July 30, 200520 yr Just to be clear, that is a model made by an independent architect, not something that has been or would be commissioned by the Marlins. They are not even close to be ready to build.
July 30, 200520 yr That looks horrible,are the Marlins planning to build it in Saturn??That stadium is weird,we need the Ballpark to have the Miami touch to it.
July 30, 200520 yr That looks horrible,are the Marlins planning to build it in Saturn??That stadium is weird,we need the Ballpark to have the Miami touch to it. 880321[/snapback] keep in mind that this is a no color model. I like the futuristic look. something that would stand out and caught the attention of people.
July 31, 200520 yr That looks horrible,are the Marlins planning to build it in Saturn??That stadium is weird,we need the Ballpark to have the Miami touch to it. 880321[/snapback] just put a big guayabera on it and there ya go... "the Miami touch"
August 1, 200520 yr It looks like the half-constructed death star. Not a huge fan. I feel like it's trying too hard to be edgy and futuristic. When designers do that, the look becomes passe way too quickly.
August 1, 200520 yr I love classic ballparks with a lot of brick. This design looks like... well yeah, the half-constructed Death Star. Good description, FlummoxedLummox.
August 2, 200520 yr Has it occurred to anybody that the model you see there is somebody's "Science Fair Project" and that the website linked is a forum for architects or architecture students to voice their "opinions." I could have my buddy who has his own architecture firm and is an architect slap up a balsa model of the stadium and submit it to that site.
August 2, 200520 yr Before anyone gets too excited, just jog your memory bank as to the last stadium that looked like a space ship on the outside... The Big "O" in Montreal. Massive cost overuns and took 15+ years to finally finish. If the Marlins are so cash-strapped as they say they are, then they need to stick to the basic proven retro-baseball stadium formula and work with it (Minute Maid, Miller Park, etc.), not go off on some space odyssey with cutting edge architecture that will skyrocket costs. Wesbters dictionary states (not really, but): Cutting Edge Architecture = Very Expensive $$$
August 2, 200520 yr Guess the majority of you are not too familiar with architectural models. As SoFlaFish correctly pointed out, this is nothing more than a cheap, un-embellished model made out of balsa wood; the purpose of which, I'm sure, is to convey structural integrity and basic design, and nothing more. In other words, the finished design for whatever this is (it may not even be the "official" design, like Ross said, but rather a student's homework) is not supposed to look like a "spaceship" or "half-constructed Death Star". Naturally, folks with a background in design are able to make that distinction. The website where the pics are posted is set up for that specific crowd, not the average joe; hence, the confusion. Hope that helps.
August 2, 200520 yr The retro look wouldn't fit in down here. The Petco look would fit in perfectly. Let me add Miller Park was tens of millions of dollars overbudget. Retro doesn't necessarily mean less expensive. You also have to remember Olympic Stadium was the first of it's kind. Most of the construction that took years to complete was the 55 story tower supporting the "retractable" roof.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.