Dome Interior Upgrades

[sutomcat]

When talking about some of these topics, I think it would be prudent to look at BC Place in Vancouver. This stadium was also built as an air supported dome and was later converted to a fixed roof.

As part of their renovation, they expanded the concourses. Here are a few pictures that show the impact on the building from the outside and inside.

The BC Place renovation reportedly cost over $563 million to complete and they had the taxpayers of Canada to cover the bill.

With a fixed roof now in place, it is much easier and practical to open up the footprint of the building, move walls, expand concourses and introduce ETFE or glass to let light into the facility.

These kinds of things directly impact the fan experience but as you can see in these pictures, also have the potential to dramatically affect the look of the exterior of the building.

I am very much against spending millions to say, cover concrete with bricks on the exterior to improve the appearance of the building. I am very much in favor of opening up the building and expanding the footprint using ETFE. These are the kinds of investments that would really make a difference to me.

 

[Sherman20]

Did they get rid of the Giant 44 garbage bag and the tacky “Melo and GMac won the national Championship by themselves” banner?

If so, GOOD.

They need to add our 6 men’s basketball Final Four banners and one women’s b-ball banner.

 

[dollarbill44]

You aren't going to win this apparent controversial topic here. I offered my opinion in the Crane Construction Thread and got kind of dissed for simply my view/opinion that although it's an impressive engineering feat, the architectural/aesthetics of the structure leaves a lot to be desired and quite unappealing. The usual suspects replied with the obvious open up your pocket book, etc. or don't complain garb as if offering my opinion was somehow deeply personal to them, as if I had just called their wife/significant other a ugly fat chit or something unflattering. Quite interesting to say the least.

And some of us said that our aesthetic might be different from yours. That's the thing with aesthetics - it's highly subjective.

 

[Sherman20]

When talking about some of these topics, I think it would be prudent to look at BC Place in Vancouver. This stadium was also built as an air supported dome and was later converted to a fixed roof.

As part of their renovation, they expanded the concourses. Here are a few pictures that show the impact on the building from the outside and inside.

View attachment 190443

The BC Place renovation reportedly cost over $563 million to complete and they had the taxpayers of Canada to cover the bill.

With a fixed roof now in place, it is much easier and practical to open up the footprint of the building, move walls, expand concourses and introduce ETFE or glass to let light into the facility.

These kinds of things directly impact the fan experience but as you can see in these pictures, also have the potential to dramatically affect the look of the exterior of the building.

I am very much against spending millions to say, cover concrete with bricks on the exterior to improve the appearance of the building. I am very much in favor of opening up the building and expanding the footprint using ETFE. These are the kinds of investments that would really make a difference to me.

Yes yes yes. This is great.

 

[orangecuse]

And some of us said that our aesthetic might be different from yours. That's the thing with aesthetics - it's highly subjective.

Yes, of course, and that's fine. If you recall, I had stated at the time that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, you apparently missed the point I was making. And, that is just because I don't care for the aesthetics and find the building's new design to be unattractive, it shouldn't subject one to ridicule or being somewhat dissed because of simply one's opinion.

PS. I hope the Browns get several of their key guys back from injury after the bye for the stretch run.

 

[orangecuse]

When talking about some of these topics, I think it would be prudent to look at BC Place in Vancouver. This stadium was also built as an air supported dome and was later converted to a fixed roof.

As part of their renovation, they expanded the concourses. Here are a few pictures that show the impact on the building from the outside and inside.

View attachment 190443

The BC Place renovation reportedly cost over $563 million to complete and they had the taxpayers of Canada to cover the bill.

With a fixed roof now in place, it is much easier and practical to open up the footprint of the building, move walls, expand concourses and introduce ETFE or glass to let light into the facility.

These kinds of things directly impact the fan experience but as you can see in these pictures, also have the potential to dramatically affect the look of the exterior of the building.

I am very much against spending millions to say, cover concrete with bricks on the exterior to improve the appearance of the building. I am very much in favor of opening up the building and expanding the footprint using ETFE. These are the kinds of investments that would really make a difference to me.

I really wish Syracuse would've incorporated that layer of ETFE that BC Place did (or something similar) that extends all the way around the building that allows for a significant amount of natural light inside. I believe this would've brought in some of the desired light (inside the bowl) without the undesired shadows, glares, etc. on the hoops court, which apparently was the main reason it wasn't done. Obviously, there's no way to do that now, as it would've had to of been done prior to going vertical with the columns and ensuing truss structure as BCP
did. (This interior pic you displayed shows this well)

If you look at the old BC place and the old Dome, they were practically identical buildings. (Pic of old BC Place below)

I'm not sure how much more $$$ that would have added to the project, but even if it were an additional $10-$15 mil or so it would've been worth it IMO. This is an iconic skyline landmark in Syracuse, and something that is supposedly going to be there for another half century. Moreover, my understanding of what made BCP's cost skyrocket was the retractable roof and all of the unforeseen issues that ran into, which of course SU was never doing anyways.

In my opinion, the way BC Place did theirs, it really makes for a more modern look. And, perhaps even more importantly, that the building appears as if it was built like that from the onset, or from the ground up vs. an after the fact "addition" that looks very much like, well, an after the fact and not part of any original design. That is where, IMO, SU really missed the boat here, and not staying with the architect (or another) that was originally on the project.

From an engineering standpoint, it'll be quite interesting to see what SU will actually do moving forward. Nowadays, as we know, just about anything can be done from an engineering standpoint, etc., but of course you have to way the cost vs. benefit factor. And, renovation is always more than doing that same exact attraction, feature, elements, etc. from scratch.

 

[IthacaMatt]

That will wow the recruits.

You know, it would wow the fans, and they are the ones who pay for this all.

 

[IthacaMatt]

When talking about some of these topics, I think it would be prudent to look at BC Place in Vancouver. This stadium was also built as an air supported dome and was later converted to a fixed roof.

As part of their renovation, they expanded the concourses. Here are a few pictures that show the impact on the building from the outside and inside.

View attachment 190443

The BC Place renovation reportedly cost over $563 million to complete and they had the taxpayers of Canada to cover the bill.

With a fixed roof now in place, it is much easier and practical to open up the footprint of the building, move walls, expand concourses and introduce ETFE or glass to let light into the facility.

These kinds of things directly impact the fan experience but as you can see in these pictures, also have the potential to dramatically affect the look of the exterior of the building.

I am very much against spending millions to say, cover concrete with bricks on the exterior to improve the appearance of the building. I am very much in favor of opening up the building and expanding the footprint using ETFE. These are the kinds of investments that would really make a difference to me.

Your second photo is exactly what I'm hoping for. That would be a great improvement in the game day experience.

 

[GoSU96]

I really wish Syracuse would've incorporated that layer of ETFE that BC Place did (or something similar) that extends all the way around the building that allows for a significant amount of natural light inside. I believe this would've brought in some of the desired light (inside the bowl) without the undesired shadows, glares, etc. on the hoops court, which apparently was the main reason it wasn't done. Obviously, there's no way to do that now, as it would've had to of been done prior to going vertical with the columns and ensuing truss structure as BCP
did. (This interior pic you displayed shows this well)

View attachment 190450

If you look at the old BC place and the old Dome, they were practically identical buildings. (Pic of old BC Place below)

View attachment 190451

I'm not sure how much more $$$ that would have added to the project, but even if it were an additional $10-$15 mil or so it would've been worth it IMO. This is an iconic skyline landmark in Syracuse, and something that is supposedly going to be there for another half century. Moreover, my understanding of what made BCP's cost skyrocket was the retractable roof and all of the unforeseen issues that ran into, which of course SU was never doing anyways.

In my opinion, the way BC Place did theirs, it really makes for a more modern look. And, perhaps even more importantly, that the building appears as if it was built like that from the onset, or from the ground up vs. an after the fact "addition" that looks very much like, well, an after the fact and not part of any original design. That is where, IMO, SU really missed the boat here, and not staying with the architect (or another) that was originally on the project.

From an engineering standpoint, it'll be quite interesting to see what SU will actually do moving forward. Nowadays, as we know, just about anything can be done from an engineering standpoint, etc., but of course you have to way the cost vs. benefit factor. And, renovation is always more than doing that same exact attraction, feature, elements, etc. from scratch.

Somewhere between 1 and 410 Million.

 

[dollarbill44]

Yes, of course, and that's fine. If you recall, I had stated at the time that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, you apparently missed the point I was making. And, that is just because I don't care for the aesthetics and find the building's new design to be unattractive, it shouldn't subject one to ridicule or being somewhat dissed because of simply one's opinion.

PS. I hope the Browns get several of their key guys back from injury after the bye for the stretch run.

I'll drink to that!

 

[dollarbill44]

Your second photo is exactly what I'm hoping for. That would be a great improvement in the game day experience.

The ocean?

 

[tipphill]

What's going to burn in the dome, the concrete walls and floors or the metal benches.

you if you get trampled trying to get out. maybe concession stands, locker, rooms roof, suites and countless other areas that we do not have access to.

 

[Moontan]

“Archbold”
I don’t know of the “Archibald” of which you speak.

 

[orlandoorange]

In the state of NY the only way to get proper funding is for a tragedy to open the door to disaster aid.

Based on this season we should be eligible for some sort of disaster relief funds

 

[sutomcat]

A couple of videos on BC Place...they are pretty cool.


ON THE STADIUM ROOF - All Access

It would be cool if someday, SUAD did a similar video. Perhaps with BillSU as the guest.

 

[xc84]

Somewhere between 1 and 410 Million.

I think the reno was $510M and the roof has had many leaks of water and some sort of oily substance.

LOL...of course we would all love it if it had major upgrades of another $400M. That would be awesome. I say we do it!!!

 

[Sherman20]

I really wish Syracuse would've incorporated that layer of ETFE that BC Place did (or something similar) that extends all the way around the building that allows for a significant amount of natural light inside. I believe this would've brought in some of the desired light (inside the bowl) without the undesired shadows, glares, etc. on the hoops court, which apparently was the main reason it wasn't done. Obviously, there's no way to do that now, as it would've had to of been done prior to going vertical with the columns and ensuing truss structure as BCP
did. (This interior pic you displayed shows this well)

View attachment 190450

If you look at the old BC place and the old Dome, they were practically identical buildings. (Pic of old BC Place below)

View attachment 190451

I'm not sure how much more $$$ that would have added to the project, but even if it were an additional $10-$15 mil or so it would've been worth it IMO. This is an iconic skyline landmark in Syracuse, and something that is supposedly going to be there for another half century. Moreover, my understanding of what made BCP's cost skyrocket was the retractable roof and all of the unforeseen issues that ran into, which of course SU was never doing anyways.

In my opinion, the way BC Place did theirs, it really makes for a more modern look. And, perhaps even more importantly, that the building appears as if it was built like that from the onset, or from the ground up vs. an after the fact "addition" that looks very much like, well, an after the fact and not part of any original design. That is where, IMO, SU really missed the boat here, and not staying with the architect (or another) that was originally on the project.

From an engineering standpoint, it'll be quite interesting to see what SU will actually do moving forward. Nowadays, as we know, just about anything can be done from an engineering standpoint, etc., but of course you have to way the cost vs. benefit factor. And, renovation is always more than doing that same exact attraction, feature, elements, etc. from scratch.

Wow. Yea, that layer of vertical ETFE all around the building would have been a great idea to let natural a lot of light in and made the building more attractive from the outside and inside. Looking at the photos of the renovated Dome, the reduced natural light inside seems like one of the biggest disappointments. I guess we’ll see once we get inside the building. I wish the university wouldn’t always go with the cheapest options. They definitely need to expand the concourses and create some glass walls all along the outside.

 

[721Comstock]

Wow. Yea, that layer of vertical ETFE all around the building would have been a great idea to let natural a lot of light in and made the building more attractive from the outside and inside. Looking at the photos of the renovated Dome, the reduced natural light inside seems like one of the biggest disappointments. I guess we’ll see once we get inside the building. I wish the university wouldn’t always go with the cheapest options. They definitely need to expand the concourses and create some glass walls all along the outside.

You can chip in the first $50 million towards getting the stuff on your wish list.

So - you literally have no clue what the inside looks and feels like now, but you feel the need to sh^t on it anyway?

 

[Toga]

right. No highly rated QB is coming here because of our new "_______" exterior cladding.

Years ago didn't some kicker sign here because he liked the concession food?

 

[Toga]

Maybe they could do the interior of the roof with a faux sky like at Caesar's Palace.

 

[kcsu]

How about we put the money towards a great OL coach, medical staff and equipment and Dave Boller