Regina | New Mosaic Stadium

[ceedub1170]

Quimby? Are you back?

[osmo]

Originally Posted by CCF

I find that very offensive as I know much of the planning staff quite well. I don't think you really know the talent and the hard work that exists in the Planning and Sustainability Department. There are quality people both young and old who are more than qualified to be where they are at. Excuse me if I don't believe that all planning decisions should come from the voices of this board.

Furthermore as I mentioned previously - there is a lot of work occurring behind the scenes on this project. Just because you aren't aware of the details doesn't mean a thing.

/end rant

Yea I took a cheap shot so what. As much as you are a fan (as I am too) I think they are fumbling the project as it stands now. I am entitled as much to a opinion as you are.

I don't know the median age of workers in the department but my hunch is its not full of youthful blood as you state. They don't even have a summer internship program to bring in youthful blood into the mix. We didn't even have a chief planner for many years prior. Many of our new innovative ideas have come the way of paying consultants from abroad to tell us this versus the ideas being created whiten the department. This problem exists in Toronto to, departments full of ogres, with little new blood. This is my personal 2cents you may not agree with it, but thats what fourms are for.

[CCF]

Originally Posted by osmo

Yea I took a cheap shot so what. As much as you are a fan (as I am too) I think they are fumbling the project as it stands now. I am entitled as much to a opinion as you are.

I don't know the median age of workers in the department but my hunch is its not full of youthful blood as you state. They don't even have a summer internship program to bring in youthful blood into the mix. We didn't even have a chief planner for many years prior. Many of our new innovative ideas have come the way of paying consultants from abroad to tell us this versus the ideas being created whiten the department. This problem exists in Toronto to, departments full of ogres, with little new blood. This is my personal 2cents you may not agree with it, but thats what fourms are for.

There actually is a summer student program. So sorry, that's not correct.

They still don't have a "chief planner" There is no one in the department under that title.

The ideas are there within the department - what the consultants are saying is not groundbreaking to city staff. The need for consultants is more so to do with the fact that there is a shortage of planners within the department to deal with the day to day work. Resources are stretched thin as is and the City has had to reach out to consultants to ensure that demands are met. That's not to say that City staff have not been heavily involved with each and every project. Teams are a mix of consultants and existing City planners.

[jlousa]

Originally Posted by osmo

Apples and Oranges though. Lets all be frank here BC Place would still be sitting with a moldy patch work fabric roof if the Olympics and the shower of Federal funds didn't fly their way! No flipping way the Province would of forked over that kind of cash for that kind of roof replacement without knowing a flush of Fed cash would follow match or exceed what they put down. Talk was rumbling in BC on a solution to the future problem of that roof but I could be be almost certain that buzz and talk started up with BC's aspirations to hold the Olympics.

What are you talking about?? The feds did not give a single dollar towards the roof nor the revitalization of BC Place. Really takes away from your other points when you throw out some non-sense. The revitalization was completely paid for by the province. The only money BC Place saw from the feds was for signage during the Olympics. This has been mentioned already in this very thread.

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by Migs

I don't think the new stadium would do well on top of railyard containers.

I am sorry, but I am not convinced that the rail yards are the best location for a stadium. The pros and cons of the rail yards and whether or not a stadium is the best use of such a valuable piece of property have been debated multiple times on this forum. However, since the power players seem to want the stadium in the rail yards, that is probably where it will end up. Unfortunately, problems and delays related to the urban redevelopment project/rail yards conversion will also mean delays to the stadium project. I would rather see the stadium as a stand alone project in a different part of the city. Winnipeg, Hamilton and Ottawa all have stand alone stadium projects and they are getting their stadiums built. Ours on the other hand is still in the planning stage waiting on the other pieces of the puzzle to come together.

[Dillweed]

Originally Posted by jlousa

What are you talking about?? The feds did not give a single dollar towards the roof nor the revitalization of BC Place. Really takes away from your other points when you throw out some non-sense. The revitalization was completely paid for by the province. The only money BC Place saw from the feds was for signage during the Olympics. This has been mentioned already in this very thread.

Uhmm there may be no direct investment by the Feds in BC Place but there is a connection. BC Place along with our Cadillac convention centre. Is owned and operated by PAVCO a BC Crown Corporation.

Which the federal government is a shareholder through it's $200 million investment primarily allocated towards the convention centre. They may not have directly allocated funds to BC Place but they ie. taxpayers own a piece of the pie.

[DowntownRiderFan]

Originally Posted by Welkin

Unfortunately, problems and delays related to the urban redevelopment project/rail yards conversion will also mean delays to the stadium project. I would rather see the stadium as a stand alone project in a different part of the city. Winnipeg, Hamilton and Ottawa all have stand alone stadium projects and they are getting their stadiums built. Ours on the other hand is still in the planning stage waiting on the other pieces of the puzzle to come together.

I am not really sure what you are getting at here other than just being wrong.

Winnipeg, - Yes stand alone project and getting built. However it experienced it's own delays and challenges, was initially projected to be ready for summer 2011.

Hamilton - The last report I saw, this stadium is not even designed yet, construction is supposed to begin after the 2012 CFL season. Aided by some money from the Feds for the Pan Am games.

Ottawa - Is not a stand alone stadium project nor is it 'getting built' any time soon. It is part of the redevelopment of Lansdowne Park (an area of 14 hectares).

All of these projects experienced (and continue to experience) delays and changes to the original plan so I am not sure why you are holding them up on a pedestal and feel the Regina planning is somehow inferior. So far the Regina project has not yet experienced any delays as nothing can be planned until the rail yards are gone.

[DowntownRiderFan]

Originally Posted by Welkin

[/B]

I don't think that there is a hate on Regina (at least not by most of us) as much as there is a frustration with Regina. Here we sit without a decent stadium while the city leadership piddles around with visions of grandeur. Winnipeg has their new stadium, Hamilton is starting their new stadium, Vancouver has their improved stadium, even Ottawa will have a new stadium. Regina just has a bunch of politicians blabbing about urban redevelopment projects and exorbitantly expensive white elephant multi-purpose entertainment facilities that no one can figure out how to pay for. We just want a new stadium. It is as simple as that. It only takes 18 months to build a new stadium, and if Fiacco had gotten off his arse and promoted a reasonable stadium project a couple of years ago we would be playing the 2013 Grey Cup in a new Riders Stadium.

Just to reiterate...

Winnipeg project approved in early 2009, anticipated completion early 2012 after significant changes to the ownership structure - 3 years.

Hamilton - Announced plans to renovate the existing stadium in early 2011. Changed plans to completely rebuild instead in mid-2011. Expected completion in time for 2014 CFL season - 3 years.

Ottawa - first started looking into new stadium options in early 2008, nothing has happened yet and they hope to have something completed by 2014 - 6 years (if it actually happens).

Regina - started looking into new stadium options late 2009/early 2010. Some of the recent talk is something under construction in 2013, possibly completed in 2014?? 3-4 years. Seems pretty reasonable given the wait for the land. I realize this is speculation and projected dates at this point but so are Ottawa and Hamilton.

Just because no one has told you how it will be paid for doesn't mean it hasn't been figured out. I would rather them wait and iron that out definitively before announcing it, than come out with a financing plan and have to completely change the project and financing structure like Winnipeg did. Im pretty sure Winnipeg still doesnt know how they will pay for their stadium as the team needs to pay back a $85M loan to the government over 40 years. That is $2.1M/yr (not counting interest) for a team that had net profits of $409k in 2010. And you want to hold the Winnipeg stadium up as the model to strive for and call the Regina project a white elephant??

[wacko]

Originally Posted by DowntownRiderFan

Some of the recent talk is something under construction in 2013, possibly completed in 2014?? 3-4 years.

3-4 years is a reasonable timeline for designing and building a new outdoor stadium. However, I believe you mean a completion date of 2015 or so (which is fine).

The Winnipeg stadium design is a model to strive for, however definitely not the financing arrangements. Let's just go straight to the provincial government from start to finish to get this done. I can't see any private businesses willing to spend significant amounts on a stadium they'll never get a profit from. And if we want to learn from Winnipeg, we should avoid complex financing deals involving other land developments.

If the Saskatchewan government is in better financial shape than the Manitoba government, then we should be able to do a nice replacement of Mosaic Stadium for around $300 million (factoring in inflation and those inevitable cost overruns).

[DowntownRiderFan]

Originally Posted by wacko

The Winnipeg stadium design is a model to strive for, however definitely not the financing arrangements. Let's just go straight to the provincial government from start to finish to get this done.

That is one opinion, there are others. To be honest I haven't completely decided on if I prefer a open air or retractable room stadium. My favorite and most memorable Rider games are those where the weather comes into play. However as a Regina resident, if they can get it done, I would also love to have the world class, top of the line MPF.

The point of my posts were in reply to Welkin who has complained numerous times about the planning, process and people involved in the Regina project. At the same time he makes fabricated claims that these other projects are somehow different and don't have any challenges.

[Dillweed]

Originally Posted by DowntownRiderFan

That is one opinion, there are others. To be honest I haven't completely decided on if I prefer a open air or retractable room stadium. My favorite and most memorable Rider games are those where the weather comes into play. However as a Regina resident, if they can get it done, I would also love to have the world class, top of the line MPF.

The point of my posts were in reply to Welkin who has complained numerous times about the planning, process and people involved in the Regina project. At the same time he makes fabricated claims that these other projects are somehow different and don't have any challenges.

Definitely Regina's stadium project has been thrown back at least a year in my view. I think they basically wasted their time after initially being led astray by the feds that there might be fed funds available for a stadium in Regina. And then had the rug pulled out from them about a year later.

And for those that are opposed to fed tax dollars being used to build multi-purpose stadiums. Should recall that fed money was used to partially fund Toronto's Sky dome. Not including the land that was donated through the CNR which was a crown corporation at the time. So definitely the argument can be made that if it was good for Toronoto it's good for _________. (Fill in the blank for the appropriate city).

Certainly the three stadium projects in the western provinces ie. Regina, Winnipeg, & Vancouver. Have faced challenges and haven't turned out in either cases in the end as what was proposed & budgeted for from the start. I can ramble on about Vancouver's roof project but I'll leave that for another time & place.

I definitely disagree with Wacko's comments that Winnipeg's new stadium is a model to strive for. I'm not saying that they shouldn't have built it because once it is it will be an asset to the city. And like Regina, & Vancouver's roof Canada Inns stadium needed to be replaced.

Winnipeg's project has gone from $115, $160 to $190 million. And personally I will be surprised if the final priced tag is less than $200 million. And was in effect bailed out by the provincial government.

And to my mind the loan given the Blue Bombers is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. I would classify it as a government grant because I highly doubt the Bombers will ever fully pay it back and at some point the loan will be forgiven by the provincial government.

The one problem with Winnipeg's new stadium is that the maximum seating capacity can only be increased to 40,000. Which I think will severely limit them to attracting large scale events like the Grey Cup. Which can have a net economic impact as much as $40 - 50 million alone.

Winnipeg might get awarded the Grey Cup here and there as a token gesture. But I doubt it will be very often. If you take a look at Vancouver which has a world class facility. Since BC Place was built in the mid 80's including this year has hosted the Grey Cup eight times. Which is more than any other city in that time frame. Which is an net economic impact of approximately $250 million just from the Grey Cup alone.

Something for Regina to consider, and whatever the city does build I would hope it would be at least something that could be expanded through temporary seating to at least 45,000.

And I would say that anyone that thinks that Regina or anywhere in this country is going to build a stadium 100% funded by the private sector is dreaming. In fact even in the U.S. only a handful of stadiums have been completely funded by the private sector..

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by DowntownRiderFan

That is one opinion, there are others. To be honest I haven't completely decided on if I prefer a open air or retractable room stadium. My favorite and most memorable Rider games are those where the weather comes into play. However as a Regina resident, if they can get it done, I would also love to have the world class, top of the line MPF.

The point of my posts were in reply to Welkin who has complained numerous times about the planning, process and people involved in the Regina project. At the same time he makes fabricated claims that these other projects are somehow different and don't have any challenges.

I never stated that these other stadium projects did not have challenges that they needed to overcome, just the opposite is true. My point was that these are all much simpler projects than Regina's proposed stadium project (unless you really feel that the redesign of Ottawa's Lansdowne Park is equal to a billion dollar urban redevelopment that will change the scope of an entire downtown) and yet they have been delayed multiple times, seen dramatic increases in construction costs, encountered numerous lawsuits, and developed issues with funding.

New stadiums are hard enough to pull off even when the entire focus is on the completion of a stand alone stadium project. When you tie a stadium project into a much more complex urban redevelopment project, any delay with the main project will definitely lead to a delay in the construction timetable of the stadium project. There are a thousand things that can and will cause delays in this project.

My focus is on a new stadium for the Riders and the sooner the better. I will stick with my opinion that Regina made a major mistake in linking the stadium project with a downtown urban redevelopment project. I am not going to get into a pissing match with you over when we will see the construction of the stadium completed (because my crystal ball is just as fuzzy as yours), but I will be very surprised if we have a new downtown stadium by 2015.

[UPP]

Originally Posted by Welkin

I never stated that these other stadium projects did not have challenges that they needed to overcome, just the opposite is true. My point was that these are all much simpler projects than Regina's proposed stadium project (unless you really feel that the redesign of Ottawa's Lansdowne Park is equal to a billion dollar urban redevelopment that will change the scope of an entire downtown) and yet they have been delayed multiple times, seen dramatic increases in construction costs, encountered numerous lawsuits, and developed issues with funding.

New stadiums are hard enough to pull off even when the entire focus is on the completion of a stand alone stadium project. When you tie a stadium project into a much more complex urban redevelopment project, any delay with the main project will definitely lead to a delay in the construction timetable of the stadium project. There are a thousand things that can and will cause delays in this project.

My focus is on a new stadium for the Riders and the sooner the better. I will stick with my opinion that Regina made a major mistake in linking the stadium project with a downtown urban redevelopment project. I am not going to get into a pissing match with you over when we will see the construction of the stadium completed (because my crystal ball is just as fuzzy as yours), but I will be very surprised if we have a new downtown stadium by 2015.

The downtown redevelopment attached to the stadium is a natural progression. Obviously something would need to be done with the old stadium and it would almost surely be lowcost housing.

The redevelopment is also a smart idea because the biggest opponents to the stadium have been those saying we need housing instead of a stadium. Well this satisfies both.

As for Winnipeg, building a new park way out at the UofM goes completely against the trend over the past 20 years of central development. They are in for a world of trouble with traffic, not unlike Saskatoon and their arena.

[drew]

Originally Posted by Dillweed

The one problem with Winnipeg's new stadium is that the maximum seating capacity can only be increased to 40,000. Which I think will severely limit them to attracting large scale events like the Grey Cup. Which can have a net economic impact as much as $40 - 50 million alone.

This won't have any impact on Winnipeg getting the Grey Cup at all IMO. IN fact with a new facility, Winnipeg should expect more, not less Grey Cups.

The thing you need to consider about reduced seating capacity is the price point.

Extra seats cost a huge amount to build, and get sold for the lowest prices.

If you can reduce seating capacity such that it drives up demand, and therefore ticket prices, the reduction is seats is basically nullified economically.

You want an example of this in practice, take a look at the MTS Centre as it works for NHL hockey (lowest capacity in the league, 2nd highest average ticket prices, will be a top 10 revenue generator for the league).

[UPP]

Originally Posted by drew

This won't have any impact on Winnipeg getting the Grey Cup at all IMO. IN fact with a new facility, Winnipeg should expect more, not less Grey Cups.

The thing you need to consider about reduced seating capacity is the price point.

Extra seats cost a huge amount to build, and get sold for the lowest prices.

If you can reduce seating capacity such that it drives up demand, and therefore ticket prices, the reduction is seats is basically nullified economically.

You want an example of this in practice, take a look at the MTS Centre as it works for NHL hockey (lowest capacity in the league, 2nd highest average ticket prices, will be a top 10 revenue generator for the league).

They don't have the second highest ticket prices. I thought they were in the mid-range. I know they are way below Calgary for instance and probably not even in the same league as Toronto.

As for the football stadium, those extra seats will be temporary and will cost to put up. Only 33,000 regular seats, only maybe 23,000 between the goal lines and 40,000 total is not a great revenue generator compared to 55,000 permanent seats in Toronto and Vancouver and over 60,000 in Montreal and Edmonton.

Also, the higher price point cost Winnipeg the last time they hosted. They had to beg companies to purchase the remaining 5,000 tickets last time around then donate them to disadvantaged kids etc, just to sell out the 44,000 seats they had.

[drew]

Originally Posted by UPP

They don't have the second highest ticket prices. I thought they were in the mid-range. I know they are way below Calgary for instance and probably not even in the same league as Toronto.

As for the football stadium, those extra seats will be temporary and will cost to put up. Only 33,000 regular seats, only maybe 23,000 between the goal lines and 40,000 total is not a great revenue generator compared to 55,000 permanent seats in Toronto and Vancouver and over 60,000 in Montreal and Edmonton.

Also, the higher price point cost Winnipeg the last time they hosted. They had to beg companies to purchase the remaining 5,000 tickets last time around then donate them to disadvantaged kids etc, just to sell out the 44,000 seats they had.

Yes, the Winnipeg Jets do have the second highest average ticket prices. Check the LINK.

We are the same as Montreal, and second only to Toronto. Considerably higher than the other Canadian teams.

40,000 seats is a good number simple for the fact it keeps supply down to encourage sales, and avoid ticket sale problems. 60,000 seats won't work in a market like Winnipeg. It would probably only sell out IF Winnipeg was playing for the Cup. Your last paragraph above simply reinforces my argument about keeping seating numbers down.

For a smaller market, especially one with fickle fans like Winnipeg, 40,000 is a good number. While it allows for some extra seats, not an overwhelming number, and helps to create a "rush" for tickets.

[osmo]

Less seats always bring in more revenue than more. IT does not matter if BC place or Skydome have 45K+ seats, they close off the sections so they are able to charge more for a more cozy atmosphere. Look at TFC and the the Montreal Allouettes, there facilities are to small, owners aren't even thinking of doing any major expansions because less supply always increases demand.

Look at the top generators of revenue in the league. BC, The Argos both struggle because they have to attempt to fill are huge facility were demand doesn't exist. Plus you still have to pay rent for a 45K facility. Stadium management/owners don't care if you only draw 20K a game you still have to rent and run the facility on game day in respects to its actual size.


Well I guess all I'm saying is that BC and Toronto are not at a advantage with their larger facilities. We talk Grey Cups in this thread a lot when they are far and few between, lets talk about the 10 dates per year the teams have to manage and leverage to make cash. GCs are cash cows for whom ever hosts them. Riders want to milk the 10 dates per year and thus IMO will have easily the highest ticket prices once the new building comes online.

What are we agreeing on for construction timelines? preliminary stuff is cute but from shovel in the ground to opening day that seems decent.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by osmo

Less seats always bring in more revenue than more. IT does not matter if BC place or Skydome have 45K+ seats, they close off the sections so they are able to charge more for a more cozy atmosphere. Look at TFC and the the Montreal Allouettes, there facilities are to small, owners aren't even thinking of doing any major expansions because less supply always increases demand.
Look at the top generators of revenue in the league. BC, The Argos both struggle because they have to attempt to fill are huge facility were demand doesn't exist. Plus you still have to pay rent for a 45K facility. Stadium management/owners don't care if you only draw 20K a game you still have to rent and run the facility on game day in respects to its actual size.


Well I guess all I'm saying is that BC and Toronto are not at a advantage with their larger facilities. We talk Grey Cups in this thread a lot when they are far and few between, lets talk about the 10 dates per year the teams have to manage and leverage to make cash. GCs are cash cows for whom ever hosts them. Riders want to milk the 10 dates per year and thus IMO will have easily the highest ticket prices once the new building comes online.

What are we agreeing on for construction timelines? preliminary stuff is cute but from shovel in the ground to opening day that seems decent.

Montreal just expanded theirs to 25k at the start of this year (they wanted 30k I believe, but groups were against that I think due to where the stadium is.

As far as Grey Cups go... now that it is turning into such a cash cow and centrepiece to the league, I think they will be far more likely in the future to be wanting to hold it in the largest venues possible as often as possible to give more of a big game feel. So as much as not building too big of a venue is an important thing to consider, I think not building too small of a venue is just as important. Building too small of a venue would be very short sighted. Regina was able to sell 50k+ tickets to both Grey Cups held here, so if we are unable to add enough expansion seating to get close to that number, we are being really short sighted... with the growth our province is finally experiencing, it should be pretty much a given that we would be able to sell at least that many for future Grey cups hosted here.

Regarding the MTS centre/Jets comparison. I'm glad they have their team back, but I'm unsure how long having the second highest prices in the league will be sustainable. Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto all have much more money than does Winnipeg both in terms of personal wealth and corporate wealth (I don't really think that point needs to be debated... it's pretty much a given based off population alone), so I just wonder how long people will be able to afford to fill the arena every game or if in a few years the price might start to affect attendance.

And I don't think the Riders have much chance of going too much higher with ticket prices. Our prices are already quite high compared to the rest of the league (with the exception of Montreal), and the same issue is present for Regina as I just mentioned in the paragraph before about Winnipeg. Granted there are fewer dates to worry about with football... but eventually you will reach the tipping point where the price will rise above what people are willing to pay, and you'll have to bring prices to more normal levels. I think we are far better off having a greater supply of more affordable tickets than a restricted supply of very expensive tickets. Lately the Riders Organization has really been going after the "family" type spectator, and pricing too high will remove this group as not many would be able to afford 4+ tickets to more than a game or two a year.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Montreal just expanded theirs to 25k at the start of this year (they wanted 30k I believe, but groups were against that I think due to where the stadium is.

As far as Grey Cups go... now that it is turning into such a cash cow and centrepiece to the league, I think they will be far more likely in the future to be wanting to hold it in the largest venues possible as often as possible to give more of a big game feel. So as much as not building too big of a venue is an important thing to consider, I think not building too small of a venue is just as important. Building too small of a venue would be very short sighted. Regina was able to sell 50k+ tickets to both Grey Cups held here, so if we are unable to add enough expansion seating to get close to that number, we are being really short sighted... with the growth our province is finally experiencing, it should be pretty much a given that we would be able to sell at least that many for future Grey cups hosted here.

Regarding the MTS centre/Jets comparison. I'm glad they have their team back, but I'm unsure how long having the second highest prices in the league will be sustainable. Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto all have much more money than does Winnipeg both in terms of personal wealth and corporate wealth (I don't really think that point needs to be debated... it's pretty much a given based off population alone), so I just wonder how long people will be able to afford to fill the arena every game or if in a few years the price might start to affect attendance.

And I don't think the Riders have much chance of going too much higher with ticket prices. Our prices are already quite high compared to the rest of the league (with the exception of Montreal), and the same issue is present for Regina as I just mentioned in the paragraph before about Winnipeg. Granted there are fewer dates to worry about with football... but eventually you will reach the tipping point where the price will rise above what people are willing to pay, and you'll have to bring prices to more normal levels. I think we are far better off having a greater supply of more affordable tickets than a restricted supply of very expensive tickets. Lately the Riders Organization has really been going after the "family" type spectator, and pricing too high will remove this group as not many would be able to afford 4+ tickets to more than a game or two a year.

You have to take into consideration that tickets are going to rise significantly regardless of how large or small your new stadium is. Here in Winnipeg, the season tickets are rising anywhere from 50% to 100% more for next season. I would expect to see something similar in Regina when the new stadium gets built (moreso there, considering the stadium's pricetag is likely going to be in the range of 3X that of Winnipeg's).

Also, based on the concept drawings, it seems unlikely that the stadium would be able to be expandable to 50,000 - that would mean room for an extra 12,000 to 17,000 seats, depending on the final capacity. Where would you possibly have enough room for that many seats (an arena's worth) in a building that will be completely enclosed? The feasibility report does show some vague renderings of extra seating in the upperdeck over the endzones, but it's definitely not possible to increase total capacity by 50% (33K to 50K) by doing only that. Hard to believe that they would spend all that extra money to build in that much empty space, only in order to temporarily expand capacity perhaps twice a decade...


^Where do you see these extra seats going?

Either way, I'm interested to see how this project is getting paid for.

[Migs]

The extra seating will go in the upper level concourse in the endzones as shown in this and other diagrams from the original feasibilty study.