Toronto Rogers Centre Renovations | ?m | ?s | Toronto Blue Jays | Populous

[ericmacm]

Next question is, do they go for an old school ball park or another retractable roof stadium? With our climate i would hope they go with the retractable roof. It's kind of nice buying tickets and not having to worry about a rain delay or rainout.

An indoor/outdoor stadium with windows opening up to the views of the city even when the roof is closed, would be fantastic.

Retractable-Roof-Ballparks, a better way to watch Baseball.

Retractable-Roof-Ballparks,.. After the transformation of the old wooden baseball stadiums to much more permanent structures, the baseball stadiums took on a life of their own.

www.aplussportsandmore-fanshop-baseballfield.com

]https://azbigmedia.com/lifestyle/experience-arizona/fans-chase-field-2017-season

I suspect they will most likely go for an open-air design. One of the biggest problems with retractable roof stadiums is maintenance costs, which can just keep getting more costly as the roof ages. They are a necessity in some climates, but I would say that they are mainly most appropriate for places that are too hot, as opposed to being more seasonal like Toronto.

What I could see them realistically going for is some kind of translucent canopy system for the seating as a sort of in-between solution to get some weather stability for spectators, while allowing for an open-air climate that permits a grass field.

 

[tstormers]

Why does everyone mention the Portlands
...my guess is a future ball park gets built at the Ex/Ontario Place

With the future Ontario line running to the Ex lands this seems possible...with a roof of course. and there is room for a grass growing area needed to play on a natural field.
Lots of options for sure in all these places.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

With the future Ontario line running to the Ex lands this seems possible...with a roof of course. and there is room for a grass growing area needed to play on a natural field.
Lots of options for sure in all these places.

There isn't much land left at the Ex - between X Hotel expansion and the need for the remaining space to stay open for CNE.

AoD

 

[ADRM]

The mention of the Sidewalk lands as an alternative struck me as something of a red herring, as I don't believe there's nearly enough space to build a baseball stadium. Obviously, there's huge appeal to the Jays finding an alternative site (one that is neither Sahlen Field, in Buffalo, nor their training complex in Dunedin) on which to build anew, rather than tearing down and rebuilding in place, from both a financial perspective and in the sense that they're trying to lure free agents who probably don't want to be spending years playing at an alternate facility.

I feel like we don't yet know important parts of the story, including what Rogers' ultimate ideal game plan is here.

 

[Northern Light]

So, I engaged in a preliminary exercise on the site of examining its dimensions.

I then compared those to Comerica Park, Yankee Stadium and Camden Yards.

In comparing, the current foot print is actually smaller than Yankee stadium (just a bit), similar in size to Comerica; but larger than Camden by about 30000ft2

That doesn't seem to create much room, unless the new towers were integrated with zero separation into one of the stadium walls.

You could possibly extend the footprint the west where a low-rise building attached to the adjacent condo exists; but I don't know that gives a critical mass of space, because that site has a shorter N-S cross-section than the Dome.

Even with a modified orientation it would be hard to pick up enough new space to make something else at scale work.

There is the park space to the east, but I don't see that being up for grabs.

That leaves only 2 options, that I can discern.

1) Expand the footprint to the north over the rail corridor.

Obviously pricey and may conflict with a park/public space vision.

2) Expand the foot print south; on the south side of Bremner there is parking and a pumping station that could likely be built over.

However, doing so would either require building over top of Bremner, or bending Bremner further south to add to the contiguous footprint to the north.

****

I don't see a lot of practical options for the volume of development being mooted.

I can find space for 1 tower fairly easily, anything more gets complicated and expensive.

 

[bmiller]

This is obviously many years away, but the fact that it is being pursued is a positive thing. Rated as the second worse stadium to play ball in is an indication it's due date is up. Real grass, smaller seating capacity, better sight lines.
All with private money and no grovelling for taxpayer cash, at least for now. Federal land could be a sticky point.

 

[syn]

I hope this isn't true.

The building is certainly far from perfect, but when it opened just 30 years ago it was considered a technological marvel. The 1st of its kind, designed and built in Toronto. Probably the last of an era when Toronto tried to be at the worldwide forefront of infrastructure innovation.

We frequently point out how bad we are at recognizing/retaining our history. This would be yet another example of us failing to do that.

After all this time I would've loved to see a proposal for updating the current structure.

 

[ADRM]

2) Expand the foot print south; on the south side of Bremner there is parking and a pumping station that could likely be built over.

However, doing so would either require building over top of Bremner, or bending Bremner further south to add to the contiguous footprint to the north.

From the G&M article: "The partners would build a new, baseball-focused stadium on the foundations of the southern end of the current facility and adjacent parking lots. The northern portion of the 12.7-acre site would be turned into residential towers, office buildings, stores and public space."

I'd assumed that meant that Bremner would either be significantly rerouted, or perhaps more likely, made noncontiguous.

 

[themarc]

Being able to bury Bremner under a new stadium might reopen the possibility of running a streetcar into Union from that direction.

Great idea.

 

[svguy]

So, I engaged in a preliminary exercise on the site of examining its dimensions.

I then compared those to Comerica Park, Yankee Stadium and Camden Yards.

In comparing, the current foot print is actually smaller than Yankee stadium (just a bit), similar in size to Comerica; but larger than Camden by about 30000ft2

That doesn't seem to create much room, unless the new towers were integrated with zero separation into one of the stadium walls.

You could possibly extend the footprint the west where a low-rise building attached to the adjacent condo exists; but I don't know that gives a critical mass of space, because that site has a shorter N-S cross-section than the Dome.

Even with a modified orientation it would be hard to pick up enough new space to make something else at scale work.

There is the park space to the east, but I don't see that being up for grabs.

That leaves only 2 options, that I can discern.

1) Expand the footprint to the north over the rail corridor.

Obviously pricey and may conflict with a park/public space vision.

2) Expand the foot print south; on the south side of Bremner there is parking and a pumping station that could likely be built over.

However, doing so would either require building over top of Bremner, or bending Bremner further south to add to the contiguous footprint to the north.

****

I don't see a lot of practical options for the volume of development being mooted.

I can find space for 1 tower fairly easily, anything more gets complicated and expensive.

Or maybe they straighten Bremner and build the stadium on the south side of the street (over the parking lot and pumping station) and build the retail, residential, and office on the north side

 

[smably]

2) Expand the foot print south; on the south side of Bremner there is parking and a pumping station that could likely be built over.

However, doing so would either require building over top of Bremner, or bending Bremner further south to add to the contiguous footprint to the north.

My assumption was that they were talking about expanding south. The article is vague but has this quote mentioning parking lots:

The partners would build a new, baseball-focused stadium on the foundations of the southern end of the current facility and adjacent parking lots. The northern portion of the 12.7-acre site would be turned into residential towers, office buildings, stores and public space.

The only "adjacent parking lots" I see are south of Bremner. I don't know how feasible it would be to build over (or realign?) Bremner, but that seems like the only feasible option given the space available.

 

[themarc]

They say it would be built "on the foundations" of the current structure. Perhaps they will build the "southern portion" of the stadium in the preceding time and then between seasons demo the southern part of Skydome and build the "outfield" section as the following season begins.

That or Toronto plays in the Big Owe for part of a year. They would draw well in Montreal and not screw up any TV revenues.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

My assumption was that they were talking about expanding south. The article is vague but has this quote mentioning parking lots:

The only "adjacent parking lots" I see are south of Bremner. I don't know how feasible it would be to build over (or realign?) Bremner, but that seems like the only feasible option given the space available.

I imagine there is enough space to leave Bremner mostly as is - a lot of the structure at the northern end is unnecessary (the hotel and the structure for the roof tracks)

AoD

 

[Riseth]

Huge disappointment if this come true. Skydome was never perfect but it's iconic and has been a huge part of the city and our skyline for over 30 years. If it's really that outdated just repurpose it and find a way to keep it for something else. Might as well tear down the CN Tower next to build more condos

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

In the end, there's going to be a massive alteration to our skyline with the removal of this an iconic structure. This is not about adding a massive load of skyscrapers to our waterfront over the years - that change in progress is much more subtle than this. But something that's graced postcards, promotions, etc in the mediums that promote and branded this city for decades now. So love it or hate it, the tearing down of this ballpark is going to leave a big hole in our skyline unless something comparable is constructed quickly in it's place.

...it's almost up there with removing the CN Tower, IMO.