Artist`s rendering of Pan Am stadium

I personally don't like stadiums that have one side with a massive amount of seats and the other with hardly any. It reminds me too much of BMO Field in Toronto where the TFC play. I think that unbalanced look ruins the whole stadium. It gives it a bush league look.

Why not put 50% of the seats on one side and 50% on the other side?

Yes, very few do go and watch a track meet. But isn't that the reason for Olympic, Pan-Am, Commonwealth, University etc. Games? And these are events which are designed to attract people to attend. Yes, no professional track circuit so I guess I can agree that after the Games are over, it really isn't for track and field as a spectator sport any longer unless it might be part of some other Games. I can see the priority being the main pro tenants that attact the most people. Fair enough but still, I like tracks, I think they are cool. But like the speed skating rink in BC for the Olympics which is being converted to ice hockey rinks.

Anyways let's wait for details and see.

WOW RELAX PEOPLE .. its an artistic rendering ... noone said the final design will end up EXCACTLY like the picture ... its just to give an idea of what it could look like

I think what we're seeing is the 15,000 seat stadium that would be expanded later to more of a CFL size which would give it a balanced look.

BTW, I agree with woody. I'd much prefer the seting to be steeper. it looks way to shallow.

Well, yeah.

Who said anything about that being the final design?

...its just to give an idea of what it could look like
And that's why people here are offering feedback. Isn't that the point of an artist's rendering?

Well it's pretty clear no on listened or appeared to even entertain the idea of elevating the front row track seats so retractable seats can be pulled out for football, soccer and conerts.

Yep that's forward thinking for us.

They probably won't do that unless some private money finances those ammenities.


I hope this is a joke!

The drawing makes me want to give up my seats right now.

The seats are gradually sloped and it looks like the lower bowl of the Rogers Centre. I think I am too spoiled with IWS and the steep seats that they offer.

I hope that we don't get the games, then we can build a stadium the way we want it, without a track. Are we honestly going to attract track and field events in the future? Would people actually go?

The thing that really ticks me off is that we are crying for money from the goverment for help to build a stadium but the city is pushing for 130 mil to fix copps? I understand that you make way more money in hockey but IWS is 80 years old and copps is not even 30.

Can someone answer this question for me. Is the grass area of the stadium drawing as big an area as a football field, or soccer field?

The thing that concerns me is the bid committee may look at this and ask why it's not a complete plan.

A) No press/media facilities shown

B) No facilities of any kind on the east side shown or accounted for.

C) No parking facilities shown

D) No corporate boxes shown

The whole drawing seems incomplete and the bid committee is going to know right away that this couldn't possibly be the final design.

You only have one chance to show your bid book. Would it have killed anyone to show a complete facilty as a design? The bid book is not the place to be going "Well, maybe it will look kinda like this"

If you're paying someone to produce a design, have them make it at least appear complete.

Well, that's my opinion on this anyways.

Why even leave the bid committee with these questions is my point.

Of course the other way to look at it is that you present a very basic design to basically show the location more than anything, in this case the backdrop of the waterfront, and in your speech you say you want to work directly with the Pan-Am Games executive to design the most appropriate corporate boxes, media facilities, parking etc. so it becomes a collaborative approach rather than "this is the it is" type of thing. :wink:

ok feedback is one thing but some of the comments people are saying hahaha and this is all based on the fact that toronto get's the Pan-Am games .. if not i doubt you'll see a stadium anytime soon anyways

Remember, we're talking David Peterson here.:roll:

He can't think that quick on his feet and would have to send it for further study before he could come up with an answer for the bid committee. :lol:

Lets face it fellas, we're spoiled with IWS. As run down as it is, the sightlines are amazing and you cant get any closer to the game with out tripping a player running near the sideline (pun intended). Any stadium that comes out of the Pan Am business will not be as good for watching football. All we can really hope is that they build something with much bigger capacity then 15,000 or even 25,000. CFL is a ticket sales driven league and in order for them to evolve they need 30k stadiums selling out on the regular. This will bring in enough revenue to properly market the teams and to raise the salary cap so we can retain even better talent. The only thing i like about that picture is the fact it's located downtown. I'd rather get an ok stadium downtown then a great stadium somewhere by the airport where it's closer to Caladonia then Gore Park.

What comments?

Can you be specific and then maybe address thsoe comments?

People its a drawing not a scale replica model.

Have you thought that the bid committee may have those numbers/facts in the 200+ page bid book? What do you think they did? Submit a photo of a stadium as their bid for the games?

What exactly is a "geek" architect?

Palying sports is certainly a great thing but it doesn't help you design a stadium. To become an licensed architect it takes three to four years to get a degree, two years of internship, and then write an exam that has a 70% failure rate. The architect not only is responsible for the design, but he is responsable for the entire project, supervising the construction, the engineers and the subtrades, choice of materials, getting permits, and is the lead professional who assumes the legal responsabilty for the safety and inrtegrity of the building from basement to roof. He is also responsable to insure that the design meets all bulding codes all the while responding to needs of the client. To make it short, if the client says that they need a tavk, then thats what they get, if you want IWS sightlines, then that's what you get.

BTW, the drawing doesn't turn my crack either.

The way I see it, it seems that everyone out here wants IWS sightlines, IWS intimacy...heres an idea!

Lets keep IWS....!!!!!!!!!!!!

Does keeping IWS help us keep Bob Young? Let's face it, every owner in any sport is looking to enhance revenue streams since many sports teams don't make a lot of money. I have to think that with Bob's history of talking about a new stadium he sees positive aspects to continue to own the Tiger-Cats, and that is a good thing in my books. Yes, a new stadium might mean some long-time TiCats customers drop by the wayside because "it isn't IWS", but I'm thinking that a new stadium will pull in many other potential TiCat fans to make the ongoing ownership of the TiCats a successful one.

How anyone can give a blanket condemnation of a building that, as of today ,is only a picture with only one vantage point provided of something that they havn't even seen nevermind sat in yet is almost breathtaking in it's stupidity.


OH the "mighty zontar" has spoken again! :roll:

Forgive us "oh mighty one" for voicing an opinion on a design.

Forgive us for casting an opinion without seeing the finished product or sitting in a seat before voicing our opinion.

Perhaps you would have several designs BUILT and then we will pick the one that suits us best! :lol:

One picture in a newspaper from one angle half a mile away and you're whining about sightlines?

How could you possibly ascertain what the sightlines are from one picture.?