Oaks Along Cajun Field

[Turbine]

My answer would be is that the trees in question do impede the beauty of the 65 million dollar facility. I could ride around the main campus or go to Girard park and see all the trees one could ever want to see. I don’t see the purpose in building a 65 million dollar facility and hide it with trees. I mean they are just freaking trees. We talking about trees just move them as they are out of place where they stand now.

I love how some of you on here could swear we are talking about murdering a baby or something. We talking about moving a few freaking trees.

They do not in any way impede the beauty of the facility.

A baren facility is an abandoned facility.

[CAJUNSby90]

I don’t see the purpose in building a 65 million dollar facility and hide it with trees.

Perhaps the purpose is to accomadate thousands of fans to watch the Ragin Cajuns football team beat the ____ out of their opponets. Not to look aesthetically pleasing from the Rouse's parking lot.

[KajunKrazy]

They do not in any way impede the beauty of the facility.

A baren facility is an abandoned facility.

How many store fronts, restaurants, bars, theaters… have you seen in your life time with huge trees or anything else blocking their ability to be seen from the road? I can recall 0 in my 55 years. I don’t know how you define impede or obstruct a view? I define them as to when something is being blocked by something else and it enables one to see the blocked object. As of this morning on my way home from Reds the view of the 65 million dollar stadium was impeded / obstructed from the trees in front of it from both Bertrand and Congress.

[KajunKrazy]

Perhaps the purpose is to accomadate thousands of fans to watch the Ragin Cajuns football team beat the ____ out of their opponets. Not to look aesthetically pleasing from the Rouse's parking lot.

Then thats just a waste of money. We could have done that in the old stadium. I think you are wrong if you look at the design of the outside of the building there is no doubt they are trying to impress with the design.

[CAJUNSby90]

Then thats just a waste of money. We could have done that in the old stadium. I think you are wrong if you look at the design of the outside of the building there is no doubt they are trying to impress with the design.

And you are trying hard to get worked up over a few oak trees.

[KajunKrazy]

And you are trying hard to get worked up over a few oak trees.

Not at all. I am really worked up over the stupidity that left the trees in the view of the 65 million dollar beautification investment. The trees didn’t make that decision. It’s not their fault.

[CAJUNSby90]

Not at all. I am really worked up over the stupidity that left the trees in the view of the 65 million dollar beautification investment. The trees didn’t make that decision. It’s not their fault.

Your Move!

[Big Buds]

How many store fronts, restaurants, bars, theaters… have you seen in your life time with huge trees or anything else blocking their ability to be seen from the road? I can recall 0 in my 55 years. I don’t know how you define impede or obstruct a view? I define them as to when something is being blocked by something else and it enables one to see the blocked object. As of this morning on my way home from Reds the view of the 65 million dollar stadium was impeded / obstructed from the trees in front of it from both Bertrand and Congress.

It’s really not an obstructed view. The view from Bertrand/Congress is magnificent!

[RedTails]

My answer would be is that the trees in question do impede the beauty of the 65 million dollar facility. I could ride around the main campus or go to Girard park and see all the trees one could ever want to see. I don’t see the purpose in building a 65 million dollar facility and hide it with trees. I mean they are just freaking trees. We talking about trees just move them as they are out of place where they stand now.

I love how some of you on here could swear we are talking about murdering a baby or something. We talking about moving a few freaking trees.

Some of us just have a personal preference of the beauty of live oaks > a stadium facade. I don't think anyone here ever said they want to preserve trees because of tree-hugging preservation, we just like the beauty of live oaks.

If you look at any architectural rendering of any project period, architects make sure to include plenty of well-established trees to make their project look better. Twice now you've invoked the politically charged issue of abortion in this thread, I think you need to go take a walk and enjoy some trees my friend.

[HoustonCajun]

Some of us just have a personal preference of the beauty of live oaks > a stadium facade. I don't think anyone here ever said they want to preserve trees because of tree-hugging preservation, we just like the beauty of live oaks.

If you look at any architectural rendering of any project period, architects make sure to include plenty of well-established trees to make their project look better. Twice now you've invoked the politically charged issue of abortion in this thread, I think you need to go take a walk and enjoy some trees my friend.

Would someone post updated pictures of the stadium and how the trees are obstructing a view of it?