Author Topic: New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!  (Read 2090 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gosensgo05

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Topic Start: July 23, 2005, 04:40:33 PM »
I have attended a few recent Nats games.  The high summer heat and humidity is making the baseball experience less enjoyable.  The awful Nationals slump is another factor.  

Every time I leave the stadium my shirts are soaked with sweat.  No matter how much water I drink or ice cream I eat, I can't stay cool in RFK Stadium.  Also, I noticed that other baseball fans aren't cheering as loudly.  The intense heat and humidity can make people feel lethargic and grumpy.  

Needless to say, I think there should be a retractable roof stadium for the Nats.  That way, fans can enjoy the game under room temperature conditions.   I don't have to worry about my sweaty shirt sticking to the seat.  A roof will also protect fans from violent summer thunderstorms.  

Architects are looking at two models of stadium development:  Camden Yards vs. Safeco.  The OPACY/Jacobs Field model is already outdated; I think the HOK architects are focusing on an innovative design that would make the Nationals ball park the new standard for stadium development.  

RFK Stadium is not conducive to summer time sports.  The closed circular design with the overhang traps the heat in the ballpark.  Fans and players don't find the conditions very comfortable.  I hope the architects and the Nationals will answer this problem with the new Anacostia stadium.

Offline rileyn

  • Posts: 1483
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #1: July 23, 2005, 04:55:08 PM »
Sounds to me like you are actually calling for a dome.  If we had a retractable roof are you suggesting that we close the roof for a game if it is too hot, even though it is not raining?  If that is the case, I totally disagree.  I assume you would have closed it all this week even though the game times were at 7:05, and it did not rain.  I have been to sticky night games and hot, steamy day games - do I wish it was 75 degrees and breezy all the time?  Of course I do, but that is no reason to build a dome.

Being a native Washingtonian I know that the heat and humidity can be brutal, but this year has been worse than most.  Plus, the new stadium will certainly be more open than RFK thus allowing for air circulation and breezes, etc..,

Just say NO to domes!!!!

mar (AKA pasqual AKA JMG)

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #2: July 23, 2005, 05:18:07 PM »
Yeah.
If you look at the only sort of similar venue with a retractable roof - Skydome or whatever they're calling it now in Toronto - they pretty much only use it if its raining.

Toronto doesn't get quite as hot and humid as DC, but it gets bad (bout the same as Chicago or Detroit). Only thing that saves it is the breeeze off the lake but, depending on the time of year, that doesn't always come up until the game is about over.

I think for maximizing your home wins, a retractable roof is always better (Nats already seen some losses due to rain). However, I doubt the prospect of winning a few more games per season is gonna influence the people who decide on the stadium design much.

Montcobaseball

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #3: July 23, 2005, 05:38:11 PM »
Please.  Thats all they need to do is to suggest that a retractable roof, which would tens of millions of dollars if not more, to the cost, would drive the city council into some kind of frenzy and there would never be a new stadium built and the team would eventually move.   We sure as hell don't need a roof.

Offline Kenz aFan

  • Posts: 5433
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #4: July 23, 2005, 06:01:13 PM »
Very true, no roof... if after its built and because of its location by the water, the air in and around is mostly cool... fans can nickname the stadium, "The Cooler" that is "IF" the breezes are cool enough...

Offline eddiejc1

  • Posts: 197
    • http://www.femfour.com
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #5: July 23, 2005, 07:13:39 PM »
Quote from: "Montcobaseball"
Please.  Thats all they need to do is to suggest that a retractable roof, which would tens of millions of dollars if not more, to the cost, would drive the city council into some kind of frenzy and there would never be a new stadium built and the team would eventually move.   We sure as hell don't need a roof.


If there is ever a domed stadium in the D.C. area, it might be FedEx Field. I heard Dan Snyder say he is thinking of adding one since the NFL (despite 9/11) does not want to have the Super Bowl in a cold-weather city without a domed stadium. Personally, I don't think RFK is that big of a problem. I like the fact that there is a LOT of shade in that park, and a part of me will be sorry when they do move since there is no way the new stadium will have overhangs as big as the ones you see at RFK...

Eddie Cunningham

Montcobaseball

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #6: July 23, 2005, 07:51:30 PM »
Quote from: "Kenz aFan"
Very true, no roof... if after its built and because of its location by the water, the air in and around is mostly cool... fans can nickname the stadium, "The Cooler" that is "IF" the breezes are cool enough...



      Funny.  There are no breezes off of the Anacostia River.  Do you have any idea what is on the other side of that river?

Offline Kenz aFan

  • Posts: 5433
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #7: July 23, 2005, 08:04:01 PM »
LOL I cant see THAT FAR, so no, so I have no idea what's on the other side of the river... Tell me...

Offline Kenz aFan

  • Posts: 5433
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #8: July 23, 2005, 08:07:06 PM »
Ohhh they have OFFICIALLY changed the dimensions of the fences at RFK... They are showing the NEW dimensions on the MLB broadcast...

Left Field Line: 336
Left Center: 395
Center Field: 407
Right Center: 395
Right Field Line: 336

Montcobaseball

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #9: July 23, 2005, 08:19:17 PM »
Quote from: "Kenz aFan"
LOL I cant see THAT FAR, so no, so I have no idea what's on the other side of the river... Tell me...



       The site of the new stadium is on what is called the southwest waterfront.  The Anacostia River has virtually no current and is barely a couple hundred yards wide.  On the other side is Southeast Washington which is one of the meanest and most crime filled areas on the east coast.

       So the Anacostia is not the Mississippi or even the Potomac.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27250
  • Hell yes!
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #10: July 24, 2005, 10:54:36 AM »
Quote from: "Montcobaseball"
Quote from: "Kenz aFan"
LOL I cant see THAT FAR, so no, so I have no idea what's on the other side of the river... Tell me...



       The site of the new stadium is on what is called the southwest waterfront.  The Anacostia River has virtually no current and is barely a couple hundred yards wide.  On the other side is Southeast Washington which is one of the meanest and most crime filled areas on the east coast.

       So the Anacostia is not the Mississippi or even the Potomac.


Actually, this is not quite correct.  South Capitol Street is the dividing line between SW and SE Washington.  The new stadium site is on the SE side of South Capitol St, hence it is technically in SE Washington, as is the terrain directly across the river in Anacostia.

Conversely, you can be east of the Anacostia River. say in the Bolling Air Force Base complex, and be in Southwest.

When most folks refer to the Southwest waterfront, they are talking about the area where the Maine avenue seafood markets, and various restaurants reside.  These businesses are not on the Potomac or the Anacostia proper, but along an anomaly called the Washington Channel.

(And to reiterate my thoughts from a previous conversation with Pasqual, neither the Anacostia nor the Washington Channel area are suitable baptismal sites for his planned christening of Ricky Henderson.)

Montcobaseball

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #11: July 24, 2005, 12:38:35 PM »
Regardless whether the site is in SE or SW I think that Ken had a vision that this would be some grand vista with cooling breezes off of a swift flowing wide river.  I didn't realize that he didn't live here.  It will be a good thing for the city and the area will explode in development and will become the new "hot" real estate.

gosensgo05

  • Guest
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #12: July 24, 2005, 02:16:28 PM »
So would you consider Safeco Field or Minute Maid Park as domes?  That doesn't make any sense.  A domed stadium is covered permanently; there's a big difference.  

If not a retractable roof stadium, then build an "open" designed ballpark.  The outfield area should have a limited section for bleachers and the giant scoreboard.  The rest should have open space for breezes and air circulation.  

I have been to OPACY during heat waves, but I was never so uncomfortable with the conditions.  That's because OPACY has open passages for wind currents.  RFK Stadium is closed with the circular dimensions and overhang.  That's what excerbates the muggy conditions.  

I also think that the stadium builders should cheat a little by moving the outfield site lines towards the Washington Monument.  Bud Selig would have to sign off on this design.  MLB regulations call for all ball parks to face northeast by east.  


Quote from: "rileyn"
Sounds to me like you are actually calling for a dome.  If we had a retractable roof are you suggesting that we close the roof for a game if it is too hot, even though it is not raining?  If that is the case, I totally disagree.  I assume you would have closed it all this week even though the game times were at 7:05, and it did not rain.  I have been to sticky night games and hot, steamy day games - do I wish it was 75 degrees and breezy all the time?  Of course I do, but that is no reason to build a dome.

Being a native Washingtonian I know that the heat and humidity can be brutal, but this year has been worse than most.  Plus, the new stadium will certainly be more open than RFK thus allowing for air circulation and breezes, etc..,

Just say NO to domes!!!!

Offline rileyn

  • Posts: 1483
New Stadium Should Have Retractable Roof!
« Reply #13: July 24, 2005, 07:05:48 PM »
There is a BIG difference between a retractable roof and an open air stadium.  I'm all for an open air stadium.