Vikings Stadium Miscellaneous Discussion

[Nick]

I totally disagree but this forum is about our urban area. These kinds of discussions about skyscrapers and urban planning would not even be taking place in Wisconsin.

I'm all about Buck the Fadgers sentiment but you seem to have quite the fixation with maligning Wisconsin.

[alleycat]

What's up with the Minnesotan superiority complex? This a rhetorical question and just something I've noticed living here for the last 9 years. We should be proud of this state, but Wisconsin is our mirror image in most ways. Now let's get back to the Viking's stadium.

[uptowncarag]

Of course we should be proud of our state and metro area but we have nothing in common with Wisconsin. The Twin Cities are competing with similar progressive metropolitan areas. That being said,I will go back to my original post. The Vikings stadium should in no way resemble Miller Park. That place is a dump!!!!!!!!

[Le Sueur]

...Soooo

Looks like Mortenson will have incentive to get done early:
Vikings stadium pact puts premium on deadlines (Free)
They really captured a "moment" between John Wood, left, and Ken Sorensen


F&C also linked the contract if anyone's interested:
http://finance-commerce.com/wp-files/cr ... -02-15.pdf
Always good to know you won't miss a play if you get stuck in the elevator...

1. Sixteen (16) 5,000 lb passenger elevators.
2. Two (2) 12,000 lb freight elevator.
3. Twenty (20) escalators.
4. Speakers and traveling cable in elevator cabs.
5. Capacity (traveling cable) for televisions in elevator cabs.

[mullen]

minneapolis is more like milwaukee than we care to admit.

milwaukee has a number of really nice developments going on and has made a ton of strides in recent years. it would be awesome of the twin cities had the fortune to front a great lake. think about duluth and how wonderful that setting is then times it by ten with what the twin cites brings to the table.

i actually like the roof of miller park, it does have a nice silhouette. but baseball shouldn't be played in airplane hangars. target field is better baseball park.

the vikings stadium is pretty much minnesota's best chance for the foreseeable future to create a truly large, inconic structure that can define this place. it's that important. if this becomes just a good football stadium akin to lucas oil stadium, a meh building that serves it's multiple purposes well, the planners and builders will have failed.

[Tom H.]

This is just me, but I would really love to see some traditional "civic architecture" in this stadium. As someone said (maybe in this forum, maybe in another), wild and crazy art is fine when it's on display in the Walker; when it's a public building that many of us will see every day, it should be held to a higher, and more historical, standard. I'm thinking closer to the "original Soldier Field" end of the spectrum than to the "Miami Marlins park" end of the spectrum.

[RailBaronYarr]

This is just me, but I would really love to see some traditional "civic architecture" in this stadium. As someone said (maybe in this forum, maybe in another), wild and crazy art is fine when it's on display in the Walker; when it's a public building that many of us will see every day, it should be held to a higher, and more historical, standard. I'm thinking closer to the "original Soldier Field" end of the spectrum than to the "Miami Marlins park" end of the spectrum.

TCF Bank Stadium comes to mind. Classic brick look mixed with modern details (glass), details like the county names etched in the panels, etc. And they did that with $280M, imagine what the Vikings could do with basically 4x that amount.

I really think it's a shame that places, art, buildings, etc aren't built with the same quality or level of detail as they used to be. So brick was 1900's this but they went the extra distance with flourishes, colors/accent stone around windows, carvings along the roof-line, etc.

[Nathan]

This is just me, but I would really love to see some traditional "civic architecture" in this stadium. As someone said (maybe in this forum, maybe in another), wild and crazy art is fine when it's on display in the Walker; when it's a public building that many of us will see every day, it should be held to a higher, and more historical, standard. I'm thinking closer to the "original Soldier Field" end of the spectrum than to the "Miami Marlins park" end of the spectrum.

I totally get what you are saying here, but I think the thing that a lot of people don't realize is that those "civic" architecture projects we think of were "WILD" developments of their time with the most dramatic architectural techniques and materials and most current trends. Therefor making a new wild artistic stadium just as civic as those buildings (and more true to that idea of civic pride than just mimicking what used to be innovation, IMO).

[Tom H.]

fotoapparatic:

I have to disagree. For centuries, the standard "civic" style in Western cultures has essentially been Greco-roman. (See, e.g., Washington, DC.) Civic structures were built with that aesthetic precisely because they were NOT the wild architectural vogue of the time - they represented a baseline that people were familiar with. They were designed to evoke a shared cultural ethos, not the fickle tastes of an architectural elite.

The Original Green blog has had some fascinating discussions regarding this topic. A few of the best are:
http://www.originalgreen.org/blog/the-p ... -time.html
http://www.originalgreen.org/blog/archi ... -of-6.html

[Nathan]

fotoapparatic:

I have to disagree. For centuries, the standard "civic" style in Western cultures has essentially been Greco-roman. (See, e.g., Washington, DC.) Civic structures were built with that aesthetic precisely because they were NOT the wild architectural vogue of the time - they represented a baseline that people were familiar with. They were designed to evoke a shared cultural ethos, not the fickle tastes of an architectural elite.

The Original Green blog has had some fascinating discussions regarding this topic. A few of the best are:
http://www.originalgreen.org/blog/the-p ... -time.html
http://www.originalgreen.org/blog/archi ... -of-6.html

We had a pretty great discussion on here at one point about peaked roofs and the amount of space they waste on large buildings vs homes and that sort of thing, Does anyone remember where that was?

[John]

This is just me, but I would really love to see some traditional "civic architecture" in this stadium. As someone said (maybe in this forum, maybe in another), wild and crazy art is fine when it's on display in the Walker; when it's a public building that many of us will see every day, it should be held to a higher, and more historical, standard. I'm thinking closer to the "original Soldier Field" end of the spectrum than to the "Miami Marlins park" end of the spectrum.

I totally get what you are saying here, but I think the thing that a lot of people don't realize is that those "civic" architecture projects we think of were "WILD" developments of their time with the most dramatic architectural techniques and materials and most current trends. Therefor making a new wild artistic stadium just as civic as those buildings (and more true to that idea of civic pride than just mimicking what used to be innovation, IMO).

I agree with you both and I think both sense of tradition combined with innovation would be great for the architecture of this stadium. I always think our Target Field is a great example of a sports facility that blends the best tradition of a good baseball field, has a modern unique design , yet fits beautifully with the civic character of the city. It would be great if the Viking's project followed this example.

[Nathan]

We're talking about a world where style and construction technology have changed at increasingly exponential rates. More has changed in architecture since The US was created than from roman times to when DC was created. To say DC wasn't created with the newest techniques and ideas is false as well. The size of the dome on the Capitol for example was radical.

[m b p]

Say no to over-the-top old school intricacy. Say yes to big bold interesting shapes, post-modernism, and relative simplicity. Post-modern only goes bad when boring materials are used... or when design details get too intricate and over the top (except for the wells fargo tower... which is more art deco than post modern).

A building like Soldier Field could fit in with St Paul... where the identity of the city is government... and what our government ideally stands for. I don't think it could fit in Minneapolis. Yes, there is a government contribution to this project. However, the identity of Minneapolis isn't government.

[nasa35]

Great news on the stadium, I have a friend who is married to a mort project manager; this will be nothing like Lucas, nothing!

[John]

Great news on the stadium, I have a friend who is married to a mort project manager; this will be nothing like Lucas, nothing!

Thanks Nasa. That is great news! It's a hint it could be something very contemporary and bold.

[writruth]

If Nasa's source is correct and we mercifully avoid construction of a Lucas-like retread, and instead Mortenson delivers another architectural gem, the years-long Dome-replacement wait will have proven to be worth it.

Excited by the prospects of a retractable glass-dome and a signature architectural landmark for Minneapolis. Bring on the renderings.

[Didier]

Unrelated to nasa's claim, in all of the discussion about not wanting to build a stadium that looks like Lucas Oil Stadium, it should be noted that building a stadium with Lucas Oil's functionality will be paramount.

[John]

Unrelated to nasa's claim, in all of the discussion about not wanting to build a stadium that looks like Lucas Oil Stadium, it should be noted that building a stadium with Lucas Oil's functionality will be paramount.

Well, considering it's the same architect, I can't imagine it won't be a functional stadium from a pragmatic viewpoint. The point is to make it both functional and beautiful. That's what makes a building good architecture.

[nasa35]

Great news on the stadium, I have a friend who is married to a mort project manager; this will be nothing like Lucas, nothing!

Thanks Nasa. That is great news! It's a hint it could be something very contemporary and bold.

Ha, ha....that I don't know. She stated that her husband said they were all laughing at the Lucas rumours and quote; "paranoia".

[moda253]

I hope that it does not resemble Miller Park either. That place is a dump.

The parking lots surrounding Miller Park suck but the building itself is great!

That building is a joke and full of fail all over the place. I mean jsut the ridiculous shadows on the field are enough to drive you nuts watching a game.