When will stadium expansion start again?

[vegattk]

Plus I think it would be wise to make sure the demand will be there for additional seating in the FBS.

Even for you, Veg, this is a completely out-of-touch statement.

I'm convinced you haven't been to a game in 8 years...

Veg does a good job of speaking for himself, but I believe he's bringing up the possibility that we might initially struggle on the field in FBS and consequently our gate is impacted.

Speculation and "what if's" don't hold much water when we're talking about a stadium that's been at 130% capacity for 5 years against relatively uninteresting competition.

He's reaching (as usual), to try and cast doubt and negativity on the FBS move.

I doubt there are many sports venues in the entire country that have more cause for expansion than Kidd Brewer Stadium.

Come on Gonz.. Not EVERY post I make is going to be anti-FBS... (But in a perfect world they would be! )

Over-Capacity seating stats at ASU are misleading

1. People WANT to sit on the grass bank
2. Students WANT to pack in like sardines in primo seats
3. The addition of temporary bleachers in the end zone (Which would be nice if there were permanant IMHO) helps alleviate the problem of people who don't want to be packed liked sardines, deal with drunk students, get mud on their rumps, or pay Yosef to sit in better seats.

What I'm trying to say is that we HAVE the room. 130% might say that 30% of our fans don't have a place to sit, but I'm willing to believe that the majority of the 30% WANT to be on the grass or with the students.

Has anyone here ever had a problem getting/finding a seat?

[Maddog1956]

Just a couple comments.

"Anytime you build that large of a structure that high in the air the cost goes up dramatically."
Actually cost goes down the higher you build (to a point), the first level is always the most expensive. Even excluding the cost of land, the roof of one level is the floor of the next. Maintenance is also less, because there is one roof to maintain. http://evstudio.info/price-per-square-f ... buildings/

"We could have also saved excluding some of the extravagance in the suites and club section."
Suites and club seats more than pay for themselves if they are full (our are). That's why everyone is building them.
"I really think that when that is seriously examined you will not see the field lowered."
Lowing the field below ground level is an option in the piedmont and more east, but not so much in the mountains where everything is rock and has to be hauled away. It can be done, but it's not easy. Plus (like you said) you never know what you could hit.

I think the feasibility study was pretty clear about what was going to happen. Leave the track alone, and generate revenue from upgrade seating. Owen's will mostly be athletics dorm's with most funding coming from non-athletics money and suites and club seating added to it for almost nothing. More regular seating will be added in front of owen's as needed.

http://issuu.com/goasu/docs/feasibility ... rt_2011/61
****** from the study *****
The addition of the Athletic Center in 2009 allows ASU direct entry into FBS
with little to no immediate need for facility upgrades

The stadium itself could benefit from upgrades that would generate more revenue and
provide upgraded fan amenities on game day. Creation of more premium seating and
suites must be in the future plans for the north and east sides of the stadium.

Multi-purpose use of the stadium field and track may be the best possible solution at this
time due to the lack of land and required space needed for a dedicated track & field/field
hockey facility.

Primary Areas of Concern:
1. Revenue generating areas and seating
2. Fan amenities
3. Parking
4. Multi-purpose use of the field and track

[asumike83]

Expanding and upgrading KBS is a need, not just a want for Appalachian IMO. The Sun Belt won't make us do it but I would be surprised and disappointed if it isn't done by our first full season in 2015.

Aside from the seating needs evidenced by averaging 130% of permanent capacity, it would help scheduling as well. If we want to schedule regional FBS opponents with good traveling fan bases, a 21,000 seat multi purpose facility would be a tough sell for a home and home. I doubt that is lost on Cobb and Co.

[bh2oson]

If App's future falls somewhere between Veg and Gonzo's predictions I think we will be ok. I do enjoy reading both perspectives. That is what makes this board fun.

[Kgfish]

Just a couple comments.

"Anytime you build that large of a structure that high in the air the cost goes up dramatically."
Actually cost goes down the higher you build (to a point), the first level is always the most expensive. Even excluding the cost of land, the roof of one level is the floor of the next. Maintenance is also less, because there is one roof to maintain. http://evstudio.info/price-per-square-f ... buildings/

"We could have also saved excluding some of the extravagance in the suites and club section."
Suites and club seats more than pay for themselves if they are full (our are). That's why everyone is building them.
"I really think that when that is seriously examined you will not see the field lowered."
Lowing the field below ground level is an option in the piedmont and more east, but not so much in the mountains where everything is rock and has to be hauled away. It can be done, but it's not easy. Plus (like you said) you never know what you could hit.

I think the feasibility study was pretty clear about what was going to happen. Leave the track alone, and generate revenue from upgrade seating. Owen's will mostly be athletics dorm's with most funding coming from non-athletics money and suites and club seating added to it for almost nothing. More regular seating will be added in front of owen's as needed.

http://issuu.com/goasu/docs/feasibility ... rt_2011/61
****** from the study *****
The addition of the Athletic Center in 2009 allows ASU direct entry into FBS
with little to no immediate need for facility upgrades

The stadium itself could benefit from upgrades that would generate more revenue and
provide upgraded fan amenities on game day. Creation of more premium seating and
suites must be in the future plans for the north and east sides of the stadium.

Multi-purpose use of the stadium field and track may be the best possible solution at this
time due to the lack of land and required space needed for a dedicated track & field/field
hockey facility.

Primary Areas of Concern:
1. Revenue generating areas and seating
2. Fan amenities
3. Parking
4. Multi-purpose use of the field and track

The data you gave is based on a 2-4 story building. The AC is 7 stories. I'll stick by what my customers, some site managers for some large GC', said. The suites do pay for themselves - in the long run - but all those extras can extended the time frame quite a bit. Many of the plush amenities are on the club level Did we really need black urinals, commodes and sinks with gold plumbing and valve caps engraved with a Block A?

[vegattk]

If App's future falls somewhere between Veg and Gonzo's predictions I think we will be ok. I do enjoy reading both perspectives. That is what makes this board fun.

Just so everyone knows that I really do hope Gonz's dreams come true. After all, it would mean that App is a rousing success and we're all rolling in the black and gold hype wagon to college glory! That would be awe.some.

I'm just trying to tone down some of the rose colored thoughts and bring some much needed reality to the equation..

But by God I hope he's right! After all.... There's no turning back now...

[CornCobPipes]

I do not like the design in that picture.

If we are adding we need to do it right, it's starting to look like an erector set stadium.

As long as the track is removed, I think it will be an improvement but I'd prefer they did not add a third level on the East side. Instead, it would be great to add those extra seats by connecting the North end zone seats to the East/West sides and have a horseshoe design.

I've also wondered about that third deck on the "State" side. The second deck that exists now already damn near hangs over stadium drive. Will they have to add spiral ramps to reach that level?


The administration needs to be leaking every single render they come up with. THAT is how you hype up this FBS jump and garner Yosef Club donations. But as usual, crickets from the top of the Mountain.

The ultimate solution to this stadium design debacle, however EXPENSIVE, is to build over the top of the east side lower stands from the upper deck down with a different corrected pitch angle allowing to cover part of the track. This could be done on the west/home side as well starting from the little mezzanaine deck correcting the pitch to slope down to cover part of track. This would also create more space underneath for expanded concourse area and more bathrooms and concessions. Much of the stands are chunking up anyway, especially the lower east side. Too me this would be better for the long run and less expensive versus grading out the field to lower. Especially if it is indeed true about all the things discussed through the years like underground streams, etc. ULTIMATELY THE TRACK HAS GOT TO GO FOR US TO GET TO THE FBS LEVEL OF EXCITEMENT WE ALL WISH FOR!

[Maddog1956]

The data you gave is based on a 2-4 story building. The AC is 7 stories. I'll stick by what my customers, some site managers for some large GC', said. The suites do pay for themselves - in the long run - but all those extras can extended the time frame quite a bit. Many of the plush amenities are on the club level Did we really need black urinals, commodes and sinks with gold plumbing and valve caps engraved with a Block A?

**** this is what I was pointing out ****

Finally, the high rise buildings see the most economic cost per square foot. For buildings between eleven and twenty stories tall, there is approximately an 11% savings over the mid rise buildings and 15% over low rise. this is largely due to the fact that similar elevator, HVAC and service equipment requirements are required for mid and high rise, resulting in more economy of scale for going up.

***** end quote ****

Also there is no additional footings, grading, land cost (I know they own the land but you have to figure in the "opportunity cost"), and less roof, etc. Building up is almost always less expensive.

Black, white, gray, etc toilets, sinks are almost always the same price (or little difference), but I don't know about the plumbing, but I imagine it about the same. But for people paying $100k for suites and $25k for club seating (plus season tickets, and not including naming rights) it's chump change, if it helps them sell. I certainly was impressed by them. They just have to be careful not to build more then they can sell, which they haven't as of yet. Maryland did and it made them go in the red.

If we're 30% over sold like some have said, we need about 3,000 - 4,000 more seats short term (leaving some seating "on the hill"). That could be covered easy with 15-20 suites and 600-1000 club seats and minor additions to the student section.

You make some other good points but the building out vs up, and black vs white just don't hold.

[ggasu]

Very simple. The objective is to have the loudest stadium possible. To do that you have to remove the track and build closer to the field.

Montana is the loudest stadium for its size, by far. I had friends who played for App against Auburn and Montana, who told me the Griz stadium was much louder than Auburn on the field. (For those who don't know, we were ahead of Auburn in the 4th, so they were not sitting on their hands)

Not rocket science...Just copy the Montana stadium the best you can. If that means getting 10 feet from the field, get 10 feet from the field.

[HkyMtneer]

Plus I think it would be wise to make sure the demand will be there for additional seating in the FBS.

Even for you, Veg, this is a completely out-of-touch statement.

I'm convinced you haven't been to a game in 8 years...

Been to EVERY home game since 1997. Last season I'm pretty sure there were a few games where I could see the glare of empty seats on the upperdeck pretty clearly...

This is true...you could definitely see a bit more "metal" last season than we have become accustomed to seeing at KBS. That having been said, I still think you begin to work towards an expansion plan, and you do it now. The kicker for me is that you do it first-class or you wait, nothing "on-the-cheap" which the trailers that still remain on top of the STATE side proclaim. I think we expand now, regardless of demand, and place the impetus on us (and by us I mean the athletic department, APP Nation, everyone) to pack the stadium. I'd rather have 30K physical seats and worry about needing to fill them than the current 22K and 35K wanting in. After all, if we do approach those numbers we know what will happen if people don't have a seat, they'll just leave at halftime en-masse, as is so often the case anyways. Which also speaks to the need to find a way to keep people engaged, even in a blowout or bad weather. Yes, you are going to lose some folks but we need to find a way to "hold" onto the fan for as long as we can, to keep butts in seats for as close to 4 full quarters as possible. What is comes down to is this: as a stadium junkie and someone that considers himself a bit of an "amateur expert" (if that is possible) on matters regarding sports facilities, I'm fine with seeing 105% of capacity, but when I'm seeing numbers approaching and above 130-140% of capacity then there is a problem, a long-term sustainability problem, on both the physical plant of KBS and the fan experience of a day at the Rock.

[huskie3]

"on-the-cheap" which the trailers that still remain on top of the STATE side proclaim.
I have friends that are in one of the units. They and all the others in that unit are long-time and big-time APP supporters. The youngest is past 70, they chose that seating to be in an accessible area for them and a short walk from YOSEF room. The units are not distracting when you consider the usefullness of them.

[Gonzo]

If App's future falls somewhere between Veg and Gonzo's predictions I think we will be ok. I do enjoy reading both perspectives. That is what makes this board fun.

I really don't feel like I have some utopian vision of the future of Appalachian. I expect ~.500 seasons for a year or two and I don't expect any changes to happen to the stadium until next off season at the earliest.

If reality falls between my predictions and Veg's doomsday future, we will have underachieved significantly.

[JTApps1]

The ultimate solution to this stadium design debacle, however EXPENSIVE, is to build over the top of the east side lower stands from the upper deck down with a different corrected pitch angle allowing to cover part of the track. This could be done on the west/home side as well starting from the little mezzanaine deck correcting the pitch to slope down to cover part of track. This would also create more space underneath for expanded concourse area and more bathrooms and concessions. Much of the stands are chunking up anyway, especially the lower east side. Too me this would be better for the long run and less expensive versus grading out the field to lower. Especially if it is indeed true about all the things discussed through the years like underground streams, etc. ULTIMATELY THE TRACK HAS GOT TO GO FOR US TO GET TO THE FBS LEVEL OF EXCITEMENT WE ALL WISH FOR!

This really would be the best possible solution to get the stand closer to the field. It would definitely be cheaper than lowering the field and could be done in one off season. Just make both sides match so we can build end zone seats that connect properly.

[Kgfish]

The data you gave is based on a 2-4 story building. The AC is 7 stories. I'll stick by what my customers, some site managers for some large GC', said. The suites do pay for themselves - in the long run - but all those extras can extended the time frame quite a bit. Many of the plush amenities are on the club level Did we really need black urinals, commodes and sinks with gold plumbing and valve caps engraved with a Block A?

**** this is what I was pointing out ****

Finally, the high rise buildings see the most economic cost per square foot. For buildings between eleven and twenty stories tall, there is approximately an 11% savings over the mid rise buildings and 15% over low rise. this is largely due to the fact that similar elevator, HVAC and service equipment requirements are required for mid and high rise, resulting in more economy of scale for going up.

***** end quote ****

Also there is no additional footings, grading, land cost (I know they own the land but you have to figure in the "opportunity cost"), and less roof, etc. Building up is almost always less expensive.

Black, white, gray, etc toilets, sinks are almost always the same price (or little difference), but I don't know about the plumbing, but I imagine it about the same. But for people paying $100k for suites and $25k for club seating (plus season tickets, and not including naming rights) it's chump change, if it helps them sell. I certainly was impressed by them. They just have to be careful not to build more then they can sell, which they haven't as of yet. Maryland did and it made them go in the red.

If we're 30% over sold like some have said, we need about 3,000 - 4,000 more seats short term (leaving some seating "on the hill"). That could be covered easy with 15-20 suites and 600-1000 club seats and minor additions to the student section.

You make some other good points but the building out vs up, and black vs white just don't hold.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm going with what these construction veterans told me. Perhaps it has something to do with the design or the site prep cost vs doing a building for the athletic offices in the end zone with a free standing press box, suites and club seating. I do know there are a lot of bricks covering those 7 stories. According to the owners of the company that supplied all the plumbing the cost for what we purchased greatly exceeded what would have normally been used.

[Saint3333]

This answer to the OP is simple and is clearly stated in the plan.

As funds allow.

[HkyMtneer]

"on-the-cheap" which the trailers that still remain on top of the STATE side proclaim.
I have friends that are in one of the units. They and all the others in that unit are long-time and big-time APP supporters. The youngest is past 70, they chose that seating to be in an accessible area for them and a short walk from YOSEF room. The units are not distracting when you consider the usefullness of them.

I can appreciate that, and I certainly see the usefulness of those shipping containers. My point being, if the future does not entail removing/redoing the STATE Upper Deck, or adding a third deck, than lets consider the cost of going endzone-to-endzone with a permanent suite/club seat facility.

[bcoach]

This answer to the OP is simple and is clearly stated in the plan.

As funds allow.

Saint
As funds allow is really not very clear and probably intentional. Funds on hand? Pledges? Ability to borrow?
I don't have a dog in the fight but that is just another thing that is not very clear. Now I will say that it may be that we don't need to know every detail but I hope the decision makers do. Just like the whole study, I would guess the decision makers had a different set of documents than we have seen with a lot more detail.

[huskie3]

"on-the-cheap" which the trailers that still remain on top of the STATE side proclaim.
I have friends that are in one of the units. They and all the others in that unit are long-time and big-time APP supporters. The youngest is past 70, they chose that seating to be in an accessible area for them and a short walk from YOSEF room. The units are not distracting when you consider the usefullness of them.

I can appreciate that, and I certainly see the usefulness of those shipping containers. My point being, if the future does not entail removing/redoing the STATE Upper Deck, or adding a third deck, than lets consider the cost of going endzone-to-endzone with a permanent suite/club seat facility.

I'm all for closing the North Endzone with student seating and suites/club seating. I have been in UNC's Blue Zone, something similar would be great.

[Kgfish]

"on-the-cheap" which the trailers that still remain on top of the STATE side proclaim.
I have friends that are in one of the units. They and all the others in that unit are long-time and big-time APP supporters. The youngest is past 70, they chose that seating to be in an accessible area for them and a short walk from YOSEF room. The units are not distracting when you consider the usefullness of them.

I can appreciate that, and I certainly see the usefulness of those shipping containers. My point being, if the future does not entail removing/redoing the STATE Upper Deck, or adding a third deck, than lets consider the cost of going endzone-to-endzone with a permanent suite/club seat facility.

I'm all for closing the North Endzone with student seating and suites/club seating. I have been in UNC's Blue Zone, something similar would be great.

I know some are enamored with the bank and seeing folks packed in there like sardines but if we expect to play Marshall and ECU in Boone again we have to put real seats in both end zones. We can not sell $50 tickets and expect opposing fans to sit on a grass bank, especially during nasty weather. One thing about the bank are those folks are the first to flee the stadium when the weather turns bad or has been bad leading up to the game. Heard many students complain of not being able to see squat from down there. It is also a source for a lot of drinking that goes on during games.

[bcoach]

"on-the-cheap" which the trailers that still remain on top of the STATE side proclaim.
I have friends that are in one of the units. They and all the others in that unit are long-time and big-time APP supporters. The youngest is past 70, they chose that seating to be in an accessible area for them and a short walk from YOSEF room. The units are not distracting when you consider the usefullness of them.

I can appreciate that, and I certainly see the usefulness of those shipping containers. My point being, if the future does not entail removing/redoing the STATE Upper Deck, or adding a third deck, than lets consider the cost of going endzone-to-endzone with a permanent suite/club seat facility.

I'm all for closing the North Endzone with student seating and suites/club seating. I have been in UNC's Blue Zone, something similar would be great.

I know some are enamored with the bank and seeing folks packed in there like sardines but if we expect to play Marshall and ECU in Boone again we have to put real seats in both end zones. We can not sell $50 tickets and expect opposing fans to sit on a grass bank, especially during nasty weather. One thing about the bank are those folks are the first to flee the stadium when the weather turns bad or has been bad leading up to the game. Heard many students complain of not being able to see squat from down there. It is also a source for a lot of drinking that goes on during games.

Well then just move them over to the temp bleachers that the students start pouring out of after the first quarter