HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1361  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 2:43 AM
CCF's Avatar
CCF CCF is online now
Saskatchewan's Capital
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjpaul View Post
so we can afford $278 million but NOT $431 million.

what ever happened to our progressive thinkers? epically huge mistake being made here,,,,

they could have built the dome at Evraz place if they needed to save on land costs. hopefully the dome debate will rersurface
I would say there's a significant difference between the costs of the two proposals.

Had the Feds offered financial support, I have no doubt that we would have ended up with a covered stadium. Ultimately the price tag was too much for the province and city to cover.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1362  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 1:18 PM
Welkin Welkin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF View Post
I would say there's a significant difference between the costs of the two proposals.

Had the Feds offered financial support, I have no doubt that we would have ended up with a covered stadium. Ultimately the price tag was too much for the province and city to cover.
The price tag was too much on the front end and the ongoing operation costs would have been dramatically higher. In the end, the total added cost was just too much for very little additional return in facility usage. I know that many people are disappointed that we are not going to build the sports and entertainment mega dome complex, but in reality we dodged a huge bullet here and we should be thankful that our civic leaders realized that fact. At $278 million this will be a top-notch facility that we all can be proud to call our own. Go Riders.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1363  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 3:27 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjpaul View Post
so we can afford $278 million but NOT $431 million.

what ever happened to our progressive thinkers? epically huge mistake being made here,,,,

they could have built the dome at Evraz place if they needed to save on land costs. hopefully the dome debate will rersurface
plus the $431 million is really well over $500 million with construction inflation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1364  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 8:48 PM
Dougler306 Dougler306 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Regina
Posts: 341
Yeah the dome stadium would be great, but in reality there is no way the city could afford that and i dont think evraz would have allowed us to build there if it was domed, that would completly take away from evraz's purpose of being an inclosed convention center/trade show.

I was also thinking of new redners but then couldnt they just use the current desgin, just with no roof?? I thought the current desgin was kick ass, just not the the name of it, id like to see it be called mosaic stadium again, just cuz the potash company has done lots for our city and they deserve recongnition.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1365  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 9:54 PM
jvj jvj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 138
Well, after lots of reading...and a couple of days to digest all of this I think I understand the conclusion...although I still see a few issues. If an affordable open air stadium can be built at Evraz Place, with a well placed group (REAL) ready to become the operators then I think this is the best choice. I will admit that I was intrigued by the idea of a Dewdney Avenue location, but at some point the financial limitations have to dictate the decision.

One item that is still a little vague is the operating costs and the potential for the facility to actually operate at a profitable basis, year to year. There was a pro-forma done by Global Spectrum in 2010 that suggested a multi purpose could generate a profit on $1M per year, but I think a lot of people questioned whether that report was valid. So the question now becomes is someone (REAL) doing another pro-forma to determine what type of financial numbers an open air facility will generate?

One drawback I see is the potential to host future Grey Cups. This should at least rate a mention in the City of Regina documents...but when they created their "Summary Assesment" table, they neglected to include Grey Cup hosting as an item to consider. I think with an MPF in place we would have likely put forward our names as a host every 5 or 6 years...but with an outdoor facility, I think we're going to back to every 10 or 12 years. Also, we'll have to deal with the familiar issue of cost/logistics to incorporate another 15 to 20K seats each time we host. Again I'm not saying that is justification for an MPF on Dewdney, but it is a drawback to the Evraz/open air decision.

The other item that bugs me is the CP land transaction process. There was a Memorandum of Understanding signed way back in 2009 but apparently it took until this month to determine exactly how much land would be available. You have to assume that the city was 90 - 95%% certain they were going to be able to acquire all 33 acres. To spend $1M on a feasibility study and debate it for 2 years only to find out that all the land use assumptions were incorrect does not look good on the CIC/City of Regina group that put the 2010 report together. I guess the question is did CP renege on some earlier discussions and statements...but due to the confidential nature of these discussions we'll probably never know the real truth. It seems strange that they've made a decision to move most of their operation to the Global Hub, but they then decide to keep certain items functional back at the Dewdney Avenue location. Hopefully that doesn't end up deterring any of the development on Dewdney, but it does end up creating some odd shaped land parcels.

A few other questions are bouncing around in my head...but that's enough for now!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1366  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 10:09 PM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 769
With a dome your guaranteed to lose cash. If favorable terms are met with rent, parking, naming rights and demanding a cut of PSLs the facility will break even or loose a pittance in servicing the debt. The 5-8 million just to keep the heat and lights on us gone. I need to research further to find comparisons in operating costs for similar sized venues in close climate but it won't cost us that much I presume.

In regards to GCs the rotation will vary I still believe the CFL and TSN will only lock in Toronto on a consistent basis to try and grow the games scope and pockets but hosting every 6-8 years seems realistic. An outdoor facility leaves greater room for temporary expansion versus a dome so getting 50k+ in the new stadium won't be an issue.

An opportunity now is to grow the scope of our exhibition. Now Evraz can bring in a big time name for a large show every year like you see take place with American State Fairs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1367  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 11:04 PM
jvj jvj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF View Post
The proposed location is a block further than its current - I don't think that extra block will change where people park or how they get to the game.
Actually it's 6 or 7 blocks further to the west...granted those are short blocks measured in the east-west direction. For a better comparision I checked it out on Google earth...using the Cornwall Centre as a starting point, it's about a half mile to Mosaic stadium...this increases to a full mile if you want to walk to Evraz. I made that half mile walk once last year, and I'm pretty sure that's my limit.

I would think for a lot of people that length of walk is going to take a downtown parking spot out of the equation. For reference a CP location (and a pedway) would have reduced that walk to about 1/5th of a mile.

Maybe we need to come up with some type of passenger rail car system that could shuttle people from the Casino area over to Evraz???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1368  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 11:40 PM
CCF's Avatar
CCF CCF is online now
Saskatchewan's Capital
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvj View Post
Actually it's 6 or 7 blocks further to the west...granted those are short blocks measured in the east-west direction. For a better comparision I checked it out on Google earth...using the Cornwall Centre as a starting point, it's about a half mile to Mosaic stadium...this increases to a full mile if you want to walk to Evraz. I made that half mile walk once last year, and I'm pretty sure that's my limit.

I would think for a lot of people that length of walk is going to take a downtown parking spot out of the equation. For reference a CP location (and a pedway) would have reduced that walk to about 1/5th of a mile.

Maybe we need to come up with some type of passenger rail car system that could shuttle people from the Casino area over to Evraz???
7 blocks? Really? It looks as if the proposal is expected to go across from the Field House on Elphinstone. Is that actually 7 blocks? Even if it - I still don't think it will be that much of an issue - it looks and feels close to Mosaic as is and that has an impact on how people commute. A significant proportion of people park at Evraz right now and walk to Mosaic, so there's a clear connection between the two.

In anycase - if they stop using downtown parking, even better. That will cut into the profit margins of some of these surface parking lots and then maybe they will be developed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1369  
Old Posted May 7, 2012, 3:40 AM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 830
Well it would make getting buses in and our of the site easier. I prefer that option when I can anyway WAY less hassle. Plus all the cheering on the bus gets you pumped up even more then you already are!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1370  
Old Posted May 7, 2012, 6:01 PM
wacko wacko is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 240
Thinking about parking logistics now...

The Brandt Centre claims parking for 3,000 vehicles is available on site. A portion of the proposed stadium site is used for parking, but not that much of it. It's basically a big empty lot right now, to be made bigger once the buildings to the west are torn down. So overall, parking shouldn't be impacted too much once the stadium is completed. Also some of the parking at the Lawson/Fieldhouse and along N Railway St can still be utilized the same way it is now.

It would be nice if the city stepped up promotion of the Football Express (park-and-ride) endeavours for 'Rider games. I'm presuming that buses would utilize the lot immediately to the north of the site (by the Armoury).

One thing I would hope for is that the parking lots at Evraz Place get repaved, because right now, some of them are in sad shape.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1371  
Old Posted May 7, 2012, 6:05 PM
sask1982's Avatar
sask1982 sask1982 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 783
Think of this: A Rider game on at the same time as The Queen City Ex (aka Buffalo Days). For the hard-core's...do the Riders' usually have a home game that weekend?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1372  
Old Posted May 7, 2012, 6:30 PM
wacko wacko is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 240
I recall in 2008 that parking at Evraz Place was unavailable for a 'Rider game because of set-up for Buffalo Days. If the new stadium is located at Evraz Place, they can't do that anymore. One way around it is for the 'Riders to request that the CFL schedule a Friday home game and then be away the following weekend.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1373  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 4:12 PM
boborider boborider is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 196
I know it is not a scientific survey but interesting anyway. CBC, on their website, conducted a poll asking whether people wanted open air, domed or retractable. More than 70% chose a closed roof, of which 48% preferred a retractable. Clearly, the open air option is not the preferred choice of those who chose to vote. Additionally, when Jim Hobson, Rider CEO, commented to the media and although diplomatic, was clear he preferred the retractable roof. We are missing a huge opportunity here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1374  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 4:18 PM
CCF's Avatar
CCF CCF is online now
Saskatchewan's Capital
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by boborider View Post
I know it is not a scientific survey but interesting anyway. CBC, on their website, conducted a poll asking whether people wanted open air, domed or retractable. More than 70% chose a closed roof, of which 48% preferred a retractable. Clearly, the open air option is not the preferred choice of those who chose to vote. Additionally, when Jim Hobson, Rider CEO, commented to the media and although diplomatic, was clear he preferred the retractable roof. We are missing a huge opportunity here.
I'd like a another home in Beverly Hills! Doesn't mean I can necessarily afford that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1375  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 4:47 PM
ceedub1170's Avatar
ceedub1170 ceedub1170 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: White City
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF View Post
I'd like a another home in Beverly Hills! Doesn't mean I can necessarily afford that.
But if we pooled our money together, I bet we could afford that house.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1376  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 4:51 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,027
What are peoples' views on the impact of the $13 million Grey Cup Legacy Project on this proposal. It seems to me with an extra $500k to upgrade washrooms, we could make do with this for quite a while.

Rider Video on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtni16x6FXQ
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1377  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 4:57 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceedub1170 View Post
But if we pooled our money together, I bet we could afford that house.
...and if you owned 100 billion tonnes of potash reserves ($50 trillion at today's prices if you could get it out of the ground), you could afford a pretty sweet shack.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1378  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 5:54 PM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Regina
Posts: 1,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormer View Post
What are peoples' views on the impact of the $13 million Grey Cup Legacy Project on this proposal. It seems to me with an extra $500k to upgrade washrooms, we could make do with this for quite a while.

Rider Video on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtni16x6FXQ
I think it makes mosaic stadium viable for another 5 years. The east side (slightly renovated washrooms or not) is still a junk heap.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1379  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 6:21 PM
mjpaul's Avatar
mjpaul mjpaul is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Little Chicago. (Moose Jaw)
Posts: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan View Post
I think it makes mosaic stadium viable for another 5 years. The east side (slightly renovated washrooms or not) is still a junk heap.



"Mosaic Stadium is currently undergoing $14.2 million in renovations. The upgrades include the addition"


and the stadium will be torn down in 3 or 4 years? honest to God there are some incredibly stupid people making some some bizarre decisions. that money could be put towards the new stadium. makes you want to scream into your pillow
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1380  
Old Posted May 8, 2012, 6:25 PM
CCF's Avatar
CCF CCF is online now
Saskatchewan's Capital
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjpaul View Post

"Mosaic Stadium is currently undergoing $14.2 million in renovations. The upgrades include the addition"


and the stadium will be torn down in 3 or 4 years? honest to God there are some incredibly stupid people making some some bizarre decisions. that money could be put towards the new stadium. makes you want to scream into your pillow
Well - I'm assuming they believe that what they put in $14.2 million will generate more than that in revenue. Furthermore, some of the stands will be dismantled and located to other venues in the province. You have to assume some of the things like the LED screens will be located elsewhere as well.

It's not as if they are going to bulldoze the entire site, without salvaging things. The money they are putting in will likely generate an increase in revenue and offer infrastructure to other locations once Mosaic is finished with them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:28 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.