Seriously though, not being able to close the roof during bad weather is not a big issue. So it starts raining during a game? So what? The game goes on, and the players get wet. The seating areas are still all covered.

From a usability standpoint, the roof is an amazing upgrade that will vastly improve the atmosphere in the stadium, and will almost certainly attract more business in terms of conventions and trade shows.

From an architectural standpoint, the stadium is, well, shall we say… striking, and I’m trying to reserve final judgment until the whole thing is done and lit. But at the moment it looks a bit monstrous, and is definitely not the most elegant solution. I just keep wondering why they required 36 masts to support the structure when most other stadiums I’ve seen have only four, if any. Maybe it has to do with being able to withstand heavy wet snow, or earthquake proofing, but man… that is one spikey, busy looking roof!

I think the media is overreacting on the “won’t close in rain”, but we will see. They won’t be able to close in 20 minutes like the skydome. I don’t think PAVCO had the option to go with a solid retractable roof due to BC Place’s original design. I can;t think of too many use cases where the stadium won;t have made the decision to keep the roof open or closed well in advance of the event.

The better comparison for Seattle stadiums is Qwest Field where the football and soccer teams play. Safeco is a pure baseball stadium, not multi-use.