The age of the Carrier Dome and Syracuse University’s recent move to the Atlantic Coast Conference are two — but not the only factors— behind the school’s decision to consider building a new downtown stadium, SU’s consultant for the project said on Thursday morning.

“I think we’re just looking to the future.  I don’t think there’s a particular reason,” said Irwin Raij, SU’s stadium consultant and a partner at Foley & Lardner LLP in New York. “We’re looking to the future and what opportunities might exist.”

Plans for a new 44,000-seat, $495 million downtown stadium near the Syracuse Stage appear to be at a standstill. No money for the project is included in New York state’s 2014-15 budget, and city and county politicians have said in previous interviews the proposal is dead for now.

Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner announced she was creating a task force to look at the possible effects of a new stadium during her 2014 State of the City Address on Jan. 23. Members of the task force include city, county and state legislators, as well as community leaders. In a Feb. 7 letter to Miner, Chancellor Kent Syverud opted not to appoint a representative to the committee, writing SU would undergo its own analysis about the options that were available for renovating or replacing the Dome.

The task force’s second meeting was held Thursday in Housing Visions Unlimited at 1201 E. Fayette St., not far from Copper Beech Commons and the Connective Corridor route.It was the second time the committee has publically met. During the meeting, task force members pressed SU’s stadium consultant about issues such as the condition of the Carrier Dome, if a new stadium would bring about economic development and where the project proposal stands right now.

Raij said SU’s move to the ACC and the age of the Dome are “facts” that need to be taken into consideration. He also noted that a developer approached SU with the idea to consider a new stadium.  At multiple times during the meeting, task force members asked what specific repairs the Dome needed and how urgent they are.

He said the roof and other improvements will eventually have to be addressed. With the exception of the roof, he did not cite specific examples. The Dome is still a “great facility,” he said, though it is “aged.”

“I don’t think there’s anything in particular that says, ‘Dome in trouble tomorrow,’” Raij said.

Next, Raij talked about other benefits he sees in the project.  If planned and done right, he said, “stadiums do and can bring significant economic development in a community.” New York state would not have had any interest in the project without the development planned around the stadium, Raij said.

“I drink the Kool Aid,” he said.

Ben Walsh, chair of the stadium task force and deputy commissioner of Syracuse’s Department of Neighborhood and Business Development, said his office has had difficulty finding studies that back up this claim. He then asked if Raij could point him to research or data supporting the idea.

“Most of what we find suggests the opposite of that,” Walsh said.

Raij said he’d try to find something for Walsh, adding: “I think what you’ll find is you really have to look at them at a case-by-case basis.”

Then, Raij was asked about a statement in his Jan. 23 letter to the mayor that said “we believe the state and county remain interested in creating a structure that would facilitate the implementation of the project vision.”

There have not been “active conversations” about the project since the last budget cycle, Raij said. He emphasized a formal decision was never reached to build a new stadium. But at some point or another, he said, one will have to be made — whether that’s building a new stadium or making renovations to the Dome. Raij said the stadium study is not “site-specific” and a draft of it continues to be discussed.

“What’s the future hold?” Raij said. “I don’t know the answer to that right now.”

Other notes:

• SU Athletics, Raij said, has been actively involved with the stadium proposal.The plan for a 44,000-seat stadium was related to the importance of No. 44 for the university. The athletic department does not think a stadium with smaller capacity will affect the competitiveness of programs such as football, he said.
• When asked whether SU would keep the Dome for football and have two separate stadiums, Raij said it was determined that would be inefficient.
•  Raij said the height of the roof in the last proposal would make it a “challenge” for the stadium to be used for baseball. He said he could not estimate how much a roof able to support the sport would cost. SU is the only ACC school without a baseball team, and it’s been rumored for years it will bring back the sport.
• At the meeting, Upstate Medical University Interim President Gregory Eastwood said he had no input with the plans to build a new stadium on the university’s property. Upstate administrators also gave a presentation about the history of the site for the proposed stadium before Raij spoke. They emphasized the importance of public-private partnerships in revitalizing the area.
•  Walsh, the chair of the stadium task force, said members are “anxious” to go on and eventually make a document of its findings available to the public.

Published on May 1, 2014 at 4:35 pm

Contact Dylan: [email protected] | @dylan_segelbaum