Jump to content

More proof that retro stadiums are cookie cutters


griffin128

Recommended Posts

Are they still planning to put a retractable roof on that new Twins ballfield? I think if they don't it's gonna be a tough time playing there in April, May, and September (October, too, if they get that far). I know I hate playing baseball in cold weather.

The legislation that will be passed calls for funding for a retractable-roofed ballpark.

BTW, Congrats goes out to all Twinkie fans.....

Now you just have to save your Vikings from following the path of the Lakers....

I'm not sure where you're getting your info, but this article, from the Twins site, uses the words "open-air" in the fourth paragraph, last sentance. "Open-air" is not "retractable-roof." That was taken off as a cost saving measure (estimated at $100-150 million in savings). Also, from ballparks.com:

The proposed ballpark wouldn't include a roof, but the Twins still favor one. The team will encourage the state to help cover that cost, projected to be at least $100 million. Minnesota Twins owner Carl Pohlad has promised to contribute $125 million to the project.

Moose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply
This is Seattle sans Space Needle. Not too identifiable. The main building is the black one in the background, Bank of America Tower.

Which is proof that one building, or structure (the Space Needle) can make a city's skyline VERY identifiable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Twins seem to be on the verge of getting their ballpark approved, and they will have quite a nice view of the Minneapolis skyline:

ph_gallery05_690.jpg

ph_gallery09_690x446.jpg

Moose

The only thing that bugs me about this site is that one cannot see all of the big 3 skyscrapers simultaneously. You get IDS Center and Wells Fargo Tower -OR- IDS Center and USBancorp. Stupid 33 South 6th gets in the way, seeing as Wells Fargo and USBancorp are especially aesthetically pleasing(especially when lit at night). This is a minor pet peeve, as outdoor baseball is the big plus.

Just as long as they don't sell the naming rights to the stadium to Schwans, SuperValu, Anderson Windows, Fingerhut or some other dumb name. I'm sure 3M, Cargill, NWA, Best Buy, Toro, General Mills, and the lot will be approached to fund the roof in trade for the name.

avatar47165711ar8.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm in St. Louis and a homer anyways, but I'd have trouble believing St. Louis doesn't have the most identifiable skyline in the US. I'm not gonna say anything about best or most pleasing or anything, though.

I just think for the most part people know what and where the Arch is. There is really no other building in the US (or world?) like it. A lot of cities have unique buildings, but chances are they aren't as well known as the Arch is.

I figure New York (Empire State Building, and WTC for some time) and Chicago (Sears Tower) have some really nice and pretty identifiable buildings, but even those buildings are pretty much just skyscrapers. Nothings quite as recognizable as the Arch.

There's a pretty decent chance I'm wrong and all, but I felt like typing anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are they still planning to put a retractable roof on that new Twins ballfield? I think if they don't it's gonna be a tough time playing there in April, May, and September (October, too, if they get that far). I know I hate playing baseball in cold weather.

For Pete's sake, the twins and Vikes survived for how many years in the MEt? How soft can you get up there? :D

savedpictures013-1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm in St. Louis and a homer anyways, but I'd have trouble believing St. Louis doesn't have the most identifiable skyline in the US. I'm not gonna say anything about best or most pleasing or anything, though.

I just think for the most part people know what and where the Arch is. There is really no other building in the US (or world?) like it. A lot of cities have unique buildings, but chances are they aren't as well known as the Arch is.

I figure New York (Empire State Building, and WTC for some time) and Chicago (Sears Tower) have some really nice and pretty identifiable buildings, but even those buildings are pretty much just skyscrapers. Nothings quite as recognizable as the Arch.

There's a pretty decent chance I'm wrong and all, but I felt like typing anyways.

.... and you would have a solid argument there. For a skyline to be really recognisable, there has to be at least one unique structure, that really stands out. St Louis has the arch. That stands out. Toronto has the CN Tower, Sydney has the Opera House. That stands out too. I think there are some skyscrapers can make a city's skyline identifiable too. You already mentioned Chicago and New York, but I'll throw in, for argument's sake, San Francisco because of the Bank of America tower.

I saw, I came, I left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sox have played outdoors, by the ocean, for over 94 years, and we have worse weather than Minnesota, so I think you'll make it.

I love your east cost perception of what "worse weather" is, but that's another story... FWIW, Intellicast has Boston and Minneapolis about even in terms of average high temps for both April and September (you can navigate those sites to find the other months). As to snowfall, Minneapolis/St. Paul averages 2.8 inches a month in April, although Denver gets away with an average of 8.9 inches, Detroit 1.7 and Chicago 1.6 inches (same site)...

Moose

(Oh, and Swamp Yankee, check out December, January and February on the Intellicast link - I think you'll find Boston much more hospitable those months than Minneapolis...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally I cringe at east coast myopia, but midwest myopia exists too. The St. Louis arch is very recognizable to those who know it, but believe me when I say that a lot of people in the U.S. have never heard of it and couldn't recognize it if they saw it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but I'll throw in, for argument's sake, San Francisco because of the Bank of America tower.

You mean the Transamerica pyramid? The BOA building (aka DeathStar is pretty generic unless u live in the city.)

sf03.jpg

UH, Yeah, that Transamerica pyramid, that's what I was referring to thanks....... wow! I'm good at details huh? ^_^

I saw, I came, I left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sox have played outdoors, by the ocean, for over 94 years, and we have worse weather than Minnesota, so I think you'll make it.

I generally agree, but you also have to remember that people will drive well over 400 miles just to see a Twins series. Heck, over 600 miles in some cases.

So having a retractable roof would be a definite advantage for the new Twins stadium. However, it just doesn't look like that will happen, and we Twins fans sure as hell can live with it.

Now, as for the Vikings, I still think it would be an advantage for them to play totally outdoors. And don't have heaters on the Vikings sideline, either, just like Bud Grant used to have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, as for the Vikings, I still think it would be an advantage for them to play totally outdoors. And don't have heaters on the Vikings sideline, either, just like Bud Grant used to have it.

Well with today's prima donnas, I doubt the Vikings would ever be able to sign a free agent or a top draft pick,with that set up. In addition, the NFL would do what the NFL does best and F*** it up. They would schedule one game past Thanksgiving and nothing at night past Halloween.

pissinonbobsmall.jpg

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

P. J. O'Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well with today's prima donnas, I doubt the Vikings would ever be able to sign a free agent or a top draft pick,with that set up. In addition, the NFL would do what the NFL does best and F*** it up. They would schedule one game past Thanksgiving and nothing at night past Halloween.

You're right. But a guy can dream, can't he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Chicago's skyline, there are plans for two enormous towers to be built. I don't know if they are definite plans yet or not, but these will be up there as far as tallest structures in the world, and they have interesting shapes (one looks like a drill bit kinda) If and once those are done, Chicago will be even more recognizable.

I'll see if I can dig up some stuff.

brianurlacher.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That new building in chicago will be amazing if it ever gets built. It will change the skyline massively, rather than chicgo being bracketed by its biggest, it will have three that stand tall.

NCFA Sunset Beach Tech - Octopi

 

ΓΔΒ!

 

Going to college gets you closer to the real world, kind of like climbing a tree gets you closer to the moon.

"...a nice illustration of what you get when skill, talent, and precedent are deducted from 'creativity.' " - James Howard Kunstler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm in St. Louis and a homer anyways, but I'd have trouble believing St. Louis doesn't have the most identifiable skyline in the US. I'm not gonna say anything about best or most pleasing or anything, though.

The most identifiable skyline?

Just because of the Arch? :blink:

That's pretty hard to justify. Sure, the Arch is very identifiable. But so are many individual elements of the skylines of other cities. Space Needle and the TransAmerica pyramid have already been named, and they're every bit as famous as the Arch. I'd also add the Washington Monument to that.

I would agree that the Arch makes the skyline of St. Louis recognizable. But makes it "the most identifiable skyline in the US"? You're having a laugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.