HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6201  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 7:54 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
Private financing would be the most realistic path. It's hard to imagine the BC government fronting the Whitecaps a pile of money to build something that will compete directly with the province's own still somewhat-newly renovated facility.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6202  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 7:57 PM
thurmas's Avatar
thurmas thurmas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 7,598
Bc government would make a fortune selling off the land bc place sits on. A 25000 seat outdoor stadium for whitecaps and lions can work. I have also heard many complaints that getting into downtown Vancouver with traffic is so bad a suburban stadium might actually be more accessible
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6203  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 8:01 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
^ Is downtown Vancouver traffic really that bad? The only time I have run into problems there on recent visits is rush hour gridlock on Granville south of downtown. In some respects I find Vancouver easier and quicker to drive around than Winnipeg, despite being a much bigger city.

Not to mention the fact that BC Place has very good transit connections.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6204  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 8:07 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka View Post
Given the slew of recent stadium builds across MLS it seems reasonable to expect any sort of Whitecaps stadium to come in at around $250-400M. 20-25K.
For sure, if we consider THF 24k at $145 mil (no roof), IGF 33k (roof) at $210 mil and Mosaic 33k ($278-310 mil) with a full roof type more conducive to what an MLS team might have. And the last of those was built five years ago. That's a lot of dough for the private sector to come up with. But like I always say, anything can be done, you just need the will to do it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6205  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 8:09 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Private financing would be the most realistic path. It's hard to imagine the BC government fronting the Whitecaps a pile of money to build something that will compete directly with the province's own still somewhat-newly renovated facility.
I was thinking of a PPP but you're right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6206  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 8:14 PM
thurmas's Avatar
thurmas thurmas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 7,598
A big reason the blue bombers are profitable in the millions most seasons is they control the revenue streams that ig field produces even after their yearly 4.5 million payments to cibc on their 30 year mortgage payments
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6207  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 9:08 PM
JustForTheHalibut JustForTheHalibut is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
But it's been what, 6 years and by your own account the quality of the field is fine... so what are people still going on about? I mean, I could understand if the turf was constantly torn up and muddy or whatever but if that isn't the case, then what is the issue?


It is very hard to understand that sentiment. I'm not saying there isn't the odd crank locally here in Winnipeg who hates one of the home teams for one reason or another, but there is nothing like that Toronto factionalism. The vast majority of people here will at least nominally support all the home teams even if they only pay attention to a couple of them.

I can't think of another city in North America that has that dynamic except for the obvious intercity rivalries like Cubs vs. White Sox, Yankees vs. Mets, etc.
It's part of soccer culture to complain and wine just a little bit though, just comes with the territory.
If you've ever watched a soccer player drop to the turf in shear agony like the world has come to an end at the slightest altercation with an opponent soccer player, it sort of is more understandable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6208  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 9:39 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustForTheHalibut View Post
It's part of soccer culture to complain and wine just a little bit though, just comes with the territory.
If you've ever watched a soccer player drop to the turf in shear agony like the world has come to an end at the slightest altercation with an opponent soccer player, it sort of is more understandable.
…. And roll around grabbing their shin like they’ve been shot in the shin, only to stand up and run 10 seconds later…. A big turn off for me when watching soccer, I typically turn the channel to playoff hockey after I see that, and am quickly reminded of what warrior athletes can actually endure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6209  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 10:08 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 21,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post


It is very hard to understand that sentiment. I'm not saying there isn't the odd crank locally here in Winnipeg who hates one of the home teams for one reason or another, but there is nothing like that Toronto factionalism. The vast majority of people here will at least nominally support all the home teams even if they only pay attention to a couple of them.

I can't think of another city in North America that has that dynamic except for the obvious intercity rivalries like Cubs vs. White Sox, Yankees vs. Mets, etc.
Forumland tends to embellish the scale of love and hate extremes. With that said, Toronto is as divisive as anyplace for just about anything. It's quite ... too common for long time friendships to end over the most frivolous differences. Why wouldn't that extend to sports teams which shares much with either politics and/or religion? The soccer specific stadium being shared with the local football club not only makes practical sense but has operated seamlessly for the most part. Freezing temperatures during the MLS Final is a bigger issue. Sharing/ exploring commonalities to benefit each other isn't popular right now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6210  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 11:02 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper View Post
The soccer specific stadium being shared with the local football club not only makes practical sense but has operated seamlessly for the most part.
It's not a soccer specific stadium and was never meant to be that, right from the very beginning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6211  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2022, 11:32 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 elly63 View Post
It's not a soccer specific stadium and was never meant to be that, right from the very beginning.
From BMO Field's website:

Located at Exhibition Place in Toronto, BMO Field is Canada’s first soccer-specific stadium

https://www.bmofield.com/venue-information/history

I'm not sure what would ever make you think otherwise. Everything in the planning and approvals referred to it as a 'soccer stadium' in design and planning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6212  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2022, 1:30 AM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka View Post
From BMO Field's website:

Located at Exhibition Place in Toronto, BMO Field is Canada’s first soccer-specific stadium

https://www.bmofield.com/venue-information/history

I'm not sure what would ever make you think otherwise. Everything in the planning and approvals referred to it as a 'soccer stadium' in design and planning.
The minutes of city council that said it was to be "football ready". What next, the old football wrecks our sacred turf routine?

Edit: sorry I was relying on memory, the quote is "capable of a conversion to a football format." not "football ready" otherwise it stands.

2212015

Last edited by elly63; Jul 5, 2022 at 1:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6213  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2022, 1:45 AM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,889
BMO built with football in mind
DAVID NAYLOR theglobeandmail.com August 13, 2008

Toronto Argonauts co-owner Howard Sokolowski insists the notion that BMO Field was intended to be a soccer-specific stadium is incorrect.

And there appears to be evidence to back him up.

Toronto city council minutes from the fall of 2005, at which $9.8-million of city money was committed to the complex, note that the stadium proposed for the exhibition grounds was to be "capable of a conversion to a football format."

However, the 20,000-seat stadium, built initially for the FIFA U-20 World Cup soccer tournament last year, doesn't fit a regulation CFL field, making it unusable for the Argonauts as well as amateur football teams.

Now, as the Argos are in the process of surveying fan support for a potential move from the CFL team's home, the Rogers Centre, to BMO Field, there has been considerable push-back from soccer fans and Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, the owner of the stadium's primary occupant, Major League Soccer's Toronto FC.

"This is not a soccer-specific stadium," Sokolowski said yesterday. "It was built for soccer, but it clearly had an understanding that it was convertible for football and to be expanded to 30,000 seats. That's what city council voted on."

Sokolowski believes Mayor David Miller is doing his best to live up to council's promise of nearly three years ago, even though the stadium would require some reconstruction to accommodate a CFL field.

"The mayor has been very helpful," Sokolowski said. "He wants to please soccer and football fans together. There's no reason they can't coexist. This isn't the Hatfields and the McCoys, but I'm not sure [MLSE president]Richard Peddie feels that way.

"The mayor has told us a number of times that if the Toronto Argonauts want to come to BMO Field, he'll do all he can within the confines of his lease agreement with MLSE."

The lease agreement gives MLSE control of all stadium revenue streams, which are then shared with the city. Though the city might back a potential Argos request to be cut into some of the revenue streams, there's no indication MLSE would accommodate such a request.

It could also be argued that a stadium that requires construction to move stands to accommodate football does not necessarily meet the definition of "capable of conversion to a football format." But a spokesman for the Toronto mayor says it does.

"What we have is a $70-million public asset that is in the shape of a stadium," Stuart Green said. "The primary occupant is the game of soccer, and what council said [in 2005]is there has to be some compatibility option [for football]there.

"It has to be an option because that was built into the approval council gave. How that happens has to be worked out."

Sokolowski said the Argos have been willing to talk about that for some time, but are being put off by Peddie.

Peddie said this week that MLSE hadn't made up its mind whether to pursue stadium expansion to meet the current demand from Toronto FC fans.

"I had a meeting with Richard Peddie three or four months ago, and he informed me that in late August there may be a time to sit down and talk about what they want to see in the stadium expansion," Sokolowski said. "Now, I understand it's not on his radar screen. I spoke to Richard last week by e-mail and it's not a priority for him right now.

"Whether we could write a cheque [for stadium expansion]or help secure funds, I'm not sure. But the Toronto Argonauts could be part of making that happen."

Yesterday, Peddie said he had talked with Sokolowski, but called the topic of discussion "premature."

"It's not cheap to expand that building," Peddie said. "It's millions and millions of dollars. We haven't nailed down cost and determined if there's a return on investment, and won't for months. It's not a matter of accommodation.

"We're just not ready."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6214  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2022, 3:33 PM
thurmas's Avatar
thurmas thurmas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 7,598
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...mes-arena-deal

City councillor 'very optimistic' as efforts continue towards reviving Flames’ arena deal
A third-party intermediary is continuing talks with both city administration and the Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corporation

The City of Calgary is continuing to work toward a resolution with the Calgary Flames ownership group on the bumpy road to a new arena for the city.

Officials were tight-lipped on specifics after a two-hour closed-door meeting of the city’s events centre committee on Monday, though they said no formal negotiations with the Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corp. are currently taking place. The committee received a confidential update from staff on the progress made so far.

“I would say I’m very optimistic of where we’re at and where we’re going,” the committee chair, Coun. Sonya Sharp, told reporters after the meeting.

A third-party intermediary, the Event Centre Visioning Group, is continuing talks with both city administration and the Flames owners, eying a path back to the negotiation table. The group consists of three Calgary businessmen: John Fisher, CBRE executive vice-president; Guy Huntingford, NAIOP Calgary strategic director; and Phil Swift, Ayrshire Group executive chair.

The committee isn’t scheduled to meet again until September. Sharp said communications between all parties will continue throughout the summer in hopes of a larger update following the September meeting.

”It is really important that we do this right. We don’t want to see this fail,” she said.

The previous arena deal fell apart when the Flames pulled out of the project over cost increases, including a $16-million jump caused by environmental and infrastructure expenses. Initially planned to cost $550 million, with costs shared between the hockey team’s owners and the city, the price tag sat around $634 million when the deal expired at the end of December.

In January, council directed administration to look for new options for the project, including having a third party look for potential partners other than the Flames’ ownership.

harp said that so far, the only organization they’ve been in talks with is Calgary Sports and Entertainment.

“We’re focused on working with CSEC, rebuilding that relationship, and then the third party would work on the second part of the mandate,” she said.

Stuart Dalgliesh, Calgary’s planning and development manager, said the city is nearing a point it can release numbers on how much the failed deal cost the city.

“We are close to being able to know what the final figure is,” he said. ”As soon as we have a final number, we’ll make sure it’s available and brought to the public, to the committee and to council as soon as we can.”

There is currently no timeline for the new project’s completion nor any details on when designs and plans could be revealed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6215  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2022, 5:40 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by thurmas View Post
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...mes-arena-deal

City councillor 'very optimistic' as efforts continue towards reviving Flames’ arena deal
A third-party intermediary is continuing talks with both city administration and the Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corporation

The City of Calgary is continuing to work toward a resolution with the Calgary Flames ownership group on the bumpy road to a new arena for the city.

Officials were tight-lipped on specifics after a two-hour closed-door meeting of the city’s events centre committee on Monday, though they said no formal negotiations with the Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corp. are currently taking place. The committee received a confidential update from staff on the progress made so far.

“I would say I’m very optimistic of where we’re at and where we’re going,” the committee chair, Coun. Sonya Sharp, told reporters after the meeting.

A third-party intermediary, the Event Centre Visioning Group, is continuing talks with both city administration and the Flames owners, eying a path back to the negotiation table. The group consists of three Calgary businessmen: John Fisher, CBRE executive vice-president; Guy Huntingford, NAIOP Calgary strategic director; and Phil Swift, Ayrshire Group executive chair.

The committee isn’t scheduled to meet again until September. Sharp said communications between all parties will continue throughout the summer in hopes of a larger update following the September meeting.

”It is really important that we do this right. We don’t want to see this fail,” she said.

The previous arena deal fell apart when the Flames pulled out of the project over cost increases, including a $16-million jump caused by environmental and infrastructure expenses. Initially planned to cost $550 million, with costs shared between the hockey team’s owners and the city, the price tag sat around $634 million when the deal expired at the end of December.

In January, council directed administration to look for new options for the project, including having a third party look for potential partners other than the Flames’ ownership.

harp said that so far, the only organization they’ve been in talks with is Calgary Sports and Entertainment.

“We’re focused on working with CSEC, rebuilding that relationship, and then the third party would work on the second part of the mandate,” she said.

Stuart Dalgliesh, Calgary’s planning and development manager, said the city is nearing a point it can release numbers on how much the failed deal cost the city.

“We are close to being able to know what the final figure is,” he said. ”As soon as we have a final number, we’ll make sure it’s available and brought to the public, to the committee and to council as soon as we can.”

There is currently no timeline for the new project’s completion nor any details on when designs and plans could be revealed.
I tell ya, it's an Ottawa v. Calgary race to see who can get it done first, if at all.

Hope we both get there eventually.

Last edited by J.OT13; Jul 11, 2022 at 6:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6216  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2022, 6:16 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,770
Calgary's is progressing nicely I am hearing.
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6217  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2022, 5:06 AM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka View Post
From BMO Field's website:

Located at Exhibition Place in Toronto, BMO Field is Canada’s first soccer-specific stadium

https://www.bmofield.com/venue-information/history

I'm not sure what would ever make you think otherwise. Everything in the planning and approvals referred to it as a 'soccer stadium' in design and planning.

Yup, the Argo's technically have no home of their own. They may as well go back to varsity with their tiny fan base in Toronto.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6218  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2022, 12:57 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,325
* shouldn’t it read “was” Canada’s first soccer specific stadium. BMO is now the Argo’s home as much as it is TFC
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6219  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2022, 3:10 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 TorontoDrew View Post
Yup, the Argo's technically have no home of their own. They may as well go back to varsity with their tiny fan base in Toronto.
Argos haven't had a "home" stadium built for them in, like, a hundred years. Varsity wasn't built for them. Exhibition wasn't built for them. Skydome is the only real argument that could be had, but it sure looks more like a baseball stadium than a gridiron stadium. BMO wasn't built for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post
* shouldn’t it read “was” Canada’s first soccer specific stadium. BMO is now the Argo’s home as much as it is TFC
It's still Canada's first soccer specific stadium. Argos are definitely second-class citizens in that building -the schedule is an easy giveaway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6220  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2022, 4:42 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka View Post
Argos haven't had a "home" stadium built for them in, like, a hundred years. Varsity wasn't built for them. Exhibition wasn't built for them. Skydome is the only real argument that could be had, but it sure looks more like a baseball stadium than a gridiron stadium. BMO wasn't built for them.
True. Same can be said for half the other teams. BC, Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal. None of those stadium were necessarily built for them, rather Olympics, Commonwealth games, etc.

Quote:
It's still Canada's first soccer specific stadium. Argos are definitely second-class citizens in that building -the schedule is an easy giveaway.
Was it built, in its bare bones days, for national soccer or specifically TFC? I know the upgrades were certainly built for TFC. But it was also went through major Reno’s to accommodate the move in of the Argos, like removing stands to account for CFL deep end zones. I think just everybody made the mistake of assuming the Argos moving in to BMO would drastically increase their popularity. If that did actually go according to plan they would be considered a 1b tenant, still behind TFC of course, but not in the terms it is now… so definitely agree that Argos are behind TFC.
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 1:21 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.