- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:23 pm to Daigeaux
Just wondering...how hard would it be to reroute south stadium drive around the south end? Seems to me, all they would need to do is take some of the south end parking lot and divert the street there.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:27 pm to Daigeaux
quote:
all they would need to do is take some of the south end parking lot and divert the street there.
have you ever tried parking at LSU?
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:31 pm to Roberteaux
For school parking is easy if you are not lazy and will park by the bank.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:56 pm to Roberteaux
Props on the design. You made it look worthy of what Tiger Stadium needs.
I didn't care too much for Alleva's description of the new addition, but if it looks anything like this I'd approve. Good work.
I didn't care too much for Alleva's description of the new addition, but if it looks anything like this I'd approve. Good work.
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:05 am to Roberteaux
quote:
have you ever tried parking at LSU?
Yes I have. I'm not talking about losing many parking spaces.
This post was edited on 3/24/12 at 12:06 am
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:07 am to Roberteaux
quote:
rschin2
I don't know what your day job is, but that is quality work...
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:14 am to Daigeaux
quote:
I don't know what your day job is
intern at an architect's office...
(but we don't do these kinds of projects, this was just a project i did on the side)
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:22 am to Roberteaux
Looks fantastic. 
This is everything I hope the expansion looks like. As stated before, keeping the coliseum look consistent with the NEZ is a must, but everything else is perfect. You really should send this to athletics@lsu.edu
This is everything I hope the expansion looks like. As stated before, keeping the coliseum look consistent with the NEZ is a must, but everything else is perfect. You really should send this to athletics@lsu.edu
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:25 am to TigerCard
quote:
I don't remember reading whether they were thinking about connecting the two decks at this time, but when they rebuilt the East deck to match the newer West deck, I figured that the ultimate goal was to connect them. I can't imagine that any new design would not at least account for the future possibility of connecting them, even if they don't do it right away.
They can't connect the east and west uppers because the bottom of one is higher than the other.
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:53 am to The Boat
quote:
They can't connect the east and west uppers because the bottom of one is higher than the other.
I've noticed this also. So what exactly was the plan to tear down the old west upper to build the new west upper? was it for a new press box and club level seating? I'm glad that both uppers match, but why that that huge extra expense?
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:53 am to Roberteaux
Fantastic work! Like others have said, I can only hope the actual expansion looks as good as that.
Does anyone else think putting an upper deck smaller than the one in these renderings is almost worthless? If the upper deck in theae renderings would put TS's capacity at 104,000, then I'm picturing Alleva's proposal as an upper deck with about half the rows, and that just seems silly.
Does anyone else think putting an upper deck smaller than the one in these renderings is almost worthless? If the upper deck in theae renderings would put TS's capacity at 104,000, then I'm picturing Alleva's proposal as an upper deck with about half the rows, and that just seems silly.
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:56 am to Jefferson Davis
well..if it means puting visitor's seats up there, which is what i'm hearing, then i'm all for it.
This post was edited on 3/24/12 at 8:25 am
Posted on 3/24/12 at 12:57 am to Roberteaux
NFPA 2012 requires a sprinkler system for assembly occupancies over 100,000.
Posted on 3/24/12 at 1:02 am to Jefferson Davis
quote:
Does anyone else think putting an upper deck smaller than the one in these renderings is almost worthless? If the upper deck in theae renderings would put TS's capacity at 104,000, then I'm picturing Alleva's proposal as an upper deck with about half the rows, and that just seems silly.
Connecting the decks completely would probably put it at about 110,00. So wrapping them half way would probably put it at around 104 or 105,000 as the op said. And you are correct, allevas proposal for only 1,500 general seating would mean an incredibly small upper portion. I think this design is a nice compromise...not too big, not too small
This post was edited on 3/24/12 at 1:03 am
Posted on 3/24/12 at 4:13 am to Bayouadrink
quote:
NFPA 2012 requires a sprinkler system for assembly occupancies over 100,000.
Hmm. Interesting if true. I bet this factored in heavily.
Posted on 3/24/12 at 6:03 am to WavinWilly
quote:
NFPA 2012 requires a sprinkler system for assembly occupancies over 100,000.
99,500 not including concession, ticket takers and security workers in the stadium. the actual attendance will be very close to 100,000 without going over.
Posted on 3/24/12 at 6:23 am to Roberteaux
that reminds me a lot of boone pickins stadium, looks good though
Posted on 3/24/12 at 7:23 am to Brendoni
really nice!
Posted on 3/24/12 at 8:06 am to ApexTiger
I wish I wouldn't have clicked on this thread, because I know it won't be as nice as this and I can't unsee what I've seen.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News