Saskatoon Construction III

[nook]

Originally Posted by hunter12

So, a prof from the University of Michigan says the existing arena is "economically obsolete".

https://thestarphoenix.com/news/loca...n-centre-study

SaskTel Centre’s chief executive officer Will Lofdahl says we want to be competitive. Concerts are becoming more elaborate, exposing further limitations. The roof and trusses are too low etc etc etc..

https://thestarphoenix.com/news/loca...t-a-crossroads

So the push is on to spend an extra $250million and build new. As much as I would like an arena downtown, my question is this: If the current arena was built downtown (which would have been in the city yards) would there be any discussion about replacing it? If the answer is no, then get on with the renovations.

As far as I can tell, most of the shortcomings can be solved with the exception of the height of the roof and the location. And quite frankly I doubt we lose many events (Will Lofdahl please name just one) because of the roof.

So, as I see it we (the taxpayers) are been asked to spend $250million for a different location. Again, as much as I would love to see an arena downtown I struggle with the cost. I really see one question: Do you want to spend $250million to relocate the arena downtown. I'm sorry for those who want it but my answer right now is a resounding NO because I can not justify the cost just because of the current location is not ideal. You have your work cut out to convince me otherwise.

The decision in the 80s to put in where it is is costing us today because no, we wouldn't be having this discussion on replacing a downtown arena. We would be renovating it and the investment would be beneficial. Even now, what point is there in renovating an arena that is still on the edge of the city (30 years later to boot) with nothing around it?

Could've saved 100 million dollars today if the right decision had been made then.

[The Bess]

Yes lets not spend 250 million on a new arena downtown, it's better we spent 250 million on a bridge form suburbs to old arena. So much for Saskatoon the compact city. Maybe we should annex Martinsville and Warman and say that the arena is almost in the center of Saskatoon. I believe that now may not be the time to do it but hell why not plan for it downtown for the future and make the commitment.

[roryn1]

1. These arenas make some good money to my knowledge. I think a new arena downtown is our only option. I also think private dollars could shell out half or more of these dollars. It’s not going to be $250million of taxpayer dollars. Fully funding an arena using taxpayer dollars is a bad scheme, and Private will come pick up a large amount of the bill.
2. Why does Regina get a brand new “provincial” stadium and a bypass, and all we get is one measly overpass funded by the provincial government. Elton John chose Saskatoon because we’re the future main city of Saskatchewan. The politicians in Regina need to stop being so biased. I think it’s time someone in the media analyzed where everyone’s taxpayer dollars are going per region. I think Regina is syphoning a large amount of it with this GTH, Bypass, and Stadium.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by roryn1

1. These arenas make some good money to my knowledge. I think a new arena downtown is our only option. I also think private dollars could shell out half or more of these dollars. It’s not going to be $250million of taxpayer dollars. Fully funding an arena using taxpayer dollars is a bad scheme, and Private will come pick up a large amount of the bill.
2. Why does Regina get a brand new “provincial” stadium and a bypass, and all we get is one measly overpass funded by the provincial government. Elton John chose Saskatoon because we’re the future main city of Saskatchewan. The politicians in Regina need to stop being so biased. I think it’s time someone in the media analyzed where everyone’s taxpayer dollars are going per region. I think Regina is syphoning a large amount of it with this GTH, Bypass, and Stadium.

I assure you the Sask Party does not give more to Regina than Saskatoon over time. When you say the "politicians in Regina", I trust you realize that more government MLAs are from Saskatoon than Regina. Mosaic Stadium got no more Provincial funding on a per capita basis than others arenas in places like Moose Jaw and Melville. The vast majority of the cost was paid by the City and the Riders and their fans.

Arenas in Saskatchewan can only make money if they write off virtually all of the capital and financing costs. It is not a good investment for a business. Businesses can have a role with sponsorships and naming rights and such, but they will not own an arena to make money.

[roryn1]

Sask taxpayers shelled out $180 million of the $278 facility lol

[Arts]

Originally Posted by roryn1

Sask taxpayers shelled out $180 million of the $278 facility lol

To be fair, $100M of that figure is in the form of a loan which is repayable in the form of user fees (ticket surcharge).

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by The Bess

Yes lets not spend 250 million on a new arena downtown, it's better we spent 250 million on a bridge form suburbs to old arena. So much for Saskatoon the compact city. Maybe we should annex Martinsville and Warman and say that the arena is almost in the center of Saskatoon. I believe that now may not be the time to do it but hell why not plan for it downtown for the future and make the commitment.

Random pet peeve: it's spelt Martensville. Martinsville is an American city.

Originally Posted by roryn1

2. Why does Regina get a brand new “provincial” stadium and a bypass, and all we get is one measly overpass funded by the provincial government. Elton John chose Saskatoon because we’re the future main city of Saskatchewan. The politicians in Regina need to stop being so biased. I think it’s time someone in the media analyzed where everyone’s taxpayer dollars are going per region. I think Regina is syphoning a large amount of it with this GTH, Bypass, and Stadium.

Saskatoon is already the main city of Saskatchewan, but Regina got a stadium because they're the home of the Riders and the bypass because they are (theoretically) better connected to the rest of Canada due to them being on Highway 1 instead of Highway 16. I imagine they see more traffic (both private and commercial) passing through daily than Saskatoon does.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Arts

To be fair, $100M of that figure is in the form of a loan which is repayable in the form of user fees (ticket surcharge).

...and the total cost including Riders' improvements, concessions etc. is north of $300M, so the Province paid less than 27%. I believe their unwritten rule of thumb is to contribute up to 30% for major arenas.

[roryn1]

Saskatoon’s highways have a lot more traffic on them with the extra 70,000 people in their metropolis area than Regina which is what mystify’s me about why they got the GTH and a bypass first... google “Highway Traffic Map Saskatchewan” for the pdf with traffic volumes

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by roryn1

Saskatoon’s highways have a lot more traffic on them with the extra 70,000 people in their metropolis area than Regina which is what mystify’s me about why they got the GTH and a bypass first... google “Highway Traffic Map Saskatchewan” for the pdf with traffic volumes

If I read it correctly, you're right in terms of all highways combined, but there's significantly more traffic on Highway 1 than there is on Highway 16.

[The Bess]

Random pet peeve: it's spelt Martensville. Martinsville is an American city.

Did you google it LOL

[roryn1]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

If I read it correctly, you're right in terms of all highways combined, but there's significantly more traffic on Highway 1 than there is on Highway 16.

I don’t think highway 16 compares to highway 1 since 16 isn’t even doubled on the other side, but the highway to PA from Saskatoon is the busiest road in the entire province.

Calculating the sum of inward and outward traffic per day outside of Saskatoon where the future bypass would be would be utilizing ~100,000 vehicles per day, whereas Regina’s will be utilized be ~75,000. That’s a pretty significant difference. Seems like it was mainly fully built out just for the GTH. These are some significant projects that Saskatoon doesn’t seem to be reaping the benefit of when we have 70,000 more people in our metropolis. I call political bias.

[scotty c]

Originally Posted by roryn1

I don’t think highway 16 compares to highway 1 since 16 isn’t even doubled on the other side, but the highway to PA from Saskatoon is the busiest road in the entire province.

Calculating the sum of inward and outward traffic per day outside of Saskatoon where the future bypass would be would be utilizing ~100,000 vehicles per day, whereas Regina’s will be utilized be ~75,000. That’s a pretty significant difference. Seems like it was mainly fully built out just for the GTH. These are some significant projects that Saskatoon doesn’t seem to be reaping the benefit of when we have 70,000 more people in our metropolis. I call political bias.

The road you are quoting as the busiest in the province was just twinned a few years ago and currently has 2 major interchange projects being completed on them. Saskatoon also just completed 2 bridges and is only a few years out from the whole Circle South project. As someone who currently lives in Saskatoon but grew up in Regina I don’t think either Saskatoon or Regina have any reason to complain about a lack of resources being supplied.

[SaskScraper]

My 2¢ on whether to build new downtown arena or renovate SaskTel Centre.
I'd say reno SaskTel Centre for now to bring it up to standards for the sports, concerts & events that it needs to be a venue for, but plan to build in 2-3 decades the next arena downtown for a more centralized location for people to access & help support spin off business downtown.

The biggest reason for new arena seems to be just to have an arena downtown, but that ship had sailed 30 years ago. For the time being, Saskatoon should make the most of the arena that the city already has now, invest in city transit like articulating high-capacity buses to offer transportation to the arena & invest in making the arena itself the best it can be, but have any ticket surcharge go to funding a new facility downtown sometime in the future.

The minimum $250 million to build new seems fiscally irresponsible as compared to less than $100 million cost to fully renovate/raise the roof/add a couple thousand more seats on SaskTel Centre, especially considering SaskTel Centre hasn't reached it's half-life expectancy yet.

Raising roof of arena would be costly but worth it if it extends the use of SaskTel Centre another couple decades.

Other arenas in North America that have raised their roof include:


The Buffalo Sabre's old Memorial Auditorium arena.


https://buffalonews.com/2016/04/14/r...0-years-ago-2/
https://prowrestling.fandom.com/wiki...ial_Auditorium


San Antonio Spur's old Hemisfair arena



http://gwmitchell.com/hemisfair-arena/

Fort Wayne Indiana's Allen County Coliseum



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_...orial_Coliseum
https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...-Coliseum.aspx
https://www.aisc.org/globalassets/mo...g_the_roof.pdf


Oklahoma States Gallagher-Iba Arena




https://www.scoopnest.com/s/Gallagher%20Iba%20Arena/
https://www.athleticbusiness.com/sta...ed-region.html

https://newsok.com/article/2688533/b...aits-expansion

Greensboro War Memorial Coliseum, North Carolina


http://www.awci.org/cd/pdfs/9403_c.pdf

[nook]

I'd be interested in seeing how much "raising the roof" would cost. I'm assuming it would raise the $100m estimated to renovate the Sasktel Centre significantly. I don't think it's a cheap fix. When they fixed the roof on BC place (and I know that's a football stadium, so it's a bit different... retractable and all that) it cost $458 million.

You don't see a lot of arenas doing that anymore. I would imagine cost in terms of the actual project and missed revenue from not being able to use the facility for an extended amount of time would be the prohibiting factor.

[WoodlandCritter]

I agree, the cost of building a new arena is a lot for tax payers to take on. But I would also love to see the arena moved downtown. Which is the lesser of two evils to choose from?

I guess my thoughts are that if the city puts $100 million (roughly) into renovating SaskTel Centre and then eventually decides to build a new arena 2-3 decades down the road the total cost will be an extra $100 million more due to the reno costs done years before. That money could be straight out invested into a new arena.

I'm not sure what is the right answer in the short term. In the long term I hope they eventually move it downtown.

[alt_center]

I think spending money to raise the roof of Sask Place is a non starter. Putting it out there was a terrible decision, spending any more money on it is throwing good money after bad.

How long would the building be out of commission? How long should we keep prime downtown land vacant for a future arena?

The only reason I can see to raise the roof on a stadium is that it's already in it's perfect location, AND raising the roof is technically and economically feasible. There would have to be some very specific conditions met to take that course of action.

[EpicPonyTime]

I too think spending money to raise the roof is unfeasible. I think as soon as you start talking about doing such an upgrade you're going to run into the same kind of opposition you have right now to building a new arena downtown: why spend so much money, we still got Garth Brooks, the seats/access/concourse is more important, etc.

If there's no political will in this city to build a new arena downtown, there sure isn't any to pop the roof off of Sask Place for that price.

[SaskScraper]

Saskatoon isn't the only city currently planning how to renovate it's arena.
Key Center in Seattle is increasing its arena to NHL & NBA standards by not raising the roof but digging arena lower to add seats and increase facility functions.

https://seattle.curbed.com/2018/8/1/...echnique-video

I wouldn't recommend Saskatoon spending as much as Seattle to 'dig' a bigger arena, or Madison Sq Gardens $1 billion, 2013 expansion/reno since the cost is too prohibitive.
But raising the roof seems like the most logical way for Saskatoon to proceed.


Buffalo's Memorial Auditorium cost approximately $52.6 million in 2017 dollars to renovate, increase seating capacity from 10,449 to 15,858, added new upper level with stairways, escalators and upper exits, getting rid of exit tunnels from lower levels & a new scoreboard upgrade.

San Antonio's Hemisfair roof lift cost $4 million in 1970's USdollars and increased seating by 6,000.

Allen County War Memorial Coliseum In 2002, had an extensive $35 million renovation and expansion raising the roof by 41 feet (12 m), increasing seating by 2,500.

Gallagher-Iba Arena completed in 2000 cost $55 million, increasing seating capacity from 6,381 seats to its current 13,611 seats.

Greensboro War Memorial Coliseum's $45.7 million expansion project in 1990 added 7,000 new seats to final 23,200 seats & doubled the size of the adjoining Special Events Center.

I'd think SaskTel Centre's raising roof project would cost less than the above examples since it's raising the roof and re-enforcing the upper girders to bring up to current structural standards in the industry and isn't to necessarily add huge amount of more seats... but while they are at it they probably could add an extra couple thousand seats to make it the size of other arenas in North America that attract large scale shows.

Something I'm noticing with arena discussion with-in city of Saskatoon is that there doesn't seem to be a lot of informed decisions being made. How can anyone say that a new arena or a reno'd arena is the way to go until a break down in cost is illustrated for people to decide which direction to go.

The worst thing would be to make a rash decision to quickly construct a new arena that's built obsolete within a few years by not being informed enough about new concepts in arena architecture that could add features and cost efficiencies.

An example is 'inverted-bowl' arenas featuring enlarged concourses, cantilevered balconies & improved seating but are ~20% more economical to build, take up less space and more efficient to operate, and are the new evolution for live spectator experience.

http://theinvertedbowl.com/

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

The worst thing would be to make a rash decision to quickly construct a new arena that's built obsolete within a few years by not being informed enough about new concepts in arena architecture that could add features and cost efficiencies.

Interestingly enough, this is exactly what happened to Sask Place. It was one of the last big arenas built before revenue-drivers like luxury boxes became industry standard. So even from the start, Sask Place has been obsolete.