Rogers Centre... wasted potential?

[wonderboy905]

Imagine if the Skydome was engineered in a way that allowed it to open up to the city? I realize it was the first of the retractable roof stadiums (well... ones that actually work) and thus is a bit of a dinosaur... but after a recent visit to PNC park in Pittsburgh I'm sure we could have ended up a stadium immersed into the skyline as well as any with an immaculate view. The location is right, the interaction with its surroundings is all wrong.

PNC in Pittsburgh:

Comerica in Detroit ain't bad either:

Jacob's field got it right:

Safeco in Seattle demonstrates what you can really do with a retractable roof:

I know we've talked about the Skydome in countless other threads and I think Rogers has done an excellent job with it (other than rename it to the Rogers Centre, I guess the Rogers would quickly be dropped from Rogers Skydome)... but all one needs to do is visit the nearby parks in Detroit, Cleveland and of course Pittsburgh to only get jealous at what could have been right here.

Although I think Cincinatti goofed with theirs...

 

[jayomatic]

I'm finding many of the new ballparks which have been built are great throwback ballparks. But i was thinking this morning that all f these parks are starting to look the exact same. Red brick. Iron beams. etc.

I hope when it comes time to replace the skydome, we call up Mr Caltrava and have him make us something that will sparkle. Why can't a baseball stadium be as funky as an olympic or soccer stadium?

 

[samsonyuen]

It's a shame the SkyDome was planned at the end of the mega multiuse stadium, and right before the intimate open-air ballpark. I don't know if it's that practical to have open-air in Toronto though, as Toronto has the coldest of the MLB cities and the latest to get rid of its snow weather.

 

[wyliepoon]

Why can't a baseball stadium be as funky as an olympic or soccer stadium?

If the Expos had stayed in Montreal instead of becoming the Washington Nationals, they might have gotten a pretty modernist downtown stadium in the form of Labatt Park:

www.ballparks.com/baseball/index.htm

The Washington Nationals are building a ballpark that will move away from historicist architecture towards a design that is more modern. However, the Labatt Park design in my opinion is the best attempt at mixing modernist architecture with baseball. Unfortunately it will probably never be built.

re: SkyDome

I agree that Toronto might have been better off had the Jays been able to get a retro stadium that fits in the city better, but I'm quite happy with the SkyDome right now, and I think that other baseball fans in Toronto feel the same way. Interestingly, while SkyDome doesn't appear to fit in with the rest of the city, the city is beginning to fit itself around SkyDome. The CN Tower used to be the only building you can see out the playing field. Now the Cityplace buildings are starting to pop up over the left field. Though it's nothing like the skyline views from the ballparks in Detroit or Pittsburgh, but it's still an improvement.

I've already mentioned this in previous threads about ballparks... retro architecture and skyline views don't bring people to the ballpark, it's the baseball team that does. Even though I haven't been to a ballgame this year (I plan to go at least once this season), I think that the new and improved Jays this year have created a great fan atmosphere this season.

 

[samsonyuen]

Labatt Park, if it came around a decade earlier would've saved the team, I reckon. The pride of having to use Olympic Stadium didn't help the 'xpos any.

I agree, CityPlace, while not beautiful or unique buildings, are making that area a lot more interesting.

 

[shmoopie nhi]

I agree that the additional density should bring that "city feel" to the Rogers Centre over the next few years.

I think there would be little support for a new ballpark for Toronto, considering Rogers bought the Dome so cheaply. It's all excitement and novelty for the first few years, but these types of projects have the potential to lose their appeal to a tax-paying public after a while.

 

[nassauone]

I have seen three games at PNC park as well as shooting Jason Bay there earlier this year (being at field level was a trip let me tell you!) and it is by far the best park in the majors. The respect it gives the fans is amazing. Walking in you almost go right onto the left outfield. There is room for picnics, you can arrive by boat on the river and they will 'valet' park it for you. The view of fthe city as well with the bridges is amazing - if I recall correctly there is a fireworks show every sat night game of of the bridges. They also close the surrounding blocks off to traffic about three hours before each game and there are bands, street preformers fluttering about. You can also drink you purchased beer openly without (on the street within the selected zones) without being ticketed. Too bad there team sucks.

I would still like to see the day (when the demise of the Rogers Centre is immenent) that good ol' Ted takes it to the island airport location and builds a new outdoor stadium there.

 

[adma]

I would still like to see the day (when the demise of the Rogers Centre is immenent) that good ol' Ted takes it to the island airport location and builds a new outdoor stadium there.

That would horrify a lot of airport-opponent Island-lovers at least as much as the extant airport does--baseball's Hanlan's Point heritage notwithstanding. (And don't forget that it would all-but-inevitably involve the dreaded "bridge/tunnel to the island".)

Methinks still that Skydome's there for keeps, almost in spite of itself...

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: Skydome... wasted potential?

Given that stadia only have about a 30 year lifespan, The Skydome doesn't have that many years left before it is imploded and replaced.

 

[adma]

Re: Skydome... wasted potential?

Though my comment is more on the nature of Skydome (and of Toronto, and Toronto urbanism). That is, especially now girded by Cityplace, it's less inherently disposable/replacable than your average imploded US stadium.

So it might be in its way a white elephant, an albatross, etc etc--but I don't think the "30 year lifespan" rule quite applies here...

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Does it apply anywhere?

 

[adma]

In a lot of American burgs, it's practically by "banal 60s/70s (sub)urbanism gone awry" default--a throwaway society sort of thing. Maybe it was semi-anticipated/allowed for; but it's a real "be careful what you wish for" situation--that is, to demolish something this imposing after only 3 or 4 decades blares out "failure", regardless.

I've said it before; Skydome's saving grace is that for all its retardataire-megastructural banality, it was built and planned as a symbiotically "urban" facility--and the rise of Cityplace is making that ever more clear. Maybe, like Wembley Stadium, it'll be demolished at age 75--or just drastically rehabilitated in the interrim. But not 30.

Heck, I can't even see Montreal's Big O imploded away anytime soon--maybe because, after all, Montreal is Montreal...

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Is it a rule that stadia have a lifespan of 30 years or is it that it's been about 30 years since the round of multi-sport concrete monstrosities were built and we're now fed up with them? Unless their structural soundness and upkeep result in a technical lifespan of 30 years, we'll have to wait 30 years to see what becomes of the current round...will they follow Busch Memorial into the dust or will they just be renovated if necessary like Yankee stadium? And maybe Skydome is already beloved enough that it will be renovated regardless of how temporarily old-fashioned it may become in another generation.

"it was built and planned as a symbiotically "urban" facility"

While it does not snuggle into its surroundings seamlessly or effortlessly, it does so better than most baseball parks. Camden Yards is still hemmed in by surface parking lots, as is PNC Park, and lots of other parks are just stuck in run down industrial districts because that's where they were easy to put...Jacobs Field does seem to get it mostly right, though. All urban stadia are in some ways massive intrusions, or like periodically enjoyable splinters, but, in comparison, it seems like Toronto has taken its intrusion in stride and is slowly but consciously forming a pearl around it.

 

[SD2]

SkyDome is fine. It'll last a lot longer than 30 years, I hope. It's still a good place to watch a game and with Rogers committed to making improvements it should be a destination for some time to come.

For all the complaining people do about Toronto not 'thinking big', why would you want to get rid of such a good example?

It's the first of it's kind and an engineering marvel in it's day. I remember watching a show on the Discovery Channel a year or two ago on the world's greatest feats of engineering and it came in 10th, after all these years.

 

[TdotTrickyRicky]

Skydome will be renovated many times but I wouldn't be surprised if it outlasts most of us. Stadiums only last 30 years in places where they were completely ill conceived or when the collective folly of the population spikes for a good 5 years period. When people think about it a bit and build it well they should last a few thousand years at least.