Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="orangecuse, post: 3467925, member: 668"]
I originally replied to a poster commenting on the implication that due to hoops being played in the Dome is the reason ETFE was ruled out.  I merely suggested that there was other options and not an all or nothing proposal.  I pointed out how BC Place added a section of ETFE above the wall height that wrapped all around the perimeter before erecting the new roof. That would've allowed a significant amount of natural light into the building concourse and stands areas without casting the undesired shadows down onto the court.

Many were hoping for more natural light being brought into the building, and that was being pitched at one time by SU (Sala) how that was pretty important. When the announcement was made that a very similar PTFE (vs. ETFE) material was being used as the existing, with the same general effect, I recall many here finding that to be quite disappointing. In regards to your aspirations comment, I don't believe one to be substantially more ($$$) than the other as much as particular application, although I'm not certain.

It remains to be seen what SU may do in the future to bring in more natural light.  There are some things doing after the fact that aren't reasonable to do so, especially from an economic feasibility standpoint. And, there are some which are, like the improvements you mention, which can be accomplished without much difficulty at any time duration, phase, etc.

In regards to your [I]'hold the fire'[/I] remark, there hasn't been any [I]'fire'[/I] coming from me. Although, it's certainly interesting how it seems I'm fending it off when simply providing a non-combative opinion/viewpoint. :)
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?