Regina | New Mosaic Stadium

[Migs]

Originally Posted by trueviking

So....what is the parking strategy for the stadium anyways. Refresh my memory.

Parking stratedy will be similar to the one that was successful for Mosaic Stadium for decades. Add to that all the downtown parking facilties that already exist.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Welkin

This is what happens when we have great leaders like Wall and Fiacco, both are pretty much untouchables these days.

TrueViking- You might as well hang it up, at least on this thread. You would get better results arguing your points with your neighbor's dog. Evidently Regina has turned into a Wonderland of True Believers where logic and reason are no longer in fashion. It does not matter that no football stadium has ever led to a revitalization of a downtown core, it will in Regina. It does not matter that concerts and trade shows that never travel to Western Canada (much less southern Saskatchewan) will now start booking Regina in droves.

This project no longer has anything to do with economics and everything to do with politics, vanity and the feeling that the province is "owed" this stadium by the federal government. I would even say that now since low/moderate income housing and rebuilding North Central have become part of this project, that getting this thing built depends entirely on massive federal contributions of well more than $100-$150 million. No massive federal contributions, no Multipurpose Entertainment Football Stadium.

My advice to you is the same advice I am giving myself. Step back, observe and let them have their dream. Quit wasting your time trying to bring logic and knowledgeable information to this thread. They don't want to hear it. I am just going to let it ride out and see where this whole thing goes (although I already have a good idea how it ends up). What a long strange trip it will be. I honestly wish these True Believers the best of success. Go Riders.

It is sarcastic, condescending commments like this that got the last thread closed. If you have a problem with my comments regarding Fiacco or Wall being untouchable right now, feel free to check out their approval ratings. And remember that alot of the arguments that are made by people in support of this project, are done so also by the premier, the minister in charge, the mayor, the chamber of commerce, urban planners, the Regina hotel association, 99% of the business community, etc. As a matter of fact, name one local organization other than the CTF that opposes this project, you can't.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by jvj

So...I'm not sure if we ever established what exactly the difference is between 2 museums and 1 multi purpose facility. I would agree with Migs that the goal of related development (retail, hotels, restaurants, public squares, etc.) could all be part of the overall site redevelopment. More importantly the Office for Urbanism seems to think that all of these items listed can be a part of the redevelopment as well, so that is encouraging. Also, as part of the initial study I recall that 10 different groups responded to an Expression of Interest advertisement looking for parties to participate in related developments in the area.

One other thought...sort of related to the museum topic...the concept plan for the facility has an area designated for the Saskatchewan Sports Hall of Fame. The presence of this would be one example of how traffic can be generated on days other than Rider game days. In fact I would suggest that they could create a Hall of Fame dedicated to the Riders only. Hey we've got 100 years of history to celebrate...might as well take advantage of this new facility and locate it there!!!

Shhh, that doesn't support their agenda.

[Dalreg]

Paging spin doctor migs to the operating room......

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Paging spin doctor migs to the operating room......

What about my comments are 'spin'? Are you denying that there is going to be a Sk Sports hall of fame/Roughriders museum within the new facility and that its going to be attached to one of Sk's biggest tourist attractions?

[Migs]

Originally Posted by trueviking

i dont really care at all actually...im simply expressing my opinion based on my experience....i worked on the feasibility study of the domed stadium proposal in winnipeg so i am very familiar with the issues

That explains alot. Thankfully I'll take the opinion of those who worked on the feasibility study of the Regina facility.

the fact is that there is no parking strategy, which is actually incredible....the proposal is that the warehouse district and downtown accommodate 10-15000 cars when the stadium is in use....

Where do the 10-15000 cars park for the current stadium? Take that answer and add all the parking facilities currently in our downtown and you'll get the answer you seek.

as an urban planing strategy that is a dangerous approach....this will invite demolition in these areas as land owners try to capitalize on the parking demand which will harm the integrity of the neighbourhood

Once again comments from someone from the outside looking in who isn't familiar with the current downtown plan.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by trueviking

thats great to hear that regina has banned the creation of surface parking....that can often be a challenge politically....this does however discourage development of existing lots by providing significant revenue opportunity to the land owners.

Do you realize that there is currently more projects being constructed and proposed in downtown Regina than there have been in decades? If anything, the opposite of your statement is true

[jvj]

Originally Posted by Migs

Truth is that the stadium will include a sports bar/restaurants as well as a Sk Sports hall of fame/museum and a Roughriders store (remember how many millions of dollars per year are generated by the sales of roughrider merch). Those three things together with residential, commercial, and development and the public squares, most people will come to understand that the area will attract hundreds of people per day even on days that don't have events at the stadium.

I forgot about the Roughrider store being part of this facility as well. Anyone who's spent time in Regina can certainly vouch that the Rider stores at Northgate mall and the (undersized) location at Mosaic stadium are very popular spots. In fact between mid November and Christmas day they would likely be among the most popular retail destinations in town.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by jvj

I forgot about the Roughrider store being part of this facility as well. Anyone who's spent time in Regina can certainly vouch that the Rider stores at Northgate mall and the (undersized) location at Mosaic stadium are very popular spots. In fact between mid November and Christmas day they would likely be among the most popular retail destinations in town.

Exactly. Its quite obvious that these people from out of province aren't in tune with what is going on here. They try to sing the tune that the stadium area will be a ghost town on non-event days without grasping the true reality that it will be an entertainment location that includes the current Casino, a pedestrian bridge to the biggest shopping mall in the city, a cultural destination with regards to Sk Sport Hall of Fame and the Roughriders museum, new retail which includes a large CFL/Roughriders store, public squares for gathering and celebrating, new hotels (one that starts construction in the spring), new residential, as well as all the current nightlife/restaurants and lounges that line the Dewdney Avenue strip.

[youngregina]

I've said my objectifiable rant, and now think it is time for my voice to be heard just once more. This thread is turning into a pissing match yet again and I would hate to see it locked once more. So can we please keep our discretion levels up and just figure out a way in which to keep ourselves from exploding at the heads.

I propose a very small system in which we only post something, as long as the content is sourced; behind every argument there be a true fact from a reliable source. i.e. - something with a government stamp of approval?

Say, no leader post articles, because they are meant to provoke the reader and most times leave very important details out. (Unless of course it seconds a government approved announcement of some kind).

All I want is for outsiders to be able to enjoy this thread as much as we should. Really, I think we can do it.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by youngregina

I've said my objectifiable rant, and now think it is time for my voice to be heard just once more. This thread is turning into a pissing match yet again and I would hate to see it locked once more. So can we please keep our discretion levels up and just figure out a way in which to keep ourselves from exploding at the heads.

I propose a very small system in which we only post something, as long as the content is sourced; behind every argument there be a true fact from a reliable source. i.e. - something with a government stamp of approval?

Say, no leader post articles, because they are meant to provoke the reader and most times leave very important details out. (Unless of course it seconds a government approved announcement of some kind).

All I want is for outsiders to be able to enjoy this thread as much as we should. Really, I think we can do it.

I disagree, if you take that course than the trollers from Manitoba have won. How they come in here and try and tell us what we deserve and how we should go about getting it (over and over and over again), says more about them than anything.

In the end everything comes to the surface. Now that I see that one of the prominent naysayers from Winnipeg worked on a failed feasibilty study for a covered stadium in that city obviously shows the bias. Could you image how they'll look if they get 'showed up' by the province next door if our project is a success? Kinda reminds me of a few years ago when a buddy of mine told me I was crazy to buy a new Ford Mustang when later I found out that a couple months previous to that he couldnt' get financing for the same vehicle. lol

Fact of the matter is this, OUR feasibiltiy study, OUR leaders, and OUR business community state that this project is going to do wonders for our province, and people like me will do my part to see that it gets done!

[Chaps]

Originally Posted by trueviking

opposing opinion is not trolling.

You're right.

Asking someone to "remind you" about something you know the bloody answer to just to egg them on so you can bury another fish hook...definitely is.

Just cut the juvenile bullshit And quit playing stupid so we can all enjoy these forums. It is just stupid in there right now with the behavior of you and thefourthtower. This isn't grade school.

Mods please take action on the recent behavior of a few people across the whole Manitoba and Saskatchewan forums. It's killing this place.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Chaps

You're right.

Asking someone to "remind you" about something you know the bloody answer to just to egg them on so you can bury another fish hook...definitely is.

Just cut the juvenile bullshit And quit playing stupid so we can all enjoy these forums. It is just stupid in there right now with the behavior of you and thefourthtower. This isn't grade school.

Mods please take action on the recent behavior of a few people across the whole Manitoba and Saskatchewan forums. It's killing this place.

Yup, you'd think they would've been satisfied enough with the other thread being closed.

[macblaze]

Originally Posted by trueviking

i dont really care at all actually...im simply expressing my opinion based on my experience....i worked on the feasibility study of the domed stadium proposal in winnipeg so i am very familiar with the issues...im not sure why it is being taken as an attack or as baiting...my points are as legitimate as his.....i dont oppose this stadium at all...i'd love to see it built....its just that there are a lot of things being said here that can and should be disputed.

the fact is that there is no parking strategy, which is actually incredible....the proposal is that the warehouse district and downtown accommodate 10-15000 cars when the stadium is in use....as an urban planing strategy that is a dangerous approach....this will invite demolition in these areas as land owners try to capitalize on the parking demand which will harm the integrity of the neighbourhood.....simply offloading the parking demands on the community will lead to a degradation of the urban fabric.



if this facility is as high use as they claim, it will be far more profitable to create a surface parking lot than to restore a warehouse or build a new building....increasing parking pressures on an urban area can have major negative effect....they are not complimentary to each other.

it is actually quite unbelievable that this is the proposal....google earth any stadium in north america...it is surrounded in parking.....do people in regina actually think that spreading those lots through their downtown is a good idea?

well viking I dont agree with you on most things but I do agree you should have the right to express opinion I don't understand why this is a problem if people have a problem with ones opinion then they themselves should express there opinion for or against the topic that what discussions are all about so what if it not based on fact then correct the person and provide them with the facts and its up to them if they approve or disapprove or don't respond at all . look guys doesn't matter what we say on this page it not going to change policy this stadium will get built or not built but it wont be based on anything we say on here so let have fun in here and not take things to seriously . I for one find it very entertaining on here and love the arguments that come up some of them are very funny like watching Jessey shore but unlike the shore I am laughing with you not at you . Now about the parking I really cant see that as a problem people can keep on parking in north central which can be great for me since it more money in my pocket lol lol (evil laugh ) also this would place more presure on the public to use city transit that is already used now for rider game with the football express , now I thought they where also putting in a park aid ?

[trueviking]

migs....the final site development plan will change....this is a feasibility study....research other development of this type...it always progresses organically depending on who wants to pay for what.

almost half of the current mosaic parking is on adjacent surface lots.....you seem pretty confident that will not be the case with this new stadium so why do you claim that the parking situation will be the same as it is now?...seems to be a conflict in your assertion.

i asked what the parking strategy is because i didn't know...he seemed totally confident that it did not involve the surface parking that is part of practically every football stadium development on the continent......after re-reading the study, it is my opinion that it will harm the downtown....it will put negative pressure on development of the numerous empty lots in the downtown and warehouse areas....off loading the parking of a football stadium to an urban area is a very unique strategy in north america and in my opinion is not a good one.....this only further supports my thesis that stadiums are not appropriate urban buildings....the spread of surface parking is an issue with stadiums when large amounts are provided on site...this strategy will only exacerbate that pressure....why develop my empty lot if i can sit back, do nothing and collect fees for stadium parking?

much of what i say is based on study of numerous examples of similar projects across the continent...i realize that everyone here chooses to blindly believe a feasibility report done by a group who have no interest in presenting the negative issues because they stand to make millions from the progression of this project, but fortunately the issues it faces are not new and there are numerous precedents that can be studied.....many cities have gone down this path, selling this exact bill of goods and i am simply exposing you to their real world experience....you can choose to believe that regina will be different for whatever reason, but it doesn't mean that my points are not valid.

out of curiosity, how many annual visitors does the sports museum currently get?....looks like a pretty small operation....why is it now being championed as the catalyst for activity on this site...is it that currently?

its obvious that the desire for this stadium eclipses any rational debate about legitimate issues...i am not making any personal attacks...i am not insulting anyone...i am simply providing a legitimate opinion on the issues i see with this stadium.....why get so worked up about it.....im not sure why migs feels the need to respond to every single sentence like i am disrespecting his mother.

[CCF]

I've spent a number of years as a professional planner in Canada and am now working towards a Masters in the field. I too am providing a legitimate analysis of the proposal.

Agree to disagree, I suppose. It's as simple as that.

[trueviking]

absolutely....i take no offence...i hope you don't.

out of curiosity...you don't see the inherent issues with offloading the parking of a stadium on an urban area?

there are only 5000 parking stalls in downtown....seems like the 10-13000 cars for this stadium will use every available parking spot in the DT and warehouse area....i really cant see how creating demand for that much parking in an urban area can be seen as anything but a negative incentive to development.

[skthunder77]

Originally Posted by trueviking

migs....the final site development plan will change....this is a feasibility study....research other development of this type...it always progresses organically depending on who wants to pay for what.

almost half of the current mosaic parking is on adjacent surface lots.....you seem pretty confident that will not be the case with this new stadium so why do you claim that the parking situation will be the same as it is now?...seems to be a conflict in your assertion.

i asked what the parking strategy is because i didn't know...he seemed totally confident that it did not involve the surface parking that is part of practically every football stadium development on the continent......after re-reading the study, it is my opinion that it will harm the downtown....it will put negative pressure on development of the numerous empty lots in the downtown and warehouse areas....off loading the parking of a football stadium to an urban area is a very unique strategy in north america and in my opinion is not a good one.....this only further supports my thesis that stadiums are not appropriate urban buildings....the spread of surface parking is an issue with stadiums when large amounts are provided on site...this strategy will only exacerbate that pressure....why develop my empty lot if i can sit back, do nothing and collect fees for stadium parking?

much of what i say is based on study of numerous examples of similar projects across the continent...i realize that everyone here chooses to blindly believe a feasibility report done by a group who have no interest in presenting the negative issues because they stand to make millions from the progression of this project, but fortunately the issues it faces are not new and there are numerous precedents that can be studied.....many cities have gone down this path, selling this exact bill of goods and i am simply exposing you to their real world experience....you can choose to believe that regina will be different for whatever reason, but it doesn't mean that my points are not valid.

out of curiosity, how many annual visitors does the sports museum currently get?....looks like a pretty small operation....why is it now being championed as the catalyst for activity on this site...is it that currently?

its obvious that the desire for this stadium eclipses any rational debate about legitimate issues...i am not making any personal attacks...i am not insulting anyone...i am simply providing a legitimate opinion on the issues i see with this stadium.....why get so worked up about it.....im not sure why migs feels the need to respond to every single sentence like i am disrespecting his mother.

Personally, I come to this forum to read interesting new information on new developments in my community. It's a real downer to come hear and every second post it telling me why things won't work, how this is wrong and that is wrong...why to you take so much pleasure in constantly being a killjoy? Are you trying to set yourself for an I told you so? I don't get it...in the end, what the H E double hockey sticks is this whole development to you?

[CCF]

Originally Posted by trueviking

absolutely....i take no offence...i hope you don't.

out of curiosity...you don't see the inherent issues with offloading the parking of a stadium on an urban area?

there are only 5000 parking stalls in downtown....seems like the 10-13000 cars for this stadium will use every available parking spot in the DT and warehouse area....i really cant see how creating demand for that much parking in an urban area can be seen as anything but a negative incentive to development.

Not in the least!

I understand what you are saying, but in my opinion, it is better than the alternative of providing ample surface parking on-site.

As I said previously, the best way to make transit more effective is to make it competitive with driving. If it's easy to drive and park, then that's absolutely what people will do. The city has implemented a fairly successful park and ride system at various points in the city, and I only imagine that to increase with this proposal. The trick to challenge this possibility is to change the tax structure to tax surface lots at a higher rate than buildings. This serves as a disincentive to demolishing. Politically that could be tough to pass with some people, but again in downtown Regina it's no longer possible to develop surface lots. Quite a few lots are owned by the prov. government, so it's not really about a money making venture.

Every development comes with pros and cons. At the end of the day, the positives of this location, in my opinion, far outweigh the negatives. I'm completely opposed to suburban locations for sports facilities as I believe it negates any economic benefit.

[trueviking]

hmmm...ok...i have a hard time believing that people will be taking the bus to this facility all the time in any great numbers....it is my experience that people don't stop driving, the neighbourhood adjusts to accommodates the needs.

i agree that ample surface lots are not that much better....the reason i believe that these facilities are bad for urban environments....their economic spin-off is generally quite minimal but their environmental impact can be devastating.

in my opinion a stadium should be located in a central area but not an urban one....even the mosaic site is somewhat better....there is far more evidence to support the argument that stadiums end up hurting the sensitive fabric of urban neighbourhoods than there is improving it.

i very much agree with your tax theory....in this case though, its difficult to say to the community that you have to provide 13000 parking stalls for this development but we are also going to tax you for doing it....we would all love to not have parking but it is a reality....the operators of the facility will certainly find it a detriment if it is not easily available.

if regina was a much bigger city and that amount of parking was only a small segment, i could understand, but it is essentially all the available parking in the area.....MTS as an example has no parking, but winnipeg's downtown supports 75000 downtown employees every day so the 15000 people at the arena has little effect.....that is not the case in regina.

anyways, its simply my opinion...no need to fight endlessly about it.