Regina | New Mosaic Stadium

[Treesplease]

I may be the only one but I like the metal clad siding. I don't particularly like it all over the scoreboard and think they could have done something different, particularly on the legs, but as far as the rest of the stadium, the more people complain about the siding the more I like it.

I particularly like the perforated metal bits that will eventually cover the ramps far better than glass. I get mental pictures of spit and vomit smeared on the inside of the glass on the ramps that you can see from outside that never gets washed off. Keep in mind that this stadium will house semi drunk football fans. And when you factor in pissed up Winnipeg fans at the LDC that I consider to be somewhere between human and livestock (but not completely fitting either category) the metal clad building is completely appropriate.

[wacko]

^ You're right, the perforated metal may look rather utilitarian, but being easy to maintain is a huge plus, which helps keep operating costs down.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

And when you factor in pissed up Winnipeg fans at the LDC that I consider to be somewhere between human and livestock (but not completely fitting either category) the metal clad building is completely appropriate.

Aw, how nice, you made your stadium a little bit uglier for us

[Migs]

I just find it amusing how many times the same people have to complain numerous times about the materials that make up about 50-55% (the rest is glass, Tyndall stone, & perforated metal) of the exterior cladding when the bulk of the exterior of most football stadiums have no cladding whatsoever.

By all means, let's hear it again.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Migs

I just find it amusing how many times the same people have to complain numerous times about the materials that make up about 50-55% (the rest is glass, Tyndall stone, & perforated metal) of the exterior cladding when the bulk of the exterior of most football stadiums have no cladding whatsoever.

By all means, let's hear it again.

Or, alternatively, one could be amused at how many times someone says how perfect everything is, how amazing the features are, boasting about how jealous everyone else must be, asking players if they've seen the new stadium and how excited they are about it, etc.

There is something to be said for a happy medium on both sides of the coin.

[Nathan]

In other news, there's another info session coming up.

Transportation and Parking

The new Mosaic Stadium is a community destination in the heart of our city. Like other modern stadiums in major municipalities across North America, Regina’s is a destination experience where event-goers can enjoy convenient access to a growing number of amenities in the area, undisrupted by vehicles and parking lots.
In keeping with the spirit of the Regina Revitalization Initiative itself, new approaches to stadium T&P are an essential part of our urbanization, growth and evolving economy.

We’ve given careful thought to the best approach to transportation and parking. In addition to collaborating with partners, including Evraz Place and the Saskatchewan Roughriders, we have consulted with area community associations and businesses.

On July 27, we hosted an information session for residents of areas surrounding the new stadium. Nearly 100 residents dropped by to hear about how traffic and parking might affect their neighbourhoods.

The public is invited to an information session on September 20 in Salons 1 & 2 at Evraz Place when we will present our full Transportation & Parking Plan. Members of our T&P team will be on hand to answer your questions and explain our approach. Come anytime between 5-8 p.m.; formal remarks at 6 p.m.

Safe – Our T&P Plan is about keeping event-goers and area neighbourhoods safe. How? By reducing vehicular traffic, effectively managing the flow of people and encouraging alternate modes of travel.

Free – Every way to go to major events is free! Ride the bus on us, grab shuttles from malls and downtown, cycle, or carpool with friends.

Fun – We want your way to go to be easy and accessible so you and your friends can focus on enjoying the experience.

RRI Website

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Migs

I just find it amusing how many times the same people have to complain numerous times about the materials that make up about 50-55% (the rest is glass, Tyndall stone, & perforated metal) of the exterior cladding when the bulk of the exterior of most football stadiums have no cladding whatsoever.

By all means, let's hear it again.

The fact the exterior is way, way, way more than 50% metal siding means that you don't even take the discussion seriously at all.

You're welcome do drool over your new arm rests and I'm going to continue critiquing a pedestrian exterior which is going to sit there for decades, aging poorly.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by UPP

Apples to oranges much? The Leg is the Provincial seat in the middle of an urban park, that was built over 100 years ago.

This is a football stadium, built next to a rail line, surrounded by other sports facilities, with the exact same exteriors.

No, the siding isn't architecturally pleasing, but yes, the roof is.

Now, we could spent 1 billion plus like they did in Arlington Texas for a new football stadium that compliments beautifully the Wal-Mart across the street and the beautiful sea of parking lot around it.

Your last sentence is also ironic, if civic architecture is functional, then it does serve us well.

So on one side you say the comparison is ridiculous. And then you basically say, well actually yeah we probably should just build beige boxes to save money.

I never said we should have built AT&T stadium (especially since I think it's another HKS exterior failure). I said we should have spent a reasonable amount more ($5-10M) to make a long-term civic project better.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

The fact the exterior is way, way, way more than 50% metal siding means that you don't even take the discussion seriously at all.

You're welcome do drool over your new arm rests and I'm going to continue critiquing a pedestrian exterior which is going to sit there for decades, aging poorly.

The metal cladding (not including the perforated metal) that you many of your hours detesting so much constitutes exactly 54% of the exterior wall of the stadium. That is a fact. The rest is glass, Tyndall stone, perforated mesh metal, other materials. That info is from PCL.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Migs

The metal cladding (not including the perforated metal) that you many of your hours detesting so much constitutes exactly 54% of the exterior wall of the stadium. That is a fact. The rest is glass, Tyndall stone, perforated mesh metal, other materials. That info is from PCL.

For all intents and purposes, the perforated mesh metal and metal cladding are the same thing, and both are what he's getting at.

That's not an untenable situation like the people who say we should have domed it or had 5k more upper deck seats (likely 50-100 million more for either, though I do wish the "max expansion capacity" was closer to 45--50k)... He's just saying that for 5% more budget, max, we could have gotten something truly amazing inside and out... I don't think that's an outrageous position to have.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Or, alternatively, one could be amused at how many times someone says how perfect everything is, how amazing the features are, boasting about how jealous everyone else must be, asking players if they've seen the new stadium and how excited they are about it, etc.

There is something to be said for a happy medium on both sides of the coin.

There is a difference between saying the same thing over & over & over again about ONE aspect of the stadium & one speaking to the many many more positive things regarding the stadium. I get that a select few do not like a portion of the exterior cladding & that they feel the partners "cheaped out" even though the exterior of most football stadiums have no cladding whatsoever. To each their own.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Nathan

For all intents and purposes, the perforated mesh metal and metal cladding are the same thing (and both are what he's getting at).

In regards to cladding, no they are not the same thing. Can you guess the price point difference?

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

The fact the exterior is way, way, way more than 50% metal siding means that you don't even take the discussion seriously at all.

You're welcome do drool over your new arm rests and I'm going to continue critiquing a pedestrian exterior which is going to sit there for decades, aging poorly.

To be fair, the vast majority of exterior finishes that people will actually see (90%?) at eye level will be quality materials like glass and stone. The steel siding will be practically invisible. And from distances that you will see it you really won't be able to discrern that it is siding anyway.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Migs

In regards to cladding, no they are not the same thing. Can you guess the price point difference?

A condom with hole poked in it is still a condom.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

A condom with hole poked in it is still a condom.

When comparing exterior finishings of a football stadium that is quite honestly a ridiculous comparison.

Best of luck in Ward 4

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Baker58

As much as I disagree with some of what he posts he is certainly not Novak and actually brings some good info to the site. He isn't always right with some of the info he posts but he has been pretty accurate and informative

I feel they cheaped out with the exterior cladding (and they did) but I also think it did end up looking good. I think it would have looked better with better materials but am happy with how the finished product turned out especially since they had a fixed budget to work with. The guys who did this stadium were definitely pros

He's knowledgeable about many city issues because he sits through every single hour of council meetings.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Migs

When comparing exterior finishings of a football stadium that is quite honestly a ridiculous comparison.

Best of luck in Ward 4

Metal siding. Metal siding with holes in it. Super different.

[UPP]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

So on one side you say the comparison is ridiculous. And then you basically say, well actually yeah we probably should just build beige boxes to save money.

I never said we should have built AT&T stadium (especially since I think it's another HKS exterior failure). I said we should have spent a reasonable amount more ($5-10M) to make a long-term civic project better.

Umm... no I didn't 'basically' say that at all. I pointed out that your sentence was ironic.

If you feel so strongly about spending 5-10 million more... well then pony up. They'd probably even name a lounge after you.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by UPP

Umm... no I didn't 'basically' say that at all. I pointed out that your sentence was ironic.

If you feel so strongly about spending 5-10 million more... well then pony up. They'd probably even name a lounge after you.

I already ponied up $278M and so did you.

[Baker58]

Originally Posted by Migs

He's knowledgeable about many city issues because he sits through every single hour of council meetings.

Brutally dishonest has posted multiple times that he lives in Cathedral. Novak lives in Greens on Gardiner. Brutally Dishonest has also supported things Novak hasnt. He also doesn't have that stupid typing style Novak has with his bold and underline fetish. As I said, I don't agree with him often but you have to stop calling the guy Novak.