Started By
Message
We taking odds on whether our new IPF will...
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:11 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:11 am
be a giant, embarrassing cluster frick like our current one, a state of the art showcase, or something in the middle (serviceable, but not top of the line)?
I would guess something serviceable, but it would sure be nice to hit one out of the park on this one [heavy sigh].
I would guess something serviceable, but it would sure be nice to hit one out of the park on this one [heavy sigh].
3
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:14 am to GoldenDawg
quote:
a state of the art showcase, or something in the middle (serviceable, but not top of the line)?
Really doubt we frick this up. The only way we frick it up is if we put it in a bad location. Looks like they may put it out on Milledge by the softball complex. Apparently it would cost 4x as much to remove the track and field complex over there, which is the best place to put an IPF.
I bet the facility itself, will be state of the art.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:16 am to GoldenDawg
quote:
but it would sure be nice to hit one out of the park on this one
I feel confident we will. 100 feet tall, 70 yards wide, and 140 yards long. It will probably be awesome.
What people need to realize though is that these don't just pop up like you're building a restroom or something. It's going to take a serious amount of time to get finished, and even if we broke ground this afternoon I doubt it'd be done 9 months from now. I am hoping (and knowing our administration who knows) it'll be done at some point in 2016.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:18 am to gatorhata9
quote:
Apparently it would cost 4x as much to remove the track and field complex over there,
Where have you seen that? I can't see how it would cost that much more. Maybe 2x at the most, I would think. Tracks aren't huge projects.
I'd heard that Adams didn't want the IPF there because he thought it would be an eyesore.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:20 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
It's going to take a serious amount of time to get finished, and even if we broke ground this afternoon I doubt it'd be done 9 months from now.
My high school built a similar size indoor track/field house facility in 6 months, including the time to tear down the old one, with way less resources than UGA. They aren't complex projects.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:22 am to gatorhata9
quote:
Looks like they may put it out on Milledge by the softball complex
I would hope our AD would use his brain cells and put it by BM. What's the point of having an IPF if you still have to load up the whole team and all the equipment onto a bus to get to it?
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:22 am to gatorhata9
If they built it on Lumpkin it would look pretty ridiculous, IMO. Have you seen these things from the outside? They're generally pretty damn ugly and the size of a auto-manufacturing plant. This coupled with the purported cost of building near the existing facility makes the Millledge location seem reasonable. It's a 5 minute drive from the BM.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:22 am to Crowknowsbest
It was in the original 247 article from September when we announced the preliminary research
LINK
quote:
"We already know if the track were removed and built out off Milledge, you're probably quadrupling the cost of the project," Richt said. "So I think the track pretty much is intact."
LINK
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:33 am to Crowknowsbest
Never really understood why they just couldn't put a metal building shell around one of the athletic turf fields.
It's already graded. Just dig new footers and put the sum bitch up.
Worry about the aesthetics later.
It's already graded. Just dig new footers and put the sum bitch up.
Worry about the aesthetics later.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:34 am to GoldenDawg
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/21/15 at 7:08 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:47 am to gatorhata9
Frick the cost. If it's best to have the location where the track sits now then build it there.
Then build a better track and field facility elsewhere.
Just do it right.
Then build a better track and field facility elsewhere.
Just do it right.
This post was edited on 11/19/14 at 8:51 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 8:49 am to AirDawg
That's like our main practice field, no? They want to add a covered field but not by taking away what we have already. Might be the only way to get it on that same block.
Richt wants it as close to BM as possible,
Richt wants it as close to BM as possible,
Posted on 11/19/14 at 9:03 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
My high school built a similar size indoor track/field house facility in 6 months, including the time to tear down the old one, with way less resources than UGA. They aren't complex projects.
per Pruitt:...
quote:
“They got it done in seven months at Florida State,” said Pruitt, defensive coordinator for the 2013 season there. “The first day I took the job on Jan. 7, they broke ground and it was done the first day of practice.”
But from McCheapity...
quote:
That’s not expected to happen at Georgia by next season.
McGarity said Tuesday night that the school recently selected an architect.
“That’s the first part of the process,” he said. “It’s just impossible for it to be done next year. We’re not sure how long it’s going to take. We don’t know where it’s going. We don’t know how long it will take. …All we know is we’re moving forward as quickly as possible.”
This post was edited on 11/19/14 at 9:04 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 9:03 am to dhuck20
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/21/15 at 7:08 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 9:06 am to dallasga6
quote:
“They got it done in seven months at Florida State,” said Pruitt, defensive coordinator for the 2013 season there. “The first day I took the job on Jan. 7, they broke ground and it was done the first day of practice
It's not apples to apples though. You don't just sign off on an IPF and break ground the next day. There are MONTHS and months of planning, design, logistics, etc that have to be worked out before construction starts. I would imagine that FSU had already done all that, and all that was left was to actually build..and took 7 months. We're in phase 1, if not phase 0. Assume 6 months (since we like to drag our feet) of planning and design and 7 months to build, you're looking at over a year from the time that the project is green lit. Which means even if we signed all the contracts by thanksgiving we still wouldn't have it until early 2016.
This post was edited on 11/19/14 at 9:07 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 9:20 am to dallasga6
This post was edited on 7/21/15 at 7:09 am
Posted on 11/19/14 at 10:31 am to AirDawg
Two things:
1.) It's going to be nice and look nice. The Athletic Association doesn't own land. The University and the State of Georgia do. The Athletic Association has to request the land be allocated to this purpose first and that's going to come with a contingency on the part of the State and, more importantly, the University that it fit in with the rest of campus. It's going to look nice, but that takes time and planning (have you seen FSU's IPF? It looks like shite). I love Pruitt's fire and I hope he expedites the process, but it's not getting done before next season. Period.
2.) Milledge is the last option on the table. Coaches want it close. Players want it close. Admins want it close. It's just easier on so many levels if it is able to be built within the Athletic Complex. That being said, razing Spec Towns Track is not an option. The two best options, IMO, are:
- Tear down the Agriculture co-op across the street from Stegman and the practice fields and build it there.
- Build it on top of one of the turf fields (most likely the 100 yard field, closest to Rankin and Stegman.
Of those options, I think replacing one of the turf fields is the most likely simply because Athletics already owns the land and it wouldn't be wasting space with a fifth practice field (practices generally only occupy two of the fields, three at the most).
1.) It's going to be nice and look nice. The Athletic Association doesn't own land. The University and the State of Georgia do. The Athletic Association has to request the land be allocated to this purpose first and that's going to come with a contingency on the part of the State and, more importantly, the University that it fit in with the rest of campus. It's going to look nice, but that takes time and planning (have you seen FSU's IPF? It looks like shite). I love Pruitt's fire and I hope he expedites the process, but it's not getting done before next season. Period.
2.) Milledge is the last option on the table. Coaches want it close. Players want it close. Admins want it close. It's just easier on so many levels if it is able to be built within the Athletic Complex. That being said, razing Spec Towns Track is not an option. The two best options, IMO, are:
- Tear down the Agriculture co-op across the street from Stegman and the practice fields and build it there.
- Build it on top of one of the turf fields (most likely the 100 yard field, closest to Rankin and Stegman.
Of those options, I think replacing one of the turf fields is the most likely simply because Athletics already owns the land and it wouldn't be wasting space with a fifth practice field (practices generally only occupy two of the fields, three at the most).
Posted on 11/19/14 at 10:37 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
It's not apples to apples though. You don't just sign off on an IPF and break ground the next day. There are MONTHS and months of planning, design, logistics, etc that have to be worked out before construction starts. I would imagine that FSU had already done all that, and all that was left was to actually build..and took 7 months. We're in phase 1, if not phase 0. Assume 6 months (since we like to drag our feet) of planning and design and 7 months to build, you're looking at over a year from the time that the project is green lit. Which means even if we signed all the contracts by thanksgiving we still wouldn't have it until early 2016.
This is the most likely scenario in my estimation. FSU has land to build on and a different approval sturucture to go through. UGA has avoided this project for so long precisely because it didn't want to deal with navigating these exact headaches. However, I am willing to bet that if they have selected an architect (as McGarity stated) that they are much further along in the process than they are letting on. That likely means that preliminary designs have been submitted (the bidding process) and a location selected. I would expect that an architect would then be charged with putting together a more developed plan and specifications before consideration and revision (in other words, it's still going to be a while until ground is broken).
Posted on 11/19/14 at 10:51 am to tylerdurden24
quote:
- Build it on top of one of the turf fields (most likely the 100 yard field, closest to Rankin and Stegman.
Where would we then build another turf practice field? We can't just not have an outdoor practice field.
Posted on 11/19/14 at 11:03 am to tylerdurden24
I can't believe it would take 4 months and $400,000 to design an build. The OP was as 8 and we pretty much have it figured out already. 
Page 1 of 2
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News