www.psam.uk.com
ARCHITECTS ROUNDTABLE
FEATURE architects roundtable
In this Architects Roundtable discussion, a few of the industry’s top sports architects provide their thoughts on the topic of New Build versus Renovation.
ALEX THOMAS AADipl, RIBA
ASSOCIATE HKS Sports & Entertainment Group
For further information on HKS, visit www.hksinc.com
New Build v Renovation
N
ew Build Venues can generate significantly increased revenues over the facilities they replace. The freedom to plan a new facility from scratch provides fertile ground for innovation that will result in enhanced revenue generation: facilities can be more diverse, sophisticated and better ‘tuned’ to market demands warranting increased product range and revenues. Those venues can be designed for multi-purpose use thus expanding the range and number of scheduled events across each ‘season’. Efficient ‘back of house’ operations and overall energy consumption will minimise operational costs such as utility bills and staff hours and improve profitability. And…new stadia can be ‘future-proofed’ to accommodate on-going changes in demand as markets mature. Major up-front investment in New Build Venues can yield a new set of operations and corresponding revenue streams. In contrast, Renovated Venues will typically have the benefit of being phased – reducing initial outlay and bringing new revenue streams online earlier. So…‘revolution or evolution?’ New Build Venues should ultimately lead to a more effective facility, whereas Renovation allows the client to incrementally develop their fan base, gradually expand their market, and build on their calendar of events as the renovations progress. In addressing this challenge we should understand where the clients business currently stands and what influence we, as sports architects, can provide that will lead to improved revenues and give value to the clients’ investment. Providing demographic research, brand analysis, a holistic master plan and design concepts will indicate what new revenues the market could sustain and help build the business case. At HKS we have a wide range of tools and expertise to assist our clients in optimising their venues. We take a holistic view that encapsulates many facets such as brand, identity, fan experience, technology and built fabric. The right solution may be a New Build facility or there may be a no-build solution that concentrates on branding or technology for instance. In New Build or Renovation projects the right path will always combine multiple design initiatives aimed at bringing more people to more events more profitably. To act sustainably, we are increasingly required to justify our expenditure and consumption. Stadia should be viewed as vast resources of ‘potential’ that is embodied by huge capital and material investment; as such they should be made to work harder to deliver social, economic, environmental, cultural or even humanitarian benefits. We have already seen examples of stadium roofs that generate electricity or collect rainwater for their neighbours, and the case of several of these building types which gave refuge to thousands of displaced residents during Hurricane Katrina. By their very nature stadia will often enclose large volumes of un-used space – we should be looking for not one, but for three overlapping new uses for those spaces. Stadia should be regarded as catalysts for urban renewal by creating jobs and investment in the local economy and they should provide public spaces and facilities that contribute to everyday life.
53
PSAM Summer 2014 V9.indd 53
13/06/2014 12:06
PANSTADIA & ARENA MANAGEMENT SUMMER 2014
David Manica President MANICA Architecture
For further information on MANICA Architecture, visit www.manicaarchitecture.com
New Build v Renovation
T
he question of ‘New Build v Renovation’ is a fascinating subject, filled with distinct benefits and challenges on either side.
New build projects, at least on new greenfield sites, often require increased project costs related to the purchase of large areas of land and supporting infrastructure. These large greenfield sites are typically unavailable within established city centres and, and if they are available within the city, they are usually outrageously expensive. As a result, new build projects on greenfield sites typically occur far away from the city centre, creating less than optimal travel distances for guests and spectators. For new project builds envisioned on an existing urban stadia site, the team often must consider a temporary use facility while the historic stadium is demolished and the new venue is constructed. And while new build projects offer complete flexibility for state-of-the art design and amenities, all new build projects are by nature less environmentally favourable because the materials and resources for the existing stadium are removed and discarded and enormous new resources must be procured to rebuild. And finally, from a team history and culture standpoint, any relocation from a historic facility into a new building can create significant emotional distress to the fans – especially for the first few years until the new facility feels like “home”. On the other hand, a renovated facility can more easily leverage the existing site, central city location, and existing infrastructure to its fullest benefit for the client and fans. From an environmental perspective, the quantity of discarded and new building materials is dramatically reduced as compared to new build alternatives. This fact alone makes renovation a much “greener” solution. However, the greatest challenge related to any renovation project has to do with the phasing and continued operations during the renovation process. For example, a renovation project that must maintain ongoing operations during its construction may take two to three times longer to complete than a similar sized new built facility. This extended and highly complicated sequencing often offsets any and all cost savings related to the reuse of the existing building. And in light of these more equalized costs, a renovated building may still carry over lingering compromises related to such critical issues as sightlines, concourse widths, premium guest revenue opportunities, spectator amenities, lack of parking, etc. As a sport stadia designer, I actually find the most interesting challenging projects to be a synthesis of both new build and renovation. For example, in our VTB Arena Park project in central Moscow, Russia, we are maintaining a portion of the historic stadium façade, while building the rest of the venue completely new. The result is a balanced design that finds its foundation in the past, and its eye on the future. The memory of the project’s history is maintained and yet the entire guest experience is completely reimagined.
54
PSAM Summer 2014 V9.indd 54
13/06/2014 12:06
www.psam.uk.com FEATURE architects roundtable
New Build v Renovation
I
would say “yes” to new build – at least when it comes to big arenas and stadiums in large cities where top clubs use and, in many cases, own the facility. Of course, it’s easier to get everything tailor-made and future-proofed if it’s built from scratch. However, our experience is also that you can find good solutions when renovating arenas, as long as they are intended for sporting events only. As soon as the arena is for multi-use, costs tend to skyrocket: requirements for changes in structural design of the roof for event loads; foundation slabs that are not sufficient for loads when the stand capacity is increased; limitation of the site itself… all of these are significant and essential factors for flexible, multi-purpose arenas. Many worry about the cost of replacing installations that are no longer modern. But is it more expensive to build a new facility? Not always. To a large extent it depends on what it will be used for: is it only a sports facility or is it multi-purpose? Is it privately owned and fully commercial or is it municipally owned, with less focus on the commercial aspect?
Sven-Ake Wikers
The cost of new construction is at least fully quantifiable, which is not always the case with renovation. The cost aspect is, of course, an important part of the face-lift, but we must also consider operating and possibly the events cost; whether the site is as good as we want it; how long it will remain modern and whether it will be an efficient facility from the perspectives of the club. And we haven’t even mentioned the environmental factors, which play a major role in a modern and future-proofed building.
CEO arenaprojekt
So, should we recommend new construction, then? Not necessarily, but if a facility from the 1960s or 70’s is going to match modern requirements – from the audience, the club, the athletes, the management organisation and the property owners – the building has to be pretty good.
For further information on ArenaProjeckt, visit www.arenaprojekt.com
ArenaProjekt have just submitted a proposal for the renovation of an ice-hockey arena that is only eight years old, but that doesn’t work properly for the intended sport. In order to meet all the requirements of a modern facility and to be multi-purpose, the cost of renovation exceeded the cost of new construction. Is it worth it? In this case it probably is, given the many synergies to be gained by having it located where it is. But is it financially justified? No, not completely, since there are many “almost good” solutions, but from a hereditary point of view, it is. Sports architecture probably needs to develop better function and economy rather than a certain style. We believe you have to make sure that facilities are more flexible and lively for today’s type of event; many are too much of design monsters and not enough function and experience. We believe that a stylish arena is an arena that works well. Put more crowdpleasing factors inside the facade and in the arena space rather than outside it. It's time to start thinking from the inside-out! 55
PSAM Summer 2014 V9.indd 55
13/06/2014 12:06
PANSTADIA & ARENA MANAGEMENT SUMMER 2014
TOM JONES PRINCIPAL POPULOUS
For further information on Populous, visit www.populous.com
New Build v Renovation
T
here are a number of elements to consider when choosing between the new build or renovation of an existing venue. These can include environmental concerns, economic issues, heritage factors and physical constraints. There can often be an environmental benefit in retaining some or all of an existing building, as this reduces the embodied energy in construction; which is the largest environmental factor in any large stadia or arena project. Economic pressures can also influence a client towards considering a renovation, unless the physical constraints of the existing structure or site prove to be insurmountable. Heritage factors can also be a significant consideration in the choice of demolition of renovation, especially for heritage sports like football, tennis and cricket. Modern arena-based sports, like basketball and UFC, are often less constrained by these heritage issues and can often afford to be more radical in their outlook. Our work on Centre Court at Wimbledon involved a very careful balance of retaining the heritage and context of the All-England Club, while introducing cutting-edge technology and innovation with the new moving roof. Our approach at Wembley was to retain the existing site and approach down Wembley Way, while rotating the Stadium to enable the increase in size and capacity, while our discussions with Arsenal resulted in the decision to move to a new site, due to the severe physical constraints of the area around their Highbury Stadium. Our current work on the transformation of the London Olympic Stadium is an interesting balance of retaining a significant portion of the original stadium, while introducing moving seating and extending the roof to accommodate the introduction of Premier League football to the Stadium. The use of a stadium or arena as the core of a wider urban regeneration is still a key issue for many of our clients. The ability of the venue to act as a catalyst for regeneration, in areas where landowners and developers have struggled to initiate development, means that they are often at the centre of discussion amongst a wide range of public sector and private sector stakeholders. Our proposals for a new stadium for QPR at Old Oak Common showcase the wonderful opportunities that a stadium can offer in driving forward a wider regeneration agenda. We are also focusing a lot of research and development on the creation of more atmospheric seating bowls. This includes a re-assessment of the way in which sightlines are calculated and modelled, as well as innovative designs of the seating tiers to enhance the spectator engagement with a match. Our work for QPR is taking advantage of this research in exploring how to optimise the spectator viewing experience. There is also a lot of focus on treating spectators as guests, rather than just a number, and looking at how the complete guest experience can be enhanced from the point of leaving home to sitting down in your seat. The development of choice at all touchpoints of the matchday experience and integration of new technology across all platforms and physical spaces within a venue will see a radical change to the way in which fans can engage and interact with their club and venue.
56 FEATURE architects roundtable
PSAM Summer 2014 V9.indd 56
13/06/2014 12:06
www.psam.uk.com
DESIGN FOR WORLDWIDE AUDIENCES
FEATURE
environment
Arena das Dunas, Natal. FIFA 2014 World Cup Stadium
Drawing inspiration from the magnificent sand dunes that dominate the city of Natal, Arena das Dunas has become known as The Stadium of the Dunes. This striking development will raise the profile of Natal nationally and internationally, and will act as a catalyst for urban regeneration. At Populous, we design some of the world’s most memorable sports, civic and entertainment buildings, from Olympic stadia to groundbreaking live music venues. We work with our clients to understand exactly what drives them, providing creative, innovative solutions that result not just in imaginatively designed buildings, but places that make memories. Buildings that bring people and communities together for unforgettable experiences.
For further information contact joanna.griffin@populous.com www.populous.com
PSAM Summer 2014 V9.indd 57
57
13/06/2014 12:06
PANSTADIA & ARENA MANAGEMENT SUMMER 2014
New Build v Renovation
B
uilding new allows you to design more flexibility and re-evaluate building usages from the ground up. We see new venues designed for specific leagues, like Major League Soccer; for specific events, the College World Series Stadium in Omaha as an example; and for mixed entertainment when there is no team in place, like Sprint Center in Kansas City. While venues are being built for diverse reasons, the common theme is that they are programmed and designed as multi-use venues more than ever. Today’s cost models require these venues be flexible and serve many purposes. Engineers need to understand how these varying uses affect system sizing, part load operation, and flexibility for growth and change. This is generally easier to account for in new builds.
Michael Hart CEO M-E engineers
Retrofits typically focus on upgrades to and replacements of failed systems and modifications to accommodate architectural changes to existing areas. Applying today’s approaches to revenue-generating spaces (suites, clubs, etc.) in existing arenas can lead to some significant challenges for engineers. These challenges typically include dealing with complicated and strained space planning for uses that were not foreseen, sequencing if arenas remain online, and adapting often archaic systems to meet new building codes. Also, existing conditions can’t be predicted completely. Often problems have arisen in concealed spaces, such as corroded piping in concession areas cause by carbonated water. Interstitial coordination can be very rigorous in either new or retrofitted stadiums. In new venues we are often trying to coordinate with structural systems designed and released long before interior spaces are defined. In renovated stadiums coordination can be more complex with existing structures that must be worked around to allow for new and differently programmed spaces.
For more information on M-E Engineers, visit www.me-engineers.com
Picture above shows Pinnacle Bank Arena in Lincoln, NE. Credit: Lawrence Anderson Photography
New construction allows more flexibility for accommodating the unique and high-end spaces favoured today. It can also be difficult to accommodate technology systems in existing venues – such as telecommunications and audio/video enhancements. New energy efficiency standards, such as LEED, have shed light on the challenges of designing sustainable venues, beyond the efficiency of MEP systems. Entire project teams are beginning to understand how building architecture and operational schedules affect actual energy consumption as much or more than stand-alone conservation measures. Factors like building envelope, orientation, glazing, insulation and vestibules are more easily addressed in new builds. The cost of upgrading electrical systems really depends on the age of the facility, previous renovations and maintenance. Although many elements within a sports venue are becoming more efficient; there are now many more elements that require power. Facilities more than 30 years old likely have electrical systems without the excess capacity to feed the loads of modern venues; including video boards and ribbon boards, distributed antenna systems (DAS), IPTV systems, etc. Even if capacity exists in these older venues the electrical equipment may be at the end of its service life. We have frequently seen this in college athletic facilities which often see renovations over new construction. Because it isn’t visible and doesn’t directly affect revenue, upgrading the MEP systems is typically down the list of items owners wish to spend their renovation dollars on. Another factor to consider is smoke control and life safety systems requirements. Any major renovation will require that these systems are brought up to current codes. It can be challenging and expensive finding solutions that meet the Codes and interface with existing systems. ■
58 FEATURE architects roundtable
PSAM Summer 2014 V9.indd 58
13/06/2014 12:06