Comments on: Target Field renamed Petco Park North

By: Melvin Nieves

Melvin Nieves — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:41:56 +0000

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.

By: kult

kult — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 08:57:09 +0000

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!

By: Soundbounder

Soundbounder — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:46:32 +0000

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:
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=60018&page=102

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.

By: Melvin Nieves

Melvin Nieves — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 05:45:18 +0000

Thanks for being so polite! Proper manners truly are overlooked in this fast paced world of ours.

By: Entensify

Entensify — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 05:22:43 +0000

You sir, are very wrong.

By: Doug Wallick

Doug Wallick — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:03:36 +0000

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.

By: Melvin Nieves

Melvin Nieves — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 07:15:22 +0000

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.

By: kult

kult — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 06:52:20 +0000

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…

By: Melvin Nieves

Melvin Nieves — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:08:10 +0000

I believe PNC was designed before PETCO, so it would be the other way around.

But there’s really no need for name calling.

By: Melvin Nieves

Melvin Nieves — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:06:50 +0000

“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.