the city counsel for the most part thought they would get 15k maybe 16k so werent that bullish on the mls reno but with how quickly the paulsen's (dad still has a hand in it) have paid off the loan and put a good chunk o' funds into the bank thanks to the timbers and thorns fans, I dont think the fight will be that hard.
It would be important to get an understanding of how much more it would cost to install a grass field than to install a new artificial turf field every two years. If there is not a dramatic difference in cost, then, it seems to me, the Timbers should install a grass field. It might be better than the artificial turf field. And the artificial turf field is getting replaced at a significant cost every two years. It would also be important to get a sense from sports playing surface experts how well a grass field likely would do in Providence Park if it had a drainage system. But if the difference in cost between installing a grass field and installing a new artificial turf field every two years is not that significant, and if reasonable experts can make a strong case that a grass field (at least with a drainage system) would do well in Providence Park, then I think the Timbers should try a grass field.
Portland will never have a natural grass playing surface. Ever. There will be no try it out. There will be no trial. Nothing. Do you know why? Money. Do the Timbers spend a couple million dollars every 5 years replacing the turf, or do they spend that each year to MAYBE maintain an adequate to below average grass field?
You don't know that. A lot can happen in, say, 50 years. The Timbers might not install a grass field within the next five years. But maybe they should. And if they do, perhaps they should not have a heating system. That might cause the installation to be too close to the creek.
That's not quite right, it was the Timbers that predicted those attendance numbers. The Timbers produced a revenue estimate for the first five years of operation (at least I think that's what it was, if I can find it I'll edit and link to it here). Included in the estimate was a prediction that they'd steadily average about 14,000 a game. While it looks like that was conservative now, keep in mind what MLS looked like in 2008-2009, some people at the time thought the Timbers were actually overinflating their attendance numbers. Regardless, being conservative on their attendance estimates actually helped them a great deal, if they'd estimated 18000+ right out of the gate I think the city wouldn't have taken them seriously. The fact that they seriously lowballed their estimates actually helps them this time, because it means the city got a much better deal than they expected and that'll allow them to have more trust in the Timbers this time. Also: I believe edrocker is either arguing in bad faith or he's completely unpersuadable, in either case he's dominated and derailed the thread. As such he's the first person I've ever put on ignore, and I encourage all of you to do the same. EDIT: I found the document I was looking for. There's all sorts of interesting stuff in there for someone who is interested in the state of the league in 2008. But what I was specifically referring to was the bit on page 29, which shows the Timbers forecast for attendance in years 2011-2015. They estimated they'd get 14,000 fans a game in 2011 and have a dip each season through 2015 where they predicted they'd only get 11,780. They also only estimated a modest 3% increase each season, which I think they've blown past. At a minimum they've doubled their projected revenue, and the city has benefited in the form of higher ticket tax revenue. Hopefully that'll make this deal more palatable for them.
Yes. Though you should now be focusing on the roof. Focus. Roof. Curve. Tall. Renovation. Thread. Renovation. Roof.
Yes. Tanner Creek is running through a pipe a short distance beneath the field in that picture. In previous renovations, they've had to mark off an area around that pipe so that the heavy machines don't fall through. I would think this should complicate the renovation.
Here's a couple of articles on Tanner Creek. The good news is that it looks like it isn't part of Portland's sewer system anymore. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bes/article/521409 https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2014...g-truth-creek-under-portlands-providence-park
Yes. Pretty much right down the middle of the length of the field and then under where Timbers Army stands.
Found a map from before Providence was renovated for soccer. That half horeshoe shape is the old footprint for Providence. If you finish the horseshoe, that's where the stands they are renovating is located. The line curving through the stadium is Tanner Creek.
I understand that. But I can't even see evidence of it. But thanks for posting the map. Also, when I made this post (https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/stadium-porn-the-portlandia-edition.2043382/page-5#post-35388277), I didn't realize that the creek went under such a large percentage of the stadium. It might be a challenge to put a grass field there. If the Timbers were to install a grass field, perhaps they shouldn't include a heating system underneath the field. The weather doesn't get that cold in Portland, so it might not be that important to have a heating system. Also, it might be problematic to include a heating system over the pipe. Is the pipe strong? If not, could the pipe be replaced at a reasonable cost?
Please stop with the grass posts. But the "pipe" is brick and mortar and has been buried in very damp conditions for about a century.. I'm going to say no.
For anyone interested in how that creek lines up with the actual field of play, here's an overlay I just did.