Posted this over at CP, felt it's appropriate here as well:
According to McMahon Stadium society, they ran a redevelopment report back in 2012, and according to it $70-$90M would be enough to modernize the stadium. From the report, they've got these findings:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PLAYBOOK: McMahon Stadium Redevelopment Concepts Final Report (2012)
The stadium is in good general structural condition due to an annual maintenance program in the range of $200K per year (funds are provided from ongoing operations).
An investment of approximately $2.08M (current value based on capital escalation from 2015 construction estimates, ref. Morrison Hershfield Report) over the next four to five years would ensure the stadium structure and mechanical systems could provide service for another 25 to 30 years. A funding source has not been identified for this work.
An investment of approximately $36.7M (current value based on capital escalation from 2007 construction estimates, ref. CANNONDESIGN Report) for improvements to the existing concourse would improve user experience and address the majority of current user convenience issues. A funding source has not been identified for this work.
The McMahon Stadium Society has explored full modernization of the stadium, including: - new main entrance and lobby
- two levels of corporate boxes
- a hall of fame
- a new Stamps store
- booth/box/suite spectator amenities throughout the existing seating
- adding a south concourse level to replace the existing fieldhouse
- adding washrooms and meeting rooms
- providing pedestrian connectivity throughout entire stadium
Execution of all proposed amenities would represent an investment in the range of $69.4-89.2M (current value based on capital escalation from 2012 construction estimates, |
Now, further review would be necessary to validate the costs, but the report confirms that McMahon stadium still has life in it with proper TLC. Considering how frequently it gets used, and whom uses it, it does it's job.
The foundations of McMahon is fine, it just needs a lot of work done to it in features. Everything in the list above would help elevate it's status. I feel the only thing missing is replacing all of the seats to the same chair style. No benches or buckets.
I think when it comes to building a new stadium or just simply renovating McMahon, it'll come down to just how much more it would cost to build a new venue, and what is gained out of it. One thing that definitely would be beneficial to both the city and University of Calgary is the land that McMahon currently occupies. Even if they put the new stadium in the same area, but more south towards 16th, it'll make the area more developer friendly. Instead of having to build around the stadium, you have a whole squared out boundary to work with that can allow for the community to have unity due to proper building, street, and pathways layout.
However, the fieldhouse still needs to be built. The costs of building a new stadium on top of that, and also possibly chiping into the new Victoria Park/Stampede arena, and the city/other levels of government are investing too much money to accommodate CSEC. So a new stadium may be a bit much, and it's better off to renovate McMahon.
Unless the new stadium is also the new fieldhouse. Then you can kill three birds with one stone. New fieldhouse, new stadium, and all of the McMahon lands freed up for prime TOD development. I feel this is the option that will get serious consideration out of all. If it only costs an additional ~$100M to build the fieldhouse to stadium specs, then it'll be worth it rather than putting the money into McMahon, since it'll last longer and you don't have to deal with the constraints that redeveloping McMahon currently has. I feel this is what CSEC was hinting at with the CalgaryNEXT proposal. 'Even if we don't go with the original plan of combing the fieldhouse/stadium with the arena, keep in mind that fieldhouse and stadium can still be one of the same.'
But, the primary objective of the fieldhouse is to provide an indoor 400M track that meets IAAF standards, and is readily available for recreational, amateur, varsity, and national team athletes to use. Not only would the stamps have to occupy the building as little as possible, but the reclining seats cannot damage/wear down the track. The functionality of the fieldhouse and track cannot be compromised if the Stampeders are going to be tenants for their games and possibly practices (which take up a lot of time throughout the season).
So there will have to be a report after the arena ordeal gets figured out to confirm which option works that can accommodate everyone. If I was to call the shots here, I would go with combining the stadium with the fieldhouse, on the condition that CSEC builds a separate training facility to run their practices so then the track and field is only inaccessible for around gamedays. There would be cost-savings, and gains from TOD development of the McMahon Stadium lands.
Prev
Linear Mode
