Toronto Rogers Centre Renovations | ?m | ?s | Toronto Blue Jays | Populous
- Thread starter buildup
- Start date
UrbanOzz
Active Member
i don't know the rules around it but i would think the area is too dense for an implosion
ADRM
Senior Member
A few things with respect to some basic spatial considerations:
> The Jays currently have *two* "temporary" stadiums, both of which they have played regular season MLB games in -- and to which they made tens of millions of dollars-worth of upgrades to facilitate -- within the last ±2 years.
> Square footage of extant facilities:
- Lamport Stadium: ±170K
- BMO Field: ±260K
- Rogers Centre: ±460K
The Rogers Centre is BIG. Massive. Even if you assume that a brand new stadium would be smaller (as is the trend for some of the newer ballparks), you need a LOT of space for it (to say nothing of space for pedestrian circulation/gathering/events, etc.). By way of comparison, the square footage of newer, now much-beloved MLB ballparks:
- Petco Park (San Diego): ±400K
- Oracle Park (San Francisco): ±422K
- Target Field (Minneapolis): ±440K
- Camden Yards (Baltimore): ±460K
- PNC Park (Pittsburgh): ±480K
- T-Mobile Park (Seattle): ±600K
Here's what the RC footprint looks like (very roughly) overlaid on the largest surface parking lots at Exhibition Place:
If you're going to build a new, permanent baseball stadium on the Ex grounds, you're probably going to have to look at tearing down some existing buildings to the west of BMO (some of which are very nice, and at least a few of which, I would imagine, are listed if not designated). I really hope they never put a stadium at Downsview, for a whole bunch of reasons, and there's some Federally-owned land in the Portlands that could be interesting (but that seems like a reach for a number of reasons), so to my eye, it's basically down to three options: 1) Tear down and erect a new stadium in its place, while the team plays in one or both of Buffalo or Dunedin for 2-3 seasons; 2) Undertake a more substantial renovation of the existing building than the one that will occur over the next two off-seasons (which would probably require moving the team to the US for 1 or maybe 2 seasons, at which point they'd probably just opt to tear it down anyway given the lost revenue associated with playing in NY or FL); or 3) Get creative in working with the City about basically reimagining much of the Ex Grounds west of BMO.
With the latter option, I think you're probably only putting it one of two places:
In lieu of the space currently occupied by roads, surface parking, and (awkward timing, but them's the breaks) the QE Theatre (which is a beautiful building):
Or, in lieu of the space currently occupied by the bandshell, the rose garden, and the Better Living Centre:
Again, baseball stadiums are very big, and very expensive.
> The Jays currently have *two* "temporary" stadiums, both of which they have played regular season MLB games in -- and to which they made tens of millions of dollars-worth of upgrades to facilitate -- within the last ±2 years.
> Square footage of extant facilities:
- Lamport Stadium: ±170K
- BMO Field: ±260K
- Rogers Centre: ±460K
The Rogers Centre is BIG. Massive. Even if you assume that a brand new stadium would be smaller (as is the trend for some of the newer ballparks), you need a LOT of space for it (to say nothing of space for pedestrian circulation/gathering/events, etc.). By way of comparison, the square footage of newer, now much-beloved MLB ballparks:
- Petco Park (San Diego): ±400K
- Oracle Park (San Francisco): ±422K
- Target Field (Minneapolis): ±440K
- Camden Yards (Baltimore): ±460K
- PNC Park (Pittsburgh): ±480K
- T-Mobile Park (Seattle): ±600K
Here's what the RC footprint looks like (very roughly) overlaid on the largest surface parking lots at Exhibition Place:
If you're going to build a new, permanent baseball stadium on the Ex grounds, you're probably going to have to look at tearing down some existing buildings to the west of BMO (some of which are very nice, and at least a few of which, I would imagine, are listed if not designated). I really hope they never put a stadium at Downsview, for a whole bunch of reasons, and there's some Federally-owned land in the Portlands that could be interesting (but that seems like a reach for a number of reasons), so to my eye, it's basically down to three options: 1) Tear down and erect a new stadium in its place, while the team plays in one or both of Buffalo or Dunedin for 2-3 seasons; 2) Undertake a more substantial renovation of the existing building than the one that will occur over the next two off-seasons (which would probably require moving the team to the US for 1 or maybe 2 seasons, at which point they'd probably just opt to tear it down anyway given the lost revenue associated with playing in NY or FL); or 3) Get creative in working with the City about basically reimagining much of the Ex Grounds west of BMO.
With the latter option, I think you're probably only putting it one of two places:
In lieu of the space currently occupied by roads, surface parking, and (awkward timing, but them's the breaks) the QE Theatre (which is a beautiful building):
Or, in lieu of the space currently occupied by the bandshell, the rose garden, and the Better Living Centre:
Again, baseball stadiums are very big, and very expensive.
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
We may need to separate this thread into long-term/fantasy vs. current development like we did with the subway thread in transportation, especially given it is a real project now. Before that happens though, personal attacks will be deleted - as a large swath of them were.
MoD
MoD
Translude15
Frank the Tank
Lamport itself is ±170K SF whereas the land it sits on, including small parks and parking lot, is ±430K SF. With that lot size, a new stadium fits somewhere within the first three parks you listed. Extending the footprint east just a bit past Jefferson Ave brings the square footage to ±515K SF, larger than all the parks listed save for T-Mobile.
The Ex grounds are problematic simply because of the heritage, or quasi-heritage properties that exist on the site, not to mention the impact it would have on the CNE. A lot of moving parts with that possibility that I think would make it too complex and difficult to explore.
Last edited by a moderator:
UrbanOzz
Active Member
phase 2 of the renovations ( the 100 level) hasn't even been unveiled now. Also, people are talking about a new stadium 10 years from now. I don't think that's realistic. these renos are going to take 3 years (initially 2, but probably 4). Shapiro has admitted this is a MASSIVE renovation but a new stadium is not out of the cards. a 10 year date was mentioned somewhere. I can't imagine they'd be in a new home in 10 years. If anything, a new stadium plan will be unveiled in 10 years and they'll be in a new stadium in 15-16. I think they realize they're in the perfect location and that's what the hold up is. They know they don't own the land and it's federal land. They also know that taxpayers won't foot the bill. They also know it'll cost a fortune to tear that thing down. This renovation is buying them lots of time to get creative her and figure out what to do. there was an initial proposal that involved some condos that are on these federal lands. that's a creative way to bankroll this but would probably need the support for it. It's creative ideas like that they are probably identifying and then going through the channels to see through.
i imagine the portlands is a non-starter. it's a new neighbourhood and as of right now, won't have adequate transit for this. Downsview is a non-starter, you lose the King/Bay crowd and walk ups, plus traffic up there is already insane. i'd rather drive in downtown toronto than up near downsview (i used to live up there). Exhibition is not a non-starter as it'll have a subway line and a GO station line but you lose the walkups, and again the land is owned by government here.
I'm just going to enjoy these renos as they look pretty sharp and keep rooting for the Jays until something else is sorted, but i have a feeling it'll be on the existing grounds and there will be 2 seasons played down in Buffalo and it won't be when we have a championship caliber team, it'll be during a 'rebuild' phase for the team.
i imagine the portlands is a non-starter. it's a new neighbourhood and as of right now, won't have adequate transit for this. Downsview is a non-starter, you lose the King/Bay crowd and walk ups, plus traffic up there is already insane. i'd rather drive in downtown toronto than up near downsview (i used to live up there). Exhibition is not a non-starter as it'll have a subway line and a GO station line but you lose the walkups, and again the land is owned by government here.
I'm just going to enjoy these renos as they look pretty sharp and keep rooting for the Jays until something else is sorted, but i have a feeling it'll be on the existing grounds and there will be 2 seasons played down in Buffalo and it won't be when we have a championship caliber team, it'll be during a 'rebuild' phase for the team.
The Rogers Centre Replacement Fantasies thread has been created here with several posts moved to it.
42
SubHuman
Active Member
I assume they are going to be "ripping out the lower bowl", and it will be interesting to see what they plan to do. They are limited by having to still fit into the rest of the existing stadium. If the new lower bowl seating will rise at a greater angle as it gets farther away from the field, it could block the view from the 200 level, unless the front of it is moved farther away back from the field, which would not be desirable.
I wonder if they could have the new lower level rise to meet the front of the 200 level? That seems like it could be awkward, since the top of it would still have to fit into the round shape, meaning the angle of rise in some parts the new lower level would have to be significantly different from others.
T.E.C.II
Active Member
I just assumed they'd be putting in newer seats, making them all face the right right direction.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
I did this extremely amateurly with the first picture I could find but first of all, look how much wasted space there is with the curves they needed to accommodate football. There will definitely be less foul space than there is now, even if they don't build all the way to those red lines. Then they can start the grading of the new lower bowl from out there.
Like the new outfield seats, it doesn't have to be symmetrical.
Similarly, there is no reason to assume 100 level will be one big set of rows, just because that's what we've been used to. Like the outfield seats, they could add decks/patios or other unique areas. (Indeed, the outfield seat renderings show something along those lines in the RF corner, in particular.)
I've used a similar picture before but as you can see with Yankee Stadium, you can also break the lower bowl into sub-tiers, especially if you want to keep the VIPs away from the rest of us. The new Rangers stadium has something similar.
I have no idea what they'll go with but there is no reason to assume it will be as boring as simply re-orienting the seats or that there are any issues with the grading, as it relates to 200 level or the existing concourse. (And that's without getting into all the new space under the stands, where they can build luxury boxes, like the ones at Scotiabank.)
So, they've got a blank slate and I suspect that the new 100 level will look very different from how it does now.
Like the new outfield seats, it doesn't have to be symmetrical.
Similarly, there is no reason to assume 100 level will be one big set of rows, just because that's what we've been used to. Like the outfield seats, they could add decks/patios or other unique areas. (Indeed, the outfield seat renderings show something along those lines in the RF corner, in particular.)
I've used a similar picture before but as you can see with Yankee Stadium, you can also break the lower bowl into sub-tiers, especially if you want to keep the VIPs away from the rest of us. The new Rangers stadium has something similar.
I have no idea what they'll go with but there is no reason to assume it will be as boring as simply re-orienting the seats or that there are any issues with the grading, as it relates to 200 level or the existing concourse. (And that's without getting into all the new space under the stands, where they can build luxury boxes, like the ones at Scotiabank.)
So, they've got a blank slate and I suspect that the new 100 level will look very different from how it does now.
TossYourJacket
Senior Member
Yeah this is the big issue some people are missing. Rogers doesn't own the land, and it's only zoned for a stadium. To build any sort of new Rogers HQ or condos with a new stadium, they'd need to get the lease for the land changed to allow for any of that. And let's be real, there's not gonna be some kind of huge public support for "give Rogers cheap/free land to build a new HQ and condos" just so we can have a new stadium. So it would probably end up costing Rogers a bunch of money to get the lease changed, let alone how much it would cost if they actually tried to buy the land the Skydome sits on.
Plus, condos present an entire issue around ownership on land leased from the federal government. Hard to sell a condo when the condo corporation doesn't own the land the building stands on. Rental buildings would be easier, but that doesn't generate the instant capital of condo sales. Those issues are gonna take a lot of time and money to resolve, hence the renovations. Any sort of replacement stadium is a long game.
T.E.C.II
Active Member
True enough, but given that they will be taking a lot of seats out of the 500 section, I wonder if they'd really remove any more than they already will be?
T.E.C.II
Active Member
Guess Rogers will have an early start on those renovations....
Richard White
Senior Member
Guess Rogers will have an early start on those renovations....
Serves them right. Bichette and Springer are idiots. Had they not collided we would have likely won the game.
The last few weeks, the Jays have been lacking with their fielding and now it cost them.
It was a huge error but also extremely likely neither one could hear the other calling the play given the noise in the stadium. But blowing an 8 point lead is inexcusable.
At least Springer can recover properly and not go back to play too soon.
At least Springer can recover properly and not go back to play too soon.