Toronto Rogers Centre Renovations | ?m | ?s | Toronto Blue Jays | Populous

[C-mac]

I don't mean to be rude but the argument keeps changing here. First c-mac said that the outfield walls were the issue in bringing in natural light here:

Which obviously knocking out whole portions of the exterior wall poses a problem when there is a hotel on the other side. (not to mention structural considerations.

Then you suggested no the issue is the grandstand behind home plate and first base was the issue here:

Which obviously you need the grandstand for fans to sit in, so knocking those out is a problem

Now you shift further and say that the entire diamond should be rotated

Which you would think if they were going to do that they would have done so in parallel with the renovation over the winter. What's the point of completely refurbishing the outfield sections if you are going to turn around in a season or two, and rotate the field such that the outfield area now becomes the 3'rd base/LF side? And you'd still have the issue of the southern portion of the grandstand STILL making up part of the first base/right field corner, which isn't coming down... There are numerous reason why the field is remaining in it's current configuration.

The 100 level area already has been opened up, and does flow nicely from the concourse into the bowl. They could open up all or part of the 200 level, that would involve removing about 5-6 rows from each section, and some relocation of concession stands and bathrooms. A significant project. The 500 level really can't be opened up because it is the literal stands that block the space between the bowl and the concourse (granted they did it in a few select spots with the outfield district.

The fact remains that the Rogers centre isn't a traditional baseball ballpark and wanting to have an experience like you'd get at say Camden yards, or Great American Ballpark isn't possible.

I'm not going to get into all the details, but the argument didn't change here all and you clearly didn't read the posts fully. Different points were brought up about different issues and situations, regarding what could be done and what might done. Points were made about why they haven't been done and if they can or can't be done and what out the outcome would be. I have no idea why you aggregated the entire discussion into some type of "argument".

We all know Rogers Centre isn't a traditional ballpark and we can't have that experience, but we are stuck with it and Rogers is trying fix it as best as they can so it's simply a discussion of possibilities, what's realistic, and chances it can be done.

 

[sixrings]

I don't mean to be rude but the argument keeps changing here. First c-mac said that the outfield walls were the issue in bringing in natural light here:

Which obviously knocking out whole portions of the exterior wall poses a problem when there is a hotel on the other side. (not to mention structural considerations.

Then you suggested no the issue is the grandstand behind home plate and first base was the issue here:

Which obviously you need the grandstand for fans to sit in, so knocking those out is a problem

Now you shift further and say that the entire diamond should be rotated

Which you would think if they were going to do that they would have done so in parallel with the renovation over the winter. What's the point of completely refurbishing the outfield sections if you are going to turn around in a season or two, and rotate the field such that the outfield area now becomes the 3'rd base/LF side? And you'd still have the issue of the southern portion of the grandstand STILL making up part of the first base/right field corner, which isn't coming down... There are numerous reason why the field is remaining in it's current configuration.

The 100 level area already has been opened up, and does flow nicely from the concourse into the bowl. They could open up all or part of the 200 level, that would involve removing about 5-6 rows from each section, and some relocation of concession stands and bathrooms. A significant project. The 500 level really can't be opened up because it is the literal stands that block the space between the bowl and the concourse (granted they did it in a few select spots with the outfield district.

The fact remains that the Rogers centre isn't a traditional baseball ballpark and wanting to have an experience like you'd get at say Camden yards, or Great American Ballpark isn't possible.

I agree. That this is too late. I was responding to someone suggesting if you knock out the back wall it would bring in light. All I was saying is that the other side would significantly have been better since it wouldnt be meters away from a business building. Again I agree this is too late in the game for that.

Although i still wonder how hard it would be to completely take off the roof and add grass and drainage.

I think the big problem with no roof is that level 100 is completely exposed to the sun. The 500 level wouldn’t cover too much. It would be crazy hot.

 

[G.L.17]

Roof testing underway this morning.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1646164118162866178

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Yeah, they have to wait until it's above zero a few days before they can start whatever the test regime is.
They were saying last night, they could actually have it open for games by the weekend which, I am fairly certain, would be the earliest it's ever been open by several weeks.

And FWIW, I definitely think the new digs look good, at least on TV. I'm not entirely sold on the walls and facings being such a dark blue but I think that's just a question of getting used to it and I'd definitely like to see it in person and in the sunlight before judging.

 

[C-mac]

Yeah, they have to wait until it's above zero a few days before they can start whatever the test regime is.
They were saying last night, they could actually have it open for games by the weekend which, I am fairly certain, would be the earliest it's ever been open by several weeks.

And FWIW, I definitely think the new digs look good, at least on TV. I'm not entirely sold on the walls and facings being such a dark blue but I think that's just a question of getting used to it and I'd definitely like to see it in person and in the sunlight before judging.

I was trying to figure out why the roof wasn't open last night. Didn't realize there was some weird time frame of warm temp that prevents them from opening it.

I 100% think the new digs look better, but I don't think it's as much of a change as everyone else seems to think it is. I mean people were making seem like it was a completely different ball park. As I've stated over and over, it's still a concrete bunker which is the main issue with it. The main issue is that walls are so damn high that even when the roof is open, you still kind of feel like your in a dome. It's a kin of having sun roof in your car as opposed have a full convertible.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

I'm not going to get into all the details, but the argument didn't change here all and you clearly didn't read the posts fully. Different points were brought up about different issues and situations, regarding what could be done and what might done. Points were made about why they haven't been done and if they can or can't be done and what out the outcome would be. I have no idea why you aggregated the entire discussion into some type of "argument".

We all know Rogers Centre isn't a traditional ballpark and we can't have that experience, but we are stuck with it and Rogers is trying fix it as best as they can so it's simply a discussion of possibilities, what's realistic, and chances it can be done.

eh. The conversation went:
"There needs to be more natural light. Lets open up some of the exterior walls. Especially in the outfield that's a real issue"
"Uh, there's a hotel on the other side"
"Yeah but the real real issue is the South (home plate to first base) area. We should open that space up"
"Uh, that's the main grandstand. Fans need to sit there"
"Yeah but if they rotate the field"
...

No, just no.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I think we need to accept the stadium is what it is. They're not knocking out a wall and there is even less of a chance they will re-orient the field. They'd have done it this year, if they were doing it (which I'm sure they never seriously considered).

Anyhow, I was wondering how everything would look int he daylight and today's roof test + CTV helicopter has provided the answer:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1646194557535633422

 

[JMSRead]

I’m not against the renovation. I love the location. But the stadium always looked great when it was packed. And it has always sold out the opener. Let’s wait till 25k are in the building.

I actually think smaller crowds are when the renos will really shine. Fewer empty seats and better aesthetics will help a lot for those games. It'll look a lot less cavernous.

I think the renos will also help out when the Jays go through a rebuilding period. All those bars and things to do will be a nice draw when your team isn't great.

 

[G.L.17]

Keegan Matheson uploaded this photo from his twitter account. This is looking clean.

 

[ryanbruins17]

My biggest gripe with the roof is usually the early part of the season. Obviously the technical requirements don't allow this, but in my perfect world, it would only be closed for rain.

As for reorienting the field, my gut tells me the biggest problem with that is they would've needed to do that before digging out the infield for the dirt before 2016. Now they're kinda locked into this.
Curious to see how they manage infield renos. Lots of space from home plate to the 100L concourse. Increase the slope somehow? Time will tell.

 

[sixrings]

eh. The conversation went:
"There needs to be more natural light. Lets open up some of the exterior walls. Especially in the outfield that's a real issue"
"Uh, there's a hotel on the other side"
"Yeah but the real real issue is the South (home plate to first base) area. We should open that space up"
"Uh, that's the main grandstand. Fans need to sit there"
"Yeah but if they rotate the field"
...

No, just no.

Check this thread. I have mocked the idea of relocating. This is a done issue. We will see the final product after level 100 is complete. But what I said is accurate. Take down that hotel wall and it’s not going to be pretty. The other direction would have made more sense. But it’s all in the past now. I’m happy with the stadium. Please don’t paint me in the im not happy crowd. We’ve both been here long enough to know that’s not true.

 

[sixrings]

My biggest gripe with the roof is usually the early part of the season. Obviously the technical requirements don't allow this, but in my perfect world, it would only be closed for rain.

As for reorienting the field, my gut tells me the biggest problem with that is they would've needed to do that before digging out the infield for the dirt before 2016. Now they're kinda locked into this.
Curious to see how they manage infield renos. Lots of space from home plate to the 100L concourse. Increase the slope somehow? Time will tell.

Yes it’s too late now.

 

[sixrings]

I actually think smaller crowds are when the renos will really shine. Fewer empty seats and better aesthetics will help a lot for those games. It'll look a lot less cavernous.

I think the renos will also help out when the Jays go through a rebuilding period. All those bars and things to do will be a nice draw when your team isn't great.

I always thought just having level 100 and 200 would be perfect. Charge more for seats. And it would be packed every night.

 

[UrbanOzz]

How hard is it to retrofit it to drain? I’m semi serious with these questions since I prefer no rain during my games but I can understand those that want no roof. The location is what’s most important to me.

from my understading, very hard.

i haven't seem schematics but apparently all the electrical and mechanical is JUST below the surface so that would all have to be relocated. The mound for example is an elevator. it sinks below the surface for concerts etc and then comes back for games. they don't rebuild it to spec height every game.

with all the concrete involved, it would be a tremendous undertaking to get all the drainage in place. that's just the field, you need to factor in drainage for the stands too.

it's a concrete monster. it has a 137,000 cubic metres of concrete (the CN Tower has 40,500 cubic metres for reference)

 

[T.E.C.II]

A new roof would also be a massive undertaking, probably the most complicated.