Printable View
I'm sure we saw sketches of a similar design for Tiger Stadium and I know the funding wasn't there [[or was it?), but it sure would have been nice to have seen a similar, innovative approach to preserving an old ball park.
http://www.governing.com/blogs/view/...partments.html
Looks great except for the part about replacing the infield dirt with concrete?!
It's really sad they didn't leave that last grandstand up between 1st and 3rd. Eventually some development might have come along and wouldn't have cost much to keep it fenced in.
According to the link they replaced 85% of the original structure meaning they tore down the old structure and built one sort of like it in its place.
i loved tiger stadium, I never could figure out what to do with it. A stadium has tiered seating. The floors are all sloped. Nice way to watch a baseball game, but pretty much useless for anything else.
Read the article again they replaced 85% of the volume.Quote:
Originally Posted by gnome
If a stadium with sloped floors is useless for anything else, you haven't been following what they did to Cobo Arena. The thing was gutted to it's shell and the interior is being rebuilt.
The retained the wall:
From the look of it, the exterior was brick; Tiger stadium was a mish mash of siding, cinder block and who knows what-all. Not an attractive look for condos or apts.Quote:
About 85 percent of the building’s volume was torn out, so essentially a new structure was created in the shape of a stadium while maintaining the original wall.
Are you comparing an indoor arena that had seating for maybe 15,000 to an outdoor stadium that held 55,000?Quote:
Originally Posted by MSUguy
tiger stadium was a patchwork of construction projects going back to when it was a hay market. It was never a single structure like Cobo. Holy smokes man, just because sporting events occurred inside both does not make them the same thing.
tiger stadium was great. For baseball.
Remember Tiger Stadium was partially demolished for a time, while they tried raising money to save it. My point is it could have been saved in some fashion, there is no reason this exact type of project could not have been done here in Detroit.Quote:
Originally Posted by gnome
It's an interesting concept. It could have been done, but in a differnent way in detroit. Maybe keep that last bit of grandstand intact, and then build out the rest with condos. Keep the ball park in the middle.
There's talk of redoing Wrigley field in Chicago which would probably involve cutting off the visual access from the famed rooftops around the stadium. Makes sense business wise but kinda sad in a way.