Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

I hope the Jays share this mentality.

That would be nice. But what they have to do is more than what can be done in 6 month off season blocks I think. Depends on what Rogers decides needs to get done I guess. Seems crazy to think that since the dome opened, there have been 2 other MLB parks built that have been replaced already.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

That would be nice. But what they have to do is more than what can be done in 6 month off season blocks I think. Depends on what Rogers decides needs to get done I guess. Seems crazy to think that since the dome opened, there have been 2 other MLB parks built that have been replaced already.

I mean, it is 31 years old.

Major League Baseball has replaced most of their venues in that timespan.

I can only think of a handful of places that haven't been replaced:

Fenway Park
Wrigley Field
Dodger Stadium
Angel Stadium
Oakland Coliseum
Kauffman Stadium

That being said, I can't see Rogers giving up on a good location they got for a steal very easily. Even if they could get the province/city to pony up some cash (unlikely with currently shattered government finances), they'd still be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars, given that a new ball stadium goes for $500+ million.

It would not surprise me to see SkyDome go for another 30-50 years. Sure, it might rank low on the "MLB stadium rankings' that every sports columnist cranks out once and awhile, but those lists inherently have the flaw of forcing someone to be last, no matter how good the stadiums may be. The stadium experience is far better today than in days past, aside from maybe the price of beer.

[isaidso]

The black looks a ton better. That silver tin can roof they had looked cheap right from the get go. Glad it's gone/covered up.

[ericmacm]

It'll be interesting to see what solution Rogers and the Blue Jays will come up with for the Skydome. I don't think that they'll move sites, because the location can't possibly be any better. I remember hearing about Brookfield being involved in talks with Rogers and the city about the future of the dome, which I think would bode well for a major overhaul with lots of private money involved.

Whatever they come up with will be interesting. I suspect that the involvement of private money outside of Rogers will come at a cost, with that cost being the integration of mixed-use real estate assets to offset the renovation and produce a more diverse revenue stream for the site, similarly to Barclays Center in New York, or Rogers Place in Vancouver. I would not be surprised to see a couple of sleek office towers integrated into the footprint of the dome, at the cost of the retractable roof.

[Corndogger]

Saddledome needs $48M+ in repairs but most work may never happen

Condition report spells out big problems for aging arena, including deteriorating roof

...

A building condition assessment report from December 2018 obtained by CBC News under Alberta's Freedom of Information legislation concluded the Saddledome needs $48.7 million in repair work over the coming decade.

...

The report breaks the needed work into seven categories, and details the cost for each over 10 years. Here are the estimates, rounded up:

• Architectural, $33.8 million.
• Building envelope, $1.7 million.
• Structural, $3.1 million.
• Mechanical, $3.5 million.
• Refrigeration system, $1.7 million.
• Electrical, $4.9 million.
• Elevator, $90,000.

...

Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...roof-1.5637461

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by wave46

I mean, it is 31 years old.

Major League Baseball has replaced most of their venues in that timespan.

I can only think of a handful of places that haven't been replaced:

Yes, but what I meant was 2 of the new stadiums that opened since the dome have already been replaced themselves. Atlanta opened their new stadium in 1997 after the Olympics, and moved into another new stadium a couple years ago. Texas Rangers opened theirs in the early 90's and are moving into another new one this year.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Yes, but what I meant was 2 of the new stadiums that opened since the dome have already been replaced themselves. Atlanta opened their new stadium in 1997 after the Olympics, and moved into another new stadium a couple years ago. Texas Rangers opened theirs in the early 90's and are moving into another new one this year.

In particular, Georgia is noted for replacing their sports facilities very often. IMO much more than needed, especially that the ownership runs to the taxpayer trough for their new toy.

Outside of Oakland Coliseum and maybe Tropicana Field, I don't see another big wave of baseball field construction for a long time. There was a huge wave of replacements in the 1990s and 2000s as the multipurpose stadium thing ended.

In Canada, the multipurpose stadium is the only way to go. I can't see governments getting on board with a baseball-only stadium in Toronto or Montreal, especially one that would essentially be a big handout to Rogers.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by wave46

In particular, Georgia is noted for replacing their sports facilities very often. IMO much more than needed, especially that the ownership runs to the taxpayer trough for their new toy.

Outside of Oakland Coliseum and maybe Tropicana Field, I don't see another big wave of baseball field construction for a long time. There was a huge wave of replacements in the 1990s and 2000s as the multipurpose stadium thing ended.

In Canada, the multipurpose stadium is the only way to go. I can't see governments getting on board with a baseball-only stadium in Toronto or Montreal, especially one that would essentially be a big handout to Rogers.

Baseball and football need separate stadiums unless you're okay with a significant number of seats providing a very suboptimal fan experience. I'm not saying that governments should pay for these stadiums just that multipurpose stadiums are not ideal from a fan perspective and often from a player perspective as well.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by wave46

In Canada, the multipurpose stadium is the only way to go.

Depends on what kind of multipurpose you're referencing. Gridiron and soccer? Sure. Baseball and....literally anything else? Not really. The ship has sailed on multipurpose baseball stadiums.

If the Jays can't get the Rogers Centre location figured out I still think their next best bet is Ontario Place. I'm not 100% sure what the redevelopment potential is of the mostly concrete Rogers Centre.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Baseball and football need separate stadiums unless you're okay with a significant number of seats providing a very suboptimal fan experience. I'm not saying that governments should pay for these stadiums just that multipurpose stadiums are not ideal from a fan perspective and often from a player perspective as well.

Obviously a subjective question, but I always found this issue dramatically overstated. It seemed like multipurpose stadiums were fine until all of a sudden in the early 90s they weren't. But that said, multipurpose stadiums aren't really relevant in Canada since the only city that requires a large baseball stadium is Toronto...

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Saddledome needs $48M+ in repairs but most work may never happen

Condition report spells out big problems for aging arena, including deteriorating roof

...

A building condition assessment report from December 2018 obtained by CBC News under Alberta's Freedom of Information legislation concluded the Saddledome needs $48.7 million in repair work over the coming decade.

...

The report breaks the needed work into seven categories, and details the cost for each over 10 years. Here are the estimates, rounded up:

• Architectural, $33.8 million.
• Building envelope, $1.7 million.
• Structural, $3.1 million.
• Mechanical, $3.5 million.
• Refrigeration system, $1.7 million.
• Electrical, $4.9 million.
• Elevator, $90,000.

...

Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...roof-1.5637461

Good thing they are going to tear it down in about 5 years.

Now that our hockey arena situation is sorted, I wonder what the plan is for McMahon. Sadly yet another renovation I assume...

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Good thing they are going to tear it down in about 5 years.

Now that our hockey arena situation is sorted, I wonder what the plan is for McMahon. Sadly yet another renovation I assume...

McMahon might get a concourse upgrade along with a few other things. IIRC an estimate floating around pegged the overall cost at around $70 million but nothing was even close to being decided on. CalgaryNEXT would have been a perfect project if they had a better location for it.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

McMahon might get a concourse upgrade along with a few other things. IIRC an estimate floating around pegged the overall cost at around $70 million but nothing was even close to being decided on. CalgaryNEXT would have been a perfect project if they had a better location for it.

I would agree that Victoria Park is a better location because it's closer to the municipal/cultural/entertainment hub of Calgary, and it's served by both the Ctrain's Red Line (main transit line in the city) and eventually the Green Line, but West Village where CalgaryNext was proposed would still have been a very good location.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Depends on what kind of multipurpose you're referencing. Gridiron and soccer? Sure. Baseball and....literally anything else? Not really. The ship has sailed on multipurpose baseball stadiums.

If the Jays can't get the Rogers Centre location figured out I still think their next best bet is Ontario Place. I'm not 100% sure what the redevelopment potential is of the mostly concrete Rogers Centre.

With the odd exception don't most MSL teams have their own stadiums or are in the process of building one? Unless the teams are owned by the same group they want to have total control over all of the revenue sources a stadium generates.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I would agree that Victoria Park is a better location because it's closer to the municipal/cultural/entertainment hub of Calgary, and it's served by both the Ctrain's Red Line (main transit line in the city) and eventually the Green Line, but West Village where CalgaryNext was proposed would still have been a very good location.

The location the Flames wanted was perfectly fine but politically it was a no-go. There was also that "toxic" waste cleanup issue to deal with. It should be dealt with anyway but for some reason only became a life and death issue when CalgaryNEXT was proposed.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

With the odd exception don't most MSL teams have their own stadiums or are in the process of building one? Unless the teams are owned by the same group they want to have total control over all of the revenue sources a stadium generates.

Yeah, for the most part, MLS are purpose built. You do have the odd exception as you say, Seattle, New England, Altanta I beleive. I think there is one that uses Yankee Stadium, unless they got their own place now. Vancouver of course, I would say Toronto except that was built for them and then football came later.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by esquire

Obviously a subjective question, but I always found this issue dramatically overstated. It seemed like multipurpose stadiums were fine until all of a sudden in the early 90s they weren't. But that said, multipurpose stadiums aren't really relevant in Canada since the only city that requires a large baseball stadium is Toronto...

I suspect the multipurpose thing was less the issue and the lack of luxury boxes/features was. That, and how the revenue was allocated. SkyDome doesn't have those problems.

That being said, the multipurpose stadium is a better thing for Canada simply because it is a venue that can accommodate a wide variety of events. Montreal and Vancouver hosted the Olympics, CFL football and concerts. Toronto got baseball, the CFL and concerts at SkyDome.

At this juncture, Vancouver and Montreal really don't need their respective multipurpose stadiums, but since they're built, why not keep them? Admittedly, the CFL is using BC Place, but I don't think it's the optimal venue for the Lions.

As for Toronto, a baseball-only stadium would be a step backwards IMO, unless they go whole-hog and build another with a retractable roof. As much as aesthetics are a thing (newer ballparks have that baseball 'feel', yes) it's hard to overcome SkyDome's inherent advantages.

Since Rogers is the only arbiter of what they need, I can't see them dumping a pile of money into a new field. Better to spend the money on the Jays' payroll with better chance of long-term benefit. The Marlins spent a pile on their new stadium and they're at the bottom attendance-wise.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

With the odd exception don't most MSL teams have their own stadiums or are in the process of building one? Unless the teams are owned by the same group they want to have total control over all of the revenue sources a stadium generates.

Yeah, it's pretty much a requirement for expansion teams at this point.

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Yeah, for the most part, MLS are purpose built. You do have the odd exception as you say, Seattle, New England, Altanta I beleive. I think there is one that uses Yankee Stadium, unless they got their own place now. Vancouver of course, I would say Toronto except that was built for them and then football came later.

Seattle, New England, Atlanta, and soon Chicago will be playing in NFL stadiums. I believe Charlotte is going to be playing out of their NFL stadium as well, whereas Nashville will be playing for a short time at Nissan before building their own. NYCFC still play at Yankee because getting anything built in NY is next to impossible, but there are still plans for a soccer specific in the near future. The crop of soccer stadiums in the US now is far better than what it was only a decade ago, and the same could be said for Canada as well, just on a smaller scale.

[J.OT13]

Baseball is the only major league sport where a purpose built stadium is warranted IMO. With a minimum of 81 games per year, maybe a few concerts, that's pretty solid, considering that in the northern U.S. and in Canada, you can really only use it half the year. Plus, it's hard to adapt the stadium for any other sport (football, soccer, rugby) because of it's an odd shape and quite a lot of trouble to convert, even if just 10-20 times a year.

For soccer and football, multi-purpose is the only logical way forward. A billion dollars of tax payer's money for eight NFL games per year? $200-$500 million for 17 MLS games per year? $100-$300 million for 9 CFL games? That ridiculous.

For hockey and basketball, as indoor venues, you want to try and use it at least 100 times per year to make it worth it. Scotiabank arena, for me, seems like a raging success because it's booked almost every night. It can be difficult to adapt an arena for both hockey and basketball (see Barclay's), but Toronto seems to have found a good formula (correct me if I'm wrong Torontonians).

[esquire]

Originally Posted by wave46

I suspect the multipurpose thing was less the issue and the lack of luxury boxes/features was. That, and how the revenue was allocated. SkyDome doesn't have those problems.

You're right. The old crop of multipurpose stadiums were typically owned by public authorities and team owners didn't get much if any of the proceeds from concessions, parking, etc. There were little if any premium seating areas like suites and club seats to make money from.

Of course, that's a pretty flimsy set of arguments to justify public dollars for new venue construction, so naturally the owners had to pump up the fan angle... they had to "teach" the fans that the venues they were fine with were in fact grossly inadequate and had to be replaced, etc. Not surprisingly, many people bought it.