Stadiums and Arenas of Canada

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Multi-purpose stadiums are a 1970's concept that has for the most part failed miserably. If the track was removed, you could still accommodate football, soccer, rugby & concerts. The only thing that it couldn't accommodate would be track and field and for that the grandstand surrounding the practice track for the Pan-Am's would be more than enough. There is little use to design a stadium with retractable seats which 1) would only be used a few times in a decade if that, or 2) the weight of the seats (and the people sitting on them) would more than likely damage the track to the point where it couldn't be used anyhow which makes it not only poor for football but unsuitable for track too.

Well obviously other cities, and countries have figured out how to build stadiums with movable seats that actually function in all modes. So to can Canadian cities, There is nothing wrong with stadiums being able to host more than one specific event.

Along your line of thinking I suppose Soccer, Rugby, and Football would all need individual stadiums as the fields are different dimensions and one stadium would not be suitable for all.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Multi-purpose stadiums are a 1970's concept that has for the most part failed miserably. If the track was removed, you could still accommodate football, soccer, rugby & concerts. The only thing that it couldn't accommodate would be track and field and for that the grandstand surrounding the practice track for the Pan-Am's would be more than enough. There is little use to design a stadium with retractable seats which 1) would only be used a few times in a decade if that, or 2) the weight of the seats (and the people sitting on them) would more than likely damage the track to the point where it couldn't be used anyhow which makes it not only poor for football but unsuitable for track too.

The City will not build a stadium that will be used no more than 10 times a year, CFL football. Having the bubble during the winter with retractable seats pretty much guarantees that the stadium will be used 365 days a year.

Ontario has a severe lack of sporting venues and a track and field centre will be a huge improvement.

The warm up track and field will likely be removed after the Pan Am Games for asphalt. The Ti Cats are obsessed with parking and to compromise a deal the city will likely need to remove it.

[JayM]

I think it should be manditory to include the 365 day function in New Stadiums. Along with the ability to include other sports such as Soccer, Rugby and of course Football.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Well obviously other cities, and countries have figured out how to build stadiums with movable seats that actually function in all modes. So to can Canadian cities, There is nothing wrong with stadiums being able to host more than one specific event.

Along your line of thinking I suppose Soccer, Rugby, and Football would all need individual stadiums as the fields are different dimensions and one stadium would not be suitable for all.

Never said there was anything wrong with stadiums being able to host more than one event. I simply referred to a track surrounding the field. And actually no, most stadiums around the world built for track competitions have seen their tracks removed following the end of the event. i.e. Pan-Am, Commonwealth or Olympic games.

Also, if you would have read the post more carefully you would have seen that it was clearly stated that football, rugby, and soccer can all be played within the same field.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

The City will not build a stadium that will be used no more than 10 times a year, CFL football. Having the bubble during the winter with retractable seats pretty much guarantees that the stadium will be used 365 days a year.

Ontario has a severe lack of sporting venues and a track and field centre will be a huge improvement.

The warm up track and field will likely be removed after the Pan Am Games for asphalt. The Ti Cats are obsessed with parking and to compromise a deal the city will likely need to remove it.

The proposed stadium will be able to be used 365 days a year with or without retractable seats. Having or not having a track will not make much of a difference regarding its usage. Its not like the whole stadium will retract. We are only talking about 5-10 rows at best. Not to mention, the weight of the stands on a regulation track will render it useless pretty quick anyways.

[Coldrsx]

Edmonton arena hearing postponed

Katz Group says it needs more time to develop a funding model

EDMONTONJOURNAL.COM JUNE 7, 2010 3:10 PM COMMENTS (1)


STORYPHOTOS ( 7 )VIDEO ( 1 )



More Images »

Conceptual image of the proposed downtown Edmonton arena district.
Photograph by: Katz Group, edmontonjournal.com
EDMONTON — A public hearing on the proposed arena district has been postponed until at least the fall.

The hearing w



Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Edmo...stponed/3123886/story.html#ixzz0qCqkiIdT

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

The City will not build a stadium that will be used no more than 10 times a year, CFL football. Having the bubble during the winter with retractable seats pretty much guarantees that the stadium will be used 365 days a year.

Ontario has a severe lack of sporting venues and a track and field centre will be a huge improvement.

The warm up track and field will likely be removed after the Pan Am Games for asphalt. The Ti Cats are obsessed with parking and to compromise a deal the city will likely need to remove it.

Getting rid of the track wouldn't reduce the number of times the facility is used to 10 CFL games. Track and field will probably never require more than 5,000 seats in Hamilton after the Pan American Games. Why significantly reduce the suitability for every other sport for a sport that will probably never require 30,000 seats again?

Make this stadium a great venue for soccer, football, rugby, lacrosse, field hockey, concerts, etc. Track? Build a new track somewhere else if Hamiltonians feel the demand is so great that they need a track. Track doesn't need this much seating. This one sport shouldn't be allowed to damage all of these other sports in this way for the entire life of the stadium.

Multi use is fine, but some sports just shouldn't be combined. Track and baseball should never be combined with these other field sports.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by esquire

The fans wouldn't be any closer to the field, though. It's not like the grandstands would be moved closer to the sidelines. Sinking the field would actually move most fans just that much farther away from the action. Think about it - if you're already 50 feet away from the field as it stands, then sinking the field 10 feet will put you several feet farther away from the action.

The only way to fix the problem isaidso was talking about would be to physically move one grandstand closer to the other (impossible), or demolish one grandstand and build a new one closer to the other (costly).

That's not true. What you're doing is comparing a 'Row 1' to what would eventually become 'Row 20'. When you lower the field and build stands down to the new level of the playing surface, you certainly are moving fans closer to the action. Row 1 before is much further away than Row 1 with the new configuration.

When you re-configure, you've got about 5,000 fans on each side of the field much closer to the field of play than they were before. Go stand in Row 1 in a stadium like Ivor Wynne, then go stand in Row 1 at Commonwealth Stadium. There's no comparison at all. At Commonwealth, you're immediately 30-40 feet further away.

[SteelTown]

Looks like Hamilton's west harbour stadium is going to be taken over by Katz, Rexall Stadium?

Oilers talking Copps, stadium with the city
Councillors talking memo of understanding

June 29, 2010

Edmonton Oilers owner Daryl Katz is in the city today negotiating a deal to take control of Copps Coliseum and the Pan Am Stadium.

In a letter to city manager Chris Murray under the name of Katz Entertainment Holdings Corporation, Pat LaForge wrote that the purpose of today’s meeting is to discuss a “non-binding memorandum of agreement which would lead to a ‘licence to operate’ various HECFI properties including Copps Coliseum and the future Pan Am sports stadium proposed for the West Harbour.”

Council met behind closed doors to get council approval to negotiate a memorandum of understanding with the group.

In addition to Katz and LaForge, in attendance will be Paul Marcaccio, CFO of the Katz group and Ted Tanner, executive vice president of entertainment group AEG.

AEG, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Anschutz Company, owns or controls a collection of companies including facilities such as the Staples Center in Los Angeles amd the Colosseum at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas.

The group is now in an open session with council. Those present have just finished watching a video on AEG. Now, a consultant is taking councilors through a presentation on Hamilton’s ability to host an NHL team.

Katz commissioned a survey of 1400 people in the area. The result was 900 people said they were very interested in an NHL team here.

Based on that and other conversations with businesses, they think a Hamilton NHL team could easily draw a minimum of 15,000 season tickets.



Ticats president Scott Mitchell is also at city hall. He was guarded when asked about the Katz proposal and said he would reserve judgment.

Mitchell said he first became aware of the negotiations over the weekend.

He said he has heard rumours that Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger was shopping around to find a new owner for the Cats. But he said the team is not for sale.

Reports say Katz's goal is acquiring the lease to control the placement of a potential NHL team in Hamilton.

City Hall confirmed this morning that Eisenberger will have media availability this afternoon. And reports say that Hamilton Entertainment Convention Facilities Incorporated will be holding a press conference.

.........

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/798487

[SFUVancouver]

BC Place from Southeast False Creek

Taken by SFUVancouver, June 30th, 2010.

BC Place from Robson Street

Taken by SFUVancouver, June 30th, 2010.

BC Place and its neighbours from the Vancouver Lookout.

Taken by SFUVancouver, June 30th, 2010.

BC Place with half my zoom.

Taken by SFUVancouver, June 30th, 2010.

Full zoom!

Taken by SFUVancouver, June 30th, 2010.


The huge steel structure they are constructing is the centre point for the new cable-supported roof. Mobile cranes will required to hoist and place the 36 steel pylons that will ring the bowl of the stadium. From these 47 metre-tall 133-ton pylons will be strung the steel cables that will hold up the retractable fabric roof and the central suspended video pod that will house the retracted fabric. During construction the cables will be anchored to the steel structure in the photos prior to tensioning and the installation of the roof.

There is an animation of the construction process at this page: http://www.bcplacestadium.com/index.php/construction.html Click the "summer 2010" and "fall 2010 winter 2011" buttons on the timeline to watch the videos.

For what it's worth, here is a photograph of BC Place under construction in 1983:

Source: PAVCO
Source Link: http://www.bcplacestadium.com/index.php/history.html

And here is a photo of it on the day it was first inflated in 1985:

Source: PAVCO
Source Link: http://www.bcplacestadium.com/index.php/history.html

Finally here is photo-render of what the completed retractable roof will look like:

Source: PAVCO
Source Link: http://www.bcplacestadium.com/index.php/roof.html

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

it was clearly stated that football, rugby, and soccer can all be played within the same field.

no they cant....not in canda anyways....only one of those three games is played on plastic.

soccer when forced to can, but it isnt accepted at a higher level and is even widely rejected at lower professional levels (see BMO field)

adding a bubble in the winter does not make a stadium useful 365 days a year....having 20 people run around on the field is not using the stadium....its just political optics.

you can build a bubble for $2m on a remote location for local sports....using a full stadium for that use in the end costs more as you have to replace the turf far more often and it eliminates the potential to use real grass.

build a $150m stadium and put a $2m bubble somewhere else for the community....they are not congruent functions.

a track is the death of any stadium....it removes the seating so far from the field of play that the site lines become terrible.

m,ulti use stadiums were for the 80's....the world is smarter now.....there is a reason minneapolis is spending $2b dollars to build 3 unique stadiums to replace the metrodome.

[SteelTown]

Hamilton's west harbour stadium design funding includes retractable seating, during CFL home games the seats will park over the tracks.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by trueviking

no they cant....not in canda anyways....only one of those three games is played on plastic.

soccer when forced to can, but it isnt accepted at a higher level and is even widely rejected at lower professional levels (see BMO field)

adding a bubble in the winter does not make a stadium useful 365 days a year....having 20 people run around on the field is not using the stadium....its just political optics.

you can build a bubble for $2m on a remote location for local sports....using a full stadium for that use in the end costs more as you have to replace the turf far more often and it eliminates the potential to use real grass.

build a $150m stadium and put a $2m bubble somewhere else for the community....they are not congruent functions.

a track is the death of any stadium....it removes the seating so far from the field of play that the site lines become terrible.

m,ulti use stadiums were for the 80's....the world is smarter now.....there is a reason minneapolis is spending $2b dollars to build 3 unique stadiums to replace the metrodome.

Yes they can. Not only CAN soccer be played on "plastic" but it is played on just that surface all over Canada. Although not preferred by players, field turf is on the list of approved surfaces by FIFA. (soccer's world governing body).

As for the bubble, I agree that people using the field does not equal using the stadium. Its just some stupid political ploy to gain favour with people in order for the project not to be viewed by the public as building playing fields for private business and pro athletes. But then again if that what it takes to get money from the various levels of government we'll take it.

BTW Minnesota did NOT spend $2 billion dollars nor have they built 3 stadiums to replace the Metrodome.

[isaidso]

Field Turf is listed as an approved surface by FIFA?

Regarding Minnesota, trueviking is half right. The Metrodome was built as a multi-purpose stadium for the Twins baseball team, Vikings football team, and the Gophers football team.

TCF Bank Stadium was built for the University of Minnesota Gophers football team and opened in 2009. Target Field, a baseball specific stadium for the Twins opened the same year. The Vikings are also seeking a stadium built specifically for them.

Target Field cost $545 million, TCF cost $288.5 million, while the New Vikings Stadium proposal has a price tag of $770-$880 million. As of now, they've only spent $833.5 million building 2 stadiums. When the dust settles in a few years, Minnesota could very well have spent about $2 billion building 3 separate stadiums to replace the Metrodome.

TCF would be a great stadium to replicate in Canada. It's not too pricey, and quite big. It holds 50,805 people, but was designed so that it can be expanded to hold 80,000 at a future date. The Toronto Argonauts should work to get a football specific stadium like this in downtown Toronto. Of all of the clubs in Canada, the Argonauts need a proper home more than any one.

Build one of these for the Argonauts please!

http://www.mikebaloga.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/TCF1.jpg

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Field Turf is listed as an approved surface by FIFA?

Regarding Minnesota, trueviking is half right. The Metrodome was built as a multi-purpose stadium for the Twins baseball team, Vikings football team, and the Gophers football team.

TCF Bank Stadium was built for the University of Minnesota Gophers football team and opened in 2009. Target Field, a baseball specific stadium for the Twins opened the same year. The Vikings are also seeking a stadium built specifically for them.

Target Field cost $545 million, TCF cost $288.5 million, while the New Vikings Stadium proposal has a price tag of $770-$880 million. As of now, they've only spent $833.5 million building 2 stadiums. When the dust settles in a few years, Minnesota could very well have spent about $2 billion building 3 separate stadiums to replace the Metrodome.

TCF would be a great stadium to replicate in Canada. It's not too pricey, and quite big. It holds 50,805 people, but was designed so that it can be expanded to hold 80,000 at a future date. The Toronto Argonauts should work to get a football specific stadium like this in downtown Toronto. Of all of the clubs in Canada, the Argonauts need a proper home more than any one.

Build one of these for the Argonauts please!

http://www.mikebaloga.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/TCF1.jpg

The argo's wouldn't fill half of this stadium on a regular basis. It would be a monumental waste of money! Toronto will not support the Argo's plain and simple. So why waste the money?

As for Minnesota, don't hold your breath waiting for the Vikings to get a new stadium, more than likely the HHH Metro Dome will get a major reno and be home for years to come. It took a few goes to get financing for the Twins stadium and the Vikings have been shot down for state funding a few times already.

Quite a few teams in the CFL need a new stadium more so than the Argos, at most they would be 3-4th on the list for new stadiums.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

The argo's wouldn't fill half of this stadium on a regular basis. It would be a monumental waste of money! Toronto will not support the Argo's plain and simple. So why waste the money?

Here's a very condensed argument why:

I've been closely observing our national football league for almost 30 years, and there are many reasons to believe that our league will begin to prosper again in our nation's largest city. The Argonauts have suffered from 21 years in a horrible facility for football, decades of poor management at the league's head office, and outright hostile stadium owners in Rogers Communications.

Since 2007, league commissioner Mark Cohon has done everything right and the league is going from strength to strength. International broadcast rights are proliferating, attendance is at near record levels nationally, the CFL is now on the NFL network, new stadia are being built/expanded/renovated in almost every CFL city*, and revenues are up. Toronto is the last hole to plug.

Resisting pressure to put the 100th Grey Cup game in Canada's football heartland: Quebec or the Prairies, he awarded our national championship game to Toronto. It's really the perfect storm and an opportunity he needed to seize. They're planning a massive over the top Grey Cup 100 year celebration of football in Toronto. In a city that size, you just can't plan a regular sized festival: it will get lost in the vastness of the city. After the last Grey Cup in Toronto, he's recognized that. They're planning on closing down parts of Yonge Street and bringing our title game to the heart of the city rather than sticking it out of sight next to Skydome.

Like it or not, but Toronto is important to the health of our league. It's the nations biggest city and home to corporate Canada. The biggest road block to the resurrection of football in Toronto is the stadium issue. Stadiums are crucial to the health of football.

Football in Montreal went from near oblivion to become a mammoth success when the Alouettes moved from Olympic Stadium to an intimate, football specific stadium. 400,000 Montrealers showed up for their Grey Cup parade. What was done in Montreal needs to be replicated in Toronto. Re-create that Molson Stadium experience in Toronto, and attendance at Argonauts games will mushroom. Watching in the cavernous/plastic Skydome is absolutely soul sucking. You can't even see the corners of the end zones from some seats. It's killing the franchise, the oldest pro football team in north America I might add.

The Argonauts do need a stadium like TCF Bank Stadium. Open air, and with a capacity of around 35,000. The Argonauts averaged 29,189 fans in 2008 and 26,374 in 2009. I'd be shocked if they couldn't draw 35,000 to a new football specific stadium with great sight lines. Pick a design that allows for relatively easy expansion over time. Perhaps 6-7 years on, you could expand it to 40,000 and 6-7 years later to 45,000. Football fans will support their team if the football experience is a good one. The last 21 years at the Skydome has been the noose around the Argonauts neck.

It's not a matter of wasting money on a new stadium. The league doesn't really have much choice. The Toronto franchise needs to be resuscitated for the health of the league. The other option is unfathomable: give up, watch the Argonauts die, and see the east reduced to Hamilton and Montreal? No thanks. Not spending the money isn't an option any more.

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Quite a few teams in the CFL need a new stadium more so than the Argos, at most they would be 3-4th on the list for new stadiums.

*
Montreal: Molson stadium just expanded by 4,810 seats (awesome place to watch football)
Ottawa: new stadium is a go
Hamilton: Pan American Games stadium quite likely
Winnipeg: new stadium is a go
Regina: government financing for new stadium looks likely
Edmonton: millions in upgrades to Commonwealth underway/completed
Vancouver: temporary stadium while BC Place gets major over haul/roof

Only Calgary and Toronto have no stadium plans. McMahon is old, but has some of the best sight lines in the league and support for the Stamps is very strong. It's the Toronto franchise that desperately needs this. They have the worst football facility in the nation. Have you watched football there? I'd rather watch football in decrepit Huskies' Stadium in Halifax than Skydome.

[Dalreg]

Well you want a TCF type stadium, but want a 35,00 seat stadium? Which one is it? One is not the other! If you want a stadium that size try North Texas University in Denton. As long as the city and province pays for the stadium I don't care what happens, just no FEDERAL money! Enough money is wasted on Stadiums period.

Like I said 3rd or 4th on the list.

Ottawa is not getting a new stadium, just a major reno.
Hamilton, wait and see if it actually gets built. Don't hold your breath.
Regina, nothing concrete yet on that one either. Just hopes and prayers.
Calgary needs a stadium.
Montreal could use a new stadium. Reno's good, but still too small for them.
Edmonton, fine for now
Vancouver, major reno.
Toronto, would be nice.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Football in Montreal went from near oblivion to become a mammoth success when the Alouettes moved from Olympic Stadium to an intimate, football specific stadium. 400,000 Montrealers showed up for their Grey Cup parade. What was done in Montreal needs to be replicated in Toronto. Re-create that Molson Stadium experience in Toronto, and attendance at Argonauts games will mushroom. .

Yes, there is hope for the CFL in Toronto if one looks at the Montreal experience. I remember Montreal in the 1980s and even well into the 1990s when people in that city were defiantly indifferent to the CFL. Much like Torontonians are today.

Today, the Alouettes are almost certainly the second-most popular sports team in Montreal (far behind you-know-who) and I would say even across the province of Quebec. I live 200 km from Montreal and I overhear people talking about the Alouettes regularly and see jerseys and t-shirts all the time.

Of course, the Alouettes have the ubiquity and dominance of the locally-focused Quebec media (especially RDS) working in their favour. Something that the CFL and Argos in Toronto don't have, because of the juggernaut of NFL-obsessed Jim Rome, NFL Primetime, etc. stuff that has a far, far greater impact on the hearts and minds of Torontonians/Ontarians than they do on Montrealers and Quebecers.

Once the Alouettes and the CFL got RDS and media like Le Journal de Montréal to take them seriously (which they weren't, up until 10-12 years ago), they had it made.

It won't be so easy in Toronto, even if they do succeed in convincing all of the CFL haters in the Toronto media that three-down football is worth paying attention to.

[Jay in Cowtown]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It won't be so easy in Toronto, even if they do succeed in convincing all of the CFL haters in the Toronto media that three-down football is worth paying attention to.

I'm sure with the 5+ million population in Toronto the Argos could find 35 000 people to watch a game 9 times a year in a better setting... an outdoor stadium like BMO. Just because they prefer the NFL doesn't mean they wouldn't watch CFL as well... I prefer the NFL and still go to lots of Stamps games each year... it's still football!

As far as McMahon goes... I heard massive renos are in the plans, be it 3 or 10 years away, who knows!

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Well you want a TCF type stadium, but want a 35,00 seat stadium? Which one is it? One is not the other! If you want a stadium that size try North Texas University in Denton.

Why would you assume that arguing for an Argonauts stadium like TCF means they would be the same size? There are literally hundreds of features in a stadium, and you zero in on just one: seating capacity?

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Like I said 3rd or 4th on the list.

Ottawa is not getting a new stadium, just a major reno.
Hamilton, wait and see if it actually gets built. Don't hold your breath.
Regina, nothing concrete yet on that one either. Just hopes and prayers.
Calgary needs a stadium.
Montreal could use a new stadium. Reno's good, but still too small for them.
Edmonton, fine for now
Vancouver, major reno.
Toronto, would be nice.

I suppose I recognize the urgency of the Toronto situation not only to the franchise, but the whole league. You do not. There lies the discrepancy.