Padres bloggin' since 2007

Target Field renamed Petco Park North

July 17th, 2009 by Melvin

Petco Park North 1
Petco Park North 2Petco Park North 3
These are construction photos of the Minnesota Twins’ new ballpark, aka “Petco Park North.” Can you believe this exterior design? Look familiar?

PadreHomer informs me it was Antoine Predock who designed the exterior of Petco Park.

But check it out: HOK Sport (now Populus) is attached to both the Minnesota and San Diego ballpark projects, as well as being involved in just about every new park design the past two decades.

And HOK is also known for re-using the same ideas. Don’t get me wrong–red brick and green accents looked great. But that was just the first time or three.

Luckily there aren’t too many new ballparks left that need building, so we may only have one Petco clone.

Thanks to dwallick and resedabear for the photos.

Melvin Update 7/20: Twins fans, don’t take this post so seriously. I don’t know anything about Target Field except that one part of the facade looks just like one part of the PETCO facade. I’m sure the rest of the park is different. In fact, us Padre fans think it’s pretty cool that you’ll actually be able to tell what team plays home games at Target Field, while you’d never know who plays in PETCO because there are no signs whatsoever.

And no, I don’t care that one material is “limestone” from 100 miles north of Minnesota, while the other is “sandstone”. That’s all marketing. They look exactly alike. Don’t tell me this doesn’t look just like this. But really, I’m faulting HOK here more than anyone, they have a history of building ballparks that look just like each other.

Posted in gripes, petco park | 13 Comments »

13 Responses to “Target Field renamed Petco Park North”

  1. Matt says:

    You have some excellent writing skills. I own and operate
    We are looking to expand into baseball and are looking for bloggers. If you are interested please respond for more info.

  2. Bobbo says:

    Holy cow! PNC is a PetCo clone too! Ever seen a pic of the outside of that place? Yep, you guessed it – SAME COLOR! God forbid you look at the DESIGN of the place and realize that they look NOTHING alike – AT ALL! Just that they are made of similar materials (and, hey, not that you’d bother to look up the fact that PetCo is made out of Sandstone, and Target Field Limestone! Limestone quarried IN MINNESOTA, I should note!) You’re a dope…

  3. Kevin says:

    Petco is sandstone. Target is native Minnesota limestone, mined only 90 miles south of the ballpark. Other than the color similarities between sandstone and limestone, Petco and Target are very different ballparks. Lazy reporting and research on your part to call Target a Petco clone.

    • “Other than looking exactly the same they’re totally different.”

      Ok, so that statement is an exaggeration.

      But so is calling my post “reporting”. I’m just pointing out the similarities in that part of the facade. To call this post “reporting” is an insult to reporting.

  4. kult says:

    Melvin please! If I were to compare the common features of the exterior of both parks, I would say that they’re both tan in color and both do not have a “retro” aspect. I would give all the credit in the world to both the Padres and the Twins for moving away from the “Camden yards” design. What’s truly sad about the brilliant design of Camden, is that it was copied into the ground! The differences between Target and Petco are far more than the similarities whether outside or in. Outside… Petco: The stadium’s canopy has ground fixed supports that extend beyond the foundation of the entire bowl. The exterior of the bowl is symmetrical. The sandstone is seamless. Target: The stadium’s canopy is supported by the top deck with the stadium’s bowl lights contained within. The bowl is anything but symmetrical with the jogging of limestone and glass protruding South, East and West. The limestone is laid imperfectly with different sizes and shapes, much like the mother nature model that’s been followed here. Big love to all of those behind the Petco design! Petco is truly one of the greatest ballparks ever built! In my opinion, Petco is the first non-retro park built since Camden. If the Twins are guilty of plagiarism, it’s because they know like the Padres did, that “Retro” is dead…

    • You seem to know your stuff. I still think the exterior photos of both stadiums look remarkably similar. This doesn’t refer to the other features of the two stadiums, however.

      I agree about the retro, the departure from green and red brick is welcome. I’m just afraid the sand / limestone exterior might become the next cookie cutter look.

      I’d also lump the parks in Washington and Pittsburgh, at least the facades, in this category. They each have their distinct features though, specifically the dark colored ironwork in Pittsburgh and silver rather than sand colored stone in DC.

    • kult says:

      Hey Melvin, great rebuttal. I happen to think, by the way, that PNC is a masterpiece! There are a few towns that were born for “retro” parks and Pittsburgh is definitely one of them. Honus Wagner would be proud. I understand your fear of lemmings fouling up “individuality” in future park designs. The relevant matter here is that there are only three parks left to be built. I don’t know if you’ve caught a look at the parks that Miami, Tampa and Oakland have proposed. I hate to sound stupid, but I would have loved to see Cisco Field! That deal is dead and Oakland hasn’t built anything new since they modified Alameda County Stadium to lure the Raiders back. The two stadiums in Florida, one proposed and one approved, make Petco and Target look retro because George Jetson didn’t have input into the design! You mentioned red brick and I agree. You could go down the line from Coors Field to Citi Field and find a repetition that one day will be greatly overlooked. By the way, the “Ying Yang” element to Target Field is inside the bowl! It’s very hard for me to figure out if it will be great or horrible. Target field could go down as having “horrible warning track views” or being the most intimate ballpark since Ebbets Field. The closest seats to Home Plate!!!!! I guess we’ll see… You know your stuff too!

    • I love PNC Park. I haven’t been to any of them, but I would put my top 3 ballparks as Fenway, Wrigley, and PNC.

  5. Doug Wallick says:

    Thanks for using some of my photos here. I personally don’t think there are many similarities other than the color, PNC in Pittsburgh has the same color and was built before Petco.After 27 years in the Metrodome anything looks better! HOK also designed the Xcel Energy Center in St.Paul and it was nearly duplicated in Glendale AZ for the Phoenix Coyotes.

  6. Entensify says:

    You sir, are very wrong.

  7. Soundbounder says:

    OK, they are both HOK and neither of them are brick. Other than that, I hardly see Target Field as a Petco clone.
    Here is a thread of photos:

    Actually the two clones that never get mentioned much was Jack Murphy and the Vet. Pretty much the same structure of a rounded square,and same movable seats, except the Vet was enclosed and they each had a different exterior facing. These two were seperate from the other round multi purpose style stadiums such as Shea, Three Rivers etc.

Search Posts

The Sacrifice Bunt on Facebook The Sacrifice Bunt on Twitter


Sacrifice Bunt Shop

Sacrifice Bunt Shop