http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... get-update

Mpls City Council votes this Friday, 5/25/12

sigh. . hurry up and wait

I think the 2016 date is the absolute latest season they'd play in the new stadium. As I understand it, it could be sooner than that, but the thing is while the deal was getting hammered out with the city and state nothing concrete could be done. Once it clears the Minneapolis city council, that's when work can start in earnest. Assuming all of the planning work doesn't take the maximum amount of time it could, the stadium could be open for business sooner than 2016, perhaps even as early as the 2014 season from what I understand.

One thing the Vikes have going for them is that their owners do major developments in their day jobs. The experience and connections the Wilfs have in that area should pay dividends once people can start rolling up their sleeves and getting after it. Another thing that should speed this up is the fact that the construction industry has been depressed. They've had a lot of people waiting for work like this, so everyone on the labor and supplies fronts should also be eager to get contracts signed and start working.

My guess is the stadium will be nearly complete by the start of the 2014 season, and they may possibly be able to play a few games in it towards the end of that season.

I find it hard to believe that anyone could have an estimated timeline with that much variation. You're talking about over a year's difference, assuming we're talking late in the 2014 season vs. finishing up just after the 2015 season ends. Other than the possibility of adding a retractable roof, it sounds like the design has been finalized for quite a while. What would contribute to such a wildly wide-ranging time estimate? Delays due to weather?

Is the demolition of the Metrodome planned for immediately after the 2012 or 2013 season?

I think the 2016 timing is calculated, allowing the team to minimize the time at TCF Bank stadium. Unless they change their mind on that aspect, 2016 is the likely timing.

"Minimize"?? If they begin demolition of the Met after the 2012 season and don't open the new stadium until 2016, that would mean a full _three_ seasons at TCF.

Early talk had them in the Metrodome during construction for two seasons before demolition. If that changed, I agree a faster timeline is likely. I am not sure all decisions on timing have been made. They want a fixed price bid with construction overruns on the Contractor. I would think that will come into play on timing.

It passed! Thankfully! Let's build this thing!!

And let's try not to take 4½ years to do it.

It is finally over.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -official/



Well, all I can say is that was one hell of an emotional roller coaster. It will be interesting to see what happens with the roof as we move forward. Nevertheless, I am just glad this whole ordeal is finally over.

http://m.startribune.com/news/?id=154115495&c=y

Amazingly, it is done! Go Vikes. Onward to the Super Bowl.

I think that's the rub and source of most of the disparity in the estimated timeline - when does the Metrodome come down and construction on the new stadium begin? That part of the timeline is still very much undecided from what I understand. All things being equal, the Vikes will play in the Dome as long as they can. If that is just the 2012 season, then the shorter timeline applies. If they play there the 2013 season as well, the longer timeline applies.

As for the demolition and construction timeline, as I understand it the 2016 estimate is the "latest possible". Should they be able to speed things up due to good weather, for example, it's unlikely to take a full two seasons to complete that phase. So, in essence, if they play 2012 in the Dome and then are able to demolish it and start construction following the 2012 season, and they find ways to optimize construction times, then the new stadium could be open as early as the last few games of the 2014 season.

My understanding of the contract with the University is that it covers them for the worst-case timeframe, as it should.

From what I've seen lately, these aren't mutually exclusive things. The new stadium's construction would start before the Dome comes down. The footprints of the Dome and new building overlap, but not entirely. So, play in the Dome this year and next while as much as possible of the new building goes up, then day after 2013 season is over, down comes the Dome. 2014 and maybe 2015 at TCF. New place in either 2015 or worst case 2016.

I could see how you could *some* work done on the new stadium, but by this diagram, it doesn't look like it would be extensive. The footprint of the old Met runs right through the 50 yard line of the new one.

1/3-1/2 of the structure isn't extensive?

You cannot build 1/3 to 1/2 of the structure from the ground up. It's impossible. They could maybe lay the foundation for the one end, build a tier of stands, finish whatever internal rooms are under the stands at that end. Build an entrance ramp or two and finish a fraction of the exterior. Very little else.

http://m.twincities.com/twincities/db_3 ... d=UIQoU44O

Behind the scenes story.

Well kudos to everyone for getting it done, but it still makes me mad that the "leaders" of the state pulled the crap that they did. I am so glad we have Wilf as the owner of this team. I wonder how many other owners would have put up with this state's crap like he did?

Man, the new stadium is really shoehorned in there, isn't it? What's parking going to be like at this stadium? Looks like they're wiping out all of the surface lots.

according to that map, there will be 1100 parking spaces between the ramp to the north and the spaces to the west.

All available parking will be in parking garages? That sounds like a nightmare.

Wait, there's a tiny 'surface lot' shown at the SE corner of the stadium. That must be where team buses will park.

What is "Open Space Gameday Tailgating" on that map? Doesn't really sound like parking ... do they have a different definition for 'tailgating' in Minnesota?

The fact they call green space a 'tailgating' area is pretty absurd. I think 'they' should knock everything down 4 blocks in each direction and make a proper parking area for proper tailgating. The city is missing the fact that football fans don't want parks, and ice skating areas. They want a place to park their truck, bust out the grill and 'Tailgate'. So to answer your question....yes, they have a different definition apparently.

What is the latest rendering of the new stadium?

Those of you who are good with photoshop, I have always thought it would be cool to have the stadium in the shape of a Viking ship... like the field would be the floor of the ship and the seats would surround it like the sides... and there would be flags and stuff like the sails of the ship and stuff.. Idk. Would anyone be able to make something like that? Just for fun?

I would think that the tailgating area will be for parking but it will cost too much for the average Joe to park there. With the tailgating craze why not try to cash in on it?

Doesn't look that bad to me. The Metrodome sold out repeatedly for many years while being shoehorned into downtown, I don't see how much better it would have been to drop a stadium 40 miles out in the middle of nowhere just to grab more cheap and plentiful tailgating land. And when I say that, I mean that. Buying some overpriced buildings nearby just to tear them down and turn them into tailgating land would have never, ever, gotten through the legislative process.

If you want to pitch a grill outside the back of your truck, I recommend you drive out to the suburbs, find a nice park with wifi, get out your laptop, and put on the game while grilling. The tradeoff that most people understand is going to happen with a stadium in an urban area is that you get mass transit + shorter commute at the expense of cheap land for massive parking lots. Better that than having the team move to LA.

The Arden Hills site was only 10 miles from the current downtown location. It would have meant not having to play at TCF while construction was taking place, as well as the other benefits of the location.

I think the politicians balked at "giving" Ziggy all that money for a location that he'd develop and make additional money from. Instead, they felt more comfortable going with the status quo, even if it means a less than ideal situation for both fans and the team.



Shorter commute? That would be assuming most people attending games live where they can walk out of their homes and jump on mass transit, which I doubt is the case. Without parking, I imagine what many people are forced to do is either drive to a mass transit transit hub, park their cars and ride in, or else park 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 mile out and walk in.



Yep. In the end, you take what you can get.

THE NEW STADIUM:

http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_asset ... medium.jpg