Pan Am Games-New Stadium?

any stadium development should be used as a catalyst to clean up some of the brownfields in the city....somewhere near burlington street where there would be relatively easy access from the red hill expressway and the qew

may be eligible for some fed and prov money with a cleanup included?

Boring!

I'd much prefer the Rheem property near downtown and the waterfront.

From the TSN Live Broadcast, RE:Ottawa Franchise, the commissioner believes that old stadiums throughout the league, specifically places such as Ivor Wynne, should be refurbished.

Something must be done soon. Any excuse to get someone other than the city to build or at least help for a stadium is all fine with me.

Ivor Wynne days are truly numbered. If you go by the stadium today, you will see construction crews installing all new stairwells on the South side, because no engineer would pass them for the upcoming season. Bandage after bandage. The whole place with need repaired/replaced in a few years. The cost will not be cheap.
It comes down to how much money is the city willing to spend to just fix up an old place. When that cost reaches many millions a year, why not built new? Added revenue for parking, concessions, sponsers entices even more.

A new stadium can be built for under 200 mill. Billionare Bob could give 30, McMaster and Hamilton, 30 mill more. If you could get someone to help foot the rest of the bill, go for it. The city could spend over 20 million over a few years on repairs anyway. I believe they already have a yearly 1.4 million budget on IWS already.

If all the "games" stadium options fall through, you will see IWS completely revamped. They can only hold off so long. I, along with many others would love a new venue. The notion that sightlines will be lost is ridiculous. I will admit than IWS has 7 rows DANGEROUSLY too close to the action and you will never replicate them, but for the other 25 000 seats, they will be better to sit in and view. If you have ever walked up the stands, the steps are HUGE, the stadium is very graduall.

I noticed this study published in the journal Land Economics which I thought might be of interest to some here. I posted this in the Gades forum with the discussion of the stadium in Ottawa a concern.


Title: How does a new sports stadium affect housing values? The case of FedEx Field.

Authors: Tu, C. C.

Author Affiliation: Burnham-Moores Center for Real Estate, School of Business Administration, University of San Diego, 5998 Alcalá Park, San Diego, CA 92110, USA.

Source: Land Economics, 2005 (Vol. 81) (No. 3) 379-395

Abstract:

This study investigates how the construction of a sports stadium affects residential housing values. Hedonic analyses are conducted to assess the price differentials between housing units in close proximity to FedEx Field (home of the Washington Redskins) in Prince George's County, Maryland, USA, and comparable units away from it. Using a difference-in-difference approach, the study finds that properties near FedEx Field were sold at a discount; however, this price differential was narrowed after the completion of the stadium. Contrary to neighbourhood activists' concern that sports venues adversely affect property values, the findings of this study indicate that a new stadium improves housing values in the surrounding area.

Never mind just housing especially business. Hotels, resturants, bars, shops, etc. benefit big time.

The notion that sightlines will be lost is ridiculous. I will admit than IWS has 7 rows DANGEROUSLY too close to the action and you will never replicate them, but for the other 25 000 seats, they will be better to sit in and view. [b]If you have ever walked up the stands, the steps are HUGE, the stadium is very graduall[/b].
Actually, I believe the opposite is true.

Ivor Wynn is, by modern standards, reasonably steep (I sit up high :lol:) and the rows quite narrow. The difference in steepness between it and places like the Rogers Centre is quite pronounced (at least in the lower bowl - I've never been in the 500 level). At the ACC, the upper bowl is steeper than IWS but the rows further apart, and the lower bowl less steep.

The short distance between stand and sideline is only one reason that fans feel so close to the action at IWS. The other is the tightly compressed rows - the last row in the North Stands at IWS is Row 54 and you're still pretty close - 54 rows back in a lot of stadia and you've got a completely different view.

That's also why a seating retrofit, where they take out the benches and put in modern chairs with backs, isn't practical at IWS - there isn't enough room between rows for a proper depth seat without killing all the knee room.