Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Seems like would be similar to a BC place style renovation. I think with the reconfigured lowe bowl renovation squared off for soccer and cfl football and maybe similar upper deck curtains like bc place would be a good 30,000 seat stadium for cfl and mls as it is directly at a subway station and alouettes and cf offices are already there and it gives the big o a purpose for the first time in decades.

I know Saputo is not old, but if Olympic Stadium works out, it might be worth demolishing it in order to build an small entertainment district.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I know Saputo is not old, but if Olympic Stadium works out, it might be worth demolishing it in order to build an small entertainment district.

Would be a good idea as the area is a dead zone for entertainment outside the stadium

[elly63]

In my mind, aside from a new stadium, this Olympic Stadium plan is the only option and one I wouldn't mind seeing.

But there are three issues with that plan: One, the cost. $750 million seems likely for a total interior rebuild, and as much as I would like to see that done they could build an all new relatively small domed stadium (25-30k) seats for less than 600 million possibly 500 million.

Two, It is vitally important for both sports to have the seats as close to the action as possible, does this plan account for that?

Three, this is the elephant in the room. Parc Olympique will still control the stadium which is what neither Saputo or Peledeau want. Unless there can be some sort of agreement for more favourable terms than Saputo has at Saputo Stadium, this all would be unlikely.

[elly63]

Looking at the date on the article got me to thinking, too early for an April Fools joke?

BTW, thanks Acajack for posting that. Always fun to see a story like that and dream of what might be.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by elly63

In my mind, aside from a new stadium, this Olympic Stadium plan is the only option and one I wouldn't mind seeing.

But there are three issues with that plan: One, the cost. $750 million seems likely for a total interior rebuild, and as much as I would like to see that done they could build an all new relatively small domed stadium (25-30k) seats for less than 600 million possibly 500 million.

Two, It is vitally important for both sports to have the seats as close to the action as possible, does this plan account for that?

Three, this is the elephant in the room. Parc Olympique will still control the stadium which is what neither Saputo or Peledeau want. Unless there can be some sort of agreement for more favourable terms than Saputo has at Saputo Stadium, this all would be unlikely.

$750 million is still cheaper than demolishing the place, apparently. If the option is abandon it or invest $750 million, I'd vote for the latter. At the same time, it's pointless without a (or two) tenants. Parc Olympique needs to negotiate with Péladeau and Saputo before getting this project off the ground.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by elly63

Parc Olympique will still control the stadium which is what neither Saputo or Peledeau want. Unless there can be some sort of agreement for more favourable terms than Saputo has at Saputo Stadium, this all would be unlikely.

Why would the Olympic Board not wash their hands? Just head lease the thing.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

$750 million is still cheaper than demolishing the place, apparently. If the option is abandon it or invest $750 million, I'd vote for the latter. At the same time, it's pointless without a (or two) tenants. Parc Olympique needs to negotiate with Péladeau and Saputo before getting this project off the ground.

You posted before I could correct my post. I misread the 750 million figure, it was $750,000 for the replacement of the artificial turf. However $750 million would not be out of order for a rebuild like this, thinking back to BC Place and it's interior and exterior refurbishments.

Tearing it down, while the tower is full and doing well is not an option. The $700 million figure for disassembling the building is from the info I posted from Parc Olympique which some say is inflated.

[Acajack]

I think we may have passed the point where CFL (and also MLS) clubs forgo larger stadiums and wait it out or insist for right-sized stadiums.

Vancouver and Edmonton are in the 20-25,000 range and they play in stadiums that can hold twice as many people, and no one dies as a result.

It wouldn't be a big deal if the Alouettes and CF Montréal played in the renovated Big O even if they never sell it out.

This is common in sports all over the world.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think we may have passed the point where CFL (and also MLS) clubs forgo larger stadiums and wait it out or insist for right-sized stadiums.

Vancouver and Edmonton are in the 20-25,000 range and they play in stadiums that can hold twice as many people, and no one dies as a result.

It wouldn't be a big deal if the Alouettes and CF Montréal played in the renovated Big O even if they never sell it out.

This is common in sports all over the world.

Agreed gotta make due with what we have. Stadiums like coors field in Denver or progressive in Cleveland and the White Sox ballpark in Chicago show right-sizing if done well can work. Even the clever tarps and boards that the Sokolowski Argos owners did in the early 2000s with Rogers centre worked pretty good using various Argos legends and previous logos to cover up parts of the unused upper deck seats very well.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Agreed gotta make due with what we have. Stadiums like coors field in Denver or progressive in Cleveland and the White Sox ballpark in Chicago show right-sizing if done well can work. Even the clever tarps and boards that the Sokolowski Argos owners did in the early 2000s with Rogers centre worked pretty good using various Argos legends and previous logos to cover up parts of the unused upper deck seats very well.

New stadium design (either new builds or renovations) is also much more adaptable in this respect, than in the past.

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

$750 million is still cheaper than demolishing the place, apparently. If the option is abandon it or invest $750 million, I'd vote for the latter. At the same time, it's pointless without a (or two) tenants. Parc Olympique needs to negotiate with Péladeau and Saputo before getting this project off the ground.

I understand why Montreal passed on hosting the 2026 World Cup, but I imagine there's a few city officials who see that $750 million pricetag and lament the federal dollars that could have been.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

I understand why Montreal passed on hosting the 2026 World Cup, but I imagine there's a few city officials who see that $750 million pricetag and lament the federal dollars that could have been.

Can also be the provincial government has better fiscal capacity then it did 12-18 months ago and with the Alouettes ownership issues cleared up it gives them a clearer picture of who they are working with an more confidence when its a combo of peladeau and saputo that they have stable partners for the next 15 to 20 years for possible tenants.

[thurmas]

1985 Grey Cup here to me the Big O is a lot better when open air the roof makes the place so dark and foreboding. The place needs light.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWPIdsiSB-I

[elly63]

Originally Posted by thurmas

1985 Grey Cup here to me the Big O is a lot better when open air the roof makes the place so dark and foreboding. The place needs light.

The place is no good without the roof, they need the winter dates, you can't just give up 100+ days you could have potentially booked. That's why they want the roof.

If they knock out some interior walls as they are suggesting and add LED lights, the place should be brighter. Also they have looked at a translucent roof solution.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Can also be the provincial government has better fiscal capacity then it did 12-18 months ago and with the Alouettes ownership issues cleared up it gives them a clearer picture of who they are working with an more confidence when its a combo of peladeau and saputo that they have stable partners for the next 15 to 20 years for possible tenants.

I am thinking that Parc Olympique plan was done a long time ago, certainly not since Peledeau came on the scene. That plan had nothing to do with Saputo or Peledeau but now becomes relevant because of the changed landscape.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

I understand why Montreal passed on hosting the 2026 World Cup, but I imagine there's a few city officials who see that $750 million pricetag and lament the federal dollars that could have been.

There is no $750 million that was a mistake I made.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by elly63

The place is no good without the roof, they need the winter dates, you can't just give up 100+ days you could have potentially booked. That's why they want the roof.

If they knock out some interior walls as they are suggesting and add LED lights, the place should be brighter. Also they have looked at a translucent roof solution.

Do large stadiums attract a lot of business beyond sports? In Ottawa, not much happens beyond the CFL and CPL. Maybe a concert, if that. And it's not like the stadium isn't available for the vast majority of the summer. Tbf, it's not much bigger than our NHL arena (though far better location). The 10k Civic Centre gets way more action.

How does the Skydome, BC Place fair in terms of events outside sports, winter and summer? What about Commenwealth, Mosaic, IG Field in summer/fall?

[thurmas]

My understanding was olympic stadium is closed December to March due to safety concerns over the roof and heavy snowfall cannot hold events there due to safety concerns? That's why I don't understand keeping the roof if it cannot really be used.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thurmas

My understanding was olympic stadium is closed December to March due to safety concerns over the roof and heavy snowfall cannot hold events there due to safety concerns? That's why I don't understand keeping the roof if it cannot really be used.

They do have large trade shows and other events there over the course of the year. So even in spring, summer and fall, you need a roof for that.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Acajack

They do have large trade shows and other events there over the course of the year. So even in spring, summer and fall, you need a roof for that.

Do they still? I thought many moved to the Palais after the uncertainty due to the roof over the years.