28K seats with a roof for $134 million and a nice looking design IMO? pretty good deal comparatively.
or without a roof for only $117 million.
and yet THF at 22,500 seats cost $145 million without a roof, while IGF came in at $204 million with a roof.
something is amiss here…
IGF has close to an additional 5500 seats, and upper deck, and an extra 14 private luxury suites than this design which would account for some of the disparity. This design appears to be single level, though the descriptor says split level concourse:
I'm not defending the IGF price though, it did come in over budget for a number of reasons, some of them unavoidable, some should've been avoided and could've been by putting more experienced and knowledgeable people in place starting from the getgo with the architects to those managing the project. Still, I'm glad to have it to attend games.
I was just pointing out that both THF and IGF cost much more than this roofed commissioned project comparitively, especially considering THF will hold only 22,500 in seating.
IGF is a crowning glory of a venue and worth the price paid IMO, but in this day and age all CFL stadiums should have a protective roof/awning and am quite disappointed that THF will not.
Ivor Wynn , includes the cost of demolition and soft costs associated with relocating the team. The cost of the stadium itself is less than 100 million.
I have been saying Saskatoon is the obvious site for years, since the recent hotbed in the province.
The actual construction budget for THF is under $120 million, with $29 million in "management fees" now added on. This "fee" was supposedly being used to pay overtime to the construction union (who just might be generous donators to the next Liberal re-election campaign?)
Here is a quote from the Hamilton Spectator:
The construction costs for Hamilton's Pan Am stadium will be $119.1 million, less than the $145 million budget. However, city staff say that "soft costs" like contingence funds and architects will eat up the remaining $35 million.
I was disappointed when I saw the design too that it didn't include any form of a roof. Argument can be made that it can always be added later but in reality, what is the likelihood someone will pay the costs of adding a large ticket item down the road?
I don't think anyone would argue that Saskatchewan couldn't support two teams with the fan base. The question is will the Riders organization allow another team in the province that could split their fanbase? With a new stadium in the works for themselves, I think that answer is a pretty firm no.
I'm fine with no roof at THF. When you actually think about fully outdoor football stadiums not only in Canada but even look at NFL Stadiums or the big NCAA stadiums in the USA - very few have that many seats covered. (I'm not talking about retractable roof stadiums that when open have almost all seats covered, I'm talking about fully outdoor stadiums. At most a few top rows in an Upper deck are covered.
If you check out googlemaps and do a search on most football stadiums in North America and do the satellite or earth view where you get the directly overhead shot of stadiums - you can see the vast majority seats are not covered - other than in some cases - like Heinz Field for example in Pittsburgh - where a few upper deck row seats are covered but the vast majority of seats are not.
If not putting a roof on THF saved $20 - $30 million or more (of taxpayers money) - thank-you for no roof - I'll buy the cheap rain poncho instead.
Hurry up Cowtown, you need to get on board with everybody else! :cowboy:
TravelPatB wrote: If not putting a roof on THF saved $20 - $30 million or more (of taxpayers money) - thank-you for no roof - I'll buy the cheap rain poncho instead. :):thup:
Stadium costs always look better at the "commission" stage.
when you consider, a CFL stadium gets used 10-11 times per year, then factor in how many of those games would even require a roof....maybe 2 if unlucky.
does a $30M roof seem worth it when only needed 2 times per year? 20 times in a decade?
i can do without the roof.
they can always add it in later if justified during a bigger expansion.
A roof greatly expands the number of days/nights a stadium can be used throughout the year, for non-football events.
what has IGF been used for besides bombers/bison games?
i know there was a big church gathering there as a ‘test run’ prior to opening.
I have never been to Saskatchewan and live farther away than probably anyone on this forum but for anyone on here outside of North America on a temporary basis.
Damn am I excited by this idea. :cowboy:
Paul McCartney and Taylor Swift have already had concerts there. Also going to host soccer games. Don't know if any concerts there this year.
And those concerts wouldn’t have happened without the roof?