The New BC Place

[octothorp]

To me, the only way that it makes sense to make major renovations is to go so far that it changes the economic model of the stadium. Here's what I think it requires:
1: A permanent bleacher structure in both endzones. Not only does this increase seating, it also can massively change the acoustics of the place. The only thing preventing concerts is sound bylaws that require concerts to end by 9pm (most summers, the site hosts a few daytime concert events). The city is reluctant to issue exemptions because it's so loud, but changes to the stadium layout would change that. Work with the city to come up with target noise levels that will allow them to lift the noise bylaw for an agreed number of days.
2: Enclosed and expanded concourse. The concourse right now is the biggest thing that prevents year-round use of the stadium. Even at Stampeders games, fans stay away from cold weather games in large-part because there's no place to go warm up, and the concourse is both cold and crowded. An improved concourse would not only be a benefit to Stampeders games, but would make it a year-round facility. Imagine what a great hockey event hosting facility it would be if you put four or five rinks on the field, along with an improved concourse and an arena configuration that would cut-down on wind at ice-level. It could be used constantly from November to March in that capacity.
3: Additional indoor facilities. There's more money to be made in luxury suites of course, but they should also look at having additional indoor conference facilities, so that the site becomes a great tradeshow/event hosting site; there's a lot of money to be made in conference and event hosting... a place like the Rogers' Centre fills up a lot of open dates on their calendar with private and corporate event hosting, and additional indoor facilities would allow McMahon to be more versatile for that audience.
4: Lastly, a partial roof, similar to many european soccer stadiums, would ensure that there's some security that even in awful weather, there's partial weather protection. I don't think we need a full retractable roof or dome or anything like that in Calgary, but a partial roof would make a huge difference.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by octothorp

To me, the only way that it makes sense to make major renovations is to go so far that it changes the economic model of the stadium. Here's what I think it requires:
1: A permanent bleacher structure in both endzones. Not only does this increase seating, it also can massively change the acoustics of the place. The only thing preventing concerts is sound bylaws that require concerts to end by 9pm (most summers, the site hosts a few daytime concert events). The city is reluctant to issue exemptions because it's so loud, but changes to the stadium layout would change that. Work with the city to come up with target noise levels that will allow them to lift the noise bylaw for an agreed number of days.
2: Enclosed and expanded concourse. The concourse right now is the biggest thing that prevents year-round use of the stadium. Even at Stampeders games, fans stay away from cold weather games in large-part because there's no place to go warm up, and the concourse is both cold and crowded. An improved concourse would not only be a benefit to Stampeders games, but would make it a year-round facility. Imagine what a great hockey event hosting facility it would be if you put four or five rinks on the field, along with an improved concourse and an arena configuration that would cut-down on wind at ice-level. It could be used constantly from November to March in that capacity.
3: Additional indoor facilities. There's more money to be made in luxury suites of course, but they should also look at having additional indoor conference facilities, so that the site becomes a great tradeshow/event hosting site; there's a lot of money to be made in conference and event hosting... a place like the Rogers' Centre fills up a lot of open dates on their calendar with private and corporate event hosting, and additional indoor facilities would allow McMahon to be more versatile for that audience.
4: Lastly, a partial roof, similar to many european soccer stadiums, would ensure that there's some security that even in awful weather, there's partial weather protection. I don't think we need a full retractable roof or dome or anything like that in Calgary, but a partial roof would make a huge difference.

1 makes sense, although I'm not sure how permanent bleachers in the end zone would alter the acoustics all that much. Additional end zone seats and some sort of beer garden type area would be a good addition.

Point 2 partially makes sense, an enclosed concourse would be nice (although I can't think of a single stadium I've ever been in that had such a feature) but you lost me on the hockey rinks on the field idea. Unless we're talking about installing an ice plant you'd be dealing with some pretty hit or miss conditions, and installing an ice plant doesn't really seem like a feasible idea.

On point 3 I assume you're talking about building a separate facility as I don't see how McMahon itself is ever supposed to be able to host conference type events outside of the Red and White club. I suppose a facility could be built either on the current practice field or on the foothills park fields. To be honest the idea doesn't make much sense to me, it's not an ideal location to build conference facilities, proximity to the stadium isn't adding anything, and there are a lot of facilities and locations that would better fill that market.

A partial roof would be good, I'm just not sure what it would require. Is the current structure able to support a roof or would there need to be a significant overhaul? It's a pretty large scale project and at the end of the day I don't know that it adds all that much, I mean after all we're still talking about 10-12 days a year that the stadium is actually in use.

[Canada 02]

the support mast's are an eye-sore

$563 million for this project - how much do new stadiums cost, not named Yankee or Cowboy

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

the support mast's are an eye-sore

$563 million for this project - how much do new stadiums cost, not named Yankee or Cowboy

I know. What other stuff did they do? Can't be half a billion for a bed sheet on wheels covering a hole.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by blankall

It does not look anything like the photos in real life. It looks like an old stadium with a bunch of steel on top. Some serious MySpace photography going on with this one.

Somehow that doesn't surprise me. That's what I was saying in my post, how growing up I always thought it looked cool on TV when the Stamps were playing there, but live in person its just a dump. Looks a lot bigger on TV too.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

the support mast's are an eye-sore

$563 million for this project - how much do new stadiums cost, not named Yankee or Cowboy

$563 million? Really?

According to Wiki:

Qwest field in Seattle cost $525 million in inflation adjusted 2011 dollars.

Metlife Stadium in New York cost 1.6 billion

Lucas Oil Stadium cost $725 million

Ford Field cost $525 million in inflation adjusted 2011 dollars.

University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona cost $496 million in inflation adjusted 2011 dollars.

Seems like they could have just built a new stadium for between 500-600 million.

[shermanator]

The roof opens a lot less than I thought it did.
I guess we'll have to see what it looks like on Friday during the Lions game...

[drewboy12]

Originally Posted by blankall

May be in the minority here, but the new BC "spider dome" is an eyesore.

It does not look anything like the photos in real life. It looks like an old stadium with a bunch of steel on top. Some serious MySpace photography going on with this one.

I think it looks awesome in person.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

They would be if it was domed would they not?

Or if it were relocated? Not that I could recommend any alternate locations off the top of my head that would allow outdoor concerts within a reasonable location in the City.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Teh_Bandwagoner

Or if it were relocated? Not that I could recommend any alternate locations off the top of my head that would allow outdoor concerts within a reasonable location in the City.

I'd think the Stampede Grandstand would be able to handle outdoor shows...and there aren't a lot of really close neighbors to complain.

[VANFLAMESFAN]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

I know. What other stuff did they do? Can't be half a billion for a bed sheet on wheels covering a hole.

It's not just the roof.

The whole stadium is different. New seats, concourse, concessions, washrooms, suites, media area. The outside of the stadium is totally different as well. Glass panelling looks pretty slick, the lighting is way different. No more airlock!! And then there's the second biggest big screen in North America.

There's far more to this renovation than just the roof.

[morgin]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

It's not just the roof.
And then there's the second biggest big screen in North America.

I don't understand why there isn't money to at least upgrade the screen at McMahon. When the heritage classic was here, the screen the NHL brought made being in cruddier seats 10x better cause you could see everything on it. I get not committing to major renos until there is a solid plan in place, but the screen at Mcmahon is straight outta the 1990s. I'm pretty sure high school football stadiums in Texas have better scoreboards/video screens.

[Madman]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

It's not just the roof.

The whole stadium is different. New seats, concourse, concessions, washrooms, suites, media area. The outside of the stadium is totally different as well. Glass panelling looks pretty slick, the lighting is way different. No more airlock!! And then there's the second biggest big screen in North America.

There's far more to this renovation than just the roof.

[scotty2hotty]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

It's not just the roof.

The whole stadium is different. New seats, concourse, concessions, washrooms, suites, media area. The outside of the stadium is totally different as well. Glass panelling looks pretty slick, the lighting is way different. No more airlock!! And then there's the second biggest big screen in North America.

There's far more to this renovation than just the roof.

Exactly. They simply used the concrete shell of the old dome. They built, in essence, a entirely new facility.

[VANFLAMESFAN]

Originally Posted by Madman

I think your attitude will change when you see it in action on Friday. I really do.

[J epworth]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Lenarduzzi and co. have been pretty adamant in their stance that the seats will be closer to the field that at Empire, especially in the end zone areas. At Empire, there was a good 20 yards between the net and the seats. This apparently won't be the case at BC Place. The seats come right down to field level. I'll believe it when I see it.

They obviously can't replicate the open air in a stadium and that will definitely turn some soccer fans off. As a soccer fan myself, I don't like the idea of watching a game indoors. It will be good on a nice night though.

I'm still pissed about the waterfront stadium fiasco of a few years ago. That would have been so sweet.

The other aspect that will make it still feel like an intimate atmosphere is the mesh overlay that they will have surrounding the entire upper deck, which is supposed to make it feel like the stadium is smaller. I've yet to see a picture of this yet though so I'll wait to see what it looks likes, the only picture I've seen is a very old mock-up, and I'm pretty sure the plans have changed since then.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

$563 million? Really?

According to Wiki:

Qwest field in Seattle cost $525 million in inflation adjusted 2011 dollars.

Metlife Stadium in New York cost 1.6 billion

Lucas Oil Stadium cost $725 million

Ford Field cost $525 million in inflation adjusted 2011 dollars.

University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona cost $496 million in inflation adjusted 2011 dollars.

Seems like they could have just built a new stadium for between 500-600 million.

Yep, but it would be kind of hard to do that without land, and that doesn't come cheap in downtown Vancouver, or so I'm told. It sounds like they essentially did build a new stadium ,and avoided the costs associated with demolishing the old one. Makes sense to me.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Does McMahon get used only 10 times a year? The answer is no.

We need a 21st century stadium with modern amenities, concourses and the ability to host medium to large outdoor events.

The fact that as a City of 1M+ we don't have a building like this, is an embarrassment.

I don't understand how all these cities in have-not provinces are getting all these new buildings and Calgary is saddled with two of the worst in their respective sports. How does Winnipeg of all cities get a new arena and football stadium in the span of a decade?

It's a shame how this province is continually getting raped of it's resources and nothing ever goes back to the community.

[d_phaneuf]

I hate it, I think it was a massive waste of money

They spent the same amount that the Texans spent on Reliant Stadium that was posted above and it won't be 10% as nice inside, the spikes on the outside look hideous.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

I hate it, I think it was a massive waste of money

They spent the same amount that the Texans spent on Reliant Stadium that was posted above and it won't be 10% as nice inside, the spikes on the outside look hideous.

I have to admit the spikes look stupid. First time I saw it I though the spikes were for construction. It's just not a very pretty building from the outside. That said it's the inside that counts for the experience.