I like it! The old WHS dirt would be cheaper. FIRE COBB!!!

Still find it hard to believe App didn't purchase the old WHS site. How many times will they find something like that.

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

Saw where someone posted that over on the SunBelt Board yesterday. Heck of an idea. Agree the university not purchasing the WHS was a big mistake. Could have been our version of CofC's Patriot's Point.

Kgfish wrote:

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

Saw where someone posted that over on the SunBelt Board yesterday. Heck of an idea. Agree the university not purchasing the WHS was a big mistake. Could have been our version of CofC's Patriot's Point.

there had to be reasons they didn't purchase - any ideas?

they haven't sold it yet..have they?

WVAPPeer wrote:

Kgfish wrote:

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

Saw where someone posted that over on the SunBelt Board yesterday. Heck of an idea. Agree the university not purchasing the WHS was a big mistake. Could have been our version of CofC's Patriot's Point.

there had to be reasons they didn't purchase - any ideas?

A friend of mine was having a conversation with a high ranking official in the athletic department, and they mentioned that we should have purchased the WHS site. The response was something to along the lines of "You know, that is a pretty good idea. Never thought about it." This person doesn't have final say, but would have been involved in any discussions on the matter. Things like this really make me wonder about some of the people in charge up there...

Actually the idea has been around for a while. I suggested it to several people when App sold the county the land that the new school sits on. The original problem was that the plan first discussed with the county and town included not only an athletics complex but also student housing. The town council balked at the idea as they wanted affordable housing to be the main focus instead of more student housing. It fell on the back burner when other offers came about that included the affordable housing along with retail space but all of those have fallen through. It appears, from what I can pick up, that another push might be in the works. It needs to be as we can build a first class athletics complex there and there is plenty of room and land for several different types of venues. Believe me there are plenty of people working on this and with the new mayor and several different council members now in place we'll see if they can get anywhere this time.

Moose, We made a mistake by not having an agreement in place when we gave the county the land for the new high school. It should have been a land swap deal from the get go. This would have happened before an of our current expansion and facility updates that took place. Just imagine having all off our facilities at that one location. Plus we could have had one huge weight room/training room complex there as well as coaches offices. We would have gotten so much more for our money than what we have now with stadiums spread all over town.

I think I would be surprised if the Athletic Dept had the authority to purchase property - sounds like a university decision at the very top ---

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

The turf field would have to be larger than the SDSU field. They have women's track only--and there's not enough field for the men's javelin event. Insurance companies would never insure that size field for that reason. No way to know how much that would add to construction costs--but it'd be a chunk of $change$--extra foundation, concrete pad and supporting superstructure...yikes.

WVAPPeer wrote:I think I would be surprised if the Athletic Dept had the authority to purchase property - sounds like a university decision at the very top ---

Yes...and approval by the ASU-BOT...and approval by the UNC-BOG and approval by the state legislature. It's a big "Biden" deal.

Does this mean we paid off our last expansion?

JTApps1 wrote:Moose, We made a mistake by not having an agreement in place when we gave the county the land for the new high school. It should have been a land swap deal from the get go. This would have happened before an of our current expansion and facility updates that took place. Just imagine having all off our facilities at that one location. Plus we could have had one huge weight room/training room complex there as well as coaches offices. We would have gotten so much more for our money than what we have now with stadiums spread all over town.

Completely agree. I thought it was being discussed as part of the deal but I was still in VA at the time and wasn't close enough to know the real inside story. I only made my comments after it was already done but I would have said it before the deal first went through had I known. We seem to have a lot of cases of "We should have thought of that" syndrome here. Not much we can do now but we really should look into it as the location has already been torn down, cleared off, and is just waiting for work to begin. Can't hurt to at least check into it.

asu66 wrote:

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

The turf field would have to be larger than the SDSU field. They have women's track only--and there's not enough field for the men's javelin event. Insurance companies would never insure that size field for that reason. No way to know how much that would add to construction costs--but it'd be a chunk of $change$--extra foundation, concrete pad and supporting superstructure...yikes.

I think it has great possibilities. The idea put on the SunBelt board was build it at the top of Bodenheimer Drive in the low area on the left. The thought is if the school tears down Broyhill that land could be used for field events. This past August the Milwaukee School of Engineering began construction on a parking complex covered with an athletic field. The structure takes up an entire city block. It will include a 210” x 345’ NCAA Division III competition synthetic turf field for soccer, lacrosse and rugby along with seating for 600 spectators. The thing is even lit with LED light towers. There is an unfinished .88 acre public park on the north end of the building, along with 12,000 square feet of commercial space incorporated into the three-level parking garage. I think any concerns with this type of facility would be eliminated with an engineering school building one.

Kgfish wrote:

asu66 wrote:

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

The turf field would have to be larger than the SDSU field. They have women's track only--and there's not enough field for the men's javelin event. Insurance companies would never insure that size field for that reason. No way to know how much that would add to construction costs--but it'd be a chunk of $change$--extra foundation, concrete pad and supporting superstructure...yikes.

I think it has great possibilities. The idea put on the SunBelt board was build it at the top of Bodenheimer Drive in the low area on the left. The thought is if the school tears down Broyhill that land could be used for field events. This past August the Milwaukee School of Engineering began construction on a parking complex covered with an athletic field. The structure takes up an entire city block. It will include a 210” x 345’ NCAA Division III competition synthetic turf field for soccer, lacrosse and rugby along with seating for 600 spectators. The thing is even lit with LED light towers. There is an unfinished .88 acre public park on the north end of the building, along with 12,000 square feet of commercial space incorporated into the three-level parking garage. I think any concerns with this type of facility would be eliminated with an engineering school building one.

I'm not opposed to the idea; it just has to have adequate dimensions to fit all the NCAA events it would need to host. I don't recall the names of the schools at the moment, but I read an article in an architectural design mag a while back about three of four small inner city D-II or D-III schools whose regulation soccer fields are on the roof-tops of high-rise buildings in Chicago, LA and NYC. They had two choices--play waaay up high or not field teams. There was no street-level real estate available at any price. Now, when I say waaay up high; I mean 3-4-5-6 stories; not 15-20 or more stories.

http://california.construction.com/cali ... ucture.asp

This would help solve two problems we have on campus, land for a track and parking. Also, I would think funding may be easier to secure if we can combine resources from the traffic and athletic departments. Of course thw WHS property would meet those needs as well. We have options if the people in Boone do their homework.

asu66 wrote:

Kgfish wrote:

asu66 wrote:

Dmanuhone wrote:http://goaztecs.cstv.com/facilities/sports_deck.html

The turf field would have to be larger than the SDSU field. They have women's track only--and there's not enough field for the men's javelin event. Insurance companies would never insure that size field for that reason. No way to know how much that would add to construction costs--but it'd be a chunk of $change$--extra foundation, concrete pad and supporting superstructure...yikes.

I think it has great possibilities. The idea put on the SunBelt board was build it at the top of Bodenheimer Drive in the low area on the left. The thought is if the school tears down Broyhill that land could be used for field events. This past August the Milwaukee School of Engineering began construction on a parking complex covered with an athletic field. The structure takes up an entire city block. It will include a 210” x 345’ NCAA Division III competition synthetic turf field for soccer, lacrosse and rugby along with seating for 600 spectators. The thing is even lit with LED light towers. There is an unfinished .88 acre public park on the north end of the building, along with 12,000 square feet of commercial space incorporated into the three-level parking garage. I think any concerns with this type of facility would be eliminated with an engineering school building one.

I'm not opposed to the idea; it just has to have adequate dimensions to fit all the NCAA events it would need to host. I don't recall the names of the schools at the moment, but I read an article in an architectural design mag a while back about three of four small inner city D-II or D-III schools whose regulation soccer fields are on the roof-tops of high-rise buildings in Chicago, LA and NYC. They had two choices--play waaay up high or not field teams. There was no street-level real estate available at any price. Now, when I say waaay up high; I mean 3-4-5-6 stories; not 15-20 or more stories.

http://california.construction.com/cali ... ucture.asp

The MSE soccer facility is on the 3rd level at one end and at ground level the other. That configuration would blend it into the area where the Broyhill now sits.

I would think that the problem with building a field on top of a parking deck is cost. An architect told me that he thought building a parking deck is about $20,000 - $30,000 a space (not including land). That's just for a cement, not the additional cost of a track etc. Usually the top of a parking deck is used (for parking) so it's just not wasted space. Reinforcing a rooftop for the extra space would be expensive as well, plus you'd still need parking. If land cost was $355/sq foot like NY it might make sense, but I think it would be harder to justify here.

If a football field is 192 parking spaces, then it's something like $4 million for each level (plus the land).

Maddog1956 wrote:I would think that the problem with building a field on top of a parking deck is cost. An architect told me that he thought building a parking deck is about $20,000 - $30,000 a space (not including land). That's just for a cement, not the additional cost of a track etc. Usually the top of a parking deck is used (for parking) so it's just not wasted space. Reinforcing a rooftop for the extra space would be expensive as well, plus you'd still need parking. If land cost was $355/sq foot like NY it might make sense, but I think it would be harder to justify here.

If a football field is 192 parking spaces, then it's something like $4 million for each level (plus the land).

We need more parking on campus for Saturday's and for other events. This would kill two birds with one stone. Plus athletics could split the cost with another department. Also, you have to factor in the cost of grading and blasting to build a track since we have zero flat land available.