[adma]

The Skydome was the cat's ass for a few years after it opened, but quickly became dated as all the throwback parks started popping up. I would have loved to have seen something like Milwaukee's Miller Park in its place.

If you notice, Miller Park's in a boondocks location, relative to where Skydome is in Toronto...

 

[jn_12]

*ahem* Wrigley Field *ahem* *ahem* Fenway Park *ahem*

Clearly outliers. You're essentially comparing our 20 year old dome to century old fields that amount to the baseball equivalent of holy sites. These fields have also undergone significant renovations in order to find ways to maximize capacity to the point that if the stadiums themselves didn't attract fans, new stadiums probably would have been built already. Even Yankee Stadium had to be closed for two years for intense renovations back in the 70s. We don't have a Fenway or Wrigley in our hands. We have a substantially better Metrodome (which is being replaced as we speak). This stadium might have legs to last into the 2040s because of its versatility, but not without intense renovations, and it that point it might make more financial sense to build a whole new one.

As for where one could go, who knows what the city will look like in 20 or 30 years. I'd prefer not to land speculate about a hypothetical stadium. What's clear is that it would not be moved to the 905. The trend in stadium development is to build in urban centres, and studies have shown that suburban stadiums/arenas aren't proving to be as successful.

 

[MisterF]

Thank god because you would be talking about dismantling a League that has existed for many generations, 92 years to be exact.

All the while Canada remains the only country in the world with such a tiny number of professional teams in its most popular sport.

 

[Whoaccio]

Where are you going to place this new stadium other than 905???

Not that I think we need a new stadium, but you could probably fit one somewhere in the Portlands or Ex. Or if someone wanted to blow a billion dollars, built out into lake Ontario.

If we ever do get a new professional sports franchise (Bills, NHL....) I wouldn't mind if it was located outside of downtown. NYCC could be worthwhile. So long as it wasn't located like the Allianz Arena in Munich or the Corel Center in Ottawa, it should be okay. The hard part would be getting the zoning permissions. Put it somewhere like that block of houses in between Bonnington & Dudley and Sheppard and Anndale. Good access to 401, Sheppard & Yonge subway and some planed LRTs. Even though NYCC isn't in the 905, i've always thought of it as a sort of 'downtown' for some of the suburbs to the north.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Go back to the 'Babe's homer' field

Not that I think we need a new stadium, but you could probably fit one somewhere in the Portlands or Ex. Or if someone wanted to blow a billion dollars, built out into lake Ontario.

I ABSOLUTELY hate the idea of building a new stadium anywhere/anytime, because they'll make it big enough to support the most mindless and boring of sports, NFL football.

However, there's an obvious place to put a stadium: the City Centre airfield. It has history. It has lots of space. It's picturesque. There's an off-chance that it wouldn't be government funded (the Feds would just throw in the land for free and call it quits). And it would get us rid of both the airport and the Harbour Authority.

It would make a ridiculously fun venue for huge rock concerts. And you could take the blindingly fast Queen's Quay TTC ROW streetcar!

 

[Automation Gallery]

*ahem* Wrigley Field *ahem* *ahem* Fenway Park *ahem*

thats why both citys are talking about replacing them in the near future.

 

[Automation Gallery]

I ABSOLUTELY hate the idea of building a new stadium anywhere/anytime, because they'll make it big enough to support the most mindless and boring of sports, NFL football.

However, there's an obvious place to put a stadium: the City Centre airfield. It has history. It has lots of space. It's picturesque. There's an off-chance that it wouldn't be government funded (the Feds would just throw in the land for free and call it quits). And it would get us rid of both the airport and the Harbour Authority.

It would make a ridiculously fun venue for huge rock concerts. And you could take the blindingly fast Queen's Quay TTC ROW streetcar!

You must be living in a dream world.

 

[mangasparky]

I can't imagine the Dome not being there. It is a symbol of Toronto in my opinion, almost as much as th CN Tower. Its 20 years old, and it is still a fantastic stadium, much more so after some renovations. With all this talk of a new stadium, it makes me wonder. Can the guts of the Dome be removed, and re-developed to make a more intimate experience? Maybe even to make it better for football, though the thought makes me cringe.

 

[wyliepoon]

It's interesting to see that many Toronto fans want to see SkyDome stay (partly because taxpayers have paid so much for it, we have to milk it for all it's worth). I wonder how many decades the SkyDome will last as a stadium. If the Dome lasts for another 30 or 50 years it might become one of MLB's most revered ballparks like Wrigley or Fenway are today, the last ballpark to resemble a cookie cutter, and the last domed ballpark (assuming that the Tampa Bay Rays would either have built a new retro stadium, folded, or moved to another city). Perhaps the 1980s feel of the SkyDome would attract baseball fan-tourists all over the US who grew up with cookie-cutter stadiums.

 

[Kitsune]

Heres an idea if NFL ever comes to Toronto - spend the 200 or so million to upgrade the Skydome to 70-80K capacity, it can be done. Then, build a new stadium for the Jays at around 5-600 million, that way it has a roof, and is smaller capacity (say around 38-40K). Find a spot downtown (Cherry Beach maybe?), and design it like Miller Park so it still has a great view of downtown. In the end, it comes out cheaper then any NFL Stadium would come out to be, and would get rid of one of the last cookie cutters in North America by making the Skydome football only.

 

[jn_12]

You can correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty certain the dome can't be expanded much beyond its current capacity, and especially not for another 20-30,000 people. You're talking the equivalent of the ACC+ being added to a space that is already very compact and fit within a concrete structure that supports a retractable dome and we can't forget about the hotel, and offices. With all this, I can't see where they would add that any seats nevermind that many.

We were lucky that the dome was the definition of state of the art when it was built because it is actually in pretty good shape 20 years on. I think it has some legs in it to be honest. It's too bad they can't put a grass field in, but the artificial grass technology is only getting better and even the new field is nice enough. The dome works great, and the upgrades that Rogers put in have brought some of the dated elements (that were top notch in the late 80s) up to snuff. Really, I think we can expect it to stay until 2030 at the earliest and it's way too hard to look that far in the future when it comes to land speculation and what the city will look/be like to be able to accurately determine where a new stadium would be built.

I won't touch on the NFL stuff right now... I feel like a broken record already as it is.

 

[Kitsune]

I've actually seen the numbers - a vast number of seats can be added by removing the motel, which is somewhat fesable. I believe the number for that is between 10-15K. Add in the fact the entire first level would be redesigned for NFL Football, and you could get it over 70K for sure.

 

[wonderboy416]

I have no idea how the skydome will become "obsolete" - even 20 years down the line. It was fairly future proof when they built it. The biggest reason why so many teams got new arenas in the hockey and basketball world was the lack of luxury box suites in their existing facilities. Baseball stadiums often suffered from the same problem. The Skydome still has better sight lines to catch a game them most of the newer parks, has ample luxury suites (they were really thinking ahead on this one) and a bleeding edge video screen in centre field. All that's missing is that rustic feeling of a retro park, which is simply a matter of preference. The concourses are still modern compared to other new parks as are all the amenities... I've been really impressed with many of the new baseball parks, but the fan experience at the dome can be every bit as good... it's aged quite well IMO.

One stadium I think we'll never see replaced in our lifetime that was built in the early 70's is Kauffman stadium in Kansas City. I went there as a child and was amazed by it. It's a beautiful stadium that has been maintained extremely well and has many design quirks that you'd expect to have come from the 70's. The place just oozes charm... I'd actually take it over any of the newer ballparks in a heartbeat, and I'd probably take the Skydome next.

 

[jn_12]

I've actually seen the numbers - a vast number of seats can be added by removing the motel, which is somewhat fesable. I believe the number for that is between 10-15K. Add in the fact the entire first level would be redesigned for NFL Football, and you could get it over 70K for sure.

I'd love to see those numbers.
I think getting rid of the hotel would be a poor idea, but who knows, maybe no one stays there anyways (though when I walk by it seems to be kind of busy). You're right though that its removal would add a lot of seating.

I'm just looking at the set-up for the NFL games and I could see some gaps where you could make things a bit more "efficient" and pack some seating in, but I think you'd be losing a lot in terms of comfort and the concourse. I looked at the footprint of a few other stadiums on google maps and the skydome is as long as most stadiums (including the offices and hotel) but is anywhere from 25 to 50 metres narrower. That's pretty significant to me and suggests that even if you assume that that width isn't all used for seating in other stadiums, you're still not working with a lot of space to fit 20-30,000 extra seats. I don't know if it would be worth the loss in quality that wonderboy416 describes to increase the quantity. Mind you, if there's a will there's a way and it'd be interesting to see how they could do it.

Honestly, I'm not trying to be difficult or opposed to your argument at all, so I hope it doesn't come across that way. I think this is a great conversation to have because the dome has become so iconic in Toronto that we've kind of just assumed it will always be here now, even though the reality is that stadiums don't live long usually. So it's good to discuss its future and the possibilities that it holds.

 

[Kitsune]

I didnt take it as arguement. I too dont want to see the dome go, but as Toronto will have the last functioning cookie cutter in a couple years (Marlins new stadium, and the A's will be getting a new stadium soon as well), the Blue Jays will likely start wanting a new stadium in 10 years (the average life span for a multi-purpose stadium is about 30 years). I think the other thing with the wider footprints on stadiums now-a-days is so that they can host soccer as well. I just think it would be best to put the eventually NFL team we'll be getting in a renovated Skydome, and give the Jays another inconic stadium. Whoever suggested the island airport site, I like that idea.