There's a pretty clear timeline in the term sheet, with four milestones, the first of which is only about six months away. Not saying it's a sure thing, but if what you're looking for is a definite timeline, it's there.
It's easier to say this - but smarter for people to contact him directly, especially DC residents. to talk about the team, this deal and why this is important.
Aren't any pubs next to Nationals Park by definition also right next to this supposed DC United stadium? Maybe I just have a different idea of distance than many posters here .... I used to sometimes drink at the old Finn & McCools and walk to the 30+ minute walk to RFK.
Plus, we're in poor fitness and need the energy return that bouncing stands provide to keep us going for 90 minutes.
I see nothing funny about my knees, especially since I tore the first one up playing our beloved game.
That's good to know, but that still estimates an opening date of 3/~4th-18th/2013 at the earliest (home opener). That's assuming no hitches. That's a fine and reasonable time table, but still 4 years or more depending on circumstances. So now we hope that in the interim we still advance the needs of the team.
Yes, construction will probably only take 2 years. But designs, engineering and planning could easily take 1.5 years. Its already halfway through 2013... so beginning of 2017 seems reasonable - if not on the optimistic side.
Kojo has been historically very pro DCU and pro stadium so he should provide some good support today.
Tom Sherwood is scheduled to be on though and Kojo lets him run riot with whatever he has to say, so..
whover is on the Kojo show ALMOST explained the deal properly... "DCU owners will pay for the stadium, city will spend $150 preparing the land, moving reeve center, and giving the land to DCU" made it clear that its not another nats park screwjob, but needs correction that the land is being leased, not given. theres a difference.
Ideally some caller will suggest to Tom Sherwood that he use the phrase "leasing the land to DC United" and not "giving the land to DCU" -- although the lease rates will be extremely affordable to the soccer team.
Isn't it $1 a year? (thought I read that yesterday)...for how long? If it is a $1 year for a period of time beyond the expected usable life of the stadium...it is essentially a gift....no? (not saying it is a bad gift but sometimes the words lease and give can be interchangable )
Sure. But DC United is not being "given" the land, in the sense that they are not taking ownership of it, and the land will still belong to the city (who is investing to buy/own/control it).
My understanding is that the lease is for the "expected usable life of the stadium" -- but not beyond that timeframe. And yes, there are probably other items and facets of the deal that could be discussed and explored with Kojo and his guests today.
lease and give are not interchangeable... with a lease, if this whole project fails somewhere along the line, DC owns the land and it can be used for a public purpose. if DCU owns the land and the project goes nowhere, it turns into another poplar point. the terms in the current agreement are $1 year for 25-35 years (life of the stadium), after which, the land reverts to the city.
And if the team decides to build a new stadium elsewhere in 2050, the city gets the land back to sell, etc. The major point is it still belongs to the city, as an asset, not given to the team as something they can later sell off. That's a really important distinction.
Doesn't the price of the lease also include a share of the profit generated from the stadium but no shared losses except for the lowering of some taxes for DCU if they go into the negative on a year? So it's essentially $1+ the good possibility of a lot more.