mdu
Active Member
God, the only thing worse than getting public money to build a new stadium is to use the money to keep it there.
Toronto Rogers Centre Renovations | ?m | ?s | Toronto Blue Jays | Populous
- Thread starter buildup
- Start date
SubHuman
Active Member
Has there ever been any big or moderately-sized sports or entertainment venue that has succeeded in the GTA suburbs?
Those junior hockey arenas in Brampton and Mississauga have been largely ignored, as was the Leafs attempt at having their AHL team (now the Marlies) in Newmarket. I guess The Kingswood Music Theatre briefly did okay for a couple of years when it opened in the 1980s, but it was quickly forgotten and abandoned after the new downtown venues were built.
Last edited:
Bogtrotter
Senior Member
It seems like there is a similar love/hate situation with the Houston Astrodome- the so called "eight wonder of the world" and first domed multi-purpose stadium. Also a massive bunker the cost of the demo was much exaggerated in a campaign to keep it- which would have been the most expensive in US history. A 2013 referendum to renovate was rejected because of the cost, and subsequent schemes to utilize the space have fallen through. It still sits empty with the major sports team long gone. Not sure who is paying to keep it running- but I can guess.
gabe
Senior Member
Yep people like to drink before, during and after the games like me. Those restaurants around the dome are packed during game day. Especially the year the Jays made the playoffs. From the Eaton Centre to Front street, every bar and restaurant was flooded with Jays fans. I 'm a big jays fan, i don't own a car, i would think twice about going to a game, if i have to drive or have a long commute on the TTC. I have never drove to the dome. I remember as a kid going to Jays games, living way out in the burbs, my dad and I always took the GO train into the downtown for Jays games. Now the subway goes out to Vaughan, even less people are driving to the games or other events at the Rogers Centre.
SubHuman
Active Member
A replacement for an airport that close to downtown? I don't see how that would ever be possible, other than a hugely expensive project to build a new one on reclaimed land even farther out into Lake Ontario.
The next closest airstrip is Downsview, which won't be there much longer. The land has already been sold, and I don't think it was ever proposed as an airport for passengers with a terminal that would have had to be constructed. It has a longer runway than the Island Airport, and Bombardier had one of their C Series (now Airbus A220) jet airliners land there once, but it was purely a demonstration event.
C Series makes first visit to Toronto - Skies Mag
On Sept. 9, Bombardier’s CS100 flight test vehicle five visited Bombardier's DeHavilland Site at Toronto Downsview Airport for an employee and media event.
www.skiesmag.com
Last edited:
ericmacm
Active Member
Let's face it - renovations to the Skydome would have been announced already if they were viable. The decision to pivot to demolition and new construction has not come out of nowhere. The desire for a major overhaul has been present for at least a decade. In 2015, the major reason that the Blue Jays hired Mark Shapiro as president was because of his work in renovating Progressive Field. Even over the last few years prior to 2020 (when Brookfield became involved), there were many renovation discussions/rumours, including plans for real grass, translucent roof panels, rotating the entire field to line up with the CN Tower, and realigning the seating to better improve the baseball experience. These are not insignificant renovations and would involve changing the fundamental structure of the Dome.
At this point, it is abundantly clear that renovations to bring the Dome to where Rogers/Blue Jays/MLB want it are going to be incredibly costly. I would not be surprised if the renovations to the Dome would end up in a $1-1.5B range. While demolition costs will undoubtedly be expensive, renovation will most certainly be even more so. While it will be impossible to know the actual numbers until the plan emerges publicly, the shift in tone over the past 5 years shows that the original plans would not be as cost-effective, and that demolition and reconstruction will be the way to move forward. Despite what many may think, these multibillion dollar companies absolutely understand the costs of what they are planning here.
There is also little to no chance that they have gotten this far without consulting with the City or the federal government. Again, this hasn't come out of nowhere. Even with the originally planned renovations, they have been in discussions with the City. I highly doubt that the City would be taken by surprise at the news and end up pivoting to be fully against Rogers' plans. There is no way that the City wouldn't support this, especially if Rogers/Brookfield will be financing the whole thing privately.
It is really great that so many people have fond memories at/of the Dome, but it has grown obsolete. This is just what happens in the sports world. Yes, I will agree that the demolition of stadiums every 30 years or so is quite wasteful (if I had to guess, the Dome will probably be around 35 by the time all of this goes into motion), but that does not necessarily mean that we should keep the Dome around forever. Stadiums like the Dome are meant to be a lot more than just an iconic ornament to a skyline view. Rogers will, either here or at another site, build a new ballpark, but that will leave the Dome with no tenants at all, leaving it empty to sit and rot. The Argos will most certainly be staying at BMO, if the CFL even survives into the future. There will be no NFL team coming to Toronto (they would also 100% ask for a brand new stadium if they ever did). It will be a very long time before Toronto puts in another Olympic bid, but they would probably just want build a new stadium anyway.
There is no future for the Dome and people have to accept that.
At this point, it is abundantly clear that renovations to bring the Dome to where Rogers/Blue Jays/MLB want it are going to be incredibly costly. I would not be surprised if the renovations to the Dome would end up in a $1-1.5B range. While demolition costs will undoubtedly be expensive, renovation will most certainly be even more so. While it will be impossible to know the actual numbers until the plan emerges publicly, the shift in tone over the past 5 years shows that the original plans would not be as cost-effective, and that demolition and reconstruction will be the way to move forward. Despite what many may think, these multibillion dollar companies absolutely understand the costs of what they are planning here.
There is also little to no chance that they have gotten this far without consulting with the City or the federal government. Again, this hasn't come out of nowhere. Even with the originally planned renovations, they have been in discussions with the City. I highly doubt that the City would be taken by surprise at the news and end up pivoting to be fully against Rogers' plans. There is no way that the City wouldn't support this, especially if Rogers/Brookfield will be financing the whole thing privately.
It is really great that so many people have fond memories at/of the Dome, but it has grown obsolete. This is just what happens in the sports world. Yes, I will agree that the demolition of stadiums every 30 years or so is quite wasteful (if I had to guess, the Dome will probably be around 35 by the time all of this goes into motion), but that does not necessarily mean that we should keep the Dome around forever. Stadiums like the Dome are meant to be a lot more than just an iconic ornament to a skyline view. Rogers will, either here or at another site, build a new ballpark, but that will leave the Dome with no tenants at all, leaving it empty to sit and rot. The Argos will most certainly be staying at BMO, if the CFL even survives into the future. There will be no NFL team coming to Toronto (they would also 100% ask for a brand new stadium if they ever did). It will be a very long time before Toronto puts in another Olympic bid, but they would probably just want build a new stadium anyway.
There is no future for the Dome and people have to accept that.
Bogtrotter
Senior Member
In terms of attendance the central downtown location is definitely more advantageous. Other ballclubs have even pointed to Toronto when deciding on relocating their venues- that is one thing they did get right.
MetroMan
Senior Member
Thats a trick question. We don’t need an airport downtown. We have a major international airport that is connected to downtown via a 25 min train. It can sometimes take longer than that to get a cab from Bathurst Quay to the financial district In Toronto traffic.
While I‘d like to see the SkyDome remain and don’t believe it‘ll be demolished given the cost, I understand the Jays’ needs aren’t being met. A ballpark on the site of Billy Bishop airport would be perfect. It’s well connected by transit (waterfront LRT) and the tunnel allows pedestrian access without a bridge. Replace the elevator on the mainland side with a ramp or escalators, emerging on the other side in the new ballpark’s concourse.
Bogtrotter
Senior Member
It would be a good location, and the earlier point about the orientation of the field in the Portlands is a good one. However I'm not sure funneling 30,000- 40,000 people through the tunnel is going to work well. There would need to be better connectivity. I do like the idea though but I really doubt the airport is going anywhere and see it more likely the dome is demolished. Undoubtedly expensive but not prohibitive. I believe the estimate for the Astrodome was a maximum of 78M- which was considered by some as an inflated figure.
EddyMCD
Active Member
I looked at this some more trying to figure out if they could actually demo and build in place (without re-locating the team), or if that is just a red herring. I think it's mostly not possible, but if they were to do it here's what would have to happen. I don't really think this is feasible.
1. During an offseason, they would have to demolish the southern 1/3rd of the Rogers Centre, along with a chunk of the seating/stands. During this same offseason, they would have to rotate the playing field in the RC 180 degrees (since home plate and the dugouts are currently at the south end). This would involve demolishing a lot of seats and bringing in temporary seating for the next few seasons. They could seal off the open south end, or leave it open. In order for this to work the roof would have to be retracted permanently, with no ability to close.
2. As season #1 is being played out, you begin construction of the new stadium, pushed as far south as possible. You probably only complete 1/4 or 1/3 of the new stadium. This arrangement could continue as long as necessary.
3. During the next offseason you continue construction as much of the new stadium as possible, and the playing surface (outfield/bullpens) is extended into the portion of demolished Rogers Centre. Stands are built down the baselines. The goal here is to get a usable playing field, with whatever limited amount of seats you can finish.
4. The next season is played in the new stadium with no outfield seating whatsoever and demolition continuing on the remainder of the RC. Once this season is over you finish the outfield seating.
5. You continue to play in the new open air stadium until the demolition is entirely complete.
6. Finally, you have one last offseason to install a roof on the new building. If this isn't feasible, the whole plan falls apart.
For all of this to happen, Bremner is closed indefinitely between Van de Water and Rees.
1. During an offseason, they would have to demolish the southern 1/3rd of the Rogers Centre, along with a chunk of the seating/stands. During this same offseason, they would have to rotate the playing field in the RC 180 degrees (since home plate and the dugouts are currently at the south end). This would involve demolishing a lot of seats and bringing in temporary seating for the next few seasons. They could seal off the open south end, or leave it open. In order for this to work the roof would have to be retracted permanently, with no ability to close.
2. As season #1 is being played out, you begin construction of the new stadium, pushed as far south as possible. You probably only complete 1/4 or 1/3 of the new stadium. This arrangement could continue as long as necessary.
3. During the next offseason you continue construction as much of the new stadium as possible, and the playing surface (outfield/bullpens) is extended into the portion of demolished Rogers Centre. Stands are built down the baselines. The goal here is to get a usable playing field, with whatever limited amount of seats you can finish.
4. The next season is played in the new stadium with no outfield seating whatsoever and demolition continuing on the remainder of the RC. Once this season is over you finish the outfield seating.
5. You continue to play in the new open air stadium until the demolition is entirely complete.
6. Finally, you have one last offseason to install a roof on the new building. If this isn't feasible, the whole plan falls apart.
For all of this to happen, Bremner is closed indefinitely between Van de Water and Rees.
Last edited:
Ward8
Active Member
Not regionally though. Any new park would need to be located easy walking distance from, at least, the Lakeshore east/west GO line. The other spot that could theoretically work in a future scenario is the East harbour development. Still it's less ideal than the current location.
I personally have doubts that the renovation/retrofitting plans are as cost prohibitive as Rogers says they are. It could very well be the case, but it also fits really neatly into a narrative that supports a demolition and rebuild where the parties involved make a killing on new real estate development. A new facility would certainly be better for the Jays, but it's not as if teams can't survive in old cruddy ballparks. Fenway for example lacks any modern amenities, doesn't have enough washroom facilities and literally smells like urine. (It fits into the urban fabric of Boston impeccably but that's a different consideration.) Point is. The Jays will be ok for a while longer, and any new stadium needs careful consideration to have longevity and be in the best interests of the city.
MetroMan
Senior Member
A GO station is planned for Front and Spadina. Not too much farther than current fans have to go through the PATH from Union Station to the SkyDome, granted that's mostly indoors.
MetroMan
Senior Member
Astrodome would've been demolished by explosive in the middle of a suburban car park.
All the CityPlace glass towers, tightly packed around the dome would instantly shatter. This is the reason given by Rogers that it would cost too much to demolish which is why they've been renovating it instead.
A SkyDome demolition would have to happen by hydraulic demolition hammers which could only run during the day and would take years. Nobody would accept that, even in daytime. It'd be a political nightmare. SkyDome is protected by CityPlace. This concrete bunker will be with us for decades.
If the Jays want to play somewhere else, the SkyDome can be converted into a convention centre which, coincidentally we're going to need as the MTCC is destined to be replaced. Replace the seating rings with convention rooms and amphitheatres and amenities like restaurants and hotel rooms, while the field with the seats removed could remain largely untouched as a showroom floor. Whether there'd be a need for movable roof is up to thinking of creative summer uses or it can be replaced with a fixed glass skylight.
Last edited:
Ward8
Active Member
I did forget about that, but it's still about double the distance and the route could be confusing for out of towners. Personally, I fully support different uses for the airport, but I don't think an island stadium would work well logistically. It would be a hell of a spot to see a game though...
Bogtrotter
Senior Member
When was the Astrodome demolished? I read it was still standing in a fairly recent article.