http://www.wm.edu/news/stories/2014/boar...ate123.php

William and Mary recently updated their master plan, and one of the highlights is that the track will be removed from Zable. This is a long term master plan, so we may not see the track removed for a little, but it's still nice to see.

There's also plans to buld practice basketball courts in a space near Kaplan.


Obviously, plenty of academic changes are going to happen as well, you can read the article for the full, detailed plan. Looks like a pretty great direction the university is taking.

Quote:The plan also relocates track and field activities from Zable Stadium to an enhanced athletics complex at the Dillard site off Ironbound Road. The complex, which is the current site of Plumeri Park and Martin Family Stadium, would also contain a track and throwing area for track and field events, a small building to house team lockers, rooms for officials, meeting space and restrooms, and parking for events. To accomplish this change, Martin said two long unoccupied residence halls and five houses on the Dillard site would be removed.

Additional campus recreation spaces are also identified in the plan. Relocating the track allows the football team to practice in Zable Stadium. This, in turn, frees up the practice field to the west of Zable for outdoor student recreation use or some combined use by recreation and athletics, Martin said.

While the plan calls for moving/removing the track from Zable to Dillard, it does not mention lowering the football field or moving the field closer to the home stands. I understand why, neither of those options are practical from a cost perspective.

That being the case, I don't see much advantage to moving the track off campus. A slight aesthetic improvement maybe, but not worth the cost. I can't see the football team wanting to hold practices regularly on the turf inside Zable, track or no track. There's simply more room to operate on the grass practice fields.

Being married to a former pole-vaulter, I also don't like shipping the track team off campus (she already thinks fb has too much clout) unless there is some real benefit to it.

What am I missing here? Are we at some point, 10-20 years down the road, going to demolish the visitor side, slide the field over closer to the home side and rebuild the visitor side? That would be a real improvement, but seems highly unlikely.

Not mentioned is an indoor baseball batting/pitching/fielding facility that would be built on to Plumeri Park for year-round baseball use. The 3-5 million estimated cost will be covered by private donations and is actively underway.

I would assume eventually we'll move closer, but here's one defense of the move to Dillard...

Dillard is quickly becoming a sports complex. I like the idea of grouping a lot of the olympic sports over there and it becoming a sports facility.

I wonder whatever happened to the "EcoVillage? This was the College's Politically Correct notion to replace all of the remaining Fraternity Lodges with "Sustainable" "EnvironmentallySensitive" houses. This was always a dumb idea and it looks like somebody wised up.

These projects will cost more than a Billion Dollars, where is the money going to come from?

(11-21-2014 02:27 PM)62Indian Wrote:  I wonder whatever happened to the "EcoVillage? This was the College's Politically Correct notion to replace all of the remaining Fraternity Lodges with "Sustainable" "EnvironmentallySensitive" houses. This was always a dumb idea and it looks like somebody wised up.

These projects will cost more than a Billion Dollars, where is the money going to come from?

I'm confused - they did replace all of the fraternity houses with new buildings that are more eco friendly?

I LOVE THIS!! I like the track specific facility at Dillard and I love the next look Zable

I'll be interested to see what they do with that space. Just put more turf there for practice?

(11-21-2014 02:46 PM)wml33t Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 02:27 PM)62Indian Wrote:  I wonder whatever happened to the "EcoVillage? This was the College's Politically Correct notion to replace all of the remaining Fraternity Lodges with "Sustainable" "EnvironmentallySensitive" houses. This was always a dumb idea and it looks like somebody wised up.

These projects will cost more than a Billion Dollars, where is the money going to come from?

I'm confused - they did replace all of the fraternity houses with new buildings that are more eco friendly?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EcoVillage project was directed at the replacement of the old Fraternity LODGES - across the street from the Sadler Center - not the then existing Fraternity Dorms, which were recently replaced by new buildings to house the Fraternities. And, I do not recall the College tooting their horn about any environmental qualities of the new Fraternity Dorms/Houses

Well alrighty. Sorry that being environmentally conscious makes you so angry.

(11-21-2014 01:51 PM)WMTribe90 Wrote:  

Quote:The plan also relocates track and field activities from Zable Stadium to an enhanced athletics complex at the Dillard site off Ironbound Road. The complex, which is the current site of Plumeri Park and Martin Family Stadium, would also contain a track and throwing area for track and field events, a small building to house team lockers, rooms for officials, meeting space and restrooms, and parking for events. To accomplish this change, Martin said two long unoccupied residence halls and five houses on the Dillard site would be removed.

Additional campus recreation spaces are also identified in the plan. Relocating the track allows the football team to practice in Zable Stadium. This, in turn, frees up the practice field to the west of Zable for outdoor student recreation use or some combined use by recreation and athletics, Martin said.

While the plan calls for moving/removing the track from Zable to Dillard, it does not mention lowering the football field or moving the field closer to the home stands. I understand why, neither of those options are practical from a cost perspective.

That being the case, I don't see much advantage to moving the track off campus. A slight aesthetic improvement maybe, but not worth the cost. I can't see the football team wanting to hold practices regularly on the turf inside Zable, track or no track. There's simply more room to operate on the grass practice fields.

Being married to a former pole-vaulter, I also don't like shipping the track team off campus (she already thinks fb has too much clout) unless there is some real benefit to it.

What am I missing here? Are we at some point, 10-20 years down the road, going to demolish the visitor side, slide the field over closer to the home side and rebuild the visitor side? That would be a real improvement, but seems highly unlikely.

Dillard is going to become a Sports complex, with both Soccer, Lacrosse and Baseball already there, it makes perfect sense.

Think of it this way, once the track is removed, you can Bowl in the stadium.

(11-21-2014 05:58 PM)Paulbintheburg Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 01:51 PM)WMTribe90 Wrote:  

Quote:The plan also relocates track and field activities from Zable Stadium to an enhanced athletics complex at the Dillard site off Ironbound Road. The complex, which is the current site of Plumeri Park and Martin Family Stadium, would also contain a track and throwing area for track and field events, a small building to house team lockers, rooms for officials, meeting space and restrooms, and parking for events. To accomplish this change, Martin said two long unoccupied residence halls and five houses on the Dillard site would be removed.

Additional campus recreation spaces are also identified in the plan. Relocating the track allows the football team to practice in Zable Stadium. This, in turn, frees up the practice field to the west of Zable for outdoor student recreation use or some combined use by recreation and athletics, Martin said.

While the plan calls for moving/removing the track from Zable to Dillard, it does not mention lowering the football field or moving the field closer to the home stands. I understand why, neither of those options are practical from a cost perspective.

That being the case, I don't see much advantage to moving the track off campus. A slight aesthetic improvement maybe, but not worth the cost. I can't see the football team wanting to hold practices regularly on the turf inside Zable, track or no track. There's simply more room to operate on the grass practice fields.

Being married to a former pole-vaulter, I also don't like shipping the track team off campus (she already thinks fb has too much clout) unless there is some real benefit to it.

What am I missing here? Are we at some point, 10-20 years down the road, going to demolish the visitor side, slide the field over closer to the home side and rebuild the visitor side? That would be a real improvement, but seems highly unlikely.

Dillard is going to become a Sports complex, with both Soccer, Lacrosse and Baseball already there, it makes perfect sense.

Think of it this way, once the track is removed, you can Bowl in the stadium.

Moving baseball, m/w soccer, and lacrosse to Dillard all made sense because each new facility was a significant upgrade for those sports over where games were played on campus. I don't think you can say that for track.

I'm not against the concept of making Dillard more of a sports complex, I just don't see a positive cost to benefit for moving the track facilities, unless the end result is moving the football field closer to the stands once the track is gone, which seems unlikely given the high cost. Simply swapping the track for more turf, but keeping the fields and stands where they are is of limited benefit to football IMO.

Again, I'm sure I'm missing something in this calculus.

Agreed that moving the track to Dillard if they aren't going to change the stadium layout is of little value.

Although, if they want to build an indoor field house at Dillard - I'm sure the team would appreciate it!

I'm not sure we can slide the visitor's side inward as that would alter the base structure/foundation and THAT is a no-no.

But, like 90 suggested, lowering the field and installing lower seating where the track currently stands seems like a good idea so long as the new seats weren't level with the field as that would make it impossible to watch the game. What we have as endzone spectators is perfect.

Build eco-friendly biodegradable seats made from W&M Hall popcorn leftovers. We can balance that by burning poo and coal to run the stadium lights...this way, 62 won't withhold his contribution to Tribe Club. Win-win.

I like the idea of enhancing the baseball facilities out there at Dillard. We need that if we are to support our rise in the baseball world. Not sure how basketball practice courts are going to change things. For some real change; invite the folks from Buffalo Wild Wings in and see what they suggest to spice up this environment.

Though the article says nothing about sinking it, rather using it for practice and then opening the current practice filelds for some student use.

(11-21-2014 06:50 PM)Tribal Wrote:  I'm not sure we can slide the visitor's side inward as that would alter the base structure/foundation and THAT is a no-no.

But, like 90 suggested, lowering the field and installing lower seating where the track currently stands seems like a good idea so long as the new seats weren't level with the field as that would make it impossible to watch the game. What we have as endzone spectators is perfect.

Build eco-friendly biodegradable seats made from W&M Hall popcorn leftovers. We can balance that by burning poo and coal to run the stadium lights...this way, 62 won't withhold his contribution to Tribe Club. Win-win.

My favorite post of the year! Would give rep points for this one if allowed.

(11-21-2014 06:50 PM)Tribal Wrote:  Build eco-friendly biodegradable seats made from W&M Hall popcorn leftovers. We can balance that by burning poo and coal to run the stadium lights...this way, 62 won't withhold his contribution to Tribe Club. Win-win.

That last bit had me laughing....well done.

(11-21-2014 04:41 PM)62Indian Wrote:  The EcoVillage project was directed at the replacement of the old Fraternity LODGES - across the street from the Sadler Center - not the then existing Fraternity Dorms, which were recently replaced by new buildings to house the Fraternities. And, I do not recall the College tooting their horn about any environmental qualities of the new Fraternity Dorms/Houses

Quote:The complex is designed to be environmentally sensitive and save energy costs. All of the houses are designed to LEED certification standards. Three representative houses are registered with the USGBC under LEED for Homes, and the Community Center is registered under LEED for New Construction.

Sorry, 62. Maybe they can install a couple oil-burning ceiling fans?

(11-22-2014 12:53 AM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 04:41 PM)62Indian Wrote:  The EcoVillage project was directed at the replacement of the old Fraternity LODGES - across the street from the Sadler Center - not the then existing Fraternity Dorms, which were recently replaced by new buildings to house the Fraternities. And, I do not recall the College tooting their horn about any environmental qualities of the new Fraternity Dorms/Houses

Quote:The complex is designed to be environmentally sensitive and save energy costs. All of the houses are designed to LEED certification standards. Three representative houses are registered with the USGBC under LEED for Homes, and the Community Center is registered under LEED for New Construction.

Sorry, 62. Maybe they can install a couple oil-burning ceiling fans?

Whale oil?