The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I guess if you're able to sell it off for the price of the cleanup, bit by bit and then get land taxes off of them, then that could be better off for the city?

 

Bingo. This is what ive have been trying to say for a while now. To me the key debate is not whether or not calgarynext is a good or bad idea. The key debate is the city better off with calgarynext or better off cleaning up the land and then selling it for developlement with future property taxes? I vote the latter and I honestly don't think it would be close. 

[DirtyDeeds]

2 hours ago, Protestor said:

I don't understand why people lump the cleanup cost into the cost of the CalgaryNEXT proposal. The cleanup needs to happen regardless, and it's the city's responsibility. So really we're just looking at the cost of the stadium itself + related amenities.

While the cleanup costs will always be there(until cleaned up), I don't think the mayor or city council was ready to address this cleanup at this time or anytime soon. Think of it as swept under the rug and not having to deal with it yet.

 

Calgary Next just lifted the carpet and offered to help take it out to the garbage and put new carpets in. More importantly it brought the contamination to the front of discussion when no one around city hall wanted to talk about it. Thus part of the resistance to Calgary Next.

[DirtyDeeds]

2 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am not sure if that was a smart move or not. It might have made the proposal more palatable because it gives the city more reason to assist the Flames in an arena. Having said that, should the city be against the proposal (and say, want it located elsewhere), then it raises an ugly political issue that they want to ignore. I suspect that the city wants the arena in Victoria Park given how many residents have been displaced from the area over time. 

Close.

 

If you talk to Calgary Next people I am pretty sure they think they were trying to help out Calgary by cleaning this up this long standing problem. 

 

If you could get a straight answer from the politicians in the City they likely were not ready to address this problem especially financially. All this extra money they just found from capitol expenditures in various departments is much better spent on fancy high image projects, not some dirty cleanup from ages past.

[conundrumed]

3 hours ago, Protestor said:

I don't understand why people lump the cleanup cost into the cost of the CalgaryNEXT proposal. The cleanup needs to happen regardless, and it's the city's responsibility. So really we're just looking at the cost of the stadium itself + related amenities.

You also have to consider KK said to the city, "and here's where".

Undoubtedly touching a lot of nerves.

[TheBurn]

Let's keep in mind that the flames are worth 410 million. How bout the owners give up some of their ownership to the city (say 30%) if they want 600 million dollars. It has been discussed how arenas don't bring a huge amount back to the economy and the current funding relies on ticket sales going up. We already have higher than average ticket prices. Ownership should match any public funds going into the project and the ticket levy makes up any difference. 

[TheBurn]

The creosole cleanup is not posing any threat unless development happens on the land as you will have to dig four stories down to build the foundation and this changes the drainage in the area. This exposes the contaminants to enter the water table. To add to this, the city must make available the land in question when it already has the stampede grounds used for entertainment infrastructure. I guess some us flames fans are not about fiscal responsibility. Explains the deficit.

[travel_dude]

Sure, ignore it for another 50 years and some future generation should have to deeal with it.  No point in developing land if you can use existing land.  If it was an oil spill, Jane Fonda and Leo DiCaprio would be up here preaching about the spoil of our civilization.  

<sarcasm off>

 

 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

Sure, ignore it for another 50 years and some future generation should have to deeal with it.  No point in developing land if you can use existing land.  If it was an oil spill, Jane Fonda and Leo DiCaprio would be up here preaching about the spoil of our civilization.  

<sarcasm off>

 

 

I think the Flames and the City need to start over using the West End ( right thing to do for the community). Scale down the project to an Arena/Entertainment Centre. The Stampede group should convert the Saddledome for other functions, it is still a good building and no more parking gets taken out of play.

[DirtyDeeds]

I have to agree with Cross here. KK really botched it. He waited too long, He tried to get just about everything (all the fieldhouses arenas etc) in one plan under the guise it would save the public money and clean up a controversial environment problem.

 

The City now thinks this project will cost a lot more than the Calgary Next estimates and the City already told the Flames in 2011 that the West end was a poor spot.

 

I am pretty  sure the City will donate for an arena but wants to do its own thing on the field houses part. I also think the Mayor could have been a lot more diplomatic than what he was with his "Calgary Next is dead" comments.

[Cowtownguy]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Sure, ignore it for another 50 years and some future generation should have to deeal with it.  No point in developing land if you can use existing land.  If it was an oil spill, Jane Fonda and Leo DiCaprio would be up here preaching about the spoil of our civilization.  

<sarcasm off>

 

 

We sure have a lot of USians concerned about Alberta these days. Between Fonda, DiCaprio, and Bettman, you would think we would have all of the answers to every problem we face. By the way, can somebody please tell Leo that it fricken well snowed here yesterday!?

[DirtyDeeds]

Leo it snowed here yesterday:

I think I got a bit more than Calgary did

[Cowtownguy]

I am jealous of your back yard. It is gonna take about, oh, another 10 years before our spruce are that mature. You also win the snowfall competition. Yikes.

[Cowtownguy]

Ken King was on CFR this afternoon. He sounded rather different compared to what has been reported recently. Specifically, he said negotiations with the city have actually been going rather well, and the city acknowledges the need for a new facility. That left me with the impression that the city will offer up money somehow. Apparently, Nenshi was not singularly declaring that CalgaryNext was dead, rather, the working partners are of the notion that the West Village is not the best location. It sure sounded to me like they are going to build the new facility in Vic Park and that means no new facility for the Stamps (not enough room).

[conundrumed]

On 4/2/2017 at 5:06 PM, cross16 said:

 

Bingo. This is what ive have been trying to say for a while now. To me the key debate is not whether or not calgarynext is a good or bad idea. The key debate is the city better off with calgarynext or better off cleaning up the land and then selling it for developlement with future property taxes? I vote the latter and I honestly don't think it would be close. 

But this is also where it gets tricky.

If you're going to clean it up for residential development, your property taxes aren't going to generate the income nor attract a diversification of investors that putting a focal point like the Flames Arena would.

If we were to just throw the field out and focus on an arena and entertainment district, do you think that's a better idea?

I'm not asking facetiously, just asking.

Also, no matter where it goes, you're hauling out soil. So there's no firm separating who is paying for what.

I'm certain the contaminated area is well understood.

Pass that on to architectural firms in the design process, so the project itself requires the removal of the contaminated area regardless (I don't understand the word irregardless lol).

[cross16]

7 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

But this is also where it gets tricky.

If you're going to clean it up for residential development, your property taxes aren't going to generate the income nor attract a diversification of investors that putting a focal point like the Flames Arena would.

If we were to just throw the field out and focus on an arena and entertainment district, do you think that's a better idea?

I'm not asking facetiously, just asking.

Also, no matter where it goes, you're hauling out soil. So there's no firm separating who is paying for what.

I'm certain the contaminated area is well understood.

Pass that on to architectural firms in the design process, so the project itself requires the removal of the contaminated area regardless (I don't understand the word irregardless lol).

 

Sorry conundrumed i'm not following what you are saying. What would the area, once cleaned up, not generate attractive from developers? I am not suggesting that the land be sold off to the developers as is, the City would still have to re mediate and clean it up. I'm suggesting do that and then sell. I think if that land was fit for use it would be very popular with developers because it's a fantastic location in terms of proximity to downtown, right by the water, not in a flood plain, close to transit etc etc. 

 

So yes I do think it would be better use of the land, in terms of revenue for the City, to pay to fix the land and then develop it their own way then by building an arena/stadium complex. 

[conundrumed]

On 4/4/2017 at 10:21 AM, Cowtownguy said:

Ken King was on CFR this afternoon. He sounded rather different compared to what has been reported recently. Specifically, he said negotiations with the city have actually been going rather well, and the city acknowledges the need for a new facility. That left me with the impression that the city will offer up money somehow. Apparently, Nenshi was not singularly declaring that CalgaryNext was dead, rather, the working partners are of the notion that the West Village is not the best location. It sure sounded to me like they are going to build the new facility in Vic Park and that means no new facility for the Stamps (not enough room).

Let me guess, politician's are invested on 17th Ave? '84 Olympics anyone?

Don't get it myself, hockey should be separated from the area and bring new life to other areas. 17th Ave is a benefactor for most things in Calgary, why not spread it out?

They're has to be another source of attraction outside of tiny Kensington St and Stephen Ave and malls for the love of all that is holy (or unholy)!

[conundrumed]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Sorry conundrumed i'm not following what you are saying. What would the area, once cleaned up, not generate attractive from developers? I am not suggesting that the land be sold off to the developers as is, the City would still have to re mediate and clean it up. I'm suggesting do that and then sell. I think if that land was fit for use it would be very popular with developers because it's a fantastic location in terms of proximity to downtown, right by the water, not in a flood plain, close to transit etc etc. 

 

So yes I do think it would be better use of the land, in terms of revenue for the City, to pay to fix the land and then develop it their own way then by building an arena/stadium complex. 

An arena or any kind of focal point would generally involve hotel chains, retail icons and restaurateurs to invest at the location.

If you were having a summertime convention or trade show, it becomes very attractive to have all you need in one place.

If you want to argue the Stampede grounds are the place, my argument is that it's the ONLY place, and not great for visitors. Where do you stay? A travel away?

It ups the ante. Residential devp is just that, "okay, make room for the Wal Mart Superstore".

Just my opinion.

[zima]

I wonder if Mcmahan and the park next to it would be big enough and ppl would be able to exit I believe crowchild Tr ? Been awhile since I have been back to CGY

[The_People1]

I was just checking out some Dwarf Fortress and it gave me an idea.  We could build a new arena "underneath" Crescent Heights.

 

The new Green Line C-Train is scheduled to tunnel under Crescent Heights from Center Street North and find its way under Princes Island Park and pop back up above ground aligned with 4th St SW.  While under Crescent Heights, why not excavate further and build an entire arena there?... with a new C-Train station!  Talk about estate creation from nothing to something.  

 

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Transit-projects/Green-line/map.aspx

 

Crescent Heights starting at around 7:00 mark... 

 

 

[Cowtownguy]

On April 6, 2017 at 8:53 PM, The_People1 said:

I was just checking out some Dwarf Fortress and it gave me an idea.

Oh God, I burn so much time on the Internet looking at dwarf fortresses. No wonder I get so little done. Just not enough time in the day. 

[conundrumed]

Well peeps, I'd even be all for that. I spent 17 years in Calgary and have to say Vic Park area is pretty grungey.

I don't pretend to try to understand why everything keeps going back to the Stampede Area. Because it's easy I guess.

Where do you stay a night to WALK to the Saddledome when it's -20 outside? And have extracurricular shopping and food/drink spots?

Nowhere within a km. You're staying downtown.

Vic park is not a very good location, I really hope they don't build there. Another 20 years of, "well this wasn't well thought out".

There is a boatload of poor arena locations throughout all of hockey. It should really be studied. Vic Park needs the surrounding space for the Stampede, gotta go to an area you can develop a bigger portion of. imho.

[Cowtownguy]

I was talking to someone who once lived in the US and watched football games. He pointed that they designed football stadiums with an eye towards effective entrances and exits. He argued that they were able to get 60,000 fans in an out faster than we do at the 'dome. I hope they give thought to that matter. Last game, I got out quickly, but sometimes it is a real pain.

[MAC331]

14 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Well peeps, I'd even be all for that. I spent 17 years in Calgary and have to say Vic Park area is pretty grungey.

I don't pretend to try to understand why everything keeps going back to the Stampede Area. Because it's easy I guess.

Where do you stay a night to WALK to the Saddledome when it's -20 outside? And have extracurricular shopping and food/drink spots?

Nowhere within a km. You're staying downtown.

Vic park is not a very good location, I really hope they don't build there. Another 20 years of, "well this wasn't well thought out".

There is a boatload of poor arena locations throughout all of hockey. It should really be studied. Vic Park needs the surrounding space for the Stampede, gotta go to an area you can develop a bigger portion of. imho.

My thoughts are let the Stampede grounds be for their activities now. The Saddledome at the time helped financially in many ways but now we need a new location with consideration to spreading out the traffic. The West end needs to be cleaned up environmentally so use a new arena project as the catalyst to do something that also benefits the City. Calgary Next was IMO way to grandiose to begin with and having all 3 sports under one complex not necessary. I would like to see everyone take a step back and push the reset button to maintain some effort in a positive direction.

[conundrumed]

5 hours ago, MAC331 said:

My thoughts are let the Stampede grounds be for their activities now. The Saddledome at the time helped financially in many ways but now we need a new location with consideration to spreading out the traffic. The West end needs to be cleaned up environmentally so use a new arena project as the catalyst to do something that also benefits the City. Calgary Next was IMO way to grandiose to begin with and having all 3 sports under one complex not necessary. I would like to see everyone take a step back and push the reset button to maintain some effort in a positive direction.

Now that I don't live in Calgary, though visit often, and have traveled a lot, my perspective is as a bit of an outsider.

The tradeshows, comic-con is always at stampede, little would change in that regard, arena or not.

One thing I love and miss about Calgary is the progressive mind-set, forget the world-class catchphrase.

Humour break: how much was that foot bridge? Attach it to the new arena. pa-da-bump tssssshhhh.

 

I digress.

Calgary needs to expand it's districts. The population has almost doubled in the last 25 years, but the infrastructure and development is way behind that.

When we were at 650-700,000 population, we had:

Downtown

Eau Claire

Stampede

Kensington

17th Ave

4th St

Malls, maybe. But they're a dying breed.

Fish Creek and great parks/bike trails

 

Sorry if I missed any.

Population is what, 1.2, 1.3 now?

No new areas for tourists, lest they love WalMart Superstores.

I'm more than happy to throw the west side out, but not for a Vic Park option. It looked like 1972 in 1994 already, and little has changed.

As a tourist.

Go up any hill and put it there. Out of the flood plains, and inspiring views.

Oh right, probably should mention, SOMEWHERE IN THIS THREAD, prone to flooding is the Stampede grounds. $500 mil to cheap out when we've witnessed that water doesn't really care about engineering, lol.

 

Maybe

[The_People1]

 

Not sure if posted already but somewhat related is City of Calgary's study into Crowchild Tr which includes expansion of the Bow Tr and Crowchild overpass.