The Bernabrau: Stadium Talk

[sprintjeløy1926]

First stadium thread...too soon? Maybe.

But I want to talk stadium.

Peter, has there been any discussion about the specifics of the stadium? When could we expect to see a rendering?

Is it going to follow the formula of the last couple of stadiums? They all seem to have a very similar look and layout(Dallas, Bridgeview, Home Depot) at least on paper. Would this follow that formula? I've only been to Columbus and although I hate to complain about any SSS, it seems pretty sterile. Too airy. And what's with the vacant endzone?

Anyway, some things I would like to see done in Milwaukee(If this happens):

*Most important is getting the seats as close to the field as possible. I want to be able to whisper sweet loathings into the ears of visiting squads.

*A roof. Not a dome, but a nice little roof over the stands. Nice and homey, like grandma's house.

*Please, no TGI Fridays or hotel rooms in the endzone or anything like that.

*Mini-kegerators at every seat

[iwishiweremingus2]

peter said at the meeting that the complex would have a 1000 job office building in it, retail shops, and penthouse suites. he didn't discuss any of what the actual grounds would be like.

[Peter Wilt]

First stadium thread...too soon? Maybe.

But I want to talk stadium.

Peter, has there been any discussion about the specifics of the stadium? When could we expect to see a rendering?

Is it going to follow the formula of the last couple of stadiums? They all seem to have a very similar look and layout(Dallas, Bridgeview, Home Depot) at least on paper. Would this follow that formula? I've only been to Columbus and although I hate to complain about any SSS, it seems pretty sterile. Too airy. And what's with the vacant endzone?

Anyway, some things I would like to see done in Milwaukee(If this happens):

*Most important is getting the seats as close to the field as possible. I want to be able to whisper sweet loathings into the ears of visiting squads.

*A roof. Not a dome, but a nice little roof over the stands. Nice and homey, like grandma's house.

*Please, no TGI Fridays or hotel rooms in the endzone or anything like that.

*Mini-kegerators at every seat


love the kegerator idea! and of course the canopy roof....and close down seats....

there have been preliminary drawings and designs, but it's a dynamic situation. The ultimate site and other variables will impact the design and look.

Current design does NOT have the permanent stage built in due to space limitations on the PE site. At a future supporters meeting, i'll probably show the preliminary designs....just don't get married to these, cuz they have changed and will continue to change.

peter

[BulaJacket]

Current design does NOT have the permanent stage built in due to space limitations on the PE site. At a future supporters meeting, i'll probably show the preliminary designs....just don't get married to these, cuz they have changed and will continue to change.
You just saying it will, but isn't currently in the design?

I would think that would be a good selling point to a new city to get help with a new stadium.

[mkecane]

My worthless opinion says the new stadium should have a roof over 100% of the stands, pitch-level seating (if possible), very close proximity to the field of play, (a) terrace(s), and avoid the sterile-looking environment of the HDC, Crew Stadium, and Frisco. For inspiration, compare climates and look at the 20K seat stadiums of Northern Europe.

Norway's club Rosenborg seems to have a really good stadium that would appeal aesthetically and functionally (capacity 21,366).

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/Nor/Lerkendal_A.jpg

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/Nor/Lerkendal.jpg

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/Nor/Lerkendal3.jpg

Of course, let's work for approval of the project first.

[Peter Wilt]

You just saying it will, but isn't currently in the design?

I would think that would be a good selling point to a new city to get help with a new stadium.

not currently in design and would be difficult to add at current site. Implication of more concerts would actually hurt approval process due to resulting additional pressure from existing outdoor concert venues.

peter

[sprintjeløy1926]

I love the look of Barcelona's mini estadi, next to the Nou Camp.

Unfortunately, I'm not smart enough to attach a photo on big soccer so go to this website for a photo.

http://www.soccerstadiums.homestead.com/barcelonab.html

Ok, now picture it with a roof all the way around.

Right, uh huh, yeah, now you see what I'm talking about.

The Brou Camp? ...Ok, now that's just poor.

[mkecane]

Barca's mini:

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/ESP/Miniestadi_FC_Barcelona.jpeg

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/ESP/Miniestadi_FC_Barcelona2.jpeg

It's not bad, and it's probably a cheaper way to go than a stadium similar to Rosenborg's. I just prefer things to be built up, and try to create a more intimidating look and feel.

[doolittledog2]

I actually liked the renderings of the proposed stadium that Krause was pitching a few years ago for Milwaukee. Can't find any pictures of it now though.

Peter, if you aren't coming to the heaven that is Iowa, I am glad to see you in Milwaukee doing what you do so well. Hope everything goes well for you there.

[Shah]

To MKECane:

Why do you say the HDC and Frisco Stadiums look sterile. I can see why you might say that about Crew Stadium, but that one was more or less built on the cheap as it had to be privately funded after the public funding fell trhough. HDC as of right now has the best atmosphere in MLS and I think we should see what the Frisco game environment is like before judging as sterile.

[Supersuperman99]

Yeah Pete good luck hope this one takes off. The TO guys claim that they'll be in the next round but Im still hopefull it'll be 2 American cities and hopefully one is Milwaukee.

[jlasoon]

Yeah Pete good luck hope this one takes off. The TO guys claim that they'll be in the next round but Im still hopefull it'll be 2 American cities and hopefully one is Milwaukee.


Amen!!! :D

[mkecane]

Shah:

Sterile was probably the wrong word. I should just say these stadiums, to me, are less than appealing. HDC and the renderings of Frisco make it look like a soccer version of the new Spring Training stadiums in the Phoenix area. Maryvale (Brewers) and Peoria (Padres and Mariners) are very open, which creates a too-relaxed atmosphere. To me, the openess, the vast concourses behind the seating (more Frisco than HDC), and the lacking proximity to the field inhibit these places from being more of what I think they could be.

Really, I think there are only three important things to the stadium in Milwaukee. Build vertically as much as possible, put seats very close to the field (no track, please), and a roof over the seats. These will create a loud and intimate environment, which should be a huge part of soccer.

To really make MLS and the sss work in this country, I think we need to strive more for what the fans want than just, "Well, a sss beats Giants stadium, and MLS is better than nothing." We need to go for what will make us happy, rather than be happy with what we're given. And of course when it all comes down, my opinion isn't worth much, and it's only only voice out of many.

[Markitect]

Really, I think there are only three important things to the stadium in Milwaukee. Build vertically as much as possible, put seats very close to the field (no track, please), and a roof over the seats. These will create a loud and intimate environment, which should be a huge part of soccer.


Perhaps another advantage of building vertically would be that it could allow for other uses like small shops and restaurants tucked beneath the seating areas, facing out toward the street. This would allow the street level to be "active" year-round, and avoid having a dead space along the streets in between games and during the off-season...and might win some points with those in the Department of City Development, who would push for such street activation regardless of whatever is proposed there, statdium or not.

Those kinds of things are actually outlined in the City's Park East Redevelopment Plan (http://www.mkedcd.org/parkeast), which are the guidelines and regulations that are to be applied to all development projects in the PE corridor.

I actually liked the renderings of the proposed stadium that Krause was pitching a few years ago for Milwaukee. Can't find any pictures of it now though.

Here you go...the renderings from the Krause proposal.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/socc/image/soccer721.jpg
^ This exterior view is a good example of tucking other uses beneath the seating (besides just the concourse/escalator stuff), opening up to the sidewalks and street. That design element would be good to retain. The architectural styling, however, could be just about anything (this one is rather ho-hum).

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/socc/image/soccer2721.jpg
^ An interior view of the Krause proposal.

[khilani003]

I think it's important to rememeber that this development is (and has to be) more than just a Soccer Stadium. Though, rightfully expressed previously, that will be what the public grabs on to. But from a design standpoint, this will be very important. The previous Krause design and most of the other MLS stadiums are just lonely stadiums. This project has a great opportunity to create some of it's own context. The first American example that comes to mind is PGE park in Portland., where the Timbers play. A great urban setting for soccer, with other buildings attached and surrounding. I saw a Women's World Cup game here a couple years back. There really isn't a need to go vertical with the stadium, as you have these other buildings that will give the verticallity to the project. And tucking other things below the seating can be done quite easily without lifting the stadium out of the ground. Yes, the DCD will regurgitate their New Urbanist ideas that Mayor Norgquist laid down, but hopefully that won't lead to a formulaic design (like so much New Urbanist work). PGE Park is a New Urbanists dream with it's sunken field and sidewalk that allows glimpses down to the field.

PGE Park (http://www.pgepark.com/)

I keep going back to this, but I'm very nervous about the current Architectural team. Hopefully Peter has some more consultants that no something about Architectural Design (Bob Greenstreet would not fit this description). This compressed time frame won't help either as there will be a rush to get this approved and often the design is shortshrifted in these scenarios.

[Pygmalion]

An active street level is a must, if it ends up on Juneau we need to have Solomon's Pub tucked under there.

Looking at the stadium renderings again I'm hoping that the new drawings when they come out, have an interior view from the perspective of the north side of the stadium looking south over the field and over (hopefully) the roof into the Milwaukee skyline.

If someone wants to give me hell about the inadequacies of Milwaukee's skyline they can take it up with me over at www.bigskylines.com but for those who remember the drive heading east on the ParkEast spur it afforded a pretty nice view of the downtown skyline, City Hall, etc.

The initial renderings with the skyline in the background could peak the interest of the non-believers.

Camera and media locations should also be placed on the north side looking south. There may be difficulties with this, Sun, glare etc. but an effort should be made, we want the TV audience to have a chance to see Milwaukee.

[Pygmalion]

[/QUOTE] I keep going back to this, but I'm very nervous about the current Architectural team. Hopefully Peter has some more consultants that no something about Architectural Design (Bob Greenstreet would not fit this description). This compressed time frame won't help either as there will be a rush to get this approved and often the design is shortshrifted in these scenarios.[/QUOTE]

Don't know how many notches you have left in your belt but you're running out of designers and commentators to shoot down. You've lopped the heads off of this architectural team (for good reason it seems), Calatrava and Whitney Gould and Greenstreet is now on the pike.

Sullivan, Pei, Loos, Rossi, Gehry, Gaudi and Scarpa are all dead or busy, we'll have to work with Bob a bit. What about Hammel, Green and Abrahamson?

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/feb04/209432.asp

[khilani003]

Don't know how many notches you have left in your belt but you're running out of designers and commentators to shoot down. You've lopped the heads off of this architectural team (for good reason it seems), Calatrava and Whitney Gould and Greenstreet is now on the pike.

Sullivan, Pei, Loos, Rossi, Gehry, Gaudi and Scarpa are all dead or busy, we'll have to work with Bob a bit. What about Hammel, Green and Abrahamson?

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/feb04/209432.asp

So that's all we have? Mediocre locals and Mythical giants? Please.

HGA would be a minor improvement, and the Pier Wisconsin project will prove that they are little more than formulaic designers with little interest in ubran issues or innovation. Frankly, I'm surprised that they aren't involved, as lately they've been getting all the big projects in Milwaukee.

Bob Greentstreet is a great guy, I know him very well. His talent is in mobilizing the non-architect. Catching their imagination and getting them to give money to UWM. He's a great fundraiser and much better choice for a City Planner than most candidates. He'll do some great things for Milwaukee. However, he is not a designer. He taught Architectural Law and drawing at UWM before becoming Dean. He would not be a good consultant. Do you need him on your side? Definitely. Do you want him putting together the presentation boards? uh-uh.

My interest is to demand more out of our city and our architects. Something like the Public Market is a great idea, and will be wonderful for the city, but what would have happened if it was a great design too? Unfortunately it falls short. Will it still be successful? Yes. But it could have been more than that. Not sure how many of you saw the new PabstCity proposal, but it's laughable.

My ideal scenario would be to bring in a competent designer, a small firm, to design the project and work with a larger firm (Zimmerman if they really want to be involved) to work through the final drawings and comlicated issues. That's a common scenario and a very reasonable expectation for such a high profile, city altering project.

[Pygmalion]

So that's all we have? Mediocre locals and Mythical giants? Please.

HGA would be a minor improvement, and the Pier Wisconsin project will prove that they are little more than formulaic designers with little interest in ubran issues or innovation. Frankly, I'm surprised that they aren't involved, as lately they've been getting all the big projects in Milwaukee.

Bob Greentstreet is a great guy, I know him very well. His talent is in mobilizing the non-architect. Catching their imagination and getting them to give money to UWM. He's a great fundraiser and much better choice for a City Planner than most candidates. He'll do some great things for Milwaukee. However, he is not a designer. He taught Architectural Law and drawing at UWM before becoming Dean. He would not be a good consultant. Do you need him on your side? Definitely. Do you want him putting together the presentation boards? uh-uh.

My interest is to demand more out of our city and our architects. Something like the Public Market is a great idea, and will be wonderful for the city, but what would have happened if it was a great design too? Unfortunately it falls short. Will it still be successful? Yes. But it could have been more than that. Not sure how many of you saw the new PabstCity proposal, but it's laughable.

My ideal scenario would be to bring in a competent designer, a small firm, to design the project and work with a larger firm (Zimmerman if they really want to be involved) to work through the final drawings and comlicated issues. That's a common scenario and a very reasonable expectation for such a high profile, city altering project.

You're channeling Whitney Gould :eek: ;) . Allright, low blow. And yes I just did a cheap Google search to come up with all of those names and threw them in there.

Your goal is laudable and I defer to your expertise. There is a fine line however between promoting good design and finding oneself on an esoteric architectural pulpit. It just sounded like you were throwing Greenstreet under a bus there for a second and it seems that people 'round these parts love the guy.

What would be interesting to know is if our former city planning director Peter Park is at all involved in the Colorado Rapids efforts to build a stadium. It seemed as though he was highly respected and if he endorses the SSS plans out there perhaps that could open some eyes back here.

[Minnman]

I'd just like to add that this is a great thread. Keep it up. I'm sure that all of us with actual connections to Wisconsin find the knee-jerk "beer & cheese" posts from non-Wisconsinites about as entertaining and informative as "cap Micheal Ricketts" threads. I'd challenge any other MLS or would-be MLS city to match Milwaukee for the depth and breadth of its stadium discussion threads.

There's a lot more to WI than beer and cheese (though, in all honestly, the beer and cheese kicks ass).