The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

[The_People1]

^ ya with the size difference in playing surface, it's very difficult to achieve a one-size-fits-all complex.

The only way it can work is if the football field can roll into the arena above the lower bowl, ultimately making the second bowl of the arena into the lower bowl of the football field. Basically, the ice surface and lower bowl would be beneath the football field. Only problem with this is the roof better be extremely high or can raise/lower to suit the event.

If the lower bowl seats 9000 and the second bowl seats 15000, then you'll have a 24000 hockey arena and a 15000 football field.

[cccsberg]

^ ya with the size difference in playing surface, it's very difficult to achieve a one-size-fits-all complex.

The only way it can work is if the football field can roll into the arena above the lower bowl, ultimately making the second bowl of the arena into the lower bowl of the football field. Basically, the ice surface and lower bowl would be beneath the football field. Only problem with this is the roof better be extremely high or can raise/lower to suit the event.

If the lower bowl seats 9000 and the second bowl seats 15000, then you'll have a 24000 hockey arena and a 15000 football field.

Lots of ideas.  How about just build a more compact covered football field/bowl for about 25,000 and have deluxe seats with personal TV screens for the games like on an airplane, just a lot better quality.  You could pipe multi-video streams, game stats, other games, pause, rewind, zoom and  interactive responses into individual seats/mini-boxes.  Its the 21st century, start acting like it with some truly innovative thinking and live-game experiences.... the best of both worlds combined into one unique performance hall.  Then in off days you could use it for all sorts of things from meetings to conventions to teaching to lectures.... a truly transformative place for a far broader segment of the population.  The outdoor hockey games in huge stadiums seem to fill up petty well, and that experience is crap vs what could be done....

[darth_henning]

The convertible arena/field idea is certainly an interesting one. And one that I have to admit I was wondering about when they first started talking about a new arena. 

 

The problem is twofold (as others have already described)

 

1) The football field is WAY bigger than an NHL (or international) Ice rink (side note: i hope they make the arena able to convert sizes)

2) The football stadium needs to seat way more than a hockey rink. 

 

So while it would theoretically be possible to make a lower bowl that was retractable to enlarge the surface and solve problem 1, that in fact reduces seating for football games rather than increasing it. Cool idea, but not functional sadly. 

 

 

I like the concept of the entertainment district.  Look at Staples Center.  Or even the Gilla River Arena.  Those areas have more than just a rink.  The spinoff benefit is big.  

 

Maybe it's just me but I think the idea of combining the venue is nuts.  A rehab to McMann Stadium would cost around $65-80m.

Stick to replacing the Saddledome as a separate venue.  Design something that wows.  Build it where it is accessable.  Get is away from a polluted site the city has dragged its heels on for years.

 

The concept may have been a "high priced option" to allow a lower priced option to get quick approval.  Environmental cleanups are something hockey needs to stay away from.

 

I don't see why combining the venue is "nuts". 

 

In a hypothetical world where the land in question wasn't polluted, I'm pretty sure everyone would be all over the idea and just debating how to fund it. 

 

An entertainment district is a great idea. The West Village could become the home to:

 

- Next (stadium/arena/fieldhouse)

- Significant night life (bars, clubs, resturants), could be particularly cool to have a strip of these with patios looking out over the river

- The long needed larger site for a new glenbow

- Brand new large convention center (badly needed in Calgary)

- A food smattering of hotel and condo towers

 

With Pumphouse Theater (which is starting its expansion this summer I believe) and modern art gallery going in where the old science center is, it could become the main arts/culture/sports mecha of the city. 

 

The problem is the environmental aspect. Which is admittedly a GIANT problem. And I am happy to concede I don't know how to get around that. But it is the most logical place for this kind of development. 

 

The city administration doesn't want to delve into such a massive project right off the hop. There's the creosote, the clearing out of the car lots/bus depot (and finding a relocation point for said station), the infrastructure, road redesign, utilities...

 

Its a massive undertaking. And in the current economic climate its a really bad time (and risky to their election prospects) to take on something like that. BUT, proceeding with a massive project like that with a focus on making something that was that remarkable could really leave a legacy for the city of an absolutely stunning area. 

 

Someone suggested doing the same in the Cross-Iron area. I'm not sure there's anything comparable on the outskirts of a city. Glendale has't exactly been a success for the Coyote's attendance. The Staples Center isn't comparable. Its a couple KM away from the Hollywood Boulevard, hardly on the edge of the city. Even if transit was extended out that far (which is inevitable in time) I doubt people are going to commute that distance to get to games. 

 

Much though this is stereotyping most of the "big money" in Calgary is near downtown or in the Southwest. To a lesser degree in the Northwest. Sticking the Arena basically in the far north-east, past the airport, in an area that isn't exactly filled with people who can afford regular tickets, is going to make ticket sales much more difficult than a centrally located arena. 

 

 

Personally I think McMahon is past the point of rehab and I'm not sure they can turn it into anything but an average at best stadium. I understand an arena is likely more of a priority for the flames but there is no question that if you want to talk about which one is needed more, it's McMahon. I'm a huge stamps fan and I would honestly rather watch most of the games on TV then suffer through an outing at McMahon. It's truly a terrible facility and I don't see how they can make it into a working one it needs to be replaced and IMO before a arena. I get the extra revenue debate and that's why the arena is taking more priority but if you want to talk from a pure fan experience there is no question in my mind that calgary needs a new stadium before an arena.

I do agree that a huge mega facility is not likely going to work but I don't agree at all with the idea of trying to save money by just renovating McMahon.

 

This. 

 

 

Lots of ideas.  How about just build a more compact covered football field/bowl for about 25,000 and have deluxe seats with personal TV screens for the games like on an airplane, just a lot better quality.  You could pipe multi-video streams, game stats, other games, pause, rewind, zoom and  interactive responses into individual seats/mini-boxes.  Its the 21st century, start acting like it with some truly innovative thinking and live-game experiences.... the best of both worlds combined into one unique performance hall.  Then in off days you could use it for all sorts of things from meetings to conventions to teaching to lectures.... a truly transformative place for a far broader segment of the population.  The outdoor hockey games in huge stadiums seem to fill up petty well, and that experience is crap vs what could be done....

 

While this is certainly a cool idea (an I wouldn't be against seeing some of it implemented) a large part of the reasons people go to games is to see them live, not on a screen, and be able to interact in some way with other fans and maybe even the players. 

 

I don't think this satisfies that particular desire. 

[cross16]

 

 

Much though this is stereotyping most of the "big money" in Calgary is near downtown or in the Southwest. To a lesser degree in the Northwest. Sticking the Arena basically in the far north-east, past the airport, in an area that isn't exactly filled with people who can afford regular tickets, is going to make ticket sales much more difficult than a centrally located arena. 

 

 

Agreed. Flames would be fine I think because the demand is there but the CSEC has more than just the Flames. I think if you put an arena/Stadium out by CrossIron your attendance for Hitmen, Roughneck and Stamps game would likely drop and in some cases significantly. Need to think of more than just the Flames. 

[MAC331]

Agreed. Flames would be fine I think because the demand is there but the CSEC has more than just the Flames. I think if you put an arena/Stadium out by CrossIron your attendance for Hitmen, Roughneck and Stamps game would likely drop and in some cases significantly. Need to think of more than just the Flames. 

I think any new arena should be part of the Stampede area plans, north parking area would be where I would put it. I wouldn't even worry about the Stampeders for now McMahon will do for a few more years. The CFL is shaky at best. If they could get the West End site clean then build a football and soccer facility there.

[travel_dude]

The convertible arena/field idea is certainly an interesting one. And one that I have to admit I was wondering about when they first started talking about a new arena. 

 

The problem is twofold (as others have already described)

 

1) The football field is WAY bigger than an NHL (or international) Ice rink (side note: i hope they make the arena able to convert sizes)

2) The football stadium needs to seat way more than a hockey rink. 

 

So while it would theoretically be possible to make a lower bowl that was retractable to enlarge the surface and solve problem 1, that in fact reduces seating for football games rather than increasing it. Cool idea, but not functional sadly. 

 

 

 

I don't see why combining the venue is "nuts". 

 

In a hypothetical world where the land in question wasn't polluted, I'm pretty sure everyone would be all over the idea and just debating how to fund it. 

 

An entertainment district is a great idea. The West Village could become the home to:

 

- Next (stadium/arena/fieldhouse)

- Significant night life (bars, clubs, resturants), could be particularly cool to have a strip of these with patios looking out over the river

- The long needed larger site for a new glenbow

- Brand new large convention center (badly needed in Calgary)

- A food smattering of hotel and condo towers

 

With Pumphouse Theater (which is starting its expansion this summer I believe) and modern art gallery going in where the old science center is, it could become the main arts/culture/sports mecha of the city. 

 

The problem is the environmental aspect. Which is admittedly a GIANT problem. And I am happy to concede I don't know how to get around that. But it is the most logical place for this kind of development. 

 

The city administration doesn't want to delve into such a massive project right off the hop. There's the creosote, the clearing out of the car lots/bus depot (and finding a relocation point for said station), the infrastructure, road redesign, utilities...

 

Its a massive undertaking. And in the current economic climate its a really bad time (and risky to their election prospects) to take on something like that. BUT, proceeding with a massive project like that with a focus on making something that was that remarkable could really leave a legacy for the city of an absolutely stunning area. 

 

Someone suggested doing the same in the Cross-Iron area. I'm not sure there's anything comparable on the outskirts of a city. Glendale has't exactly been a success for the Coyote's attendance. The Staples Center isn't comparable. Its a couple KM away from the Hollywood Boulevard, hardly on the edge of the city. Even if transit was extended out that far (which is inevitable in time) I doubt people are going to commute that distance to get to games. 

 

Much though this is stereotyping most of the "big money" in Calgary is near downtown or in the Southwest. To a lesser degree in the Northwest. Sticking the Arena basically in the far north-east, past the airport, in an area that isn't exactly filled with people who can afford regular tickets, is going to make ticket sales much more difficult than a centrally located arena. 

 

 

 

This. 

 

 

 

While this is certainly a cool idea (an I wouldn't be against seeing some of it implemented) a large part of the reasons people go to games is to see them live, not on a screen, and be able to interact in some way with other fans and maybe even the players. 

 

I don't think this satisfies that particular desire. 

 

The idea of combining venues has problems.  Combine events in the same timeframe and you have a logistical nightmare.  A concert or hockey game the same night as a CFL game.  20,000 + 35,000 fans arriving the same day.  That's just a scheduling and attendance problem.  Having available transit and/or parking for 35,000 fans in a city center is problematic.

 

My bigger problem is that using a remediated site would add years onto the construction.  Even if things went as planned, you are talking about waiting about 5 years from breaking ground.  What if there is a huge environmental impact that doesn't show up right now?  Calgary has let the area fester for too many years to use this kind of project to fix.  

[cccsberg]

Agreed. Flames would be fine I think because the demand is there but the CSEC has more than just the Flames. I think if you put an arena/Stadium out by CrossIron your attendance for Hitmen, Roughneck and Stamps game would likely drop and in some cases significantly. Need to think of more than just the Flames. 

I was thinking in terms of developing a mega-entertainment, multi-sport, multi-venue locale.  Cross Iron Mills just comes to mind because it already has some of the necessary infrastructure, with great access and with the horse racing going there, venues. Obviously something closer in would be even better.  Heck, Stampede Grounds is ideal but it would have to expand significantly and the vision would beed to expand beyond its current plans.  They already had a track but lost it and now look to be in peril of losing the Arena.  

[darth_henning]

The idea of combining venues has problems.  Combine events in the same timeframe and you have a logistical nightmare.  A concert or hockey game the same night as a CFL game.  20,000 + 35,000 fans arriving the same day.  That's just a scheduling and attendance problem.  Having available transit and/or parking for 35,000 fans in a city center is problematic.

 

BC Place and Rogers Stadium are within a block of one another. Dozens of venues in the states (for the NFL and MLB) seat in excess of 50,000 on their own. 

 

Its definitely possible to iron those problems out. 

 

LRT capacity increased to 4 cars running at rush-hour peak levels would take care of the transit issue. 

 

Proper interchanges from Bow Trail and Crowchild into an efficient parking structure would mitigate the vehicle traffic. 

 

Yes, it would be something that would have to have careful logistics involved, but there are about 12 CFL games per year. That's not likely to be a frequent problem given the lack of overlap between the seasons. (Concerts more of a concern granted)

 

I don't see that as prohibitive. 

 

My bigger problem is that using a remediated site would add years onto the construction.  Even if things went as planned, you are talking about waiting about 5 years from breaking ground.  What if there is a huge environmental impact that doesn't show up right now?  Calgary has let the area fester for too many years to use this kind of project to fix.

 

But I do grant that this is a major problem. 

 

A 5 year delay before construction can even start. And that's being a little optimistic given the scale of clean-up and infrastructure involved in something like this. 

 

However, if the Flames have to start looking at another site, is that going to be ready much (any) sooner? Let alone if we talk about sites for BOTH the arena and stadium? 

 

As you point out, Calgary administration has let the area fester. This at least provides impetus to finally do something about it. 

[travel_dude]

BC Place and Rogers Stadium are within a block of one another. Dozens of venues in the states (for the NFL and MLB) seat in excess of 50,000 on their own. 

 

Its definitely possible to iron those problems out. 

 

LRT capacity increased to 4 cars running at rush-hour peak levels would take care of the transit issue. 

 

Proper interchanges from Bow Trail and Crowchild into an efficient parking structure would mitigate the vehicle traffic. 

 

Yes, it would be something that would have to have careful logistics involved, but there are about 12 CFL games per year. That's not likely to be a frequent problem given the lack of overlap between the seasons. (Concerts more of a concern granted)

 

I don't see that as prohibitive. 

 

 

But I do grant that this is a major problem. 

 

A 5 year delay before construction can even start. And that's being a little optimistic given the scale of clean-up and infrastructure involved in something like this. 

 

However, if the Flames have to start looking at another site, is that going to be ready much (any) sooner? Let alone if we talk about sites for BOTH the arena and stadium? 

 

As you point out, Calgary administration has let the area fester. This at least provides impetus to finally do something about it. 

 

I doubt that the city will do it unless it is Fed money coming in for it.  Cheaper to ignore and leave it be.  Redevelopment of the area will take a backseat to other things more important to the council.  

 

I think a new plan development could occur a lot faster, that doesn't involve remediation.  Construction could be completed in 2 years.  

[The_People1]

The new LRT Green Line is estimated to cost $1.53-billion to construct over 10-years. But when is the last time the c-train in Calgary made money? Or public transit in general for that matter?

Would we rather have the c-train line that 90% of Calgarians will never use more than a handful of times in their lifetime? Or a new NHL arena and pro sports complex that 90% of us can't afford the tickets to go enjoy?

[travel_dude]

Here is an example with an arena development with a vision.  Off course it's in Ottawa, so the Fed $$ will flow into the project.

 

I don't remember seeing anything close to this is Calgary Next.

 

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/rendezvous-lebreton-group-aims-to-light-up-long-neglected-flats

[The_People1]

Here is an example with an arena development with a vision.  Off course it's in Ottawa, so the Fed $$ will flow into the project.

 

I don't remember seeing anything close to this is Calgary Next.

 

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/rendezvous-lebreton-group-aims-to-light-up-long-neglected-flats

I don't feel this is much different than CalgaryNext when you take into consideration CalgaryNext includes the residential development in the Pumphouse Theater area. It's a "live, work, and play" West Village redevelopment proposal. Sure, throw in a library or school too, that was never ruled out or anything.

[Cowtownguy]

It seems to me that a new facility for the Flames will have a broader social impact. As such, perhaps taxpayers should invest in such a facility. The real question is how much should the average person be made to invest. I would like voters to have the ability to determine what this limited liability will be. If it is a scenario where there is unlimited liability on the part of government, I am out. If the city agrees to pay 40% and the tab comes to $1.5 billion, then a lot of people are understandably going to be choked and a lot of politicians are going to be given their walking papers. I am already tired of the drama and we are just getting started.

[cross16]

The new LRT Green Line is estimated to cost $1.53-billion to construct over 10-years. But when is the last time the c-train in Calgary made money? Or public transit in general for that matter?

Would we rather have the c-train line that 90% of Calgarians will never use more than a handful of times in their lifetime? Or a new NHL arena and pro sports complex that 90% of us can't afford the tickets to go enjoy?

 

C-Train, not even close IMO.

 

It will pay for itself, eventually and faster than an area, it last longer than an arena and IMO public transit and transportation in general has more impact on citizens either moving her to live to staying here to live than an arena does. Therefore greater impact on property tax revenue. 

[phoenix66]

I watched an interview with Ken King yesterday. Was quite good, and the points he madoccupyingreat in that he pointed out the numbers havent changed, but the city is inflating them based on 3 things:

1)The city is going to develop the west village anyway

2) the land will need to be cleaned up regardless if they build NEXT or not

3) the city already had intentions of building a fieldhouse

So regardless the city was already facing approximately a billion or more in costs with or without NEXT

He also pointed out the clean up bill is for the entire area, of which NEXT will only occupy a percentage of that area

I think if they can come to some agreement on sharing the cleanup costs it should still be moving ahead

[The_People1]

C-Train, not even close IMO.

 

It will pay for itself, eventually and faster than an area, it last longer than an arena and IMO public transit and transportation in general has more impact on citizens either moving her to live to staying here to live than an arena does. Therefore greater impact on property tax revenue.

C-trains lose money though (based on what I've read anyways). So we build it for billions and then keep funding it in the red for eternity.

[cross16]

C-trains lose money though (based on what I've read anyways). So we build it for billions and then keep funding it in the red for eternity.

 

I've read differently. I understand that Calgary Transit operates at a loss, but I've always been told and led to understood that the C Trains actually have such low operating costs that they are profitable, albeit not by a ton. 

[flamesfan89forever]

I live in Ottawa, there was a bidding process for the Lebreton Flats redevelopment.  The Calgary Next proposal so far has no competing bid.  There has been no talk of the taxpayers being on the hook for any of the Ottawa proposals but I am sure that now a bid has been chosen dollar talk won't be far behind.

 

 

[cccsberg]

I don't feel this is much different than CalgaryNext when you take into consideration CalgaryNext includes the residential development in the Pumphouse Theater area. It's a "live, work, and play" West Village redevelopment proposal. Sure, throw in a library or school too, that was never ruled out or anything.

Yes, exactly.  Ottawa's plan:  $3.5B, 10 years in the making, 500 arena parking stalls, lots of digital fluff and "green" drivel....  Yikes!  CalgaryNext looks like a GREAT plan in comparison.

[darth_henning]

Here is an example with an arena development with a vision.  Off course it's in Ottawa, so the Fed $$ will flow into the project.

 

I don't remember seeing anything close to this is Calgary Next.

 

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/rendezvous-lebreton-group-aims-to-light-up-long-neglected-flats

 

That's basically like the Flames posting pictures of the arena and the entire west village development project. 

 

The arena isn't going to build all of that, its part of a much bigger project. 

 

I don't feel this is much different than CalgaryNext when you take into consideration CalgaryNext includes the residential development in the Pumphouse Theater area. It's a "live, work, and play" West Village redevelopment proposal. Sure, throw in a library or school too, that was never ruled out or anything.

 as People said. 

 

I watched an interview with Ken King yesterday. Was quite good, and the points he madoccupyingreat in that he pointed out the numbers havent changed, but the city is inflating them based on 3 things:

1)The city is going to develop the west village anyway

2) the land will need to be cleaned up regardless if they build NEXT or not

3) the city already had intentions of building a fieldhouse

So regardless the city was already facing approximately a billion or more in costs with or without NEXT

He also pointed out the clean up bill is for the entire area, of which NEXT will only occupy a percentage of that area

I think if they can come to some agreement on sharing the cleanup costs it should still be moving ahead

 

This is exactly the thing that bugs me. 

 

Is the arena expensive? yes. Should the city be paying specifically for the arena/stadium (not includig field house)? No. 

 

 

But, should they be claiming that the costs of the field house and area cleanup are solely part of Next? Not in the slightest. Those costs are going to be outlaid eventually. 

 

Let alone the fact that the cleanup bill is the entire area. 

 

As I said on the previous page, the area could be turned into a major development district with arena/stadium/field house/convention center/new glenbow/expanded pumphouse/riverfront restaurants and bars.

 

That would far surpass the idea presented for Ottawa. 

 

The problem is only partially the arena cost (which should indeed be mostly covered by the owners/attendees, not the city). Claiming that the city's costs for remediation/infrastructure, which have to be done no matter what goes there are part of the arena is attempting to obscure the fact that the city does not want to put money into redeveloping the area. 

 

 

 

 

As to the LRT vs. Stadium thing, the transit line will away be WAY more important. 

[Cowtownguy]

I wonder if the city alone can foot the bill for the cleanup. The province will have to help out and I don't see that happening for a long time. 

[Cowtownguy]

I thought that this was an interesting discussion on Calgary NEXT. One individual confidentially proclaims that there is no way the new arena will include the field house. Another maintains that city council is just being polite with King by agreeing to continue discussing the matter. None of them seem to feel overly optimistic about it.

 

ETA: Kermit the Nenshi is still sour on the proposal. 

[CheersMan]

I thought that this was an interesting discussion on Calgary NEXT. One individual confidentially proclaims that there is no way the new arena will include the field house. Another maintains that city council is just being polite with King by agreeing to continue discussing the matter. None of them seem to feel overly optimistic about it.

 

ETA: Kermit the Nenshi is still sour on the proposal.

Calgary Next is a grand proposal for an even grander city. Shame on us if we settle for less!

[MAC331]

I don't see this project to be or to become a high priority with the current provincial or municipal governments. This project will have to wait for better times.

[rickross]

We need a new arena. Period. Watching Friday's game really made me realize how outdated the Saddledome is. It's served its time but that thing looks archaic when compared to Rogers Place. Now I just want a new arena so we can run an absolutely, unneccesarily long opening ceremony prior to a game against the Oilers