phoenix66 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 4 minutes ago, The_People1 said: Sounds good in theory but the highest tier/deck will have to have a steep slope/angle if pushed forward in order to maintain a good line of sight of the arena below. I wonder how this will work and if they've built these arenas already. From the presentation that appears to be exactly what it does .. did some digging right after, it was from 2017 so could not find any works in progress, so quite likely if this wins the bid we could be the groundbreaker Tho a comment in the YouTube comments mentions Cleveland may be considering it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: From the presentation that appears to be exactly what it does .. did some digging right after, it was from 2017 so could not find any works in progress, so quite likely if this wins the bid we could be the groundbreaker Tho a comment in the YouTube comments mentions Cleveland may be considering it Then my next question is, does the Alberta building code allow stair construction with a rise larger than the run? We're talking likely, greater than 45 Degree incline at the highest deck. Unless of course, it's all gimmick and the upper tiers are hardly pushed forward much from traditional layouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 Just now, The_People1 said: Then my next question is, does the Alberta building code allow stair construction with a rise larger than the run? We're talking likely, greater than 45 Degree incline at the highest deck. Unless of course, it's all gimmick and the upper tiers are hardly pushed forward much from traditional layouts. Sure we'll find out lol It's definitely not a done deal.. a friend of a friend's engineering company told her they are bidding on it so definitely no decision Ona. Design yet.. but cross is right , the flames are in the video so there had to have been some consulting already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 12 minutes ago, The_People1 said: Sounds good in theory but the highest tier/deck will have to have a steep slope/angle if pushed forward in order to maintain a good line of sight of the arena below. I wonder how this will work and if they've built these arenas already. Their outline is different it doesn't stack, it overlaps 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 I don't believe anyone has actually built the "inverted Bowl" as outlined here. In the past King has said Columbus' arena is one of their design inspirations and it has some of the concepts of the inverted bowl but not all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 5 minutes ago, cross16 said: Their outline is different it doesn't stack, it overlaps That's even worse, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 Didn't realize this until now but the renderings we have seen in the media are actually from Rossetti, the company who has patented this design. They are probably one of many that have been consulted, but would appear there is at very least a proposal from them. King is quoted on their website. https://www.rossetti.com/work/project/calgary-entertainment-district Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 2 minutes ago, cross16 said: Didn't realize this until now but the renderings we have seen in the media are actually from Rossetti, the company who has patented this design. They are probably one of many that have been consulted, but would appear there is at very least a proposal from them. King is quoted on their website. https://www.rossetti.com/work/project/calgary-entertainment-district Oh wow they are too.. that definitely gives it traction.. I recall when they were playing duelling offers with the city last time king did say they already have a look for the building in mind Probably have to open up all bids but that may suggest it's these guys to lose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 Not sure how many may have caught this .. one of the parcels the flames get "first Dibs " on .. is the VicPark Bus Barns.. 500,000 square feet .. 11.5 Acres Plenty big enough to put a Football stadium on Enoch House is doable , but would be a lot tighter (less than 2 acres) not surprised if this is the possible goal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, phoenix66 said: Not sure how many may have caught this .. one of the parcels the flames get "first Dibs " on .. is the VicPark Bus Barns.. 500,000 square feet .. 11.5 Acres Plenty big enough to put a Football stadium on Enoch House is doable , but would be a lot tighter (less than 2 acres) not surprised if this is the possible goal This is what scares me about that part of the deal. city gives them first rights which limits bidding and thus lowers the market value to allow sometime to be built that will provide them minimal revenue moving forward. Would really increase the risk on this overall project and IMO ensure that the city would take big losses on the deal. That's really valuable land so if anything is going to go there it should be something that provides a substantial revenue source to the city. I don't know and likely understand he legal situation behind the first right of refusal, but I can't imagine the City would be keen on letting CESC build a stadium there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 9 minutes ago, cross16 said: This is what scares me about that part of the deal. city gives them first rights which limits bidding and thus lowers the market value to allow sometime to be built that will provide them minimal revenue moving forward. Would really increase the risk on this overall project and IMO ensure that the city would take big losses on the deal. That's really valuable land so if anything is going to go there it should be something that provides a substantial revenue source to the city. I don't know and likely understand he legal situation behind the first right of refusal, but I can't imagine the City would be keen on letting CESC build a stadium there. I was reading it gives them a price set at time of appraisal, they can buy it for that price up to a determined date ..if a potential buyer comes along before that date , then the flames have to either buy it then, or let it go I guess at that time it would come down to zoning.. but if theres a hockey stadium already can't see a football one being out of zone Could actually boost the district in the non hockey months as well.. build it right and you get a soccer field too Would not surprise me at all if that is the plan..I mean in the big picture I was finding it hard to believe the football was totally forgotten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, phoenix66 said: ..I mean in the big picture I was finding it hard to believe the football was totally forgotten The CFL is dying. The big markets are caring less and less. Toronto and Montreal especially have NFL aspirations. Why spend money on a new stadium to see the CFL fold in less than 10 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flames-fan-in-jets-land Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 3 hours ago, The_People1 said: Sounds good in theory but the highest tier/deck will have to have a steep slope/angle if pushed forward in order to maintain a good line of sight of the arena below. I wonder how this will work and if they've built these arenas already. Wouldn't the people in the back of L5 only have a line of sight that follows the top profile of the seating area? Basically a 45 degree line of sight that doesnt let them even see the ice surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 13 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said: Wouldn't the people in the back of L5 only have a line of sight that follows the top profile of the seating area? Basically a 45 degree line of sight that doesnt let them even see the ice surface. Not sure if joking but that's exactly what I was trying to illustrate with my sketch. My point is that this "inverted bowl" concept would be a total fail if those in the back rows of L5 cannot see the ice surface. And i don't see how a line of sight can be achieved without an angle greater than 45 degrees which then makes the slope highly dangerous. Unless of course, we're talking 1 row of seats per deck. Then, you can stack as many rows as you wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flames-fan-in-jets-land Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 19 minutes ago, The_People1 said: Not sure if joking but that's exactly what I was trying to illustrate with my sketch. My point is that this "inverted bowl" concept would be a total fail if those in the back rows of L5 cannot see the ice surface. And i don't see how a line of sight can be achieved without an angle greater than 45 degrees which then makes the slope highly dangerous. Unless of course, we're talking 1 row of seats per deck. Then, you can stack as many rows as you wish. Not joking, just a little thick sometimes. I'm not too sure if theres a legal limit but heres a pic of the Jets arena. The upper bowl looks to be a 45 degree angle, but ascending or descending the stairs to your seat can be a bit tricky even before the beer. I wouldnt recommend anyone with fear of heights or vertigo go go up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said: Not joking, just a little thick sometimes. I'm not too sure if theres a legal limit but heres a pic of the Jets arena. The upper bowl looks to be a 45 degree angle, but ascending or descending the stairs to your seat can be a bit tricky even before the beer. I wouldnt recommend anyone with fear of heights or vertigo go go up there. In Peeps pic, he shows a flat section behind the first few rows. That doesn't make sense. The rows would need to be slanted at the same angle. The top row of the top section would be the same as the first row of that section. Pictures look cool, but you have to think about why you are building it. Hockey and concerts. You can't build a facility in this day and age that doesn't allow for ease of access. Boomers are getting older. At most, a patron should have top climb about 10 rows or go down the same number. Take the best ideas from modern facilities and build it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 I have to laugh. TSN has no coverage of the new agreement. The last story about it was from the 29th talking about council to debate it. Instead, they have two stories about McDavid and the Oilers. TSN managed to report the signing of Gerard and the firing of Fenton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 29 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said: Not joking, just a little thick sometimes. I'm not too sure if theres a legal limit but heres a pic of the Jets arena. The upper bowl looks to be a 45 degree angle, but ascending or descending the stairs to your seat can be a bit tricky even before the beer. I wouldnt recommend anyone with fear of heights or vertigo go go up there. Kek, check out the slope on the highest deck in Rossetti's own video plug, Looks like between 45 to 65 degrees. As if those in the back row of the highest deck can see the near boards of the rink below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 18 minutes ago, travel_dude said: In Peeps pic, he shows a flat section behind the first few rows. That doesn't make sense. The rows would need to be slanted at the same angle. The top row of the top section would be the same as the first row of that section. Pictures look cool, but you have to think about why you are building it. Hockey and concerts. You can't build a facility in this day and age that doesn't allow for ease of access. Boomers are getting older. At most, a patron should have top climb about 10 rows or go down the same number. Take the best ideas from modern facilities and build it right. The more i think about this inverted bowl concept, the more problems i see with it. What if something falls from the highest deck onto the lower bowl below? A 1 litre fountain pop dropped from that height could be considered a lethal projectile by the time it picks up speed and reaches an unlucky fan below. What about dropping a cell phone from that height? loose change? Or worse, a person falls over the railings? Have these hazards been considered? "break up the upper deck and push them forward" is a great marketing scheme and sounds great until you wonder why nobody has ever built this before and if you've actually done some geometry and math to calculate the angle of seats required to be maintained so the upper decks can still view everything below. "Patent pending" is more marketing gimmick. Who would ever copy this design when there are so many apparent flaws with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said: Not joking, just a little thick sometimes. I'm not too sure if theres a legal limit but heres a pic of the Jets arena. The upper bowl looks to be a 45 degree angle, but ascending or descending the stairs to your seat can be a bit tricky even before the beer. I wouldnt recommend anyone with fear of heights or vertigo go go up there. Dude, nothing can be worse than the old Winnipeg Arena. Now that was a fricken scary arena. You could be on beer #7 and still get scared mierdeless. When I sat in one of the worst seats in the 'dome, they actually have staff approach you every now and then to ask how you are doing. Someone musta had a panic attack up there or something. They are the most loyal fans up there too. They cheer the Flames even though they can't really watch the game without a telescope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, The_People1 said: The more i think about this inverted bowl concept, the more problems i see with it. What if something falls from the highest deck onto the lower bowl below? A 1 litre fountain pop dropped from that height could be considered a lethal projectile by the time it picks up speed and reaches an unlucky fan below. What about dropping a cell phone from that height? loose change? Or worse, a person falls over the railings? Have these hazards been considered? "break up the upper deck and push them forward" is a great marketing scheme and sounds great until you wonder why nobody has ever built this before and if you've actually done some geometry and math to calculate the angle of seats required to be maintained so the upper decks can still view everything below. "Patent pending" is more marketing gimmick. Who would ever copy this design when there are so many apparent flaws with it? not being an engineer .. i'll have to defer to the experts .. pretty sure Millions went into the design so most things like that are likely thought of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flames-fan-in-jets-land Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, The_People1 said: The more i think about this inverted bowl concept, the more problems i see with it. What if something falls from the highest deck onto the lower bowl below? A 1 litre fountain pop dropped from that height could be considered a lethal projectile by the time it picks up speed and reaches an unlucky fan below. What about dropping a cell phone from that height? loose change? Or worse, a person falls over the railings? Have these hazards been considered? "break up the upper deck and push them forward" is a great marketing scheme and sounds great until you wonder why nobody has ever built this before and if you've actually done some geometry and math to calculate the angle of seats required to be maintained so the upper decks can still view everything below. "Patent pending" is more marketing gimmick. Who would ever copy this design when there are so many apparent flaws with it? The funny thing is that it's not like this is some new company doing this, these guys have the 3 newest arenas in the league under their belt. I've never been to any of them but I don't think theres anything inherently wrong with them, in fact I really like the idea of the players tunnel having glass walls going through a sports bar like they do in Detroit. You would think their engineers should have seen the same issues that some message board hacks have noticed. Maybe in a large football/ soccer/ motorsport stadium the "disconnected" idea of the cheap seats may be true but I dont think that applies to a hockey/basketball arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 10 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: not being an engineer .. i'll have to defer to the experts .. pretty sure Millions went into the design so most things like that are likely thought of I dunno man. I have never purchased a home where the lot was the correct size. Some areas of the city that are relatively high up experience frequent flooding. There are still lead pipes in the city, and when they put new asphalt on 16th ave, apparently they forgot about the rail lines underneath and had to do it again. What these problems have in common are "engineers" who were educated in the "Cs and Ds get degrees" era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Tribal Chief Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/Players/ISIStandAlonePlayer.aspx?ClientId=calgary&FileName=2019-07-28.mp4 anyone that wishes to watch the votes and complaints on the arena by city council Starts at 9:29:46 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted November 27, 2019 Report Share Posted November 27, 2019 Seems like the funding is back in question. https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/council-should-reconsider-550-million-arena-deal-woolley?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1574881295 Farkas is going to 2nd the motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now