What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Cal approves $321 million stadium renovation

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
SAN FRANCISCO -- The University of California has approved a $321 million renovation of UC Berkeley's Memorial Stadium.

The UC Board of Regents signed off on the renovation and seismic retrofit of UC Berkeley's 87-year-old Memorial Stadium, which straddles the Hayward Fault. The project will reduce seating from about 72,000 to 63,000 and upgrade restrooms, food service and public safety facilities.

The project is expected to begin later this year and be completed by the start of the 2012 football season. The stadium will be closed during Cal's 2011 season, when the team will play at another location.

UC officials say the project will be funded mainly by sales of long-term rights to about 3,000 stadium seats and that no state money will be used.

Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press

*************

Very interesting. This looks to me like they're spending $300 MM in order to make less money. That stadium is a dump and needs to be fixed, but they're losing 9k seats and sacrificing the 2011 home slate. Plus, you'd have to think that if people paid $50k+ per seat for long-term rights on 3k premium seats then they're not paying the regular ticket price for those seats going forward.

I hope Bohn studies this in depth and learns something valuable from it. CU is going to need to look at a Folsom, Dal Ward & Balch project at some point in the near future. The Cal plan may offer some ideas since they pulled it off without using state money, but I'm skeptical that it's the exact right model.
 
Tedford better start doing something with that team to justify this. 5 more years of shattered expectations and Emerald Bowls and those fans are going to stop buying tickets.
 
what's the big deal.. they play their 2011 schedule at Oakland Alameda Coliseum. They'll probably outdraw the Raiders.. :lol:


Disagree on Tedford.. They haven't gotten over the hump, but that program is in so much better shape than before. Tedford is a good coach..
 
This sounds remarkably like what Stanford did a few years ago. They went from a 85K seat stadium +/- to around 55K ( I don't know the exact figures, somebody can feel free to correct me) but made the stadium much nicer.
 
This sounds remarkably like what Stanford did a few years ago. They went from a 85K seat stadium +/- to around 55K ( I don't know the exact figures, somebody can feel free to correct me) but made the stadium much nicer.

you are right, although somehow it only cost Stanford about 1/3rd of the Cal price.
 
you are right, although somehow it only cost Stanford about 1/3rd of the Cal price.

Has to be location. Cal's stadium is on a fault, and on a hill, might make it a little more expensive. Plus they probably have to pay the tree people to move during the construction.
 
What sucks is that this is going to make Tightwad Hill a thing of the past. It's really a great place to watch a game. And it's free!

Tightwad_Hill,_Cal_vs._MSU,_8-30-08_3.JPG


Tightwad_hill_9_5_09.jpg
 
This sounds remarkably like what Stanford did a few years ago. They went from a 85K seat stadium +/- to around 55K ( I don't know the exact figures, somebody can feel free to correct me) but made the stadium much nicer.

I think it was similar to the LA Coliseum before they lowered the field in that it had a track and had a pretty flat slope. It almost looks like they completely rebuilt it because not only is the track gone but it now has an upper deck. And I'm pretty sure they rarely ever had a capacity or near-capacity crowd anyway, so it's not like they lost much if anything by giving up that many seats. I guess having 85K seats (or whatever it was) helped in getting them a Super Bowl played there. :huh:
 
I think it was similar to the LA Coliseum before they lowered the field in that it had a track and had a pretty flat slope. It almost looks like they completely rebuilt it because not only is the track gone but it now has an upper deck. And I'm pretty sure they rarely ever had a capacity or near-capacity crowd anyway, so it's not like they lost much if anything by giving up that many seats. I guess having 85K seats (or whatever it was) helped in getting them a Super Bowl played there. :huh:

I was in that old stadium. It was a relic from a bygone era. Huge stadium.
 
apparently a large chunk of the money is for a retrofit. they are gunna separate the stadium in sections and lay a bunch of plastic below it so it will "move" with the earthquakes.
 
Can't wait to check out the stadium before they close it down. Next season can't start soon enough.
 
apparently a large chunk of the money is for a retrofit. they are gunna separate the stadium in sections and lay a bunch of plastic below it so it will "move" with the earthquakes.

Exactly. Plus, it's typically easier to just tear something down and rebuild it, which is what Stanford did.
 
Exactly. Plus, it's typically easier to just tear something down and rebuild it, which is what Stanford did.

Stanford did the whole thing in a single offseason too which is pretty incredible. The old stadium was a terrible place to watch a game especially with the track around the field.
 
Stanford did the whole thing in a single offseason too which is pretty incredible. The old stadium was a terrible place to watch a game especially with the track around the field.

The furds' old stadium sure did suck. Haven't been to the new one yet, but have heard good things.

Pretty much all stadiums with tracks suck. The only stadium I can think of that doesn't is Husky Stadium, which would be absolutely amazing if it got rid of the track somehow.
 
The way you get rid of a track is to lower the level of the field and expand the seats inward.
 
The way you get rid of a track is to lower the level of the field and expand the seats inward.

In most places maybe, but tough to do in the bay area without some heavy duty waterproofing. Pretty sure Stanford would have run into the water table going that far down.
 
Back
Top