Stadiums and Arenas of Canada part 2

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

mine

That is a very different looking Hudson's Bay building. Do you know when it was built or the exterior was changed?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

That is a very different looking Hudson's Bay building. Do you know when it was built or the exterior was changed?

It was originally an Eaton's store built in the mid 80s. It was part of the Eaton Centre complex developed by Triple 5, the group behind West Edmonton Mall.

What's interesting is that Eaton Centre was pitched as a grandiose mega-development with several very tall (50+ storey towers), although not much of it was actually built. In some ways, the Ice District is the spiritual heir to the Eaton Centre, except with an arena instead of a department store at the core. The chief difference of course, is that the Ice District is actually getting built.

The Bay has hopped around downtown Edmonton a bit... they used to be in their beautiful old Jasper Avenue location until the 90s at which point they moved into the old Woodward's, then finally around 2000 or so they moved into the former Eaton's.

[Corndogger]

Thanks for the background info. Edmonton would have looked very different if they had built a set of 50+ story towers in that location.

[elly63]

Can you actually grow grass inside the Rogers Centre?
cbc.ca April 01, 2016

This weekend, the Toronto Blue Jays will begin another season's quest to reach the World Series.

But for several years, they've also been on another quest: trying to figure out how to get rid of the artificial turf at the Rogers Centre and replace it with real grass.

Currently, there is only one other stadium in Major League Baseball that has artificial turf: Tropicana Field in Tampa, where the Jays will start their season on Sunday.

The Jays have taken the first step towards transforming their stadium. It now features an all-dirt infield, which players say makes balls bounce more predictably.

But real grass remains the holy grail.

Eric Lyons, an associate professor of turf grass science at the University of Guelph has been commissioned by the Blue Jays to study whether it's possible to grow real grass at the stadium.

Lyons says the biggest issue when it comes to growing real grass at the Rogers Centre is humidity. "It can be a dealbreaker. We don't know how much humidity these grasses will create in the giant stadium," he tells Day 6 host Brent Bambury.

Then there's the issue of natural light. "If they could open the roof up, it's actually a very good stadium for growing grass," he says, noting that the amount of sunshine it gets -- with the roof open -- is ideal. So is airflow, he adds.

"But when the roof is closed, these things are no longer provided. They're going to be at 100 per cent artificial light. And there isn't a stadium in the world that's working in that way," Lyons says.

Working in labs funded by the Canadian and European space agencies -- with the ultimate goal of growing plants extra-terrestrially, Lyons is excited about working on the project. He got interested in the subject while playing college football on artificial turf in a domed stadium (UNI-Dome University of Northern Iowa).

Asked directly whether there will ever be real grass at the Rogers Centre, he's circumspect.

"I don't know. It's not about the grass. It's about the building. We have the technology, it's just never been engineered because there's never been a stadium that needed it."

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by Airboy

Can't use your Camera Dave.

I could live with that, or even an embargo if I were allowed. Would still love to tour the site.

[mistercorporate]

By Red CB Toronto and his contact in MLSE on RPB Forums:

[king10]

big improvement over 10 years ago. now all they need to do is fill in that north end

[Migs]

(@Flyingpicture)

[EpicPonyTime]

My favourite part of any stadium construction is when they put in the seats. Can't wait to see the stadium when it's full of green.

[The Fisher Account]

Some news about Calgary's new arena/stadium:

City Administration has come out with a report that states CalgaryNext is "not feasible in its present form or location".

Notes:

- Creosote cleanup expected to be $85-$140M
- Costs with land, infrastructure, remediation, financing - $1.83B
- Suggests building arena in Stampede Park
- Stadium recommended to be built at existing McMahon Stadium/U of C location
- Reiterates recommendation to move forward with a fieldhouse in Foothills Athletic Park

Ken King and the Flames will need to come up with a new option now for developing their arena and stadium

[tomthumb2]

^^^ It's not officially dead but that looks like a grave prognosis. I could see them just building an arena now and forgetting about a stadium.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by tomthumb2

^^^ It's not officially dead but that looks like a grave prognosis. I could see them just building an arena now and forgetting about a stadium.

I think the CalgaryNext concept is dead. It'll now likely be separate buildings in separate locations

[tomthumb2]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

I think the CalgaryNext concept is dead. It'll now likely be separate buildings in separate locations

Arena yes but I can't see them building a stadium as well, especially without a field-house included in it. I think they were really pinning their hopes on that.

In any case, it took them 8 years to come up this this crap proposal which got shot down in 6 months, how long will it take for that moron Ken King to come up with Plan B? He should be fired immediately.

[elly63]

CalgaryNext proposal torpedoed by city report that pegs total cost at $1.8B
Actual price tag would be twice what Calgary Flames owners claimed last summer, city staff say
Robson Fletcher, CBC News Apr 20, 2016

The actual cost of the CalgaryNext arena-and-stadium project would likely reach $1.8 billion, with Calgary taxpayers on the hook for at least $1.2 billion, according to a new city report that effectively scuttles the proposal as it stands.

That's double the $890-million total price tag put forward last August, when the Calgary Flames and Calgary Stampeders ownership group first revealed their proposal to build a new professional sports complex on the west end of downtown.

Given those costs, the report recommends looking at alternatives for replacing the aging Saddledome and McMahon Stadium, in conjunction with the Calgary Flames, Calgary Stampeders and the city-owned Calgary Municipal Land Corporation.

"Administration has come to the conclusion that CalgaryNext is not feasible in its present form or location," the report reads.

The best alternative, according to the report, is to build a new arena at Stampede Park and a new football stadium and field house at the existing McMahon Stadium/Foothills Stadium site at the University of Calgary.

Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corporation — which owns the Flames and Stampeders in addition to the Calgary Hitmen junior hockey team and Calgary Roughnecks lacrosse team — said last summer it was willing to put up $200 million of its own money for the $890-million project.

The company proposed finding the other $690 million through a $250-million ticket tax, a $240-million community revitalization levy (CRL), and $200 million direct from city taxpayers, in exchange for public use of a field house that would be included as part of the stadium component of the facility.

But the city report concludes the actual cost — including financing, related infrastructure and creosote clean-up of the contaminated land on the identified site — would be much higher.

Of the $1.8-billion total, the report estimates the total city contribution would be between $1.2 billion and $1.4 billion.

The estimate of the city's share includes direct contributions, the cost of the creosote cleanup, and the CRL, which is a sort of loan to be paid back by anticipated growth in property-tax revenues resulting from the project and related development.

The report cost the city $375,000 to do, not including the price of an environmental study the Calgary Municipal Land Corporation carried out to examine the creosote contamination, specifically.

City council is set to discuss the report at its meeting on Monday.

Time for an 'Option B'

Coun. Andre Chabot said the city needs to start looking for an "option B" because he sees no way the current CalgaryNext proposal can work.

"We might want to consider looking at a second option, which might be something of a scaled-back version of what was envisioned," he said.

"I don't think taxpayers are prepared to foot the bill on for-profit organizations," Chabot added.

Mayor Naheed Nenshi issued a statement Wednesday afternoon, highlighting the "significant challenges" identified in the report.

"I know many Calgarians are looking for a better arena space, but this is just one option," the mayor said of the CalgaryNext proposal.

"I've always said: public money must be used for public benefit and council will have a robust discussion about this on Monday," Nenshi added.

"City administration has also identified a potential alternative for council's consideration that may accomplish the same objectives, but at a lower cost."

Start of a conversation

Coun. Druh Farrell said the report validates the concerns she has had all along.

"The vast majority of it would be covered by Calgarians and we've got other priorities," Farrell said.

"I think it's just the start of a conversation."

She said in the current economic environment, public funding would be a tough sell to taxpayers.

"The principle of public dollars going to public benefit of course is a fundamental one so they will have to look at sharpening their pencil," Farrell said.

"I can't imagine, especially during this economy, that Calgarians would welcome paying for an arena for a private organization, a for-profit organization, so there are other mechanisms to pay for this, I hope they explore them."

Executive Summary of City of Calgary's report on CalgaryNext

[speedog]

That creosote problem is never going to go away and the city will eventually have to fix the Crowchild Trail/Bow Trail/Memorial Drive mess. - these two things most likely account for the almost doubled cost and are time bombs that the city will have to address at some point in the future.

So back to square one or plan B, however long that'll take.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by speedog

That creosote problem is never going to go away and the city will eventually have to fix the Crowchild Trail/Bow Trail/Memorial Drive mess. - these two things most likely account for the almost doubled cost and are time bombs that the city will have to address at some point in the future.

So back to square one or plan B, however long that'll take.

I totally agree. City administration has their own agenda when it comes to the area so I'm not surprised they pulled their usual stunt of generating a very negative report to protect what they really want done. As bad as CSEC's plans are this report is even worse. Their recommendations for McMahon Stadium in particular are insulting. The report reads as if they're seriously recommending spending just $2 million to extend the life of the stadium for another 30 years.

Building a new arena and stadium in the same location makes a lot of sense. Keeping them where they are makes no sense for numerous reasons. Did the Stampede board lobby the city to help them keep the Flames on their property? Does a new arena tie into their recent plans? And where are they getting $500m+ from? Like I said before, nothing will really happen until we get new people in power locally and provincially. Best case would be for the Flames to pay everything themselves and give the city ZERO say in what is done. Build the complex in Balzac--Rocky View County would love the jobs and revenue.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Build the complex in Balzac--Rocky View County would love the jobs and revenue.

Yeah, because building arenas out in the boonies always works out really well

[Riise]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

I totally agree. City administration has their own agenda when it comes to the area so I'm not surprised they pulled their usual stunt of generating a very negative report to protect what they really want done. As bad as CSEC's plans are this report is even worse. Their recommendations for McMahon Stadium in particular are insulting. The report reads as if they're seriously recommending spending just $2 million to extend the life of the stadium for another 30 years.

Building a new arena and stadium in the same location makes a lot of sense. Keeping them where they are makes no sense for numerous reasons. Did the Stampede board lobby the city to help them keep the Flames on their property? Does a new arena tie into their recent plans? And where are they getting $500m+ from? Like I said before, nothing will really happen until we get new people in power locally and provincially. Best case would be for the Flames to pay everything themselves and give the city ZERO say in what is done. Build the complex in Balzac--Rocky View County would love the jobs and revenue.

It's not so bad when you actually read their suggestions in their entirety. Administration stated that it would take an investment between $69M and $89M to ensure that the stadium could be a viable venue. The $2M figure was simply the required investment in structural and mechanical systems.

Let me guess, you are in charge of producing documentation for Ready2Engage?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Riise

It's not so bad when you actually read their suggestions in their entirety. Administration stated that it would take an investment between $69M and $89M to ensure that the stadium could be a viable venue. The $2M figure was simply the required investment in structural and mechanical systems.

Let me guess, you are in charge of producing documentation for Ready2Engage?

I read the entire report released. Are you trying to tell me that a city administrator is so knowledgeable that they can determine the cost of what will make McMahon a good fan experience? Get real, the city will push the $2 million option as they don't give a fuck how bad the experience is.

Why do you have to resort to insulting me? Why are you so afraid to hear opinions and facts that differ than your own? Comes across as if you've invested so much in your ideology that you're worried about being proven wrong.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

Yeah, because building arenas out in the boonies always works out really well

If the Flames pay for everything why would you care if the project fails? Are you expecting them to invest a large sum of money to achieve what you want to see done? If the city wasn't so closed minded we could have ended up with a great project but now we're going to end up with an embarrassment that will please now one. But if they moved to Rocky View County they could at least build what they want. And not everything has to be in the core to succeed. If you have proof to the contrary start providing some cites.