Greg, is it steel and material prices mainly that makes building stadiums here more expensive, or is it expected amenities that drive the cost up? Other? Name: Arteveldestadion Scheduled inauguration: March 2007 Club: KAA Gent Capacity: 20,000 seats Business seats: 1,000-1,200 Sky boxes: 20
In fact, with the post X-Games resodding last summer, they finally stopped putting in grass all the way to the walls at the Home Depot Center. Between the foot traffic and relative lack of light, the corners and the tunnel end at the HDC had become a total mess.
Exactly. Now here's a "rolling roof" I could see people liking...while I'm dreaming (AEL Arena, Greece):
Construction inflation has been rather high for the last few years. In 2004 alone prices were up over 15%. 2005 saw moderation to an increase of only a few %. However the increase for the last quarter was almost 4.71%. If that keeps up inflation for 2006 would be 20.21%. Steel has certainly been a culprit. Right now, as anyone who drives knows, the price of crude oil has hit new highs. Oil is a primary ingredient in asphalt products and plastics. Also transportation costs have increased for everything. Cement prices are up which makes concrete more expensive. Gypsum is up, copper is up, you get the point. Again, the price of the Swansea Stadium is in probably 2004 to 2005 pounds (dollars). Additionally there is a location factor to consider when comparing construction costs between Swansea, Wales and Kansas City. So the $47 million figure needs to be brought up the timeframe this project would bid, probably sometime in 2007.
Greg, guys trying to buy the team and anyone from the cities thinking about building a stadium: I would like a stadium, please. Make it purple with pink seats for all I care, just build one. I'm not picky, really, I swear. I'll even come help build it. That is all, thanks.
Sorry, I do not know what everyone's interworking on this thing. So since you are asking I will fire away. I want the first row of seats to be 6 feet from the touchline and a 2ft below field level. The rows of seats at a pretty steap angle to make it feel like you are right on top of the field. Thus having a more intament and more intimidating atmosphere for games. Blue seats and Kansas City on one side and Wizards on the other. I want 4 stands, kinda like this. Put a jumbotron in 2 of the corners. Club offices in one corner and a pub in the other. A roof is a must atleast over the section of singing fans. Hell the stand behind the goal could be called the cauldron. Put a big cauldron infront of the section that explodes or shoots out flames when the noise level gets high enough. In the supporters section have a couple of spots for buckets of water so we have a place to put out the smoke bombs.
For some reason those photos aren't showing up anymore in the original post, and when I tried to repost it, BS told me 3 pics was too many even though it wasn't a few minutes ago? I saved the images and hosted them myself this time.
FC Utrecht's stadium, all the better to make Dave van den Bergh feel at home when he gets here! Seats 24,428. 44 sky boxes. 2100 business seats.
Utrecht's stadium is, like Utrecht, lovely. As much as there are many things I like about it, the four-stand design has some major flaws from a fan's standpoint. The biggest problem is that it leaves a *lot* of undesireable seats. A lot of folks wind up against a wall, facing one goal, and spending the whole game twisted in their seat. The curved nature of a bowl allows for *much* better viewing angles. One thing I love about PHP and Crew Stadium is that you can watch the game from the concession areas. While you do get a lot of "milling about" this way, it's also extremely pleasant. As for the start and pitch of the lower bowl...I've sat (stood, really) in front row seats at Highbury. It ain't all it's cracked up to be. You can't see jack. But I couldn't agree more with those who want a steeper pitch to the seats are absolutely right. Mike and I were talking about this the other day on the way home. It makes for better views and feeling closer to the game. The single most important factor, IMHO, is roofing. Fortunately, I think that we'll have our opportunity to make that point loud and clear.
I'm not sure I like those middle seats being distant from the field. It's kind of RFKish. What's the advantage to that, or is it probably there to accomodate another event? There's got to be a better way to be able to quickly stage a concert than making a quarter of your stadium unusable. A removable stand section that goes over it on gameday? Could it maybe make that Transformers sound when it switches too? Also, notice on this one I posted before, the trough and extra concrete around the bottom of built in. That looks great to me, though you don't want those stands to be too far from the field. Gives them extra room instead of like at Old Trafford.
Doesn't matter to me because I will not be sitting down there. I will be up high under the roof. But I can garrendarntee you that some smuck will pay bookoo bucks for a seat that close.
How is that?? If you are up agianst the wall to the right you don't need to see any ferther right. The stand ends just after the end touch line. So there would be no reason to be looking that way. I like the old 4 side stadiums better than the new stadiums that have been built in the last 4 years in England. The atmosphere in the new buildings are horrid. They don't seem to have the same acoustics as old barns. In the end, I am sure someone way smarter than me could take this ideas and mold them into something more modern. Taking the general idea of the 4 stand venue and making it better.
I like these two... my only problem with the 2nd is, can we keep the seats all one color or develop a better pattern than that?