Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[esquire]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Given how much they spent, I think they were hoping the BC Lions, and to a lesser extend the Whitecaps, would draw better than they do, frequently requiring the opening of the upper deck. With that said, I think someone involved with the project stated that a brand new BC Place would cost in the neighbourhood of $1 billion. I imagine in the present that would be in excess of $1.5 billion and probably closer to $2 billion.

It's weird, I remember at the time of the renovations thinking that it would give the Lions a shot in the arm. Instead, Lions attendance dropped. Average attendance at the renovated BC Place never matched what they were drawing in the mid-2000s pre-renovations.

[thurmas]

Probably cheaper in the long run to shrink the seating size of the upper deck than to build a new stadium in Vancouver.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by esquire

It's interesting how some NFL venues like the Superdome just keep going and going while others are replaced on the 25-year plan.

And considering the damage Hurricane Katrina inflicted on the Superdome, a replacement would have been justified.

Looking at the stadium list on Wikipedia, I'm actually surprised at some of their vintage.

Originally Posted by thewave46

Lambeau Field is more than 60 years old. Sure, it is not the same as when it opened, but to replace it would seem to be sacrilege.

It's not like downtown location matters as much for the NFL unlike baseball. There's no 'inferior multi-purpose stadium' excuse anymore (AFAIK) for stadium replacement, so I don't know what the excuse is for the 25-year replacement cycle. Or why taxpayers keep buying it.

Baseball is even weirder. Fenway Park and Wrigley Field are, what, more than 100 years old? Even Dodger Stadium was built in the 1960s and works great today. Then you have places like Atlanta. Bizarre.

At least most current NHL rinks/stadiums in this country are pretty well used until they're used up. About the only sore thumb that sticks out on that metric is Ottawa, but that's a location problem that would have worked better in the core of the city. And Calgary...well...we'll see if that replacement ever happens given the ongoing drama.

Lambeau renovations cost $295 million in 2003 and $435 million in 2021. Pretty reasonable. Of course, they are community owned.

In Canada, we've done a good job updating our NHL stadiums to keep them relevant. It's understandable that the likes of the Forum and Maple Leaf Garden had to be replaced in the 90s, and I don't think Molson or ACC will be replaced at anytime in the near future.

Corel is fine as a building. The issue as we know, is purely location. And well yeah, Calgary is past its prime.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Probably cheaper in the long run to shrink the seating size of the upper deck than to build a new stadium in Vancouver.

Why? It's there, it's paid for (or will be) and Vancouver can use it for major events. What would be the point of throwing more money at it?

[JHikka]

Surely BC Place is fine as-is for the next decade at least. Don't see any need for it to be renovated or reconfigured in any way. It serves both main tenants and one-off events relatively well.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by esquire

Why? It's there, it's paid for (or will be) and Vancouver can use it for major events. What would be the point of throwing more money at it?

Grey cups now can be done in 33,00 seat stadiums. The need for 54000 seats is not there for the lions or whitecaps. There's creative ways to make it shrink down like how progressive field in Cleveland and the white Sox in Chicago shrunk the upper decks down to bring more suitable capacity to their stadiums. Commonwealth in edmonton should be considering this as well

[esquire]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Grey cups now can be done in 33,00 seat stadiums. The need for 54000 seats is not there for the lions or whitecaps. There's creative ways to make it shrink down like how progressive field in Cleveland and the white Sox in Chicago shrunk the upper decks down to bring more suitable capacity to their stadiums. Commonwealth in edmonton should be considering this as well

Think about it... you are proposing to spend in all likelihood hundreds of millions of dollars to reduce the functionality of the stadium. Has anyone even asked for this?

[blueandgoldguy]

Lambeau Field has probably had over $1 billion in today's money spent on it over the past 30-40 years expanding the stadium from a little over 50,000 to its current capacity of just under 80,000. People see the 50 - 55,000 bench seats and think Lambeau Field is pretty utilitarian but looks are deceiving. It has just under 170 suites, over 6,000 club seats, numerous concourses of which the main one is absolutely enormous, large atrium, expanded locker rooms, training facilities plus a very nice brick exterior.

With regards to the Titans new stadium, the impetus behind it were rather dubious claims that a refurbishment of their current facility would cost north of $900 million US. I'm sure those claims were highly exaggerated as an extensive renovation of Hard Rock Stadium in Miami came in at a tidy $350 million a few years earlier. This is a stadium that is much older than Nissan Stadium in Nashville and included the addition of a roof to cover the spectators.

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

NFL has crazy huge and expensive stadiums for 10 games per year. I can't begin to understand.

At least in Canada, we often have soccer in there as well.

They also have TV contracts which add up to something like 13+ billion dollars. Across 30 teams that is 455 million per team per year (wikipedia was my source.) That's just a wee bit more than the 50 million CAD divided up by 8 teams I see for the CFL.

Putting that in perspective with respect to construction costs. Minnesota's stadium was $1.061billion. Mosaic Stadium was $278million. Doing some math, I can come out with a TV Revenue years of 2.33 for Minnesota and 44.48 years for Mosaic stadium.

A billion dollar stadium to an NFL team doesn't really seem like a big deal.

I could totally be wrong on the numbers, but that is what I found.

[Acajack]

I can't imagine there is much additional maintenance cost if any to having BC Place keeping the 54,000 capacity.

Seems like the tarps are a good solution in terms of atmosphere, and it's always good for a major city to have a large stadium.

Most cities in the world of Vancouver's size would have a stadium with a capacity of 50,000 at least.

If anything, Canadian cities tend to be on the low end in terms of stadium facilities, and the usual capacity that they have.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Given how much they spent, I think they were hoping the BC Lions, and to a lesser extend the Whitecaps, would draw better than they do, frequently requiring the opening of the upper deck. With that said, I think someone involved with the project stated that a brand new BC Place would cost in the neighbourhood of $1 billion. I imagine in the present that would be in excess of $1.5 billion and probably closer to $2 billion.

I don't think anyone can be blamed for thinking audiences would grow or at least remain status quo back then. The rapid pace and adoption of technology (HD TVs, omnipresent smartphone use) and the realigning of society in regards to Covid have created a new reality. And with that, the realignment is still unfinished, will sporting crowds shrink, grow in the upcoming long term, who knows.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Surely BC Place is fine as-is for the next decade at least. Don't see any need for it to be renovated or reconfigured in any way. It serves both main tenants and one-off events relatively well.

I agree, and it's the challenge both the Lions and Caps face to try and fill that building in the present environment. I have been keeping up with the Lions trying to meet that challenge but I'm not familiar with what the Caps have been doing. But I know Doman is trying and so far incrementally succeeding, hope the Caps do the same.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I can't imagine there is much additional maintenance cost if any to having BC Place keeping the 54,000 capacity.

Seems like the tarps are a good solution in terms of atmosphere, and it's always good for a major city to have a large stadium.

Most cities in the world of Vancouver's size would have a stadium with a capacity of 50,000 at least.

If anything, Canadian cities tend to be on the low end in terms of stadium facilities, and the usual capacity that they have.

It's more a Canadian oddity that we don't use facilities of that size, mostly. It pretty much comes down to the CFL (which arguably most of these stadiums are too large for), Major League Baseball, and the Olympics. Given that MLB is a one-city phenomenon right now in Canada and seems to have no plan beyond, I suspect the large stadiums we do have will remain underused.

I am trying to think of another country that has something akin to this phenomenon for the same size of cities.

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I can't imagine there is much additional maintenance cost if any to having BC Place keeping the 54,000 capacity.

Seems like the tarps are a good solution in terms of atmosphere, and it's always good for a major city to have a large stadium.

Most cities in the world of Vancouver's size would have a stadium with a capacity of 50,000 at least.

If anything, Canadian cities tend to be on the low end in terms of stadium facilities, and the usual capacity that they have.

Most countries in the world don't have Canada's quality of midsize to large arenas though. In fact, I would say only the USA beats us.

Any updates on when Montreal will replace the roof on Olympic Stadium?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Most countries in the world don't have Canada's quality of midsize to large arenas though. In fact, I would say only the USA beats us.

Any updates on when Montreal will replace the roof on Olympic Stadium?

Nope.

Though I will note that MLS Commissioner Don Garber (?) was in Montreal yesterday trying to shame the city into helping the Saputo family make improvements to the stadium that bears their name.

He said something like: "owning a pro sports team isn't a charity endeavour".

[Berklon]

Originally Posted by Acajack

He said something like: "owning a pro sports team isn't a charity endeavour".

He's right... it's a profit-making business.
Whereas taxpayers funding a stadium for a private business is actual charity.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Any updates on when Montreal will replace the roof on Olympic Stadium?

I don't think there is any new news (first two articles) but I will post the third, (although an old article) it contains some interesting details I didn't recall.

‘Removable roof not apt for Olympic Stadium’
Coliseum March 15, 2021

Montreal Olympic Stadium roof project suffers further delays
Rob Ridley thestadiumbusiness.com February 23 2022

Dream team plans third roof for Montreal’s Big O
Don Wall canada.constructconnect.com August 1, 2019

A “dream team” has been assembled to develop a new roof — the third — for Montreal’s star-crossed Big O, the Olympic Stadium.

Collaborating to prepare a business case for a new covering are Schlaich Bergermann Partner (sbp), a German engineering firm that has designed over 60 stadium roofs; German architectural firm GMP; Canadian engineers WSP; and the project owner, the Regie des Installations Olympiques (RIO).

The Quebec government approved planning for a new roof in 2017 and reiterated the goal in May. The target date for completion is 2024 with a projected cost announced at $250 million by the government two years ago, a figure RIO public relations counsellor Cedric Essiminy said does not reflect RIO’s current cost case.

“We tried to gather a dream team, with somebody that is more technical, somebody that has an eye on the architecture and sbp, overall they have a lot of expertise on many stadiums, and us who are leading the project,” said Essiminy recently.

“We are working really hard to be sure this time it is going to be the correct roof. The only purpose that we want is that it holds — retractable or not, partial or total, that is not the main focus. This time, it needs to work and it has to be flawless.”

WSP was hired in April 2018 and sbp last August.

In unveiling a new website with a historical project timeline June 26, RIO made no attempt to minimize the litany of missed deadlines, cost overruns, rips, blunders and other embarrassments that have plagued the stadium since it opened, the tower and roof incomplete, for the Montreal Olympics in 1976.

Initial projections were that the stadium would cost $134 million to construct but the final cost estimate was over $1 billion.

The 175-metre, 45-degree inclined tower designed by French architect Roger Taillibert was finally completed in 1987; its retractable Kevlar roof is said to have sat in a French warehouse for five years awaiting installation. SNC-Lavalin erected the 66-tonne roof in 1987 but just a year later during a wind storm, the canvas tore in two places with rips 40 metres and five metres long.

Essiminy said the failure of the first roof — it was replaced in 1999 — was in part because it was a victim of its own success.

“People were saying, this is marvellous,” he said. “The roof was not meant to be open and closed so many times but so many people were coming to see the roof open and close, they made the decision to open it and close it once or twice a day. So it tore up drastically. It was supposed to be open once or twice a month.”

The roof was retracted about 80 times before it was closed for good in 1991; the biggest tear that year was 120 metres. Essiminy cites human, engineering and climatic reasons for its failure.

The current roof, non-retractable and designed by Birdair, consists of 93 panels of Teflon covered with fibreglass and resting on a lattice of steel cables. The RIO website recounts numerous failures including dumps of snow that have caused the cancellation of events and lately there is a yearly tally of the number of tears that have been repaired — the summer 2018 inspection found 3,256 perforations, though many were only the “size of a loonie,” according to Essiminy.

“As soon as we installed it we had problems,” said Essiminy. “But the original life expectancy was 25 years. So 2024, it is going to be 25 years. So even with the problems we had in 1999 while installing the roof, we were able to keep it on its life expectancy.”

There have been several false starts over the past 15 years in initiating plans for the third roof but the current iteration seems to have legitimacy.

If the Quebec government approves the business plan next year, according to a tentative schedule, RIO will be in a position to issue a call for proposals and hire a project team. Meanwhile, the banker Desjardins moved into the tower with 1,000 employees last year, creating more momentum for RIO.

Schlaich Bergermann Partner general manager Michael Stein identified three major issues the design team must deal with in an interview published on the RIO website: harmonizing the design with Taillibert’s existing tower, dealing with snowloads and adhering to Canada’s National Building Code, which is much stricter than 50 years ago.

Essiminy noted that each roof is essentially a prototype, given that there are no other major stadiums with roofs held in place by a vertical tower.

“There are some stadiums where there is tension from the top but the way the Olympic Stadium is built, it is inclined not for esthetics, it is inclined because it holds the roof,” he explained. “Around 70 per cent of the roof is held by the tower. The technical ring and stadium holds maybe 30 per cent.”

Essiminy said the team will provide a conceptual design as part of the call for proposals. There is still a possibility parts of the roof could be retractable, he said. The procurement will be DBFM.

[thurmas]

Canadian Stadiums were appropriately sized for their markets in the 1950s and 60s where we had CNE stadium, Empire Stadium and Autostade seating around 33,000 for our 3 largest cities and Canadas mid sized cities had stadiums around 20,000 at the time. Games looked mostly full and had better atmosphere as a result. The stadium boom of the 70s and 80s blew these appropriate sized stadia out of proportion big time and it caused serious problems for the main tenants most years since that time.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Canadian Stadiums were appropriately sized for their markets in the 1950s and 60s where we had CNE stadium, Empire Stadium and Autostade seating around 33,000 for our 3 largest cities and Canadas mid sized cities had stadiums around 20,000 at the time. Games looked mostly full and had better atmosphere as a result. The stadium boom of the 70s and 80s blew these appropriate sized stadia out of proportion big time and it caused serious problems for the main tenants most years since that time.

Those stadiums were built with the international events they were purposed for and as a bonus the CFL. Olympic Stadium, Commonwealth Stadium and BC Place were built for those large international events. Even with the large size, for many years they were not totally oversized for their later needs, all the CFL teams did a respectable job for many years afterwards. Frankly, had Commonwealth not added another 20k seats for Universiade it would be rightsized for all events today aside from the Elks recent attendance woes. Considering all events (not just the CFL) the last building boom got it just about perfect (Wpg, Reg, Ott, Ham, Tor).

[thewave46]

If one had to rewrite history, domed super-stadiums from the 1970s-1990s in Canada were the anomaly that stuck out. I would be curious to see how a time traveler from the future would forewarn the past and what would arise from that.

Admittedly, they did get somewhat used for their purpose. I just don’t see much of a way forward other than status quo. Pay to tear them down and one is left with nothing.

We just never grew into them. The sports they hosted were either one-time hits, or shrank from their peak. At least they kind of look cool?