HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #441  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 1:06 AM
Dr Awesomesauce's Avatar
Dr Awesomesauce Dr Awesomesauce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BEYOND THE OUTER RIM
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
Am I missing something here (Rogers Communications), are you thinking of the NFL. Even then those guidelines are not like they used to be.
You're right that MLB has no such rule prohibiting corporate ownership, though it's quite clear they prefer dealing with individuals. However, I don't think they'd say no to Bell holding a 49.9% stake in the franchise, for example.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #442  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 1:37 AM
Berklon's Avatar
Berklon Berklon is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,129
Yea, I'm sure MLB would welcome a telecommunications company owning a team.. especially one as big as Bell. Montreal will get a team... it's just a matter of time. Hopefully it's in a new stadium, because Olympic Stadium... ugh.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #443  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 2:18 AM
elly63 elly63 is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
Yea, I'm sure MLB would welcome a telecommunications company owning a team.. especially one as big as Bell. Montreal will get a team... it's just a matter of time. Hopefully it's in a new stadium, because Olympic Stadium... ugh.
For the guy a couple posts above who said corporations couldn't own MLB teams, CBS owned the Yankees for about 10 years before selling to Steinbrenner.

Depending on the timing, the Expos will have a new stadium, maybe the Big O as a stop gap while construction is underway.

I'd like to see the Big O get gutted inside, reconfigured into a 25-30k rectilinear stadium with the rest of the space being used for an Eastern NTC. I can dream.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #444  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 2:20 AM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce View Post
It's pretty clear you're not at all interested in this topic based on your creativity with facts and numbers. If you really want to know about what's happening, just do a Google search.
What creativity?

Montreal Expos Attendance

Nationals Park - $693m (2008)
Nationals Park Cost

Miller Park - $400m (2001) - as per Wiki

Great American Ballpark - $290m (2003) - as per Wiki

Target Field - $555m (2010)
Target Field Budget

Busch Stadium - $365m (2006)
Busch Stadium Facts

I'm not even quoting expensive stadiums like Yankee Stadium or Citi Field.

I'll admit to being unaware of the supposed ownership group that intends to bring a team to the city. But, the numbers I have quoted are based on fact.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #445  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 2:33 AM
elly63 elly63 is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
The Forgotten Story of ... the world's best baseball stadium – that was never built
Labatt Park, in downtown Montreal, was to be modern, elegant and memorable. But then the money ran out – and the Expos moved to Washington.


A sketch for the proposed Labatt Park. Photograph: Provencher Roy

The best major league baseball park that was never built now lives forever in a glass case. The case is sealed, protecting the best major league park that was never built from dust and grime and wobbly people who don’t watch their step. This is because the scale model of the best major league baseball park that was never built is too big to tuck away and too precious to destroy so it sits like beautiful but useless furniture on the lobby floor of the Montreal architecture firm Provencher Roy.

The best major league baseball park that was never built was given a name: Labatt Park. It had a site; in downtown Montreal, just southeast of the Bell Center, home to hockey’s Canadiens. The best major league baseball park that was never built was going to be tiny, with only 35,000 seats. It would have given fans in even the worst seats a sense they were close to the field. It would have had a grace unique to any ballpark – modern but not utilitarian. It would have been … perfect.

“Ahhh, it’s a shame it didn’t get built,” Eugenio Carelli said with a sigh. Carelli is one of the architects who designed Labatt Park. Before the late 1990s, when Provencher Roy was approached by the Montreal Expos to create their new home, the team led by Claude Provencher had never built a stadium. This didn’t bother them. They designed grand civic buildings in public places. The Expos park gave them a chance to make something memorable, something distinctive.

Carelli took a trip of a few days around North America, studying the best new sports stadiums. He visited Baltimore’s Camden Yards and was taken by Cleveland’s Jacobs (now Progressive) Field. Then he came back to Montreal and set about designing something great. What sits in the glass case of Provencher Roy’s lobby is a ballpark like none in baseball today.

While Labatt Field would have opened into a downtown skyline like the stadiums in Baltimore, Cleveland, Seattle and Pittsburgh, it would not have the clunky, retro look of a 1930s ballpark. An original proposal for a Camden Yards-type park ringed in brick, was scuttled at the suggestion of legendary architect Richard Meier (a friend of then-Expos owner Jeffrey Loria), replaced with something sleeker. The ultimate design of Labatt Park gave an image of a wishbone rather than the box other stadium designers were making. There was nothing old-fashioned about Labatt Park, nothing to evoke a time lost. Provencher wanted something that would stand out, something more distinctive.

“Baseball is a fluid game,” Carelli said, staring down that the model on the lobby floor. “I think it goes well. It’s not like the Astrodome or the round stadiums. We wanted to make something contemporary. We wanted something that spoke of our times.”

Contemporary is always dangerous when building stadiums. Montreal got contemporary when it built Olympic Stadium for the 1976 Olympics and turned it into the Expos’ home for 27 years. Olympic Stadium was a dreary relic to a modernist view of a sports facility, a monument of concrete and garish yellow seats, covered by an enormous overhang that was supposed to be topped with a retractable roof that never worked. The roof was supposed to fold up into a tower that looms over the stadium. Eventually a permanent blue roof covered Olympic Stadium and the tower remains, awkwardly arcing over the stadium like a huge decapitated swan.

The ball park was going to be a happy place, built for the super low sum of $200m. No space would be wasted. Perhaps the park’s most endearing feature was the intimacy it was going to give. Even though the new ballparks were being built closer to the action, the fans were actually sitting farther away because the new parks put the bulk of their seats in the first tier – giving an impression of being close while not being close at all.

Labatt Park’s bottom tier was small, only about 15 rows.

Because of this, the architects drew a steeper upper deck that dangled low over the field. In the stadium even the fans in the last row of the last tier would feel as if they were hovering over the action rather than being detached observers too far from the players to see their numbers.

Maybe because Provencher had never built a stadium before, he never saw the politics that sabotaged his project. Big league baseball in Montreal had been a three-decade struggle. Once the city had been a thriving minor league city, most famous in game’s lore for being the place that welcomed Jackie Robinson to professional baseball. But stadium fiascos and economic burdens plagued the Expos’ ability to be a winning team. A chance for momentum was lost in 1994 when the season was scrapped by a lockout with the Expos in first place in the National League East. When team president Claude Brochu asked Provencher Roy to design a new home, Carelli had every reason to believe the project would be built.

Carelli found it odd that when Loria assumed control of the team in 1999 that he only attended one meeting about the new park, but shook off any feelings of concern. The project kept moving forward until 2002, when the plans were 75% complete. Then one day he got a call. The stadium was off. Quebec premier Lucien Bouchard did not want to spend any public money – no matter how small – for a new stadium when the old Olympic Stadium was still being paid off. Labatt Park would never be built.

“I have never had a project as advanced as this one without being built,” Carelli said.

Loria cashed out of Montreal, selling the team to Major League Baseball while taking over the Florida Marlins. After the 2004 season, the Expos moved to Washington, and developers began picking at the downtown site that would have been perfect for baseball. Today the skeletons of high rise condominiums rise from pieces of the plot that would have housed the best major league ballpark that was never built.

But even as Carelli gazes forlornly at the model of the perfect stadium, a movement is growing to bring it back – not as the structure under the glass but as some kind of home to another major league team. Former Expos outfielder Warren Cromartie has quietly been gathering potential owners to form a group that could buy another big league team and move it to Montreal. A common belief is that team could be the Tampa Bay Rays, if the Rays are unable to leave their own dreary indoor stadium much the way the Expos couldn’t nearly two decades ago.

Cromartie said in a phone interview that on a trip to Montreal four and a half years ago, someone tapped him on the shoulder and asked where the Expos Hall of Fame was. It was then that Cromartie realized no legacy of the old team existed. He decided to find a new team and build a new history.

“Why not me?” he said. “When I started this it was something I was supposed to do. I am the one.”

For the last two years baseball as staged exhibition games at Olympic Stadium and the response has been tremendous.

“It felt like a huge celebration of baseball the whole weekend,” said Mark Byrnes, a writer for Atlantic’s City Lab who attended this year’s exhibition games and wrote a nostalgic piece about Labatt Park.

In recent months, Cromartie and Carelli have been talking. Provencher is looking at other downtown sites for a possible stadium. To see if they work he lays the plans for Labatt Park over the prospective plots to see if a ballpark will fit. He is probably wiser this time, expecting nothing, careful about his dreams.

But if the right investors step forward and if a team can be bought and baseball agrees to let it move, a new stadium might indeed be built. It just won’t be Labatt Park.

“That was the coolest ballpark that never got built,” Cromartie said softly.

This article was amended on 6 July 2015. The original article incorrectly stated that there were 15 rows in the lower tier of Labatt Park when there were actually 25. The stadium plans were also 75% complete rather than 90%, while Eugenio Carelli’s travels in North America to look at stadiums last a few days rather than a few months.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #446  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 2:43 AM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
The Forgotten Story of ... the world's best baseball stadium – that was never built
Labatt Park, in downtown Montreal, was to be modern, elegant and memorable. But then the money ran out – and the Expos moved to Washington.
If they could do it for $200m and minimal government 'assistance', I'd be happy.

I'm not anti-Expos. I just see these things and have a sense of dread of Skydome and Olympic Stadium all over again.

If somebody wants to do it and maybe set a good example of how to do it cheaply (no small feat today) and bring pro sports back to the masses, as opposed to a super duper 'all the frills' stadium, I'm good with that.

Keeping it cheap will also help from a profit side too. Easier to fill out a stadium with reasonably priced tickets. Make a baseball game an outing that not only those who are upper middle class can afford again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #447  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 3:27 AM
elly63 elly63 is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
If they could do it for $200m and minimal government 'assistance', I'd be happy.

I'm not anti-Expos. I just see these things and have a sense of dread of Skydome and Olympic Stadium all over again.
You seem to be making a lot of sky is falling comments without evidence. I agree with you about SkyDome and the Big O but that doesn't mean we have failed to learn any lessons. I don't think I have run into too many comments from people saying that our latest stadium building ventures have been boondoggles. We have built some pretty good facilities for a reasonable cost.

As big a failure as the Big O was, even that gets exaggerated because people include the cost of all the facilities combined as the final cost of stadium which it was not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #448  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 3:37 AM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
You seem to be making a lot of sky is falling comments without evidence. I agree with you about SkyDome and the Big O but that doesn't mean we have failed to learn any lessons. I don't think I have run into too many comments from people saying that our latest stadium building ventures have been boondoggles. We have built some pretty good facilities for a reasonable cost.

As big a failure as the Big O was, even that gets exaggerated because people include the cost of all the facilities combined as the final cost of stadium which it was not.
I will agree with you that we've built some sensibly priced venues in this country in the recent past - ACC, Bell Centre, MTS Place, New Mosaic Stadium, etc. Perhaps I've given too much weight to the US, where excessive cost seems to be the norm for sporting venues.

However, I don't think I've made 'sky is falling' comments without evidence. I've posted the numbers that I believe are legitimate and have sourced some of them to fairly reputable sources.

I've also avoided using comparisons to stadiums that clearly not going to be a reliable guide - e.g. New Yankee Stadium.

While I get the enthusiasm of a new stadium or thing (especially on this website), I do believe that we should go into any new thing with eyes wide open. These aren't insignificant amounts of money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #449  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 3:45 AM
elly63 elly63 is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
While I get the enthusiasm of a new stadium or thing (especially on this website), I do believe that we should go into any new thing with eyes wide open. These aren't insignificant amounts of money.
Of course, but let's not be negative for negative's sake either. I'd rather see a Regina can-do attitude any day over what's been happening in Calgary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #450  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 2:42 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
Hopefully it's in a new stadium, because Olympic Stadium... ugh.
There's zero chance the MLB returns to Olympic. This can't be stressed enough.

I'd be impressed if the organization is there for combined financing of both a team and a stadium from prospective ownership. Good luck, QC taxpayers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #451  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 6:09 PM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,717
MLB has mentioned would be open to Olympic being a temporary facility while construction of a new stadium takes place. I don't know if this would be ideal to start back up, but if shovels were in the ground and Montreal just needed to wait two years for construction, I believe MLB would be okay with it. Similar situation with LA Rams playing in the dumpy LA Collusium during construction of their new facility.

MLB in Montreal is viable as not many other options left for markets in the USA.
MLB now is fueled by strong local markets that can generate big-time local TV and sponsorships, being a small scaled region will hamper you big time. Charlotte would be the only large region left that could be viable on that level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #452  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 6:56 PM
blueandgoldguy blueandgoldguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,847
I don't think you can build a "no-frills" MLB stadium with 35,000 seats for $200 million. That $200 million stadium proposed for Montreal in the late 90s would probably be $500 million today...maybe even slightly more.

The two newest stadiums in MLB are/will be suntrust park in Atlanta - a 42,000 seat park that cost $620 million - and Texas (under construction) - a 41,000 seat stadium with a retractable roof for the tidy sum of $1.1 billion

The funny thing is the Rangers have a perfectly suitable 45,000 seat stadium that is only 20 years old but their contention is attendance is hurt in the summer due to the heat and humidity hence the need for the roof in the new stadium.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #453  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 7:15 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by osmo View Post
MLB in Montreal is viable as not many other options left for markets in the USA
Charlotte, Portland, Nashville....

Mexico City is a pipedream for a number of reasons (altitude being one) but Monterey makes sense on a number of different levels. Montreal is probably at the top of the list but all applicants need owners and stadiums. Vancouver gets thrown around some but stadium would be a giant hurdle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
I don't think you can build a "no-frills" MLB stadium with 35,000 seats for $200 million. That $200 million stadium proposed for Montreal in the late 90s would probably be $500 million today...maybe even slightly more.
Absolutely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #454  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 7:42 PM
Berklon's Avatar
Berklon Berklon is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
The funny thing is the Rangers have a perfectly suitable 45,000 seat stadium that is only 20 years old but their contention is attendance is hurt in the summer due to the heat and humidity hence the need for the roof in the new stadium.
Yea, I saw the plans for the new stadium the other day. It looks nice from some angles, while not-so-nice from other angels... and it's a mostly modern looking building with some brick pillars. This blows my mind since their current stadium is great - although without a roof. I haven't heard if they plan to keep the current one running after the new stadium is built - it would be such a waste to tear it down.



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #455  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 7:44 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 22,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
Am I missing something here (Rogers Communications), are you thinking of the NFL. Even then those guidelines are not like they used to be.
Yes, You are missing something as I explicitly said expansion franchise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #456  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 7:53 PM
blueandgoldguy blueandgoldguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
Yea, I saw the plans for the new stadium the other day. It looks nice from some angles, while not-so-nice from other angels... and it's a mostly modern looking building with some brick pillars. This blows my mind since their current stadium is great - although without a roof. I haven't heard if they plan to keep the current one running after the new stadium is built - it would be such a waste to tear it down.



Montreal would be doing backflips if they had something like that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #457  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2017, 9:02 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper View Post
Yes, You are missing something as I explicitly said expansion franchise.
I would like to see some proof of that. Why would they reverse and create a policy that conflicts with their past practices (Rogers, CBS for starters). If Rogers owns a team and Bell is ready to pony up the money for an expansion franchise, MLB will say no? Sounds like antitrust to me. And probably not real good for TV contract negotiations either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #458  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2017, 4:03 AM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,717
I don't understand why the Texas Rangers can't renovate the stadium and install larger awnings to cover the seats?

Maybe people don't go to games because the Rangers have been up and down and inconsistent for the past 20 years. Maybe also because the ballpark is in a suburban bog that makes sense for ten football games a year but is a stretch for 80 games?

Arlington Ballpark is a gem. A quirky suburban model that was a retro style response to Skydome which attempted to copy the same "mixed-use" elements by incorporating an office building into the ballpark.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #459  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2017, 4:17 AM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 10,520
The rangers have ODOR so they suck. As for the stadium maybe structurally they can't add awnings? It's a decent venue otherwise.
__________________
"Less is more" – Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #460  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2017, 4:23 AM
Berklon's Avatar
Berklon Berklon is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by osmo View Post
I don't understand why the Texas Rangers can't renovate the stadium and install larger awnings to cover the seats?
The awnings would protect the fans from the sun and the extra heat it gives off, but I'd imagine it's still too hot even in the shade in Texas. It's not going to compete with a roof and air conditioning. Phoenix opened their baseball stadium just 4 years later, and they were smart enough to build it with a retractable roof.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:45 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.