Aka Gwinnett…The rumored original plan of the new Dome was supposed to be at the old GM Plant which would’ve been perfect. It’s the first stop on the Marta line from the north (Doraville), and would encourage people from the city to use Marta to get to the north…Building a new Dome is dumb in the first place, but Atleast build it where a great deal of the season ticket holders are..

    And it seems like most of the teams don’t put their stadiums in the actual city anyway. Arlington, New Jersey etc

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!