daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 18th, 2010, 01:04 AM   #81
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Yeah don't the Packers have like 100,000 strong waiting list for season tickets lol
hngcm no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 18th, 2010, 05:19 AM   #82
Benn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,729
Likes (Received): 167

Last I checked its an estimated 734 year wait for season tickets, so more seats are probably in order.
Benn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2010, 05:26 AM   #83
Jim856796
Registered User
 
Jim856796's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 8,943
Likes (Received): 843

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgk920 View Post
No article links handy, but the Green Bay Packers (NFL) are now considering another seating expansion at Lambeau Field. The added seats would be above and behind the south end zone and bring it up to just over 80K.

Mike
If they (the Packers) want another capacity expansion at their stadium, they're gonna have to add additional luxury suites to the south endzone.
__________________
I honestly think all development projects must be sustainable and futureproof.

You support the good projects... and oppose the bad.
Jim856796 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2010, 12:05 PM   #84
derzberb
operierender Titan
 
derzberb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Bunny Hills
Posts: 1,804
Likes (Received): 3293

Quote:
Originally Posted by weava View Post
US college stadiums have some of the worst patchwork additions and create some asymetrical stadiums.





Bad additions? I love that asymmetric patchwork-style.

Compare it to e.g. Emirates stadium in London. There is no patchwork, no asymmetry and no athmosphere, no style, no football-feeling in there.
derzberb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 05:12 AM   #85
Benn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,729
Likes (Received): 167

Some places it works, some it doesn't, I would put Beaver Stadium and Kyle Field in the top 5 or 10 ugliest in the world. What they are doing at North Carolina right now, or did to Indiana Memorial Stadium and Lane Stadium is atrocious. On the other hand some are quite striking, like Autzen Stadium, Ohio Stadium, DKR or Doak Campbell.
Benn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 10:04 AM   #86
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benn View Post
Some places it works, some it doesn't, I would put Beaver Stadium and Kyle Field in the top 5 or 10 ugliest in the world. What they are doing at North Carolina right now, or did to Indiana Memorial Stadium and Lane Stadium is atrocious. On the other hand some are quite striking, like Autzen Stadium, Ohio Stadium, DKR or Doak Campbell.
Whats wrong with Lane Stadium? Its far from terrible. In fact, it looks pretty nice in person.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 03:23 PM   #87
matthemod
Registered User
 
matthemod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Gillingham, Medway
Posts: 766
Likes (Received): 95

As the same with Indiana's Memorial stadium? I was luckily a student there both pre-building and post building and the only thing I can say about the extension is that is compliments the already existing structures well.
__________________
http://pricetown.myminicity.com

My MiniCity!
matthemod no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 03:35 PM   #88
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

Holy crap, I hadn't seen the Blue Zone. Damn Keenan was beautiful. Now it will be adding a tackle box to one end. Interesting its coming at a time that their program might be in trouble.

And Lane is very disjointed. Every stand is different. It looks like its nice(meaning well maintained, with nice areas in each stand. But I think Benn is refering to how each stand is kind of its own thing. Like 4 different projects, where as Autzen, Michigan Stadium, Ohio Stadium, DKR, Doak Campell and Bryant-Denny have expanded very cohesively though the expansions have been just as spread out as place like Beaver or Kyle Field.
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 05:20 PM   #89
KingmanIII
Registered User
 
KingmanIII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Killa City, Misery
Posts: 2,627
Likes (Received): 415

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benn View Post
Some places it works, some it doesn't, I would put Beaver Stadium and Kyle Field in the top 5 or 10 ugliest in the world. What they are doing at North Carolina right now, or did to Indiana Memorial Stadium and Lane Stadium is atrocious. On the other hand some are quite striking, like Autzen Stadium, Ohio Stadium, DKR or Doak Campbell.
What's wrong with Kenan?

I think the Blue Zone addition will look awesome. Won't disrupt the symmetry at all.


KingmanIII no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 05:50 PM   #90
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benn View Post
Some places it works, some it doesn't, I would put Beaver Stadium and Kyle Field in the top 5 or 10 ugliest in the world. What they are doing at North Carolina right now, or did to Indiana Memorial Stadium and Lane Stadium is atrocious. On the other hand some are quite striking, like Autzen Stadium, Ohio Stadium, DKR or Doak Campbell.
I'm literally stupefied because I can't fathom the criteria you're using here. How on earth can you suggest the efforts at UNC and Indiana are "atrocious" yet find that Ohio Stadium is fine?!!! If you're citing Lane Stadium as a foul for its disjointed form, you'd think Indiana's solution, which was the complete opposite, would be pleasing to you. And while UNC's Blue Zone is overblown for what they'll get out of it, its form is arguably far more harmonious with the existing structure than the last end zone seating added at Ohio Stadium.

I'm not being critical of you, I am just seriously confused as to what criteria you're applying because I don't see the pattern or reasoning behind it.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 06:06 PM   #91
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Regarding this idea of cohesive expansion, let's not get too carried away with making everything too harmonious.

Each construction, while needing to work with the existing structure, should also be respectful of its current time and context. Just we would want to use the latest materials and building codes, we're inclined to improve upon the old where possible. Maybe this means a steeper or closer tier for better sightlines, or higher qualities of seating, deeper concourses, etc. Putting these things in place will ultimately yield a different form compared to the existing structure, and that can be good. Otherwise we're staring at a world full of sterile bowls.

Notice that OSU didn't simply enclose their famed horseshoe. It was recognized that the architecture deemed that end a unique element, and that fans also preferred better sightlines than the deep bend of the old track end. While a simplistic extension of the current form all the way around might have been the most "harmonious" idea, the resulting form is arguably more fan friendly, provided better return for the costs and provided the stadium with a new, unique element. We know it's not part of the original, and it also says they revered the original stadium enough to let it retain it's own personality and form.



I'm not saying Kenan or any other modern expansion is ideal, but we must always remember that the contextual decisions and conditions behind each expansion are different from the last, and as such the metrics used for judging what works and doesn't need adjusting, as well. The form of the Kenan proposal at least mimics the shape and scale of the other end, with some adjusted angles in the corners to create better sightlines. Arguably when full it would be more difficult to distinguish some of these differences. In the meantime UNC gets the prime seating sections their looking for at the best costs possible (presumably). Yes, I'd prefer another form that would more readily accommodate future expansion, but I can see where this meets the merits of their ambitions.

Bottom line, at least recall how each expansion has its own context and that what appears to be the ideal solution in form may not be the most practical, or even physically possible.

Cheers.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 09:02 PM   #92
derzberb
operierender Titan
 
derzberb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Bunny Hills
Posts: 1,804
Likes (Received): 3293

I've never been to USA. But all that stadiums (esp the college-stads) look really great. The more patchwork and asymmetry the better!

All these well-designed "state-of-the-art" stadiums are just sad. It takes some Chaos to generate athmosphere, life, feeling etc.


"takes some chaos to generate a dancing star" - hope this translation works.
derzberb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 10:10 PM   #93
Benn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,729
Likes (Received): 167

[QUOTE=KingmanIII;60565713]What's wrong with Kenan?

I think the Blue Zone addition will look awesome. Won't disrupt the symmetry at all.[QUOTE\]


The retro faux historic endzone filling into a Modern stadium totally clashes in an ugly way, to me at least. It feels totally foreign and has nothing to do with existing structure. I know the added capacity and premium seating is needed, but they could have found a more harmonious way of doing this rather than insert tacky retro here, because its the flavor of the month. I liked it as a horseshoe better as well, but personal tastes I guess.

Last edited by Benn; July 19th, 2010 at 10:15 PM.
Benn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 10:14 PM   #94
Benn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,729
Likes (Received): 167

Quote:
Originally Posted by matthemod View Post
As the same with Indiana's Memorial stadium? I was luckily a student there both pre-building and post building and the only thing I can say about the extension is that is compliments the already existing structures well.
They put a neo gothic little cathedral thing in the end of a massive raw concrete stadium, with out changing the rest of the exterior at all, that club end is totally out of place from the exterior. If they had gone with something that actually related to to the existing building they were adding on to it would have been fine. it didn't really get worse inside the bowl, but I never cared for it personally.
Benn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 10:25 PM   #95
Benn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,729
Likes (Received): 167

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
I'm literally stupefied because I can't fathom the criteria you're using here. How on earth can you suggest the efforts at UNC and Indiana are "atrocious" yet find that Ohio Stadium is fine?!!! If you're citing Lane Stadium as a foul for its disjointed form, you'd think Indiana's solution, which was the complete opposite, would be pleasing to you. And while UNC's Blue Zone is overblown for what they'll get out of it, its form is arguably far more harmonious with the existing structure than the last end zone seating added at Ohio Stadium.

I'm not being critical of you, I am just seriously confused as to what criteria you're applying because I don't see the pattern or reasoning behind it.

Does it have to have a pattern of style or formal strategy, some seem balanced (by symmetry or asymmetry) and well executed, others don't. The formerly open end at Ohio stadium could have been done better, but they felt it had to be a separate entity for reasons of history and tradition, and I can get along with that. The rest of it still looks good to me. Lane stadium feels really ugly to me for a lot of reasons, mostly that the various parts don't seem to mesh at all, and the press box from the inside always bothered me, the new endzone isn't much better.
As stated above my main beef with Indiana as the exterior of the new end, and I never really cared for the interior. Both have the same odd cutbacks along the field which seems awkward for no good reason; I know it alows more curvature to the stands while placing them right along the sideline but it tends causes some partial views on the highest portions, and puts people lowest on the sideline right behind the benches which doesn't make any sense. Same problem at Wake Fores, but at least they went with a unified detailing scheme (tacky retro though it may be).

Your above comments about context seems prudent, many of the ones I don't like seem to disregard it on a lot of levels. The The renovations to Michigan Stadium for instance have applied huge Brick Arched facades to a building that never had anything to do with that style (not to mention it doesn't relate all that well to campus, the brick part does, but none of the big schemes to it). It looks fine, but thinking of context it feels like they could have done so much more.

Last edited by Benn; July 19th, 2010 at 10:30 PM.
Benn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2010, 10:56 PM   #96
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Benn, thanks for clarifying your stance. I truly was curious and at least now have a better appreciation of where you're coming from.

Indiana Memorial: Yes, the exterior now has an element that appears decidedly too grand for the stadium as a whole. To their credit, they needed to dress up this element in order to make it appealing to the heavy spenders they're looking for in that special seating section. Further, the long-term aspiration is to incorporate the nicer look into future expansions. In the meantime, the fans and athletes (especially recruits) can get a sense that the University is investing in the program. Now Indiana has another structure worthy of postcards, even if only from one angle. For that the stadium is considered better, IMO.

Re: The retro/faux facade look
Architects will always have difficulty reconciling dynamism with the language of familiar form. What you might call a retro facade another might call classic, and in either case the common fan will see it familiar and evoking a desired mystique. Archways and colonnades are features that people relate to for civic and public structures, and they're highly functional. Let's face it, within the realm of practical experimentation there's only so many different ways to design a room, or a stadium.

Again, for UNC and UM the idea is to improve upon the overall facility (in UNC's case, as part of a several phase plan), and structurally the form of the new additions required spaces that are often utilized and expressed through arched porticoes, etc. The traffic flow and the use of these for far more than simple seating areas demands this. There may be more detailing and minor touches we don't see in these images that can truly enhance the experience, but even without such there's at least the recognition that the owners wanted a space that was more humane than a minimalist concrete cavern. Again, trying to express the wealth and prestige behind the programs.

I say this only because I hope people realize the difficulty in such expansions, and that they shouldn't be evaluated as succinctly as totally new structures. I'm undecided about either structure expressed here, but I respect their efforts and think that overall both venues are/will be better for the additions. Whether or not there was an even better option, however, is debatable.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Cheers.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2010, 03:08 AM   #97
Jim856796
Registered User
 
Jim856796's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 8,943
Likes (Received): 843

Expansion history of a deceased stadium: Mile High stadium in Denver, United States.

1948 - Originally constructed as a baseball stadium with a single 17,000-seat grandstand stretching along the north side from the left field foul pole to the right field foul pole on the west side.
1957 - 8,000 seat south stand added, bringing stadium capacity to 23,100.
1960 - The new east stands were added increasing capacity to 34,657.
1968 - Second and third tiers were added along the west sideline, increasing capacity to 51,706.
1976 - Secong and third tiers were extended along the north endzone, increasing capacity to 63,000
1977 - Old east stands removed and a new movable three-tier stand was added in its place, increasing capacity to 75,000. The movable stands allowed the stadium to be transformed from football use to baseball use.
1986 - 77 luxury boxes were added along the west side of the stadium, increasing capacity to 76,123.
2002 - Mile High Stadium passes away.
__________________
I honestly think all development projects must be sustainable and futureproof.

You support the good projects... and oppose the bad.
Jim856796 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu