Completely right. I didn't know what I was missing until I went to a Nats game in DC. Much more charm on the concourse.
Stadium Discussion
- Thread starter Gene
- Start date
Hopefully, neither.
How about a stadium that, from the outside, actually looks like it belongs in a New York neighborhood? It could have a brick or stone facade, retail at street level and appear like it belongs where it was placed. Such stadiums exist, but not as many as there should be given that most owners go for something splashy.
What if they build something like Boca Juniors where it's a massive steep section for all of the fans and then other side it's just suites?
Which side would you be interested in?
Following up on my earlier post.
This is what I think we do NOT want.
Tottenham's new stadium
These are better examples.
Monaco. Notice how the roofline and facade match the surroundings. People can walk by on matchday and not know or care they are near the stadium. It's just part of the neighborhood.
Minute Maid Park, Houston
Fenway Park, Boston
Craven Cottage, London.
Note too, that there is no reason a more modern, open look cannot be a part of the stadium facing away from the neighborhood - say, out over the water. See proposal for the other side of Craven Cottage.
We are going to be putting something into a crowded, urban environment. The kind of stadium that works in the middle of a large, suburban parking lot isn't going to work for us. I think something that fits within a typical NYC neighborhood is better architecturally and also give us a better chance at approval since we are minimizing the impact on the local area.
Granted - but I think one of the cool things about New York is the architectural heterogeneity. I think I said it somewhere on this thread earlier (ha), but it would be cool to try to represent that heterogeneity rather than to attempt to conform to a homogeneity that doesn't really exist. I also think that post-hoc trying to build within that constraint would be a little bit revisionist / Epcot Center. Although, to be fair, there's a decent amount of that stuff in NYC too lol.Following up on my earlier post.
This is what I think we do NOT want.
Tottenham's new stadium
These are better examples.
Monaco. Notice how the roofline and facade match the surroundings. People can walk by on matchday and not know or care they are near the stadium. It's just part of the neighborhood.
Minute Maid Park, Houston
Fenway Park, Boston
Craven Cottage, London.
Note too, that there is no reason a more modern, open look cannot be a part of the stadium facing away from the neighborhood - say, out over the water. See proposal for the other side of Craven Cottage.
We are going to be putting something into a crowded, urban environment. The kind of stadium that works in the middle of a large, suburban parking lot isn't going to work for us. I think something that fits within a typical NYC neighborhood is better architecturally and also give us a better chance at approval since we are minimizing the impact on the local area.
Last edited:
Following up on my earlier post.
This is what I think we do NOT want.
Tottenham's new stadium
These are better examples.
Monaco. Notice how the roofline and facade match the surroundings. People can walk by on matchday and not know or care they are near the stadium. It's just part of the neighborhood.
Minute Maid Park, Houston
Fenway Park, Boston
Craven Cottage, London.
Note too, that there is no reason a more modern, open look cannot be a part of the stadium facing away from the neighborhood - say, out over the water. See proposal for the other side of Craven Cottage.
We are going to be putting something into a crowded, urban environment. The kind of stadium that works in the middle of a large, suburban parking lot isn't going to work for us. I think something that fits within a typical NYC neighborhood is better architecturally and also give us a better chance at approval since we are minimizing the impact on the local area.
My preferred exterior styling would mimic Radio City Music Hall.
I just want it to pull inspiration from some established NYC architecture. Might as well mimic Yankee Stadium if we are across the street from it, which I wouldn't mind either.
For those curious, here are prior renderings of RBA and the GAL/Parking site near Yankee Stadium.
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-discussion.21/page-204#post-120558
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-discussion.21/page-700#post-253268
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-discussion.21/page-200#post-119124
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?attachments/screen-shot-2018-07-13-at-9-39-51-am-png.8884/
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-discussion.21/page-204#post-120558
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-discussion.21/page-700#post-253268
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-discussion.21/page-200#post-119124
https://nycfcforums.com/index.php?attachments/screen-shot-2018-07-13-at-9-39-51-am-png.8884/
Aggregator! Booooo, hisss..... make your own content you parasite, boooooo!
That sounds plausible, that way, that whole area is completely incorporated. Crap, coming from Westchester, getting out at the station IN the stadium sounds insanely cool.
I’d blow my brains out if it looked like Times Square/RCMH. Times Square is the butt of all jokes at design schools and while something new in that neighborhood is ok to mimic it, because it would appropriately blend in, you won’t see those elements anywhere else in the city. Just won’t happen.My preferred exterior styling would mimic Radio City Music Hall.
I just want it to pull inspiration from some established NYC architecture. Might as well mimic Yankee Stadium if we are across the street from it, which I wouldn't mind either.
How do you dump on someone for wanting to mimic RCMH? Apparently by bringing up an irrelevant part of New York a few blocks away.
Radio City Music Hall looks nothing like Times Square and is not part of Times Square. The building RCMH is in is part of the original Rock Center development, and is Art Deco/Streamlined Moderne. RCMH has a well lit marquee, and Rockefeller Center is close to Times Square. But apart from that they are different and look very different, and beyond that I see no connection, especially in design, between RCMH and TS.
Last edited:
I'm not clear how you'd make something "look like Times Square" unless that means covering the entirety of the outside of the stadium with enormous animated advertisements.
I didn’t dump on someone, I dumped on a part of the city.
Because it’s crap architecture using gimmicks and flashing lights and over-the-top signage to draw attention, but because the entire area is overdensified and overstimulated, so the exact thing it’s trying to do if drawing attention to one area is counterproductive and doesn’t allow focus.
ETA - I was commuting home so couldn't finish my thought
mgarbowski , so here goes:Times Square/RCMH is all part of the Theater district, from 40th street up to 54th. Should I have been more specific and referred to it as the TD, perhaps, but I didn't think I was going to have to defend the written reference "Times Square/RCMH" to somebody accusing me that they're "irrelevant part of New York a few blocks away" - when in actually they are connected and intertwined as being part of the same theater district and the lights, pomp, and over the top signage that encompasses the area. So yeah, it's kinda relevant.
Further, if Mark doesn't like the grouping of RCMH with either Time Square or the Theater District, then I'll approach it from the history/theory side in that architecture is a constructed measure of time/history, society, methods, function, etc to form a particular aesthetic. Design aesthetic has changed over throughout time which is why periods come/go/evolve, and this is why there are the areas of the city are all different because they were built-up during different periods of time when different materials/methods/societal changes were taking place and were in vogue. NYC just so happens to have 5 main styles: Italianate (19th century), Beaux Arts (19th-20th Century), Art Deco (early 20th century), Post Modern (mid-20th century), Deconstructivism (20th-21st century) although the last is more of a catch-all phrase that doesn't really accurately capture the direction of the recent architecture in the city as it's more contextualized than simply deconstructing. Rarely do you see a new building in the city adopt a historical style and/or scale that isn't already part of the surrounding neighborhood as it would lack context and stick out like a sore thumb - white elephants are disingenuous to the neighborhood. That said, it does happen with very mixed results. Would an Art Deco stadium with stylized lighting, intense color, and a style that mimics the geometry of florals, animals, and sunr-strokes look out of place at the GAL site (or most other sites that have been examined as potential places) - yes, most definitely. That area of the Bronx doesn't have a history of the art deco style, at least not a history with a critical mass - the Bronx municipal building qualifies but that's out of the line of site. It'd be the same issue if built in the Brooklyn Navy Yard - Art Deco would be completely out of context. And yet, using the BNY as an example, there's a lot of new construction going up there, that is completely contextual to the warehouse-genre, and yet with a modern twist that is fresh and not dated (the deconstruction).
So yeah, I don't want to see a style dropped in to a neighborhood that forces it to be a white elephant. Somebody posted stadiums that blend in to their surroundings, and that's the appropriate thing to do to to help smooth the way with the NIMBY crowd. That doesn't mean it has to be a dated design, it can and should be a modern interpretation, but the context is important. If it's built next to Rockefeller Center, fine, make it art deco, at least there it makes sense. If next to the Fresh Direct site, draw from the industrial area/warehouses. If on Pier 40, draw upon the imagery of the docks/water/park greenway.
Last edited:
I came across a powerpoint presentation today at work (Coca-Cola). The owners shared it with the local leadership team as an example of some new slides to replace our standard outdated ones. Big NYCFC logo on slide one. They must have cut out the juicy bits, but they were clearly pitching a stadium-focused partnership. Pepsi has a long term contract with Yankee Stadium. Not much, but if they are talking to vendors at this point, something must be moving along.
I didn’t dump on someone, I dumped on a part of the city.
Because it’s crap architecture using gimmicks and flashing lights and over-the-top signage to draw attention, but because the entire area is overdensified and overstimulated, so the exact thing it’s trying to do if drawing attention to one area is counterproductive and doesn’t allow focus.
ETA - I was commuting home so couldn't finish my thought
Times Square/RCMH is all part of the Theater district, from 40th street up to 54th. Should I have been more specific and referred to it as the TD, perhaps, but I didn't think I was going to have to defend the written reference "Times Square/RCMH" to somebody accusing me that they're "irrelevant part of New York a few blocks away" - when in actually they are connected and intertwined as being part of the same theater district and the lights, pomp, and over the top signage that encompasses the area. So yeah, it's kinda relevant.
Further, if Mark doesn't like the grouping of RCMH with either Time Square or the Theater District, then I'll approach it from the history/theory side in that architecture is a constructed measure of time/history, society, methods, function, etc to form a particular aesthetic. Design aesthetic has changed over throughout time which is why periods come/go/evolve, and this is why there are the areas of the city are all different because they were built-up during different periods of time when different materials/methods/societal changes were taking place and were in vogue. NYC just so happens to have 5 main styles: Italianate (19th century), Beaux Arts (19th-20th Century), Art Deco (early 20th century), Post Modern (mid-20th century), Deconstructivism (20th-21st century) although the last is more of a catch-all phrase that doesn't really accurately capture the direction of the recent architecture in the city as it's more contextualized than simply deconstructing. Rarely do you see a new building in the city adopt a historical style and/or scale that isn't already part of the surrounding neighborhood as it would lack context and stick out like a sore thumb - white elephants are disingenuous to the neighborhood. That said, it does happen with very mixed results. Would an Art Deco stadium with stylized lighting, intense color, and a style that mimics the geometry of florals, animals, and sunr-strokes look out of place at the GAL site (or most other sites that have been examined as potential places) - yes, most definitely. That area of the Bronx doesn't have a history of the art deco style, at least not a history with a critical mass - the Bronx municipal building qualifies but that's out of the line of site. It'd be the same issue if built in the Brooklyn Navy Yard - Art Deco would be completely out of context. And yet, using the BNY as an example, there's a lot of new construction going up there, that is completely contextual to the warehouse-genre, and yet with a modern twist that is fresh and not dated (the deconstruction).
So yeah, I don't want to see a style dropped in to a neighborhood that forces it to be a white elephant. Somebody posted stadiums that blend in to their surroundings, and that's the appropriate thing to do to to help smooth the way with the NIMBY crowd. That doesn't mean it has to be a dated design, it can and should be a modern interpretation, but the context is important. If it's built next to Rockefeller Center, fine, make it art deco, at least there it makes sense. If next to the Fresh Direct site, draw from the industrial area/warehouses. If on Pier 40, draw upon the imagery of the docks/water/park greenway.
As the person who suggested RCMH styling, I retract. You're correct.
I don't give a shit what it looks like. I just want a bigger sized field and at least 25k seats.
