This is a baseball site, right?

Style, per se, is not a particularly useful term here. The form of the ballpark is shaped by its program, and that–a field surrounded by seats–has been the same for more than a century. Historically, it has been an urban industrial typology. Is it possible to work within this tradition and have a progressive design–which, IMHO, means more than simply cloaking a structure with lime jello for effect? Do these new stadiums respond creatively to the demands of the ballpark program? PacBell does. So do Coors and Safeco, despite some admittedly annoying olde-style affectations.

Regarding SkyDome: however seminal a work it might be, it is also, as you write, a hermetic, corporate environment. And if you’re looking for a really bold architectural gesture in ballpark design, the place to go in Canada is Montreal. Stade Olympique. Neat architectural idea. Cool form. Worst ballpark ever made. And they’re still paying for it.

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Next post:

Previous post: