Paul come back! Find me the Wrought Iron Coat of Arms!
Yes... They will finanlly get it
No.... They will screw this up royally
hmmm... not sure? how much money will they make from this?
Paul come back! Find me the Wrought Iron Coat of Arms!
sweetOriginally Posted by tfctillidie
someday...
huh?
Paul, will BMO ever get digital ad boards?
I don't really care about advertising but the digital boards (like seattle has) looks so professional and gives any stadium that "european" look.
Thank you.
I remember seeing an old wrought iron Canadian coat of arms in storage at Maple Leaf Gardens once that I don't believe was sold at auction when they closed down MLG.
If it is still in possession by MLSE, could something like that be added/incorporated to BMO field?
Why do this? I think it would be a rocking idea to add character and flavour to the Stadium. I know MLSE don't own BMO field etc (but a man can dream can't he?)
Last edited by billyfly; 03-25-2009 at 10:45 AM.
I'm not arguing, I'm informing. There's a difference
Thanks for the answers Paul.its like i'm not even in the room....
*snip*.
I'll reserve comment on the breadth of my responsibilities. I know what I do for a living. Funny how others feel they can comment. Gotta go. I have to call the infrastructure department.
As for commenting on the breadth of your responsibilities, I'm just giving my impression based on what I know. In the future, I'll just ask you directly.
Toronto FC baby...best team everrrrrrrrrr -Jozy
yeah digital boards would be cool
I agree - that game looked great and that was part of the overall package. We have looked at investing in those but if you check out the ad boards at the next game you'll notice that most of the space goes to league-wide partners...meaning we only see 1/15th of the revenue from those. We are given only a handful of spots for local partners so it is difficult to make the math work. We're working with the league to come up with a different model (and they are responsive)...but I expect that this will take a few years as existing partnership deals come up for renewal.
Yeah I don't remember there being a Dick's Sporting goods in the GTA
Proud Supporter of: FC Bayern München, AIK Solna, Toronto FC, Nottingham Forest FC
For a pres. who is supposed to show some leadership you sure do like to nit pick and prolong debates.I'm not arguing, I'm informing. There's a difference
Thanks Paul, makes sense.
It's funny how you seem to be the one that provokes that behavour, not just in me, but in many different people.
The members of the group know what I do and that's enough for me. Your opinion of my leadership is irrelevant.
Toronto FC baby...best team everrrrrrrrrr -Jozy
He isn't your president as per your "registered user" so why are you harping on him?
Seems you were doing just as much nitpicking.
I just want my Coat of Arms
i find those boards annoying. I prefer how they are now.
Roof & Luxury Suites
This looks great. However, how much of the stadium would really be covered by that "roof". Plus look at how much of the skyline is left with this roof. Roofs cost lots of money too... and unless done right can end up looking pretty crappy... pretty fast (especially when you think about the winds coming off Lake Ontario during the winter).
someday...
And if I know MLSE, and I don't, I know that they would for 100% sure put in luxury boxes on the East side. (The only way they can re-coup the costs of any expansion to their shareholders).
I personally however think that if you doubled the South end zone that would make a huge difference....
1. It would allow some of the 14,000 people on the waiting list to purchase affordable tickets.
2. It would be terrifying for the opposition when attacking that end of the field!
But again... there is no opportunity for Luxury suites + the room to expand in that end is limited.
The East side will likely be the only candidate for expansion.
Thanks for all the replies!
Moderator
Hold on a second. You're saying that the city of Toronto, the one that's currently up to its eyeballs in debt, won't be willing to sell off BMO Field? The feds and provinces are all talking about selling off crown properties left, right, and centre, but suddenly our stadium is something they want to keep? I'm sorry Paul, it doesn't add up. Is it a case of no willingness to sell, or is it perhaps no willingness to buy?its like i'm not even in the room....
My comments on expansion into the north end have been tempered with a "likely scenario" perspective. When MLSEL is looking at expansion, we need to take some factors into account:
1) we do not own the building and will probably never own the building because of its location on Ex Place. all the property there belongs to the city. So if we invest in the building it has to have some sort of payback...and remember we're not adding top price seats. Add to that the payback has to come over 19 games (or so) a year. Just like if you are renting a house, you'd think long and hard before renovating.
Now this is what I don't understand. You've got a patio at the north end filled to the brim with heavy movable tables and chairs, and hundreds of people all crammed together in no orderly fashion and that's okay. But it becomes a fire hazard to build a proper stand with the obligatory corridors and points of access and systematic seating arrangement. Again, are we talking more along the lines of fulfilling our fire safety obligations, or the contract we have with Carlsberg?2) the north patio (and the north limit to the property) is quite tight. When I said we need it for fire egress I was referring to a worst case scenario (thats how the fire marshall looks at it, and rightly so.) for us the worst case is a disaster during a Full House event (rock concert with over 10,000 people on the field). As I understand it all patrons need 2 exit opportunities, and the building needs to be able to evacuate in a number of minutes. Given all of that, expanding on the north is not impossible, just not practical.
Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.
Hey Paul, I know this has nothing to do with BMO expansion, but while you might be still online, why does every MLS team, even the Sounders have an official MLSnet podcast on itunes, but TFC don't? Is it because we're Canadian and have different laws that apply to media distribution?
Fire code is weird like that. Things like distance to the nearest exit change depending on the layout. Having an open area has completely different restrictions from having fixed seating stands. Also, with fixed seating I doubt they would be able to pull off the fire regulations for concerts. That's IMO the biggest issue along with Carlsberg's contract.
???? I can assume that you have not lived in Toronto long, and have no understanding of the city. BMO Field is part of the exhibition grounds; the city has owned this whole area for well over a century. No one in their right-mind would ever think that the city would part with this, any more than the federal government would sell Parliament Hill!
And as for the cities debt issue - the city budget is in better shape than it has been for years, particularly with the recent plan to remove the welfare costs from cities over the next 10 years. Good grief, they recently restored all the transit service they had to cut in the mid-1990s when Harris eliminated much of it's funding for cities - what makes you think things are dire now?
Besides, there are plenty of pieces of city land that they are looking to sell, that they don't need, and can get money for.
8000 for sure in the next two years... And the Argos coming is a foregone conclusion...
Oh really?
Toronto FC baby...best team everrrrrrrrrr -Jozy
Whatever happen's i hope there is NO ROOF
Why not?
its like i'm not even in the room....
My comments on expansion into the north end have been tempered with a "likely scenario" perspective. When MLSEL is looking at expansion, we need to take some factors into account:
1) we do not own the building and will probably never own the building because of its location on Ex Place. all the property there belongs to the city. So if we invest in the building it has to have some sort of payback...and remember we're not adding top price seats. Add to that the payback has to come over 19 games (or so) a year. Just like if you are renting a house, you'd think long and hard before renovating.
2) the north patio (and the north limit to the property) is quite tight. When I said we need it for fire egress I was referring to a worst case scenario (thats how the fire marshall looks at it, and rightly so.) for us the worst case is a disaster during a Full House event (rock concert with over 10,000 people on the field). As I understand it all patrons need 2 exit opportunities, and the building needs to be able to evacuate in a number of minutes. Given all of that, expanding on the north is not impossible, just not practical.
I'll reserve comment on the breadth of my responsibilities. I know what I do for a living. Funny how others feel they can comment. Gotta go. I have to call the infrastructure department.
I hope this isn't taken the wrong way, I'm more just curious in a "I never though about it before" kind of way. If worst case is evacuating the building in a matter of mins with the floor open, how does a place like the ACC differ in fire saftey requirements than what BMO would look like with a closed-in north end?
Really I'd rather be safe then build a north stand, but I'm just curious!
Thanks
Last edited by cy43; 03-25-2009 at 10:08 PM. Reason: a dash
ok so now I've never thought of it before in enough depth to comment intelligently so take these as someone who is not an expert in fire code:
ACC has really cool fire safety systems. I've been in there when they've been testing AND the building has many many stairwells and exits and each has air handling systems to create a wall of fresh air to create walls that fire cannot go through and people can. The air handling and water handling systems are something you can't replicate in an outdoor facility.
but thats just a guess.
Last edited by mlsintoronto; 03-26-2009 at 07:23 PM. Reason: Too early in the morning. Original post made no sense!
Nice photoshop job
Really decent work from footy supporters, who knew some can photoshop and chant, good on ya lads.
If I send you my photo can you make a balding almost 60 year old worn out retired firefighter regain that hot look made me a chick magnet in a uniform? NO not the chicks in the retirement home!!!!!
And while yer at it, I'm playing with my brass band aat the St. Lawrence Centre on April 5, but can get off during the game. Can't find a ticket to save my soul. Reminds me of the shock when I decided to try and get from London to take in a Raptors game. The son who works in TO got a bonus and paid $275 for each for tickets 12 rows pas the backboard and 15 rows up. Man those seats sucked but at least I can die having said I was at an nba game.
But I played football (soccer) until the arthritis took my walking to a waddle and osteoporosis killed any idea of kicking a ball, well maybe with my new grandson, though I want to tackle anyone with a thing that looks like a ball.
As to the stadium, the high def big screen TV is as close as I can get, and I hook the sound to my gig speakers and turn the living room into a supporters section. Streamers, beer cups on the floor and I send the wife to Bouclair for the game.
I have to give her cash cause some guy stole her credit card, but I'm not reporting it, he's spending less money than she did.
So if I'm in Toronto and want to take in pre-game and watch in a bar which one? I've lived in Toronto before, and am staying at the Metropolitan on Chestnut street. \
If I meet the right guy I might even spring for dues, I hear Dalton is giving me $1000 to spend. Actually it's my money anyway, maybe I should save it LOL.
Basically, you're right.
HUGE differences between them. One you have an open air stadium with both fixed and non fixed seating areas. The other you have a fully enclosed arena, with a massive sprinkler system and as you mentioned a state of the art air handling system. Sprinkler systems, especially more modern ones, improve your fire rating drastically. Something, as you mentioned, cannot be replicated in an outdoor facility. Also as you mentioned, the ACC has a bunch of major exits that are considered means of egress. At BMO, there's really only one means of egress for the whole north end of the stadium. Problem being, for the means of egress to meet fire code, there has to be no obstruction or immovable objects that prevent people from exiting and it has to exit to safe and public way. Another bonus the ACC has, is they can (whether they do I don't know) provide 'safe rooms' so that the people don't necessarily have to exit the building to be protected from fire. For BMO, being that it's an open air stadium, the patrons must be fully outside the stadium to be considered 'safe'.
Anyway, that's off the top of my head... early in the morning so I may have missed something.
In the interest of the "you learn something everyday" category...
The difference between the Building Code and the Fire Code is this; the Building Code describes how your building is constructed or laid out, the Fire Code describes how your building is used. Section 9 of the Fire Code deals with renovations but it only applies to buildings that are so old that they do not comply with the Building Code - I don't think this applies to BMO Field.
I expect that any changes to the stadium would be a Building Code issue. Within the Building Code BMO Field would be classified as an Assembly structure (people assemble there). I cannot quote you the exact sections that apply because the code is not available online (they sell it for big bucks). There are different types of Assembly classifications and a buiding like BMO Field might have some areas that are two or more types. I think the stands would be one type while the beer garden would be another. Each type of assembly has it's own formula regarding the maximum occupancy and the type of exists. For instance, a movie theatre can have more people per square metre than an office building. That is because the theatre has fixed seating while an office is expected to have more large furniture.
When you design a building you have to account for the occupancy load and provide adaquate "means of egress" (ways to get out). That's why we use professional architects instead of photoshop guys to draw blueprints (even though the photoshop pictures in this thread are very cool).
If Paul says they can't find a way to redesign the beer garden to make money and still comply with exit requirements, I tend to believe him. It is not an easy thing to do and I'd expect that MLSE has explored it in detail.
Don't forget MLSE is only a tenant in the building. Typically when you rent you don't renovate. Any construction you do automatically belongs to the landlord and the landlord has the responsibility to maintain it. I think the City of Toronto is the landlord in this case and they should not be looking at what is good for BMO Field for the next 5 - 10 years. They should be looking at what is good for BMO Field for the next 50 years. If (heaven forbid) TFC stops being their tenent they are stuck with a very specialized building and are still obliged by law to maintain it to a safe standard. As far as I know, no one has come up with a good use for Maple Leaf Gardens but the owners are still carrying the costs of maintaining it. The old Exhibition Stadium was not torn down to make way for a more proffitable venture. It was torn down because that was cheaper than maintaining a building that no one knew what to do with.
As a fan I'd love to see some kind of expansion at BMO Field but Paul talks to people who see BMO Field as a business venture so it comes down to the math of how do you make the most money with the least amount of risk. They know they can sell more seats but they won't expand until they find a way to do it where all the key players make enough money to justify the risks involved. I'm not sure this is the right ecconomic climate to be taking a gamble on future revenue. Instead, this is a time to provide you customers better value to keep them loyal. Judging by what we saw in K.C. last week, that looks like what TFC is doing (at least I hope so).
BTW the cool air system Paul described at the ACC are called smoke curtains and they are becoming common in large assembly areas because they create isolation zones and reduce the requirements for mass egress capability.
P.S. Paul - You are a funny guy! I love to read your posts.
As I taught Building and Fire Code, and was part of the enforcment process for over 10 years as an Assistant to the Fire Marshal I can clarify some things.
1. The Fire Code is a maintenance document. For existing buildings. It provided for some retrofit of buildings in Section 9, however it has squat to do with an expansion.
2. The building code calls bmo an open air facility, unless you start enclosing spaces. Putting on a roof would change the classification from A Division 4 to 3. A beer garden, unless it has a permanent roof, walls etc. is A Division 2 and thus the fire separation requirements and fire protection and egress becomes an issue. Also I don't remember exactly when they built the original structure but the insanity that doubled the water closet requirements for assembly occupancies (Ie the women got double the toilets in a recent building code change which has stopped lots of restaurants from updating or expanding), without giving any leeway to the building divisions.
So an open air non combustible structure has some lenient regulations. There are still restrictions of travel distances, and the number of fixed seats before you hit an aisle. I've been retired for quite a while but I think I remember the Fire Code (included old arenas and baseball stadiums) that you could not pass more than 15 seats to get to an aisle. Then because the stairs have to handle who's coming down you need 9mm of clear stairs per person. Then when you get to grade or level space you need 6mm per person.
The problem with adding on the top another deck that covers the lower portion of a structure gets you into an interpretation problem. If the lower deck is no longer open air you have to meet certain requirements. And that deck above needs fire protection from below.
If there is a rose in the process, it is that the code is no longer written in stone. Due to the objective based code system now in place an engineer can make something that does not conform to the existing code, but meets the objective in a broad sense. Most of the guys I worked with and still have breakfast with once a week, 2 engineers mostly retired, and a guy with a large construcion company all agree, most don't want to put a stamp on a plan that makes them vulnerable.
The private boxes are a sticky wicket. Now you have fire separation requirments, perhaps sprinklers, egress issues, handicapped access issues, elevators for assembly occupancies washrooms on that level...YIKES.
Not a lot of easy solutions. I suspect you are going to see the thing infilled, meaning they will put seats in corners. I do not know how much higher you can go without making aisles wider, nor am I really an expert on how you add the washroom facilities, or even calculate that.
The whole thing will take some fancy footwork..........
Posting Permissions
