urbanMSP

Please, let The Nicollet lie in its over-hyped grave.

No. Open the grave. That tower is awesome.

Ah, the Nicollet, what could have, should have been.

Alas, I remember getting a postcard with the Nicollet glistening in the Minneapolis night skyline. It was a stunner that would have added so much the architectural signature of the city and south end of the mall.

i didn't bring it up to upset anyone... just to inform people that great architecture often comes off of a scribble on a napkin.

I find it interesting right now that so much of the negative press circling the stadium is regarding items that the state is responsible for. If it's such a bad deal, why did they sign up for it. Yes, the pull tabs are far short of expectations...hold the company that sells them, (and sold our legislators a bill of goods), responsible; if they promised a certain level of return, they need to own up to part of it, or take it out of the legislators coffers as they're the one's who bought the story. If the Governor had wanted more money from the Wilf's he should have done it up front, not beg for money after everything has been agreed upon, he looks like a total fool; it's like giving money at church then asking for change from the priest after the service is over.
I'm trying to remember if there were these type of attacks with the Twin's stadium. I can remember land holders trying to hold out for more money and having to go to court, and I remember a lit of negative talk about the Pohlads, but I can't remember if it was this bad?.

This was one of the original drawings of the weisman... so... yeah, don't worry too much about the napkin sketch.

The point is even the RENDERINGS look horrible. Sure every project starts with a rough sketch, but then some actual work is done to design the building. It looks like no thought was put into this, just a few random angles and giant blank walls. No attention to detail. Just a gimmicky giant bunker with some giant clear doors that will probably break and a clear roof. That will look great when its covered in bird poop. Did they even hire an architect? Wouldn't surprise me this project is done on the cheap just like the Metrodome. Sorry, I'm just tired of peoples egos and trying to be 'creative' and 'progressive' when it just turns into a race who can be the most ridiculous.

The point is even the RENDERINGS look horrible. Sure every project starts with a rough sketch, but then some actual work is done to design the building. It looks like no thought was put into this, just a few random angles and giant blank walls. No attention to detail. Just a gimmicky giant bunker with some giant clear doors that will probably break and a clear roof. That will look great when its covered in bird poop. Did they even hire an architect? Wouldn't surprise me this project is done on the cheap just like the Metrodome. Sorry, I'm just tired of peoples egos and trying to be 'creative' and 'progressive' when it just turns into a race who can be the most ridiculous.

You've made some pretty ridiculous claims here. Do you really need to be so... well, whatever. I love the design - it fits in with Minneapolis modernity, although the blank walls to the north and east are a bit severe. From the inside, or approaching from the city side, it will be amazing.

2/3 of the north elevation at street level is glazing. That's not exactly a giant blank wall.

it's subjective and i have a good friend who detests modern architecture. he hates the walker, jokes the guthrie is just a big downtown ikea, finds the weisman a shiny pile of crap and thinks the only good painting was done in the 16th century.

then there are some who just hate the stadium on the merits because it's a lot of public money and any design, no matter how awesome would be criticized. cya at the groundbreaking.....

it's subjective and i have a good friend who detests modern architecture. he hates the walker, jokes the guthrie is just a big downtown ikea, finds the weisman a shiny pile of crap and thinks the only good painting was done in the 16th century...

I'm pretty sure it was architect John Howe who, when asked by a couple to design them a traditional plantation-style house, replied "Why? Do you own slaves?"

http://johnhowemovie.com/johnhowe.php

The point is even the RENDERINGS look horrible. Sure every project starts with a rough sketch, but then some actual work is done to design the building. It looks like no thought was put into this, just a few random angles and giant blank walls. No attention to detail. Just a gimmicky giant bunker with some giant clear doors that will probably break and a clear roof. That will look great when its covered in bird poop. Did they even hire an architect? Wouldn't surprise me this project is done on the cheap just like the Metrodome. Sorry, I'm just tired of peoples egos and trying to be 'creative' and 'progressive' when it just turns into a race who can be the most ridiculous.

STOP THIS PROJECT!!! GMAN ISN"T SATISFIED!!!

I understand that we all have opinions. However, I wish people would make "I statements" about those opinions. like.... "I don't feel that...." or "My belief is that...." Instead, people make it sound like they are the final word out there... when in truth, they're just some guy (or gal). Talk about egos.

I'm pretty sure they hired an award winning architect. But... if you, just some guy , want to tell that award winning architect he sucks... email HKS.

to the roof... There was an entire team of people out there who designed the fabric. There's an entire team of people out there that evaluated the fabric. There's an entire team of people who OKd the thing to happen. The roof is self cleaning... No bird poop... ever.

You're free to love or hate art/design/architecture. However, it seems that your reasons for not liking this stadium are non-existant (bird poop on the self cleaning roof), ridiculous (the preliminary sketch looks like a 5 year old drew it... all preliminary sketches look like children drew them), or completely speculative (the giant glass doors will probably break).

You do make a fair point about giant blank walls. However, find a stadium that doesn't have a giant empty blank wall. They all do. This stadium breaks up the giant walls with angles and different materials.

it's subjective and i have a good friend who detests modern architecture. he hates the walker, jokes the guthrie is just a big downtown ikea, finds the weisman a shiny pile of crap and thinks the only good painting was done in the 16th century...

I'm pretty sure it was architect John Howe who, when asked by a couple to design them a traditional plantation-style house, replied "Why? Do you own slaves?"

http://johnhowemovie.com/johnhowe.php

So much awesome in that quote.

I find it interesting right now that so much of the negative press circling the stadium is regarding items that the state is responsible for. If it's such a bad deal, why did they sign up for it. Yes, the pull tabs are far short of expectations...hold the company that sells them, (and sold our legislators a bill of goods), responsible; if they promised a certain level of return, they need to own up to part of it, or take it out of the legislators coffers as they're the one's who bought the story. If the Governor had wanted more money from the Wilf's he should have done it up front, not beg for money after everything has been agreed upon, he looks like a total fool; it's like giving money at church then asking for change from the priest after the service is over.
I'm trying to remember if there were these type of attacks with the Twin's stadium. I can remember land holders trying to hold out for more money and having to go to court, and I remember a lit of negative talk about the Pohlads, but I can't remember if it was this bad?.

It's hard now to separate the various phases of the Twins project; certainly there was plenty of unhappiness and negativity at the start but I don't recall it being anything like with the Vikings stadium. There are several reasons for that, but at least one piece that quickly helped the Twins ballpark out was the fact that Pohlads and the Twins never chose to take their legal requirements as the entirety of their commitment - they showed a surprisingly genuine interest in making the ballpark as good as it could be, for the team, the fans and the city, and were quite willing to spend additional funds to help make that a reality. It demonstrated that they were interested in the long-term success of the space and not just in maximizing the rising value that the stadium would give the team.

It's still early; at this point in that process I don't know that the Twins had done any of the things that demonstrated their commitment to the project yet. But I will say that the Wilfs seem more concerned about the value proposition and less concerned about the project's usefulness to the city and the community that did the Pohlads. To me this is a marked and important difference because I had been quite skeptical of the Twins deal, and the Pohlads and the team surprised and impressed me.

Well stated, Talindsay, and I'd agree with your assessment. For some reason, the Wilf's have seemed consistently tone-deaf in the way they've handled this whole thing.

For example, they're the ones that got called out in a real estate law suit and will have to pay out millions of dollars. The state (quite reasonably, if for no other reason than political cover) asks them to provide some financial information so that everybody can be comfortable that they'll still be able to pay for their share. The Wilf's balk at this, and refuse to provide the information, thus delaying the investigation. Then, the Wilf's refuse to negotiate with the state on financial terms while the investigation is ongoing, and warn that this could delay the project and cause cost overruns. WHAT?

The Pohlad's seemed to go the extra mile once construction started and actually upgraded some things on their own dime. Let's hope the Wilf's follow suit, but I won't hold my breath.

pohlads are now re-hiring the same manager who has lost 92+ games 3 yrs in a row......hes gotta be signing cheap!! without mauer the salary of the team rivals houston! they are the richest owners in baseball!

Gettin' into the weeds here...

The point is even the RENDERINGS look horrible. Sure every project starts with a rough sketch, but then some actual work is done to design the building. It looks like no thought was put into this, just a few random angles and giant blank walls. No attention to detail. Just a gimmicky giant bunker with some giant clear doors that will probably break and a clear roof. That will look great when its covered in bird poop. Did they even hire an architect? Wouldn't surprise me this project is done on the cheap just like the Metrodome. Sorry, I'm just tired of peoples egos and trying to be 'creative' and 'progressive' when it just turns into a race who can be the most ridiculous.

have you read anything about this stadium?

The Twins stadium is a completely different animal. It had zero state dollars involved so it has an entirely different political face.