Cameron/Wallace Wade upgrades

[kingboozer]

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/65130


Friend of mine sent me this link and I had heard nothing about any of this, wondering if anyone could share some insight beyond the article?

[sandinmyshoes]

This makes me a little bit nervous. But I suppose judgement would have to be withheld until we see some renderings of what it would look like.

[kingboozer]

This makes me a little bit nervous. But I suppose judgement would have to be withheld until we see some renderings of what it would look like.

my first thought after reading it, I hope they don't ruin Cameron

[Bluedevil114]

The only upgrade I am looking forward to seeing is a Fourth National Championship Banner. Go Duke!!

[roywhite]

Thanks for sharing the info.


A plan to build suites on top of the Schwartz-Butters Athletic Center, a six-story building next to Cameron Indoor, from where patrons would peer down inside the arena, remains a possibility. That project is further down on a list of priorities, Cragg said.

....peer down inside the arena??

[Newton_14]

Hallelujah for the track going away. That is the best part of that plan. The new addition to Cameron would not be a bad thing imo. Sounds like it would be a really nice addition. I am sure the architects would make the outside of the building look great as well.

Wallace Wade is long overdue for improvements. The sooner this starts the better to me.

[uh_no]

Hallelujah for the track going away. That is the best part of that plan.

So we just say 'screw you track team'?

glad people here are so ready to support money teams at the direct expense of other teams....

[godukerocks]

So we just say 'screw you track team'?

glad people here are so ready to support money teams at the direct expense of other teams....

Thank you.

The Duke running program has consistently been improving; cross country earned a trip to Nationals this year. As a former camper and runner myself, running in Wallace Wade was without a doubt a great experience, and I hope and trust Duke will give due justice to a first-rate track facility wherever it goes.

[DukeCO2009]

Thanks for sharing the info.



....peer down inside the arena??

I don't even know how the logistics of such a renovation would work, lol.

BTW, if Duke Athletics screws with the front end of Cameron they'll never see another dime from me. I guess they should hope I never get promoted :p.

[phaedrus]

So we just say 'screw you track team'?

glad people here are so ready to support money teams at the direct expense of other teams....

They will build a new track before they get rid of the old track.

Or the Iron Dukes will lose my $25 per year donation.

[DevilHorns]

So we just say 'screw you track team'?

glad people here are so ready to support money teams at the direct expense of other teams....

uh no.

Of course they'll build another track. Most college football stadiums dont have tracks circling the field.

[roywhite]

They will build a new track before they get rid of the old track.

Or the Iron Dukes will lose my $25 per year donation.

We may have talked about this before, but I wonder where a new track would go? On the other side of Route 751, kind of below the Wash. Duke Inn?

Saw some big time track meets at Wallace Wade, but hardly any D-1 school has a track at the football stadium any longer. I'll be curious to get a better idea of what's in mind in all three cases---Wallace Wade, Cameron, and a new track area.

[Newton_14]

So we just say 'screw you track team'?

glad people here are so ready to support money teams at the direct expense of other teams....

Uh, did my post say anything about getting rid of the track teams? Uh No, it didn't.

Getting the track out of the football stadium was the ONLY thing my post was referring to. I am quite sure before they remove the old one they will construct a nicer, new track.

My post was about applauding improvements to the football stadium and was not in any way a slam against the track teams or any other non revenue sport. Sorry you chose to read it as such.

[DukeSean]

So we just say 'screw you track team'?

glad people here are so ready to support money teams at the direct expense of other teams....


Thank you.

The Duke running program has consistently been improving; cross country earned a trip to Nationals this year. As a former camper and runner myself, running in Wallace Wade was without a doubt a great experience, and I hope and trust Duke will give due justice to a first-rate track facility wherever it goes.

Is anyone aware of any D-I program maintaining a track around the football field that is covered up with turf or something like that during football games?

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

I don't even know how the logistics of such a renovation would work, lol.

BTW, if Duke Athletics screws with the front end of Cameron they'll never see another dime from me. I guess they should hope I never get promoted :p.

What do you consider to be the "front end of Cameron"?

The picture accompanying the article shows the South Entrance which faces the North Gate of Wallace Wade Stadium. The current ticket office is in the South Lobby.

[DukeCO2009]

What do you consider to be the "front end of Cameron"?

The picture accompanying the article shows the South Entrance which faces the North Gate of Wallace Wade Stadium. The current ticket office is in the South Lobby.

Ah, didn't see the picture. Although the address is on Whitford, I always think of the K-Ville side of Cameron as the "front". Either way, I think an addition is a horrible move--just money down the drain and a huge potential eyesore.

[kyriecrazy2013]

Is anyone aware of any D-I program maintaining a track around the football field that is covered up with turf or something like that during football games?

When we traveled to Kansas this past year, they had a track around their field but they did not cover it. Renfree fell on it after running out of bounds though.

The track team is also losing their main area for discus, javelin, and shot-put because of a new indoor practice facility for the football team Duke has been considering for some years.

Coach Cut said that the track team will definitely get new facilities before the track around the field is destroyed.

As for the new track being better than the old track, that is unlikely but possible. The Wade track is VERY high quality and people travel to Durham simply to train on it. It is definitely TOP quality so hopefully the new one will also be top quality.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Where to build the new track? See the left side of page 2 of these sketches/renderings.

http://www.bluedevilsfootball.com/pdf/Wallace_Wade_Renovation_Proposal_web.pdf

[kingboozer]

Where to build the new track? See the left side of page 2 of these sketches/renderings.

http://www.bluedevilsfootball.com/pdf/Wallace_Wade_Renovation_Proposal_web.pdf

thats awesome, imagine how much of a boost coach cut would get in recruiting with a state of the art facility

[hughgs]

Where to build the new track? See the left side of page 2 of these sketches/renderings.

http://www.bluedevilsfootball.com/pdf/Wallace_Wade_Renovation_Proposal_web.pdf

That area is the lacrosse practice field. Where are those teams going to practice?

[MADevil30]

Where to build the new track? See the left side of page 2 of these sketches/renderings.

http://www.bluedevilsfootball.com/pdf/Wallace_Wade_Renovation_Proposal_web.pdf

As a member of Duke's rugby team, that plan worries me - and I'm sure all other club sports players on campus - A LOT. That new track is in the place of a current multipurpose turf field that is booked every night for club sports practices, which is huge because there is already very limited field space for the club sports teams on campus. Club sports (and IMs, which also use that field) are a big part of life on campus for a lot of students, and I would be just as wary of the athletic department forcing out us students who play purely for the love of the game as much as I would be of them displacing the track team. I want to see the extended plan before giving my approval to any of this.

[senkiri]

Boozer: I am sure the architects would make the outside of the building look great as well.

I wish I could share your confidence. I am still repulsed by the one-third Duke-stone, two-thirds gray metal siding monstrosity they added to the side of Cameron during my senior year at Duke. I am scared any new front entrance would be made to match that addition, or worse, be made to look "modern" instead of its classic facade at present.

I hope they post the architect renderings before any final decisions are made...

[formerdukeathlete]

Where to build the new track? See the left side of page 2 of these sketches/renderings.

http://www.bluedevilsfootball.com/pdf/Wallace_Wade_Renovation_Proposal_web.pdf

Ozzie, looks like the seats added by lowering the field, because the field is also moved sideways over, closer to the closed end of the horseshoe (as Jarhead has commented would be nice for those sitting in those existing seats, including him) are limited, similar to the RATIO renderings. Maybe that is the best way to go, but would rather a more monolithic approach whereby seats are added in a uniform fashion around the stadium when lowering the field. So what we gain by lowering the field as rendered we give back with handicap accessibility. Then, we add 6k and change on the old Pres. Box side. How many seats would be added on the open end, closing in the endzone? That number is not included on the renderings, at least as I view them. Would be nice if endzone and all other seats added would roughly equal 50k. That probably covers our payouts on big time teams visiting such as Alabama. And, harkens back to 57k attendance games of the past.

[DukeSean]

Boozer: I am sure the architects would make the outside of the building look great as well.

I wish I could share your confidence. I am still repulsed by the one-third Duke-stone, two-thirds gray metal siding monstrosity they added to the side of Cameron during my senior year at Duke. I am scared any new front entrance would be made to match that addition, or worse, be made to look "modern" instead of its classic facade at present.

I hope they post the architect renderings before any final decisions are made...

I think someone had posted on this forum before that the original quarry from where the "Duke stone" had been acquired essentially has no more of that distinct rock, which might explain the mixing. Yea, I'm not the biggest fan of that stone/metal siding thing, but hey, it could be worse, it could be the dean dome.

[Jarhead]

Thanks to Ozzie for that architects design link. It seems to answer almost all of my desires, but it does do a bit too much for the fat cat elements. I can live with that, though, if someone gives me an occasional invite into the club seats. I'd call it the octogenarian clause.

After Coach Cutcliffe's first season, he came down here, and many other places, for a get together with local Alums for dinner. He was very well received in the Pinehurst/Southern Pines community. I was able to talk with him for a while, and I told him about my season seats being moved relative to the football field when they converted the track to Olympic metric standards. I was right exactly on the 50 yard line, but I was moved to the 45 yard line. Actually the field was moved 5 yards. He told me that would be corrected, because they would be removing the track.

He added that they would probably be lowering the field. About that time there were active discussions on this board about just that subject. I had recently switched sides form keeping the track to removing it, and I posted that here. What a relief it was to learn that Coach Cut and Duke Athletics were thinking the same thing. He must have been reading our threads on the DBR, because the design seems to coincide with what many of us were posting. Smart man. Glad he's ours.

The only issue that remained in our forum discussions was where to put the track. IIRC, nobody suggested that field just to the west of the soccer stadium. That is a bad choice in my mind. With the amount of money they seemed determined to devote to this project, just a little bit more would be necessary to provide a state-of-the-art track and field facility. That would consist of much more than just a track wedged in on that field.

All it takes is a good look using Google Earth, or something similar, to find an adequate space. I say it should be across 751 just below the golf course, but there may be other places. Maybe East Campus, or out in Duke Forest. It may be wise to use Coombs Field in some creative way. We do play a lot of our baseball games at the DBAP, so why not make that deal more permanent utilizing the DAP for conflicts with the Bulls schedule. It would be good for Duke/Durham relations, too.

[blazindw]

Yes, the lax practice fields are next to Koskinen (the West turf fields, as the students call it). They also host the intramural sports. From the looks of it, it looks like that the track would be where the turf fields are and that the 751 fields (the grass fields between 751 and Bassett Drive) would serve as practice fields. However, you can still have a practice field on the infield of the track facility for lacrosse or soccer (the field would be big enough). They would just have to coordinate the practice schedules just as they do now. I'm also under the belief that should the response from baseball playing most of its games at DBAP be well-received (which I think it has been so far), that Jack Coombs Field is in its final days and that it can be cleared for more practice space or to serve as club/intramural fields.

[uh_no]

Yes, the lax practice fields are next to Koskinen (the West turf fields, as the students call it). They also host the intramural sports. From the looks of it, it looks like that the track would be where the turf fields are and that the 751 fields (the grass fields between 751 and Bassett Drive) would serve as practice fields. However, you can still have a practice field on the infield of the track facility for lacrosse or soccer (the field would be big enough). They would just have to coordinate the practice schedules just as they do now. I'm also under the belief that should the response from baseball playing most of its games at DBAP be well-received (which I think it has been so far), that Jack Coombs Field is in its final days and that it can be cleared for more practice space or to serve as club/intramural fields.

There isn't enough room in between basset drive and the koskinen parking lot for a track. The soccer field only just fits before the grade drops off towards basset, and a track extends about 40-50 yds out from either end of a soccer field. As a track enthusiast, I would be all for removing the track from wally wade only if a modern track facility was built elsewhere. My pick would be on the wa duke property out where the 1k loop is, where there are soccer fields in the middle. build a few thousand seats worth of stands, some nice locker rooms, and it would be a very nice facility.

Few people know that the track at wallace wade has as much, or more history than the field. WHile the field hosted the rose bowl, the track hosted a cold war track meet between the USA and Russia

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1755&dat=19740706&id=u_8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4GYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5717,2075010

it also hosted several other high profile international track meets (i believe one with germany also)

unfortunately, those sorts of meets rarely happen, and wally wade's brightest track show is the invitational each spring. and for that, the stadium is just too big

[grc5]

I LMAO when I saw Student "tailgating" as a Wallace Wade negative on page 6 of that report. Too bad they got it all wrong, 'cause Tailgate is a POSITIVE.

[El_Diablo]

There isn't enough room in between basset drive and the koskinen parking lot for a track. The soccer field only just fits before the grade drops off towards basset, and a track extends about 40-50 yds out from either end of a soccer field.

The sketch shows that it can fit. The turf field is already wide enough--the length is the problem. However, the planned track would eliminate some of the Green Zone Bassett parking (to the south) and spill into the field on the other side. Look at slide 7 (current) and then slide 8 (planned) to see where they'd extend it southward.

Also, for the would-be IM participants, in addition to the playing area inside of the track, there's another planned field added directly south of Koskinen. That is a big Green Zone parking lot right now.

[blazindw]

I LMAO when I saw Student "tailgating" as a Wallace Wade negative on page 6 of that report. Too bad they got it all wrong, 'cause Tailgate is a POSITIVE.

As someone who's first Tailgate was after he graduated (due to gameday responsibilities with the football team) and understands the true premise behind how Tailgate started, I wholeheartedly agree with Tailgate being a WW negative. But, that's for another thread.

[DallasDevil]

Yes, the lax practice fields are next to Koskinen (the West turf fields, as the students call it). They also host the intramural sports. From the looks of it, it looks like that the track would be where the turf fields are and that the 751 fields (the grass fields between 751 and Bassett Drive) would serve as practice fields. However, you can still have a practice field on the infield of the track facility for lacrosse or soccer (the field would be big enough). They would just have to coordinate the practice schedules just as they do now. I'm also under the belief that should the response from baseball playing most of its games at DBAP be well-received (which I think it has been so far), that Jack Coombs Field is in its final days and that it can be cleared for more practice space or to serve as club/intramural fields.

Looking at the renderings, it seems clear that a new baseball stadium is also being planned.

[aimo]

I really don't see, and hope I never see, anything being constructed in Duke Forest. Below the golf course is all part of Duke Forest, and they've just done extensive work in "fixing" the watershed area all around there.

And the thought of some ugly facade covering up Cameron's beautiful south entrance makes me physically ill.

[formerdukeathlete]

Thanks to Ozzie for that architects design link. It seems to answer almost all of my desires, but it does do a bit too much for the fat cat elements. I can live with that, though, if someone gives me an occasional invite into the club seats. I'd call it the octogenarian clause.

After Coach Cutcliffe's first season, he came down here, and many other places, for a get together with local Alums for dinner. He was very well received in the Pinehurst/Southern Pines community. I was able to talk with him for a while, and I told him about my season seats being moved relative to the football field when they converted the track to Olympic metric standards. I was right exactly on the 50 yard line, but I was moved to the 45 yard line. Actually the field was moved 5 yards. He told me that would be corrected, because they would be removing the track.

He added that they would probably be lowering the field. About that time there were active discussions on this board about just that subject. I had recently switched sides form keeping the track to removing it, and I posted that here. What a relief it was to learn that Coach Cut and Duke Athletics were thinking the same thing. He must have been reading our threads on the DBR, because the design seems to coincide with what many of us were posting. Smart man. Glad he's ours.

The only issue that remained in our forum discussions was where to put the track. IIRC, nobody suggested that field just to the west of the soccer stadium. That is a bad choice in my mind. With the amount of money they seemed determined to devote to this project, just a little bit more would be necessary to provide a state-of-the-art track and field facility. That would consist of much more than just a track wedged in on that field.

All it takes is a good look using Google Earth, or something similar, to find an adequate space. I say it should be across 751 just below the golf course, but there may be other places. Maybe East Campus, or out in Duke Forest. It may be wise to use Coombs Field in some creative way. We do play a lot of our baseball games at the DBAP, so why not make that deal more permanent utilizing the DAP for conflicts with the Bulls schedule. It would be good for Duke/Durham relations, too.

The whole plan looks to be making relatively the best out of the situation, and we have to thank Kevin White really more than Cutcliffe for the vision. Kevin White's immediate impression was that the RATIO plan just did not do (nearly) enough of the right things, did not pass the smell test. Going with a tower of sorts, one building, and then on the other side stands, primarily, moving the field over, with endzone seating, with bridges over to the concourse of the horseshoe, its all pretty much good. Thankfully, the RATIO bathrooms and concession stand were not too much in the way.

Anyone have drawings of the Cameron renderings?

[Indoor66]

There isn't enough room in between basset drive and the koskinen parking lot for a track. The soccer field only just fits before the grade drops off towards basset, and a track extends about 40-50 yds out from either end of a soccer field. As a track enthusiast, I would be all for removing the track from wally wade only if a modern track facility was built elsewhere. My pick would be on the wa duke property out where the 1k loop is, where there are soccer fields in the middle. build a few thousand seats worth of stands, some nice locker rooms, and it would be a very nice facility.

Few people know that the track at wallace wade has as much, or more history than the field. WHile the field hosted the rose bowl, the track hosted a cold war track meet between the USA and Russia

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1755&dat=19740706&id=u_8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4GYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5717,2075010

it also hosted several other high profile international track meets (i believe one with germany also)

unfortunately, those sorts of meets rarely happen, and wally wade's brightest track show is the invitational each spring. and for that, the stadium is just too big

It also hosted the US - Pan-Africa meet - all three of these in the 70's when Dr. LeRoy Walker (of NCCU) was the most prominent coach in US Track and Field. The Durham Sports Club of that era was also quite active in the organization and support of the international meets.

[DU82]

There isn't enough room in between basset drive and the koskinen parking lot for a track. The soccer field only just fits before the grade drops off towards basset, and a track extends about 40-50 yds out from either end of a soccer field. As a track enthusiast, I would be all for removing the track from wally wade only if a modern track facility was built elsewhere. My pick would be on the wa duke property out where the 1k loop is, where there are soccer fields in the middle. build a few thousand seats worth of stands, some nice locker rooms, and it would be a very nice facility.


Note that the plan (page two) removes Whitfield and the parking lot next to the soccer field. That'll give enough room for the new track. Actually, it appears to remove Bassett Drive as well, and that's where the room comes from (with a lot of fill dirt, of course). And the baseball field is reoriented. With all that, a parking deck is probably needed on the 751 lot.

[buddy]

This is the follow-up to the surveys of Iron Dukes made in the winter. As I see it, we add football seat and take away parking (part of Whitford lot, and all of Bassett Drive). We lost Bassett Field for football parking last year. I see no additional parking in the plan. Any successful plan designed to fill Wade must provide for additional parking. Maybe a shuttle bus plan will have to be added, but there still has to be a place for cars. The "sports complex" area is very constrained as it is. It may be necessary to deck the 751 lot, which would be a reasonable compromise.

As for Cameron, whoever commented on the quarry is correct. All that is left, is anything, are shards that can be embedded in pre-stress concrete to look like the BC (with large stones dislodging).

Something has to be down about Wade, and I am all in favor of upgrades. That said, I always fear that those of us who have loyally supported the team for lo these many years will be the ones to be screwed. Either we will have to cough up even more really big bucks to keep our seats, or we'll be moved to the end zone to make room for johnny-come-lately high rollers. Expect to see a major turnover in attendees at football.

[77devil]

There isn't enough room in between basset drive and the koskinen parking lot for a track. The soccer field only just fits before the grade drops off towards basset, and a track extends about 40-50 yds out from either end of a soccer field. As a track enthusiast, I would be all for removing the track from wally wade only if a modern track facility was built elsewhere. My pick would be on the wa duke property out where the 1k loop is, where there are soccer fields in the middle. build a few thousand seats worth of stands, some nice locker rooms, and it would be a very nice facility.

Few people know that the track at wallace wade has as much, or more history than the field. WHile the field hosted the rose bowl, the track hosted a cold war track meet between the USA and Russia

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1755&dat=19740706&id=u_8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4GYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5717,2075010

it also hosted several other high profile international track meets (i believe one with germany also)

unfortunately, those sorts of meets rarely happen, and wally wade's brightest track show is the invitational each spring. and for that, the stadium is just too big

The 1970's track had a reputation as being one of the fastest in the country. This era was arguably the strongest for Duke track. Many records or top 3 times are still on the books including the 440 by my friend Mike Murphy.

[diablesseblu]

I am betraying my age. If you want to know more about the halcyon days of Duke track, Google Dave Sime and Joel Shankle.

[senkiri]

As for Cameron, whoever commented on the quarry is correct. All that is left, is anything, are shards that can be embedded in pre-stress concrete to look like the BC (with large stones dislodging).

Well there must be similar enough quarries somewhere in the region that stone can be purchased from, right? It just seems shocking to me that just because one particular quarry has been tapped dry Duke would consider abandoning its signature architectural style. Especially when adding an extension to one of the most iconic structures on campus and sporting venues in the country -- an extension that will in all likelihood look quite dated in 10-15 years if the classic look isn't employed.

[SharkD]

As for Cameron, whoever commented on the quarry is correct. All that is left, is anything, are shards that can be embedded in pre-stress concrete to look like the BC (with large stones dislodging).

That's interesting, considering that in January 2009, Duke's internal survey found that the quarry still had 40 years of usable reserves left for new construction and repair.

http://imgur.com/zdB2K.jpg
Sources: 1 (http://www.dukemagazine.duke.edu/dukemag/issues/010209/depnumbers.html), 2 (http://www.nvcc.edu/home/cbentley/geoblog/2009/11/duke-quarry.html)

[DukeVu]

). We lost Bassett Field for football parking last year. I see no additional parking in the plan. Any successful plan designed to fill Wade must provide for additional parking. Maybe a shuttle bus plan will have to be added, but there still has to be a place for cars. The "sports complex" area is very constrained as it is. It may be necessary to deck the 751 lot, which would be a reasonable compromise.

Expect to see a major turnover in attendees at football.

I too have concerns about parking. Even with the sparse crowds as of late it is hard for an out-of-towner to find parking. My friends and I drive 200+ miles and it would be nice to have some reasonable parking expectations. Not Duke alumni but longtime fans, we cannot attend every game but only 3 or 4 times each year. At my age this may not be a valid concern for me as the finished product may be years before completion. But if the program escalates and 50K crowds are expected, there needs to be some planning for parking.

Personally, I do not understand why everything has to be jam-packed around Wallace Wade. I know that for the past 20-30 years it was due to poor planning and apathy for football , but it should be addressed in these plans.

[Indoor66]

I too have concerns about parking. Even with the sparse crowds as of late it is hard for an out-of-towner to find parking. My friends and I drive 200+ miles and it would be nice to have some reasonable parking expectations. Not Duke alumni but longtime fans, we cannot attend every game but only 3 or 4 times each year. At my age this may not be a valid concern for me as the finished product may be years before completion. But if the program escalates and 50K crowds are expected, there needs to be some planning for parking.

Personally, I do not understand why everything has to be jam-packed around Wallace Wade. I know that for the past 20-30 years it was due to poor planning and apathy for football , but it should be addressed in these plans.

I completely agree with the jam-packed and parking concerns. The parking pressure is for basketball and football. That needs to be addressed.

This might be the opportunity to raise sufficient funds to add to the athletic facilities to the point to allow relocation of Soccer & Lax & Baseball across 751 in a new complex and allow the growth of Wade and Cameron without the confines of the other facilities.

Let's think bigger than the next 10 years. Thoughts?

[hughgs]

I completely agree with the jam-packed and parking concerns. The parking pressure is for basketball and football. That needs to be addressed.

This might be the opportunity to raise sufficient funds to add to the athletic facilities to the point to allow relocation of Soccer & Lax & Baseball across 751 in a new complex and allow the growth of Wade and Cameron without the confines of the other facilities.

Let's think bigger than the next 10 years. Thoughts?

Besides parking for fans, parking for employees is going to be impacted as much, if not more.

I don't think that moving sports across 751 is in anyone's best interests. There are already issues with getting large numbers of students to games. Do you really think that moving the fields farther away is going to increase attendance?

[Jarhead]

That's interesting, considering that in January 2009, Duke's internal survey found that the quarry still had 40 years of usable reserves left for new construction and repair.

http://imgur.com/zdB2K.jpg
Sources: 1 (http://www.dukemagazine.duke.edu/dukemag/issues/010209/depnumbers.html), 2 (http://www.nvcc.edu/home/cbentley/geoblog/2009/11/duke-quarry.html)

That's nice to see. Construction materials are now not part of the discussion. We can use whatever we can afford, and I hope its the stone. However, I'm still not happy with the location of the track and field facility in the proposal. I remain in favor of the property across 751 to the south. There is also adequate property across Duke University that would be adequate. Taking away space now used by students is a really bad idea, considering all of the land that the University owns. How about that space at the Northwest corner of East Campus. In size, it is more than adequate.

I didn't see much in the drawings that explained just how the track facility would even fit in the space near the soccer stadium. It appears that the space lacks the necessary dimensions to hold just the track, not to mention the other facilities that would be needed. There would be a need for spectator stands for any meets may be held, at least.

[tux]

My first impression looking at those plans, in terms of the football field, is that it is much too derivative. Of course, the safe thing to do is to take a bunch of pictures and gather a bunch of data about other stadiums, etc. So, we'll glob all that together and end up with something that pretty much looks like every other newly renovated football stadium. I.e., it looks like what you'd pay some consultants to put together for way more money than the actual effort would justify.

[Jarhead]

My first impression looking at those plans, in terms of the football field, is that it is much too derivative. Of course, the safe thing to do is to take a bunch of pictures and gather a bunch of data about other stadiums, etc. So, we'll glob all that together and end up with something that pretty much looks like every other newly renovated football stadium. I.e., it looks like what you'd pay some consultants to put together for way more money than the actual effort would justify.

What's wrong with looking at what other colleges are doing? There lots of are good ideas out there. As for using consultants -- this is a short term part (relatively) of the effort. Somebody has to determine the scope and feasibility of the project. If the University maintained a paid staff to do this kind of work, the internal bureaucracy would be much too cumbersome and costly to move forward. Apparently the decision has already been made to improve the athletic facilities. I don't hear any arguments that say our campus is adequate for all present and future endeavors. To move forward on extending athletic facilities, the consultants are here to help us go about doing that in a responsible way. There is no other way to do it.

Justifying cost is another matter, but it boils down to how much money we can raise. Whatever we can raise is what the improvements will cost. Simple isn't it? Trust me, the University will not go into long term debt to do this, or any other projects.

[tux]

What's wrong with looking at what other colleges are doing? There lots of are good ideas out there. As for using consultants -- this is a short term part (relatively) of the effort. Somebody has to determine the scope and feasibility of the project. If the University maintained a paid staff to do this kind of work, the internal bureaucracy would be much too cumbersome and costly to move forward. Apparently the decision has already been made to improve the athletic facilities. I don't hear any arguments that say our campus is adequate for all present and future endeavors. To move forward on extending athletic facilities, the consultants are here to help us go about doing that in a responsible way. There is no other way to do it.

Justifying cost is another matter, but it boils down to how much money we can raise. Whatever we can raise is what the improvements will cost. Simple isn't it? Trust me, the University will not go into long term debt to do this, or any other projects.

Not that it really matters, but I was referring to the money paid to the consultants, not the cost of the overall renovations. I'm fine (and even excited) for Duke to upgrade Wallace Wade. I just would like to see a little more risk-taking in the actual design (perhaps some unique way to incorporate some green space into the design/seating). Duke - to state the obvious - does not have a large local alumni base to fill the existing stadium, much less an expanded one. The goal should be to create a unique and compelling atmosphere for the *average* local fan, IMO. To end up with a stadium that looks like pretty much every other "new" stadium is safe (afterall, no one is going to get fired or blame the consultants for suggesting that we look at Wake's stadium, or Purdue's stadium, etc.) It's just a very linear and limited approach, bound to produce a thoroughly acceptable yet boring end product. Duke should take the opportunity (with the renewed interest in football and Cut's commitment) to surprise and surpass, not to just safely try and reach some sort of parity with other schools. Again, just my opinion...

[sagegrouse]

My first impression looking at those plans, in terms of the football field, is that it is much too derivative. Of course, the safe thing to do is to take a bunch of pictures and gather a bunch of data about other stadiums, etc. So, we'll glob all that together and end up with something that pretty much looks like every other newly renovated football stadium. I.e., it looks like what you'd pay some consultants to put together for way more money than the actual effort would justify.

Maybe because I used to make my living as a consultant, but scoping a total remake of athletic facilities seems like a reasonably good use of knowledgeable consultants, who have (a) done this kind of thing many times and (b) know what projects other major athletic programs have undertaken. And, FWIW, the premier consultants probably have some pretty good stuff in their privates files :) ;) .

I would guess that the project was, first, to systematically lay out all the "requirements" that the Duke athletic staff and others thought were important. Then, force some priorities on the needs, given a [very] rough estimates of the costs.

The fun part is to show what other comparable universities have been spending their money on, because that entails some pictures and diagrams.

Then there would be a host of physical plans and sketches for the powers-that-be to approve. At Duke, the Board of Trustees takes an active role in physical plant changes, so the plans would surely be re-drawn a number of times based on design and funding issues.

A few years ago, the Trustees totally turned around a plan to develop Central Campus into a third major component of the University (actually, fourth, given the size of the Medical Center). I believe that new building projects are still on hold, given the economy and the sunken values of endowments. But, instead of a new Central Campus, the Trustees approved a plan to extend West Campus through the circle and along Campus Drive and nearby areas.

Any way, major changes in athletic facilities will take years and years to come to fruition....

sagegrouse

[brlftz]

anyone else keep seeing this thread on the main page and do a double take, thinking it's about carmen wallace?

[Atldukie79]

I have gone from an anti expansion traditionalist to an advocate for the general deas proposed here. i think I had the realization that the exisitng facilities were, once upon a time, innovative, new and big .... they were in fact a big part of the success Duke had in attracting coaches, talent and presitge. WHile Cameron has made the transition from being considered a new, large, progressive structure, to small quaint and old to its current status as a revered, sacred structure, Wallace Wade is, at best, cute...but sorely out of date.

After some resistance to ripping out the track ( I too am old enough to remember the track meets in the 70's where Eugene OR and Durham were in an unofficial competition to be considered the USA track capital) I think it needs to go.


My observations on the plans:
1) To borrow from the Hippocratic oath....Do no harm to Cameron...DO NOT SCREW IT UP! If you must extend the entrance....USE THE STONE AND THE SAME DESIGN!
2) Don't cram the track in....use the space across from 751.
3) Must have substantial parking plan...when Duke was drawing 50k plus crowds, there was no soccer stadium and the curent playing fields were all used for parking.

I can't wait!