Is AEG Lagging On Getting DTLA Stadium Project Going?

Design firm Rensler's rendering of the LA Live complex including Farmers Field.

It seemed like things couldn't get going fast enough earlier this year when the Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG) was trying to sell Los Angeles leaders and residents on building another sports stadium at their Downtown L.A. Live campus. They gave it a name, and Angelenos the hardsell, and the hunt for an NFL team to call it home continued.

So why does the OC Register say all these months later, "planning department officials are still waiting" to get the documentation they need to keep the project moving?

What the city planners are waiting on is the massive--10,000 pages, potentially--Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

"AEG president Tim Leiweke said the project’s EIR is half complete. AEG officials said they expect to provide city officials with documents later this year and remain on schedule to provide the city with a draft of the EIR by January 2012," notes the Register, adding that Leiweke says the City knows that this was AEG's schedule for the documentation.

The City, in return, seems a little dubious about AEG's progress.

Meanwhile, there are other issues holding AEG back. Today attorneys for AEG singled out Los Angeles County Supervisor, and alleged he "may have a financial conflict of interest that should bar him from involvement in actions tied to the project," reports L.A. Now. "The potential conflict stems from claims by Supervisor Michael Antonovich's wife that she is owed hundreds of thousands of dollars by an affiliate of the stadium developer."

It's not all bad news, though, when it comes to Farmers Field. Today AEG sent out a release saying that they have more folks on their side:

The Independent Cities Association (ICA), an organization of elected officials representing 54 municipalities and 7.1 million residents across Los Angeles County, announced today their formal Resolution of Endorsement for AEG’s Farmers Field and L.A. Convention Center modernization project.

As part of the stipulations for building the stadium, a NFL team must commit to playing at the venue. So far, there's been no takers.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@laist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Lindsay William-Ross in News on August 30, 2011 1:40 PM

Comments [rss]

Florent Mbesse

how do you know consumer will spend less when you don't even know the purchassing power of people coming outside of the country. on vacation, business and others. pure speculation.baggers ? because they are trying to generate jobs for angelinos. are you kidding me. comon man.

Jesse Sanchez

I am 50/50 on my decision so far.

I want the NFL back in LA, AND stadium in a central location (Downtown LA is Perfect), but I also want it to be done right.

We better not regret this 10 years from now

lfnfrtank

they will pay the city back w/ expected revenues from the stadium( rosy perdictions) these perdictions are 230,000,000 over 30 years that 7,000,000 a year,thats not an asset it is a liability w/ AEG risking none of their own money only the taxpayers money. AEG has negotiated this deal w/ the dumbest people on the block our city council and the mayor. they have had the smartest,highest paid people going up against our council members and mayor who only want free tickets.This is a bad deal for the city of LA, may i remind the mayor and council that they are in the drivers seat not AEG...The NFL needs LA...we the citizens must scream loud and hard to stop this give away to a billionaire.

lfnfrtank

Surprise, surprise! From all the places, a State CLA has the following statement on the AEG Stadium. Shame on our CLA and City Attorney who was kissing Lieweke's butt just the other day."A new football stadium in downtown Los Angeles may not generate the economic benefit predicted by its backers because consumers would simply spend less on other activities, a state legislative analyst said at a state hearing on the project Friday.Mark Whitaker, a senior fiscal policy analyst in the state Legislative Analyst's Office, told a Senate committee that the studies by the city and developer "overstated the economic benefits" of the $1.2 billion project."Most consumers have a fixed entertainment income," he said. "The dollars that they are spending at the stadium, they aren't spending the money elsewhere." This is a bad deal for the city negotiated w/ our CORRUPT CITY LEADERS, IF HE WANTS IT BUILT LET HIM USE HIS OWN MONEY.

wackyxaky

I'm all for recognizing the very marginal benefits of sports stadiums, especially for larger cities, but I was under the impression that the AEG stadium will NOT be built with any funding from the city. In fact, even nearby transportation infrastructure improvements will be handled by AEG.

RedMercury

Not entirely.

AEG will pay for the stadium. However, in order to build the stadium--or more precisely, parking for the stadium--part of the city-owned LA Convention Center needs to be demolished.

AEG won't initially pay for the changes to the Convention Center. However, they have promised to pay the city back for the changes if the city spends the money initially.

Andy Sternberg

10,000 pages?!? The City better hope the Cliffs Notes version isn't delayed.

I'm guessing that any future L.A. team wouldn't dare commit until after this season (late Jan - Feb) to avoid backlash from current fans. They still have seats to sell!