The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

[conundrumed]

7 hours ago, tmac70 said:

The whole thing is a win for the city and province. Housing around any form of water will be a premium return. 

It's also important to remember that building housing within existing infrastructure is waaaaay more efficient than expanding new areas. By waaaaay, I mean waaaaaaaay. New infrastructure creates a lot of headaches down the road as it becomes a larger maintenance issue. Save all of that money from your new tax base, you're going to need it.

I doubt that there are a lot of civil engineers that promote expansion these days.

I'm not a fan of how little CSEC is kicking in unless they plan on kicking in a new wing in a hospital or something.

Ilitch kicked in about $50mil in donations to Wayne State U outside of LCA for example. CNRL should be kicking out a lot of "thank you" cards...if this isn't just disguised as a partnership.

But Calgary definitely needs to fix that area, 2 weeks of rodeo for 50 weeks of blight seems like a really bad tradeoff.

I've been to quite a few arenas...I thought the Joe was musty.lol

I know when I first moved and saw the stampede area my reaction went way beyond disappointment. Tourists are likely impacted similarly.

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It's also important to remember that building housing within existing infrastructure is waaaaay more efficient than expanding new areas. By waaaaay, I mean waaaaaaaay. New infrastructure creates a lot of headaches down the road as it becomes a larger maintenance issue. Save all of that money from your new tax base, you're going to need it.

I doubt that there are a lot of civil engineers that promote expansion these days.

I'm not a fan of how little CSEC is kicking in unless they plan on kicking in a new wing in a hospital or something.

Ilitch kicked in about $50mil in donations to Wayne State U outside of LCA for example. CNRL should be kicking out a lot of "thank you" cards...if this isn't just disguised as a partnership.

But Calgary definitely needs to fix that area, 2 weeks of rodeo for 50 weeks of blight seems like a really bad tradeoff.

I've been to quite a few arenas...I thought the Joe was musty.lol

I know when I first moved and saw the stampede area my reaction went way beyond disappointment. Tourists are likely impacted similarly.

 

New infrastructure must be more efficient than 100 years old infrastructure.  Have the Stampede area even ripped out all their lead pipes and upgraded to PVC yet?  For sure it's cheaper to build on initially because the roads and sidewalks are already in place.  But it's old though and sidewalks are cracking already.  New stuff will need less maintenance.

[conundrumed]

17 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

New infrastructure must be more efficient than 100 years old infrastructure.  Have the Stampede area even ripped out all their lead pipes and upgraded to PVC yet?  For sure it's cheaper to build on initially because the roads and sidewalks are already in place.  But it's old though and sidewalks are cracking already.  New stuff will need less maintenance.

Yes, but that is infrastructure that requires maintenance regardless. Building new infrastructure creates a whole new package. So now you're fixing mistakes, maintaining whole other packages, while still needing to address aging infrastructure. It's not like you can abandon a core area due to aging infrastructure. How long will it be before maintaining infrastructure south of Canyon Meadows, Coventry Hills to Simons Valley etc becomes another financial burden?

This is why most places now prefer to build upwards. It's fiscally responsible before it becomes fiscally impossible.

Our aging counsel here has a real problem understanding this. Ignoring all recommendations from 3rd parties that they hire.

Because, well, everyone wants to live near the lake and taxes are higher. While all of the core infrastructure needs to be addressed regardless. I'm not against expansion, but expanding while what you already have is crumbling infrastructure is living beyond your means. If my house needs a new roof and drainage tiles, I'm not spending that money on a new garage.

[tmac70]

On 4/28/2023 at 5:43 AM, conundrumed said:

Yes, but that is infrastructure that requires maintenance regardless. Building new infrastructure creates a whole new package. So now you're fixing mistakes, maintaining whole other packages, while still needing to address aging infrastructure. It's not like you can abandon a core area due to aging infrastructure. How long will it be before maintaining infrastructure south of Canyon Meadows, Coventry Hills to Simons Valley etc becomes another financial burden?

This is why most places now prefer to build upwards. It's fiscally responsible before it becomes fiscally impossible.

Our aging counsel here has a real problem understanding this. Ignoring all recommendations from 3rd parties that they hire.

Because, well, everyone wants to live near the lake and taxes are higher. While all of the core infrastructure needs to be addressed regardless. I'm not against expansion, but expanding while what you already have is crumbling infrastructure is living beyond your means. If my house needs a new roof and drainage tiles, I'm not spending that money on a new garage.

Maybe we're in the same province as that is the common theme here, lol. Fix or repaired it 5 times because you didn't want to do spend the money the first time to do it right. The number of items in the city where I reside that were done, designed, and repaired incorrectly based on trying to save a dollar is mind-blowing.

[Thebrewcrew]

Pretty good night for CSEC

[travel_dude]

18 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Pretty good night for CSEC

 

Small delay with all the defeated cabinet ministers that would need to vote on it.

Giess you can get the parliamentary secretaries in their place?

Not really sure.

Not your typical situations.

[The_People1]

Edmonton voting to not build the arena for the Flames...

 

[sak22]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

Edmonton voting to not build the arena for the Flames...

 

Edmonton has been the reason for the NDP's position in the province, the arena never became the issue that people thought, I no people who hated the announcement who would never vote NDP and people who just want the arena but can't stand Smith or didn't like the last 4 years of the UCP, the NDP budgeted money for it and Edmonton's district anyways.  Can't call it a victory yet, the strength of the UCP's cabinet is mostly in the rural areas, I don't see it failing but with this project you never know.

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, sak22 said:

Edmonton has been the reason for the NDP's position in the province, the arena never became the issue that people thought, I no people who hated the announcement who would never vote NDP and people who just want the arena but can't stand Smith or didn't like the last 4 years of the UCP, the NDP budgeted money for it and Edmonton's district anyways.  Can't call it a victory yet, the strength of the UCP's cabinet is mostly in the rural areas, I don't see it failing but with this project you never know.

 

Ya I was just half joking.  I mean, half of Calgary also voted against the Flames, kek.  I don't think the arena became an issue at all... and like you say, it's not a sure thing yet.  It still needs to go through a final vote with the new cabinet.

[travel_dude]

21 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya I was just half joking.  I mean, half of Calgary so voted against the Flames, kek.  I don't think the arena became an issue at all... and like you say, it's not a sure thing yet.  It still needs to go through a final vote with the new cabinet.

 

I think the cabinet vote is likely a done deal.  It's one of the first things the government will undertake.

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think the cabinet vote is likely a done deal.  It's one of the first things the government will undertake.

Yep I believe it was said at the time it just has to pass through legislature .they stated end of June or so .(not sure exactly when they reconvene but it's sometime in June )  And with a majority it will pass no problem 

 

Especially with no Edmontontians to vote against it lol

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

35 years is a long time. Whats the life expectancy of an arena nowadays? 

 

City official says Calgary Flames arena deal to include 35-year commitment to stay | TSN

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

35 years is a long time. Whats the life expectancy of an arena nowadays? 

 

City official says Calgary Flames arena deal to include 35-year commitment to stay | TSN

i remember reading somewhere that 25 years was, and that the Canucks arena is now considered old. 
 

it seems in decent shape still, so i would hope they would do one where the design is timeless. Like it would age well.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

35 years is a long time. Whats the life expectancy of an arena nowadays? 

 

City official says Calgary Flames arena deal to include 35-year commitment to stay | TSN

 

How old is MSG?  They spent as much as Calgary will on renos to it.  And that was some time ago.

The Dome, to me, was an icon to show the world what Calgary was.

The design would create some issues down the road due to environment.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

How old is MSG?  They spent as much as Calgary will on renos to it.  And that was some time ago.

The Dome, to me, was an icon to show the world what Calgary was.

The design would create some issues down the road due to environment.

I think they had no other option to reno MSG. Besides it being a Manhattan landmark where would you put a new one? 

 

Even though I'm not a local so it doesnt effect me too much I'm always in favor of functionality over esthetics (sightlines, attendee convienance, player needs). But as its part of a bigger project it does need to be a nice place to be outside of game/event days.

 

Just hope they design it with a bit bigger seats than the CL Place here. I'm not skinny by any measure nor am I a large person but literally touching shoulder to shoulder with your neighbors is not a pleasant experience.

[sak22]

7 hours ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

35 years is a long time. Whats the life expectancy of an arena nowadays? 

 

City official says Calgary Flames arena deal to include 35-year commitment to stay | TSN

Always hard to predict, but the '70's and '80's were a disaster for sports facilities.  The Flames problem as far as the arena goes is that the team came a decade too early.  After the Saddledome is done the next group of oldest arena's would be Anaheim and San Jose turn 30 next year followed by St. Louis and Chicago turning 30 the year after, and there really aren't too many discussions about replacing those.  Arizona and Ottawa are next on the list and the issues there are/were more location based.  After those are done I have no idea who would be next or when.

[DirtyDeeds]

 

How does the proposed Calgary arena deal compare to other small market deals? (msn.com)

 

Good read. Comparison to other small markets with focus on "public Funding contributions %"

[conundrumed]

The concept should be pretty easy, talk to Detroit and Montreal. Detroit was quite frank in noting in their arena research stage a lot of concepts came from the Molson Center, as they deemed it the best viewing experience in the NHL.

I've been to both LCA and Rogers Place 1/2 a dozen times at least. Rogers Place cheap seats push the vertigo limits. Literal nosebleed seats. Then you find yourself watching the massive jumbotron rather than looking 120' straight down. LCA is a waaay better experience. Even the nosebleeds aren't literal.

The 'ol Joe Louis is the only arena I've been in that's worse than the Saddledome, but even that had great location going for it overlooking the river, the massive Cobo Hall next door and Greektown next to that.

The main concourse at LCA is wide open restauraunts/bar & grill swimming into each other and patio seating out front. It's a great vibe just walking in. The whole area is vibrant with Comerica Park on one side and the Fillmore and Fox Theatres on the other. The only downside is if you're from out of town for one game you desperately want a hotel for 2 nights because there is so much other stuff going on. It gets expensive.lol

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

The concept should be pretty easy, talk to Detroit and Montreal. Detroit was quite frank in noting in their arena research stage a lot of concepts came from the Molson Center, as they deemed it the best viewing experience in the NHL.

I've been to both LCA and Rogers Place 1/2 a dozen times at least. Rogers Place cheap seats push the vertigo limits. Literal nosebleed seats. Then you find yourself watching the massive jumbotron rather than looking 120' straight down. LCA is a waaay better experience. Even the nosebleeds aren't literal.

The 'ol Joe Louis is the only arena I've been in that's worse than the Saddledome, but even that had great location going for it overlooking the river, the massive Cobo Hall next door and Greektown next to that.

The main concourse at LCA is wide open restauraunts/bar & grill swimming into each other and patio seating out front. It's a great vibe just walking in. The whole area is vibrant with Comerica Park on one side and the Fillmore and Fox Theatres on the other. The only downside is if you're from out of town for one game you desperately want a hotel for 2 nights because there is so much other stuff going on. It gets expensive.lol

One thing I liked from what I saw from a game at LCA was the glass corridor the Wings go through from lockerroom to ice. It looked like it literally went through a sports bar type area where the fans can get up close as the players went through.

 

Lets hope designers and engineers focus in whats inside rather than what it looks like from outside

[The_Tribal Chief]

Bump

[DirtyDeeds]

So the only possible delay(the election) is over and the possible NDP putting the axe to the project is not going to happen.....

 

Are we gong to break ground here soon?

Anyone seen the new plans? or..

even a few designs?

 

Come on people we are waiting here patiently for something .... anything...

[conundrumed]

Well...here is the design company?

https://dialogdesign.ca/project-type/civic-culture/

[jjgallow]

Would be really cool if they could kinda make it like a saddle

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

On 7/27/2023 at 7:18 PM, jjgallow said:

Would be really cool if they could kinda make it like a saddle

I just hope someone else besides Rogers or Scotiabank win the naming rights. And not something pious like "save the whales" arena.

[conundrumed]

15 hours ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

I just hope someone else besides Rogers or Scotiabank win the naming rights. And not something pious like "save the whales" arena.

Uh-oh. "Welcome to CNRL Place". It will need maintenance as soon as it opens, but they'll find the right engineer to algorithm the problem away until there's a critical failure. Then we can even have a motto!

"Welcome to CNRL Place. True to Form". At least we can say the team falling apart comes upon it honestly.lol