... rules to provide scope and cost relief on having to rebuild everything in an existing facility to bring it up to full ADA compliance when making additions and/or alterations to the existing facility.

And then there are considerations for new structural design loads? Seismic loading? Sustainability and lifecycle costing? A seemingly endless amount of compliance obstacles to clear out of the way to successfully build to a strategic vision; and yet it can be accomplished and has been accomplished many times over in the infra business.

And yet, VT chose to build four separate structures. Why?

Budget? Okay, I get that. A limiting factor for sure. One cannot build what one cannot pay for. That would include long term O&M as well.

What I don't get is a (seemingly) lack of a facility master plan and how the disparate structures (E/W/SEZ/NEZ) interact as part of a comprehensive and single purpose 'facility'.

Lane is one of the more interesting stadiums to sit and take in a game. Whenever there's a lull in the action, one can spend hours trying to figure out the riddle on how to 'fix' the present mess of structures, renos, rebuilds, upgrades, etc. that have been parachuted in over the years.

If we do anything, please, please, please demo those high school bleachers in the north end zone. I'd rather have earthen bank and blanket seating in the NEZ than look like we can't figure out how to apply the build art-sciences that we proclaim to teach at our #10 CIVIL department and #1 ARCH school. Heck, I'd rather bring back those old wooden bleachers. At least we could tie that to historical preservation!

Innovate the Future. Yeah.