• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Why Illinois is going to hell #1

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
We Wisconsinners know that Illinois is already hell. It is certainly under us. But, just for the sake of argument, say it is only going there right now. On of the reasons is certainly the Bears. Not only do they suck (they are about the worst team, except maybe sometimes for the Vikings), but the newly remodelled Soldier's Field is an abomination. This wonderful old historic structure has been destroyed in the process of "renovation." Is it any wonder that the official sites of the Bears and Soldier's Field only show renderings or views from the inside? The picture below makes it look much better than it is in person. The stadium belongs on Kunstler's web site or in the Yikes! feature of Preservation Magazine.
 

boiker

Cyburbian
Messages
3,889
Points
26
my fears have been realized.. it honestly looks worse than 'new' comisky park.. i mean.. us cellular field.

anyway.. i asked my wife the other day if we wanted to drive by it when we were near downtown and she said no.. i don't want to be upset.. too late for me.
 

Chet

Cyburbian Emeritus
Messages
10,623
Points
34
boiker said:
anyway.. i asked my wife the other day if we wanted to drive by it when we were near downtown and she said no.. i don't want to be upset.. too late for me.
Dude, your wife actually said that? Damn. Lucky man.
 

mendelman

Unfrozen Caveman Planner
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
13,926
Points
57
It's not the end of the world!

I have been by the revised Soldier Field many times in the last year, and I have really thought about the new addition in relation to the old section's historical and emotional significance, and I have come to the conclusion that it is actually a plus for the city.

Let me explain:
The new section is decidedly different, typologically, than the old, classical revival columned section. On first sight, the juxatposition can be jarring, but that is simply an initial gut reaction. As one looks at it more, and really considers the juxtaposed elements, the whole becomes greater than the parts. (In order to not make this into my doctoral thesis) I will simply say that the new added to the old will encourage discussion about it and the nature of the built environment. It is dynamic: architecturally and historically.

...But this is just my opinion, I could be wrong. (Millerism)

PS, they could have torn down the whole thing and built some non-descript dome like the Pontiac Silverdome.
 

Repo Man

Cyburbian
Messages
2,549
Points
25
I think that looks terrible, kind of like the Millenium Falcon landed on Soldier Field. If you want to renovate an old stadium, here is how you do it:

 

Chet

Cyburbian Emeritus
Messages
10,623
Points
34
Repo Man said:
I think that looks terrible, kind of like the Millenium Falcon landed on Soldier Field. If you want to renovate an old stadium, here is how you do it:
Any one have a photo of the 'old' Lambaeu to compare side by side with the new? Im amazed that they transformed that structure into its curent form without a complete tear down. I alkways hated the way that old green tin box stood out on Onieda Street. Now its a beauty.
 

pete-rock

Cyburbian
Messages
1,550
Points
24
Repo Man said:
I think that looks terrible, kind of like the Millenium Falcon landed on Soldier Field.
I couldn't have said it better myself.

I drove by it just yesterday morning, and it looks worse in person. Couldn't the architects design, at the very least, a complementary exterior? Something that would actually look like it fits and maybe accentuates the columns, rather than hiding them?

The reason this (and new Comiskey) looks so bad? They're both political creatures. Politicians told the architects to design them on the fly and on the cheap so they could get political support ASAP. Public opinion on the stadium's appearance was never a consideration.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,176
Points
51
Yes, it looks bad... but they run a few wires, and you can get 40,000 satellite TV stations.
 

Wannaplan?

Bounty Hunter
Messages
3,217
Points
29
Repo Man said:
If you want to renovate an old stadium, here is how you do it...
I will kindly disagree. It looks like a big freaking warehouse or production facility. It's a stadium, not a canning factory.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,176
Points
51
There are many old stadiums that have the simple box look. For Example, the stands at the York County Fair, (america's oldest fair) has a simular look to it. It is simple, inviting, and makes people want to go have fun and drink beerk. LONG LIVE LAMBEAU
 

NHPlanner

A shadow of my former self
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
9,945
Points
40
I'm biased, but sometimes the modern stadiums look OK....

 

Repo Man

Cyburbian
Messages
2,549
Points
25
Alan said:
I will kindly disagree. It looks like a big freaking warehouse or production facility. It's a stadium, not a canning factory.
Going from this:



To this:

 

Wannaplan?

Bounty Hunter
Messages
3,217
Points
29
Yes, yes, it is probably more attractive. But so what? What about site design? What about connecting it to the neighborhood, mass-transit lines, etc, etc? I know, it's only a football stadium, but still.
 

Repo Man

Cyburbian
Messages
2,549
Points
25
Alan said:
Yes, yes, it is probably more attractive. But so what? What about site design? What about connecting it to the neighborhood, mass-transit lines, etc, etc? I know, it's only a football stadium, but still.
Its in Green Bay!! Mass transit is 8 guys piling into a van or a pickup truck and driving to the game. There are sidewalks connecting it to several bars, a hotel, and restaurants. It is right across the street from a nice residential area. I think that they did an awesome job re-facing and adding onto lambeau. The bowl is staying somewhat intact, so when you are inside the stadium, it won't look that much different (except for some more seats and boxes). If they had put this in a setting like Wrigley with no parking lot, people would have freaked out and never voted to the stadium financing package.
 

SkeLeton

Cyburbian
Messages
4,853
Points
26
Damn... that's a f-ulgy stadium!

How can an architect do such bastardization of a building! (and how can planners aprove such horrible mess!)

The other two stadiums that NHPlanner and Repo Man posted are much better...and I doubt that it would have cost much more to do something decent!
 

jordanb

Cyburbian
Messages
3,232
Points
25
To an architect, that's a "subtle" and "expressive" building. It's expressing the duality of crap and all that, I suppose. (By the way, I'd bet money that the architect who designed that building wears really chichi yellow-tinted glasses).

As far as how it got approved, it was one of Herr Daley's pet projects, and what Der Führer wants, Der Führer gets.
 
Last edited:

Wannaplan?

Bounty Hunter
Messages
3,217
Points
29
Repo Man said:
Its in Green Bay!! Mass transit is 8 guys piling into a van or a pickup truck and driving to the game. There are sidewalks connecting it to several bars, a hotel, and restaurants. It is right across the street from a nice residential area. I think that they did an awesome job re-facing and adding onto lambeau...
Yes, you are right. Green Bay is quite unique. Improving a building so that it looks clean and new, and to make the facilities more modern and usable for the, team, staff, and fans makes a lot of sense. Nobody likes an eyesore. My point is that a stadium is still a stadium - a massive building that gets used probably only eight times a year and is probably surrounded by a sea of parking lots. It is what it is, I know, but still, as a planner I am interested in how it connects to the rest of the built environment and to the people that live and visit there.
 

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
Alan said:
Yes, you are right. Green Bay is quite unique. Improving a building so that it looks clean and new, and to make the facilities more modern and usable for the, team, staff, and fans makes a lot of sense. Nobody likes an eyesore. My point is that a stadium is still a stadium - a massive building that gets used probably only eight times a year and is probably surrounded by a sea of parking lots. It is what it is, I know, but still, as a planner I am interested in how it connects to the rest of the built environment and to the people that live and visit there.
You are quite right. Almost all large public buildings -- convention centers, museums, theaters, parking garages, you name it -- all forget how to merge with, and contribute to the urban fabric. Instead of standing off alone in a field of parking, imagine if they fronted the street? In stead of blank walls (or glass windows that still provide no entry) what if the street level was lined with shops? Why not make it aaccessible to transit, or a train station, as is being considered (and fought by some!) for Madison's Monona Terrace?
 

LouisvilleSlugger

Cyburbian
Messages
216
Points
9
Michael Stumpf said:
This wonderful old historic structure has been destroyed in the process of "renovation." Is it any wonder that the official sites of the Bears and Soldier's Field only show renderings or views from the inside? The picture below makes it look much better than it is in person. The stadium belongs on Kunstler's web site or in the Yikes! feature of Preservation Magazine.
I've seen it up front and it's ugly..I spoke to peope and few seemed to like it as well..I was disappointed with the plans they came up with.
 

Wulf9

Member
Messages
923
Points
22
The new Soldier Field is a facade-ectomy in historic preservation terms -- putting an out of scale and jarring structure behind a historic facade.
 
Last edited:
Top