New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

So. They are willing to forsake the project over turf. Point taken.

Is the actual cost of Field turf $5 mil? Seems really high.

There was just an article in the Billings paper about how Wendys of MT donated $400k to install field turf at the local high school field back in the late 90's. Not sure if that was the total cost but I'm pretty sure the school district didn't pony up $4.5 mil.

[filbert]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

So. They are willing to forsake the project over turf. Point taken.

You do understand that for approximately half of the football season, and especially for any playoff games which may come to Brookings, when you say "grass" you actually are referring to "painted dirt", yes?

[slosho]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

You do understand that for approximately half of the football season, and especially for any playoff games which may come to Brookings, when you say "grass" you actually are referring to "painted dirt", yes?

Frozen painted dirt to be exact

[NoVaJack]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

Frozen painted dirt to be exact

Some of us prefer to call it "frozen tundra" and "home-field advantage."

Getting to the nub of the issue: Is the new stadium in jeapordy over this?

[bigticket1]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

I would agree, We are getting turf. You have to consider this budget or total contract is 65 million, and details beyond my comprehension.

I would imagine Justin Sell is going to have sit down with Brookings High School and talk about their future use of the new stadium. I don't know how far into the future this working agreement extended to. At the time there would not have been any lights at CAS if the High school had not step up with the funds to install them in exchange for using CAS. That was 2002 or thereabouts.

With a turf field , what issues would there be with BHS using the stadium ?

[slosho]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

Some of us prefer to call it "frozen tundra" and "home-field advantage."

Getting to the nub of the issue: Is the new stadium in jeapordy over this?

My understanding is this: The proposal #'s are higher than the budgeted amount. Therefore the project cannot start until it is back at or below the budgeted #. some (many?) contractor bids came in as a lone bid or too high for the budget. and now they are trying to make up approx 10% by rebidding the problem areas. If that does not work they will likely need to cut some things out to proceed.

Certain posters on this board feel eliminating the field turf (which was at one time stated to be about $5M to complete) would be a decent alternative in the meantime to not stall or stop the project. Other posters think the idea is blasphemy and that the administration would never consider this. To be clear it the aforementioned field turf discussion has only been verified as occuring on the SDSUFANS.COM fan forum.

[jack power]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

My understanding is this: The proposal #'s are higher than the budgeted amount. Therefore the project cannot start until it is back at or below the budgeted #. some (many?) contractor bids came in as a lone bid or too high for the budget. and now they are trying to make up approx 10% by rebidding the problem areas. If that does not work they will likely need to cut some things out to proceed.

Certain posters on this board feel eliminating the field turf (which at was one time stated to be about $5M to complete) would be a decent alternative in the meantime to not stall or stop the project. Other posters think the idea is blasphemy and that the administration would never consider this. To be clear it the aforementioned field turf discussion has only been verified as occuring on the SDSUFANS.COM fan forum.

The problem is the field turf cost is probably around $1 million not $5 million.

[mango4]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

The problem is the field turf cost is probably around $1 million not $5 million.

This, it's not going to cost $5 million to put in FieldTurf. Notre Dame put in FieldTurf last year for $750,000.

According to Georgia-based FieldTurf, the cost to install an 80,000-square-foot athletic field, including preparation work, materials and a year of maintenance, is approximately $750,000. The company estimates the artificial turf will last 8 to 10 years before needing to be replaced.

[JimmyJack]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

This, it's not going to cost $5 million to put in FieldTurf. Notre Dame put in FieldTurf last year for $750,000.

They did one at my kid's school here in Wichita last year for about $750k. New installation.

Here's what the Field Turf people say about costs:

http://www.fieldturf.com/en/fieldtur.../cost-analysis

[slosho]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

I got the 5m from here many moon's ago. It was wrong(apparently) and all but invalidates my argument. My apologies for basing an opinion on hearsay, likely I'll go down as the first individual to do so.

[Nidaros]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

With a turf field , what issues would there be with BHS using the stadium ?

What would be the issue is the continue usage of the new stadium and does it contain a price tag of how much? Also would the old lights or present lights continue to be used or will they be replaced with a better lighting system? All I know is that original lights were paid for by School district and city parks, how long ago, I am not sure. Lots of details which I am sure AD Sells will work out with the city/parks and schools. Could the hs usage affect the turf, not likely. The point I was trying to make was back in the D2 days,.CAS went many many years without lights and the high school and city parks came to rescue with funds to put in the current lights in exchange for useage of the CAS field. I making this point to those who bad mouth the high school usage of a college field.

[SoDakJack]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

With a turf field , what issues would there be with BHS using the stadium ?

I've never had any issues with BHS using the stadium. But I would think BHS would want to play in a smaller venue after this stadium is finished. They just don't draw enough fans and playing back on the high school "campus" would fit them better.

[Nidaros]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

I've never had any issues with BHS using the stadium. But I would think BHS would want to play in a smaller venue after this stadium is finished. They just don't draw enough fans and playing back on the high school "campus" would fit them better.

Yes it probably would.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

I've never had any issues with BHS using the stadium. But I would think BHS would want to play in a smaller venue after this stadium is finished. They just don't draw enough fans and playing back on the high school "campus" would fit them better.

I'm not against BHS using the stadium. I'm not for it either, though. BHS should pay for the privilege, just like anybody else would.

BHS hasn't been using the stadium for free up to this point, why would they or anybody expect to use it for free in the future?

[TK22867]

Re: New SDSU Football Stadium Site Plan

This, it's not going to cost $5 million to put in FieldTurf. Notre Dame put in FieldTurf last year for $750,000.

I can vouch for Mango re: Notre Dame field turf. From the South Bend Tribune: "According to Georgia-based FieldTurf, the cost to install an 80,000-square-foot athletic field, including preparation work, materials and a year of maintenance, is approximately $750,000. The company estimates the artificial turf will last 8 to 10 years before needing to be replaced."