Forgive me, but I never quite figured out why people would make a three sided stadium. And yeah, those sharp corners look dumb on that latest render.
it also looks like they've lost the outbuilding or entrance building that would house ticket sales and store and stuff ... it looks all the more bare bones and high-school stadiumish without a nice attached building as part of the facade. the roof looks cheaper and the squared off corners also looks cheaper. and one of the few things i liked about the first two were the panels around the outside with what i assumed were going to be ex-quakes players and scenes (not sure if it was glass or something else) and those are also gone. if that is the newest iteration it is very much a giant leap backwards from where they started, field level boxes notwithstanding.
I could never figure out why people would build a stadium with only half the seats on the sideline. The architect likes the corners. Here's another stadium they're working on.
Architecturally, sharp corners and high contrast are really in right now. Rounded corners are easier on the eyes (arcording to scientific studies), however many architects want to make a statement. These sharp edges are intended to be jarring. The three sided stadiums exist so that adding capacity in the future is inexpensive. When you need 25,000 seats, just finish the final side.
Disclaimer - The latest iteration wasn't released by the team and it may not be official. I think it represents the latest design but I have no official knowledge of that. The lastest view is from the opposite side from the outbuilding. You can see it here on this layout. (gotta zoom in). I didn't like the panels with pictures. Reminds me too much of the Home Depot Center. The corners will generate a lot of usable space within the concourse. You can see the space in this rendering of the Najaf stadium.
It's so the stadium can have more seats. Of course, I recall having an annoyingly long debate about this some time back...
Well in the recognition of the 2/3rds of the fans at RBA that can't sit on sidelines, I like to share my future expansion plans for the new quakes stadium.
I guess I understand the fiscal logic behind it. Doesn't mean it doesn't bleed half the atmosphere, look silly, and scream cheap all the way to the market.
Call me a dumb-ass (please, go ahead) but with the exception of the last illustration/rendering (posted by Ole Gunnar 20), does it not appear that Quakes fans who drive had better wear REALLY comfortable shoes? Or did we overlook how Californians LOVE to drive (what air pollution)?
Like so many MLS SSSs temporary bleacher stands for the fan clubs at the open end is likely the play here if zoning permits.
There will be, hypothetically, some underground parking and a five story parking structure situated within stones throw of the stadium. Maybe.
The zoning doesn't permit it. Capacity is capped at 18K. The supporters group is behind the goal in the closed end. The grass berm is terraced into 3-4 levels.
This is an 8kx3k image of the entire proposed Coleman Highline property build out. It corresponds to this: The three buildings across the back are 4 story parking structures with parking lots in between them. I don't think an expected completion date has been set for the entire property. I'm not sure what we'll get when the stadium opens in 2014. Probably something closer to what Ole Gunnar posted with a massive temporary parking lot right next to the stadium. In terms of walking it's only 2 miles to the downtown bars.
Based on the seat information we have right now for the club seats (scroll down to the imbedded PDF to the bottom and you'll see a close up of the seats and the area: http://www.sjearthquakes.com/newstadium/clubseats) I think the 2nd is still accurate... Not sure were that 3rd came from. The 2nd is also what is all over the new stadium section of the website.
The team president recently said that if demand warrants it they would enclose the open end to increase the capacity to 25,000.
That's the difference between getting a public hand out to help build your stadium, and having to fund it yourself. With nearly an 80% increase in capacity, three continuous sides, and a roof over those sides, the atmosphere will be much better than Buck Shaw, which really isn't that bad.
I do understand. I just wish you folks got a full stadium from the get-go. Especially after having put up with the most disappointing stadium in MLS for too long. Having a brilliant stadium is something that I wouldn't keep from any team in the league, no matter how much I dislike them. I guess I'll cram up the negativity and go back to my regularly scheduled nerdish glee that MLS is getting more SSS-love nationwide.
Have you actually been to Buck Shaw? It's a GREAT atmosphere. You're closer to the action than anywhere else I've been (and I've been to the stadium formerly known as LiveStrong Park.) The cheap-seated 1906 Ultras (who pack a per person atmospheric punch second to none) are virtually on top of the goal, and there's a field level standing section a couple yards from the action that anyone, regardless of ticket price, can enjoy. And in lieu of luxury boxes, the VIP seats are also on the field, and within in the fenced perimeter. (Have you ever served as de facto ball boy for Bobby Convey from a foot away? I have.) As long as nature doesn't call you to the porta-potty, Buck Shaw is hard to beat. Sure it seats fewer than 11k, but if you've got one of those seats, what do you care? "Putting up with" Buck Shaw the last several years hasn't been nearly the problem of "putting up with" no team beforehand. The greatest benefit of the new stadium won't be that it's the antithesis of Buck Shaw, but instead that it ensures the team will stick around awhile. Quakes fans will look back fondly upon Buck Shaw as the good 'ole days.
Sorry if you thought I was ragging on the atmosphere of Buck Shaw. Merely the size and, well, prettiness. The most dominant team of 2012 deserves a few more fans and some better eye candy, is all.