PDA

View Full Version : New Downtown Calgary Arena


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

H.E.Pennypacker
May 10, 2013, 9:01 PM
I agree, Calgary severely lacks space for these types of conferences where smaller rooms are required for talks/presentations. In terms of exhibition space, Stampede is just ok. The GO Expo in June has 20,000 attendees and the Global petroleum Show is 63,000 but the conference side of both shows is really small in comparison.

Aside from what has been posted here in terms of hotel development, there are plenty of plans for even more.

When the new GM of the City's PDA department, Rollin Stanley first came to Calgary he was shocked at how little hotel space was available downtown .. Combine that with his vision of increasing the density with the core via mixed use developments, I'm sure he is willing to make some concessions if developers are proposing these kinds of ideas.

I also know he hates stadiums from a planning point of view for a municipality (especially public funded) .. IMO if a large mixed use district, dense with hotels, residential/retail/office mixed use developments is put forth it will definitely get the process moving much sooner than later .. From the City's POV anyways

Deepstar
May 10, 2013, 9:12 PM
I don't care if the arena is in West Village or near the Stampede grounds or along the tracks as long as it's downtown.

The best place of all would be the big Four building, but it does't look like that will happen.

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 9:54 PM
I don't care if the arena is in West Village or near the Stampede grounds or along the tracks as long as it's downtown.

The best place of all would be the big Four building, but it does't look like that will happen.

Not nearly enough room there for an arena + stadium. The grounds are already bursting at the seems!

Bigtime
May 10, 2013, 10:00 PM
I'd take just an arena on the Big 4 site. It has always been the best opportunity, just having the ability to have an LRT station right inside of it was awesome.

Too bad it is nothing more than a pipe dream...

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 10:43 PM
I'd take just an arena on the Big 4 site. It has always been the best opportunity, just having the ability to have an LRT station right inside of it was awesome.

Too bad it is nothing more than a pipe dream...

I think even if it is just the arena (and I'd be sad if this opportunity for a pseudo-enhancement of our convention hosting ability didn't happen with a co-located retractable roof stadium) it would need to bridge over-top of Macleod to get enough space. The footprint of the saddledome is not a good touchstone as it doesn't have enough service areas (one of the gripes about it).

DizzyEdge
May 11, 2013, 1:14 AM
My point is I am not crazy on a arena and new field together if it costs us valuable space in the core that could be put to a much better use if we are only talking about fitting an arena in the space.

What if the high density housing is 'right across the street' on 10th ave in Sunalta?

Like this (blue arena district, red high density)

http://i.imgur.com/ZvwoW8W.jpg

Joborule
May 11, 2013, 5:18 AM
I figure that the football stadium would actually go in the Pumphouse area, and the arena would be across Bow Trail westbound, or the road would be realigned/bent southward so then the arena would be beside the stadium eastward. Keeping it on the same 'block'.

suburbia
May 11, 2013, 5:35 AM
I figure that the football stadium would actually go in the Pumphouse area, and the arena would be across Bow Trail westbound, or the road would be realigned/bent southward so then the arena would be beside the stadium eastward. Keeping it on the same 'block'.

The pumphouse area is too far from the train station. These facilities would need to be right smack near the middle of West Village, with the river promenade to the north, flanked by the mixed-used gateway districts. Would certainly need to find a way to get a good amount of mid to high density in there, so the pumphouse and the area south of the tracks would need to be it. The gateway districts would need to have several, in fact more than several, hotels.

Joborule
May 11, 2013, 6:13 AM
The pumphouse area is too far from the train station. These facilities would need to be right smack near the middle of West Village, with the river promenade to the north, flanked by the mixed-used gateway districts. Would certainly need to find a way to get a good amount of mid to high density in there, so the pumphouse and the area south of the tracks would need to be it. The gateway districts would need to have several, in fact more than several, hotels.

It's not that far away. The walk to there would be about the same equivalent as it is now to Flames game from Stampede station. It's much more ideal to have those two venues located right by the station though if they find a way to do that, while making the rest of the complex work.

Cage
May 11, 2013, 2:47 PM
The pumphouse area is too far from the train station.

A gondola would solve that problem. :notacrook:

speedog
May 11, 2013, 2:56 PM
So leave the Pumphouse area for the housing that so many desire and put the two sports complexes in the blue area - much closer to the LRT than the Saddledome or McMahon Stadium currently are.

Cowtown_Tim
May 12, 2013, 5:07 AM
Not nearly enough room there for an arena + stadium. The grounds are already bursting at the seems!

I don't care if the arena and stadium are combined. I would be happy with just the new arena downtown, and the Big Four would be the best spot, but like you say probably not enough room. Mute point anyway, sounds like it's already not in the plans.

Innersoul1
May 12, 2013, 6:55 PM
I imagine that a Stadium in the pump house area would have some serious shadowing issues.

Calgarian
May 12, 2013, 8:17 PM
I imagine that a Stadium in the pump house area would have some serious shadowing issues.

Is the city concerned about shadowing on that part of the pathway?

Does Sunalta station have a connection to the north side of the CPR tracks?

mersar
May 12, 2013, 8:32 PM
Does Sunalta station have a connection to the north side of the CPR tracks?

Yes, it connects to the pedestrian bridge that runs over towards the greyhound station.

suburbia
May 13, 2013, 3:01 AM
Is the city concerned about shadowing on that part of the pathway?

Does Sunalta station have a connection to the north side of the CPR tracks?

Not only does it have a connection to the north, that connection, in the West Village ARP, cuts straight through to the river, linking with the river promenade centred at that point. As Innersoul1 has highlighted, there is nothing there that would prevent further augmentation. Heck, all the roads are to be re-done based on the current vision of the West Village ARP, so what big deal is a pedestrian way?

Innersoul1
May 13, 2013, 3:51 PM
Yes, it connects to the pedestrian bridge that runs over towards the greyhound station.

Obviously the connection to the north would be completely redone as the current pedestrian bridge would be too small to accommodate such large crowds.

Coldrsx
May 15, 2013, 10:22 PM
10-3 in favour for the Downtown Arena in Edmonton... over to you:)

WOOOOOOO

RicoLance21
May 15, 2013, 11:00 PM
10-3 in favour for the Downtown Arena in Edmonton... over to you:)

WOOOOOOO

Great news for Edmonton! Your miserable downtown will finally see the light! :cheers:

I am betting the shovels will be on the ground for construction of the new Calgary arena in 2015. Ready to move in by the 2017/18 season. Ba-da-bing-ba-da-boom!

craner
May 16, 2013, 6:48 AM
Sure hope this speculation of a new stadium combined with the arena in an entertainment district is true.
:fingerscrossed:
Oh, and NO STAMPITECHTURE!

Coldrsx
May 16, 2013, 3:35 PM
Great news for Edmonton! Your miserable downtown will finally see the light!

Sadly, comments such as that make me wonder when you will.

lubicon
May 16, 2013, 6:44 PM
Great news for Edmonton! Your miserable downtown will finally see the light! :cheers:

I am betting the shovels will be on the ground for construction of the new Calgary arena in 2015. Ready to move in by the 2017/18 season. Ba-da-bing-ba-da-boom!

just in time for the Flames next playoff appearance:cheers:

Cage
May 16, 2013, 7:46 PM
10-3 in favour for the Downtown Arena in Edmonton... over to you:)

WOOOOOOO

No prediction as to move in date for new Calgary Arena. I suspect that plans for the new arena will be presented immediately after the civic election. Included within the plans will be a bunch of me too clauses from the Edmonton's final deal. I think there will be two differences, (1) The Calgary deal will not have a cash outlay from the City, (2) The Calgary deal will have a way more property tax reduction request.

I don't think the Calgary Flames will present plans before civic eledction, otherwise this will just push the new arena to the top of the civic election discussion.

jsbertram
May 17, 2013, 1:11 AM
10-3 in favour for the Downtown Arena in Edmonton... over to you:)

WOOOOOOO

How soon will we hear that the new Edmonton arena is over-budget and behind schedule?

Followed by Katz and Council will continue fighting over who has to put up the extra $$ to get it finished.

Pavlov
May 17, 2013, 2:07 PM
No prediction as to move in date for new Calgary Arena. I suspect that plans for the new arena will be presented immediately after the civic election. Included within the plans will be a bunch of me too clauses from the Edmonton's final deal. I think there will be two differences, (1) The Calgary deal will not have a cash outlay from the City, (2) The Calgary deal will have a way more property tax reduction request.

I don't think the Calgary Flames will present plans before civic eledction, otherwise this will just push the new arena to the top of the civic election discussion.

In terms of timing, that certainly makes sense.

speedog
May 19, 2013, 7:31 PM
So Edmonton has an arena deal in place although it appears to be a deal dependent on at least one unknown so far ($25 million that Edmonton is counting on getting from the province’s regional collaboration grant). A read of this article, link (http://www.edmontonsun.com/2013/05/17/hicks-on-biz-implications-of-edmontons-downtown-arena-deal), (take it for what it is) seems to make this deal like a precarious house of cards with the Katz group carrying the smallest risk.

So in reality, what does this mean to the average Edmonton tax payer? How long to pay off the up-front money (loans) needed to make this all work? And what of the very real Northlands risk to the city.

No doubt, Calgary's new arena deal is on the foreseeable horizon but let's just hope that it's a bit more solid in it's base then what this Edmonton arena deal appears to be.

monocle
May 20, 2013, 1:46 AM
I'm getting out of here before you get scolded. We do not disparage our Capital!

Luk_o
May 24, 2013, 1:21 AM
Roger Millions from SportsNet did a small article on Calgary's new arena here from May 20th:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/millions-on-calgary-calgary-to-follow-edmontons-suit/

Nothing really new, still all speculation at this point - he does mention though that there are talks that concept plans could be revealed within the next two months (take that for what its worth). More and more hints from the article that the Flames want to get away from the Stampede grounds with the new development.

Really like the renderings for Edmontons new arena, here's hoping wherever it lands we get something as modern.

RicoLance21
May 24, 2013, 2:12 PM
Roger Millions from SportsNet did a small article on Calgary's new arena here from May 20th:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/millions-on-calgary-calgary-to-follow-edmontons-suit/

Nothing really new, still all speculation at this point - he does mention though that there are talks that concept plans could be revealed within the next two months (take that for what its worth). More and more hints from the article that the Flames want to get away from the Stampede grounds with the new development.

Really like the renderings for Edmontons new arena, here's hoping wherever it lands we get something as modern.

Perhaps this is the way to build something as iconic as Edmonton's...to go far beyond "Stampitecture".

Vercingetorix
May 24, 2013, 2:59 PM
I'm not surprised at all by that. If they get away from the grounds, they get all the revenue, which I suspect is one of the main reasons they are building a new arena.

Roger Millions from SportsNet did a small article on Calgary's new arena here from May 20th:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/millions-on-calgary-calgary-to-follow-edmontons-suit/

Nothing really new, still all speculation at this point - he does mention though that there are talks that concept plans could be revealed within the next two months (take that for what its worth). More and more hints from the article that the Flames want to get away from the Stampede grounds with the new development.

Really like the renderings for Edmontons new arena, here's hoping wherever it lands we get something as modern.

MalcolmTucker
May 24, 2013, 3:04 PM
I'm not surprised at all by that. If they get away from the grounds, they get all the revenue, which I suspect is one of the main reasons they are building a new arena.
Also, city council will then have to make a call on taxes, but I doubt it will be a very big fight — if it remained on the grounds there would be no taxes anyways, so not a huge opprotunity cost. Not sure 100%, but I think currently the request for tax exemption would have to be sent to the provincial government.

Innersoul1
May 24, 2013, 9:11 PM
Interesting article for sure...nothing new, just a lot of journalism. But I am wondering, if the Flames were to leave Stampede Park do you think that the Stampede would keep the Saddledome? This would potentially mean two large arenas in the city that could host concerts. Would that be viable?

Cage
May 24, 2013, 9:29 PM
Interesting article for sure...nothing new, just a lot of journalism. But I am wondering, if the Flames were to leave Stampede Park do you think that the Stampede would keep the Saddledome? This would potentially mean two large arenas in the city that could host concerts. Would that be viable?

The Stampede does not own the Saddledome. The Saddledome is owned by City of Calgary through not-for-profit Saddledome Foundation. The Saddledome foundation Board consists of representatives from Calgary Flames, Stampede, and City of Calgary.

I suspect that if the Flames move to their own arena, the Saddledome will be handed over to Stampede association with the City retaining full ownership. IIRC the foundation only has about 8-12 employees and relies upon either the flames or stampede for management services.

H.E.Pennypacker
May 24, 2013, 9:36 PM
I think the Saddledome should be kept since it's been a pretty big landmark on the Stampede grounds and skyline for years now ... But it'd have to be retrofitted for some other use asides from an arena to make it practical, not sure what else they could use it for but the uniqueness of the structure could make for an interesting development to compliment the future Stampede Trail redevelopment

Luk_o
May 24, 2013, 10:23 PM
I would love to see the Saddledome be kept in operation after the new arena gets built. It would be awesome if the same type of situation in Vancouver with the Pacific Coliseum happened here, and the 'Dome became the home building for the Hitmen and other seasonal / Stampede functions.

SubwayRev
May 24, 2013, 10:53 PM
While I think it would be nice to have two arenas, we just do not have enough people to support two arenas of that size, just as Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, Boston, and LA don't.

Since the Flames own the Hitmen, (and the Roughnecks) there is no way they would have them play in somebody else's arena, where they'd have to pay, while their own shiny new building sat empty.

And the Stampede wouldn't want to keep a building that sits empty 355 nights each year.

monocle
May 24, 2013, 11:35 PM
Turn the Saddledom into a Western-themed Hotel/Integrated waterpark for an unbeatable staycation!

Bassic Lab
May 25, 2013, 12:25 AM
While I think it would be nice to have two arenas, we just do not have enough people to support two arenas of that size, just as Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, Boston, and LA don't.

Since the Flames own the Hitmen, (and the Roughnecks) there is no way they would have them play in somebody else's arena, where they'd have to pay, while their own shiny new building sat empty.

And the Stampede wouldn't want to keep a building that sits empty 355 nights each year.

All of those cities could, and often do, easily support two arenas. Hell, Los Angeles has the Staples Center, the Honda Center, and the Forum, which are all that size, along with a solid half dozen arenas in the 10 000-15 000 capacity range.

The biggest issue with retaining the Saddledome as an operating venue are its concert hosting flaws. If it weren't for poor acoustics and the problems with the roof supporting weight it would make a lot more sense.

Doug_Cgy
May 25, 2013, 12:37 AM
All of those cities could, and often do, easily support two arenas. Hell, Los Angeles has the Staples Center, the Honda Center, and the Forum, which are all that size, along with a solid half dozen arenas in the 10 000-15 000 capacity range.

The biggest issue with retaining the Saddledome as an operating venue are its concert hosting flaws. If it weren't for poor acoustics and the problems with the roof supporting weight it would make a lot more sense.

Edmonton's also keeping Rexall Place

SubwayRev
May 25, 2013, 10:03 PM
All of those cities could, and often do, easily support two arenas. Hell, Los Angeles has the Staples Center, the Honda Center, and the Forum, which are all that size, along with a solid half dozen arenas in the 10 000-15 000 capacity range.

But the Forum hasn't hosted an event in almost 15 years. I believe it is currently a church.

The difference in LA is that while the two arenas are in the same metro area, Anaheim and LA are different cities. The Honda Center serves Orange County and its 3,000,000 people, while the Staples Center serves LA County, and its 10,000,000 people. I just can't see Calgary being able to support two 20,000 person facilities with only 1,200,000 people.

SubwayRev
May 25, 2013, 10:05 PM
Edmonton's also keeping Rexall Place

I'm not so sure, as the City stated in the press release about the new arena, that Edmonton could not support two arenas. That leads me to believe it will meet the wrecking ball.

Coldrsx
May 25, 2013, 10:10 PM
Edmonton's also keeping Rexall Place

For now... But tbd.

Black Star
May 25, 2013, 10:32 PM
Perhaps this is the way to build something as iconic as Edmonton's...to go far beyond "Stampitecture".



There's something you don't hear everyday!! But Im starting to hear this more and more with different projects in the city. Bout time:cheers:

Im sure when and if Calgary announces plans and rendering...it will be stellar...the Calgary way!

MalcolmTucker
May 26, 2013, 2:54 AM
Reconfiguring the Saddledome into a great set up for 10,000 could certainly be worth it, and avoid having to make the choice. If it couldn't pay its upkeep after a couple years, can always pull the plug later. How many years did the pacific coliseum in vancouver sit underused?

Bassic Lab
May 26, 2013, 9:53 AM
But the Forum hasn't hosted an event in almost 15 years. I believe it is currently a church.

The difference in LA is that while the two arenas are in the same metro area, Anaheim and LA are different cities. The Honda Center serves Orange County and its 3,000,000 people, while the Staples Center serves LA County, and its 10,000,000 people. I just can't see Calgary being able to support two 20,000 person facilities with only 1,200,000 people.

The Forum has been hosting events the entire time. A church did own it, and might still, but they rented it out for concerts, sporting events, and just about anything else that could be thought of.

CapitalYEG
May 27, 2013, 3:46 AM
Would it be possible to renovate the Saddledome for CFL uses? Have the Stampeders play there and build a new arena elsewhere for the Flames?

craner
May 27, 2013, 3:58 AM
^ Anything is possible but this would be highly impractical.

You Need A Thneed
May 27, 2013, 4:15 AM
Would it be possible to renovate the Saddledome for CFL uses? Have the Stampeders play there and build a new arena elsewhere for the Flames?

Possible, of course. Also, rediculously impractical, since it would likely cost a billion dollars, and not be very good for football.

MalcolmTucker
May 27, 2013, 4:26 AM
^ Anything is possible but this would be highly impractical.

I always have wondered whether it would be practical to have a CFL field take advantage of the existing infrastructure of the Stampede Grandstand. A modular field in heavy concrete 'planters' for lack of a better word that could be packed up for Stampede time, with way more potential viewing areas for rodeo.

Of course would be a bit awkward.

Otherwise, I hold out hope for a complex with the new arena, a new convention centre, and a new football stadium that can be used as a huge convention space. I think a hockey arena can get done with minimal public dollars, but I doubt a football stadium can. But with a lower bowl that has seats that are retractable to create an even larger floor area for convention type events would be interesting if a business case can be made. Still would have to be value engineered big time to avoid financial ruin.

What ever plan the Flames' owners are cooking up, I sure hope they aren't hoping for more than surrounding infrastructure support and a property tax break for the arena.

SubwayRev
May 28, 2013, 5:58 PM
The Forum has been hosting events the entire time. A church did own it, and might still, but they rented it out for concerts, sporting events, and just about anything else that could be thought of.

Ah, I didn't realize they had been renting it out. And, I just read that MSG bought it last year, with plans to renovate and host more events.

But I still stand by my thought that Calgary cannot support two venues of this size. As it is, The Dome probably sits empty over 150 days a year.

jsbertram
Jun 23, 2013, 2:36 AM
Saddledome flooded up to 10th (or 14th) row of seats.

"total loss" sez Flames president Ken King.

no doubt now there will be a push for a new NHL arena.

Maybe now the old Firestone site isn't such a dumb idea ...

btw: did the Renfrew Chrysler / GSL Chev City / Greyhound sites flood too?

Doug_Cgy
Jun 23, 2013, 5:50 AM
Saddledome flooded up to 10th (or 14th) row of seats.

"total loss" sez Flames president Ken King.

no doubt now there will be a push for a new NHL arena.

Maybe now the old Firestone site isn't such a dumb idea ...

btw: did the Renfrew Chrysler / GSL Chev City / Greyhound sites flood too?

No flooding on those sites. I can see them very well from my balcony in Downtown West

Spring2008
Jun 23, 2013, 4:13 PM
Saddledome flooded up to 10th (or 14th) row of seats.

"total loss" sez Flames president Ken King.

no doubt now there will be a push for a new NHL arena.

Maybe now the old Firestone site isn't such a dumb idea ...

btw: did the Renfrew Chrysler / GSL Chev City / Greyhound sites flood too?

He also said everything will likely be covered by insurance, so not really sure if this would necessarily effect the decision to build a new arena or not.

suburbia
Jun 23, 2013, 5:32 PM
He also said everything will likely be covered by insurance, so not really sure if this would necessarily effect the decision to build a new arena or not.

Insurance proceeds could be split into getting saddledome to where it can operate but not up to prior snuff, with balance towards new arena. It would absolutely effect decision-making.

monocle
Jun 29, 2013, 1:32 PM
NO mention of Tills13's comment in the big thread? He mentioned the new areana going on the GMC dealer in the west end. If they put in the Football stadium as well, I'll be happy. Should really liven up that area.

suburbia
Jun 29, 2013, 5:43 PM
NO mention of Tills13's comment in the big thread? He mentioned the new areana going on the GMC dealer in the west end. If they put in the Football stadium as well, I'll be happy. Should really liven up that area.

I thought his comment was that the stadium was going there - or did he mean arena?

Tropics
Jun 29, 2013, 9:27 PM
I thought his comment was that the stadium was going there - or did he mean arena?

He said "stadium" but then also said his dad works with an owner of the "Flames" so I am guessing he used the word "stadium" but meant "arena".

artvandelay
Jun 30, 2013, 12:34 AM
He said "stadium" but then also said his dad works with an owner of the "Flames" so I am guessing he used the word "stadium" but meant "arena".

The Flames own the Stamps.

Tills13
Jun 30, 2013, 3:51 AM
He said "stadium" but then also said his dad works with an owner of the "Flames" so I am guessing he used the word "stadium" but meant "arena".

I meant arena, yes.

And while there is still a lot of speculation, I will say this is a good source.

I have no idea if they're doing a new football stadium, as well - McMahon seems to be doing the job just fine, atm.

monocle
Jun 30, 2013, 1:43 PM
Any chance we can get some covert pics of renderings, site plans, etc;)?

Tills13
Jun 30, 2013, 9:46 PM
Any chance we can get some covert pics of renderings, site plans, etc;)?

If my Dad gets them, I'll get them, and you guys will get them.

Mista_Incognito
Jul 21, 2013, 10:25 PM
This article is suggesting that the flood restrictions could have an impact on the Flames building a new arena on Stampede grounds and suggests that the university area is a possibility. I sure hope not, anything beats fire park area but I would much rather it be west village if its not the stampede grounds. I sure hope we hear something about the arena soon.


http://www.examiner.com/article/flames-could-be-impacted-by-new-development-regulations

Doug_Cgy
Jul 21, 2013, 11:59 PM
This article is suggesting that the flood restrictions could have an impact on the Flames building a new arena on Stampede grounds and suggests that the university area is a possibility. I sure hope not, anything beats fire park area but I would much rather it be west village if its not the stampede grounds. I sure hope we hear something about the arena soon.


http://www.examiner.com/article/flames-could-be-impacted-by-new-development-regulations

I wouldn't put much stock into that article. If memory serves me correctly, the Dome is in a "Flood Fringe", which still permits development with certain building conditions/codes in place to mitigate future issues. Also, I believe the West Village is actually in a safe zone. No parts of Downtown West we're impacted by the floods (I live in the area), so I'm sure there would be no issue moving forward with any plans in this area.

suburbia
Jul 22, 2013, 1:31 AM
I wouldn't put much stock into that article. If memory serves me correctly, the Dome is in a "Flood Fringe", which still permits development with certain building conditions/codes in place to mitigate future issues. Also, I believe the West Village is actually in a safe zone. No parts of Downtown West we're impacted by the floods (I live in the area), so I'm sure there would be no issue moving forward with any plans in this area.

It would be silly to invest $500m+ on a facility in the "flood fringe", and I'm surprised anyone would be surprised by a move away from an area that was so badly hammered.

West Village is good. University could work, with redevelopment of "motel village" and a major upgrade to the LRT station. Roll in the NW transit improvements that are being contemplated and we could have a winner.

SEsupporter
Oct 19, 2013, 10:26 AM
Has anyone heard any stadium/arena updates? In response to Mista Incognito July 21 stating anything but firepark I believe is incorrect. After the flooding and the crowchild trail traffic congestion and lack of room in the west village for a stadium and arena the Max Bell Arena LRT station would have been perfect considering the room available and the major roads access with room for underground parking and the new east calgary ring road access fairly close by with the billion dollar view looking west as well. Amenities can easily be built in the area as there is lots of room to build around the facilities. I sure hope Ken King considers this firepark location as the leading site to build.

Bigtime
Oct 19, 2013, 1:20 PM
It will not be built at Firepark.

YYCguys
Oct 19, 2013, 1:29 PM
Bigtime, that's a pretty definitive statement. Must be insider knowledge?

Firepark is quite detached from downtown currently. ALOT of infrastructure (including shops, restaurants, hotels) would need to built to make it a destination. Right now, Max Bell is pretty secluded.

Yes, access to Firepark is quite handy via transit and the roads seem adequate to handle increased traffic, but perhaps Firepark isn't the wisest location. What location is suitable in terms of access, transit, shops, proximity to the core, etc and not in a flood zone is beyond me. I know that West Village has been mentioned. What other locations other than Stampede Park are on the radar?

Tropics
Oct 19, 2013, 3:18 PM
Firepark should be where the Calgary bus terminal is relocated to when it is finally removed from the downtown core. I has great transit access, is right off of Deerfoot which is extremely handy for Alberta bus travel, and it has ample room to expand as the city grows.

I cannot think of a better location for a bus terminal in this city then Firepark and the location on the west side of the core has to go soon. It is outdated, small, and the location is terrible as far as logistics of getting large busses to and from the terminal go.

Not to mention the ability to re-purpose and re-develop the land the current terminal is on which as tremendous potential whether it be for a arena or an urban, high density, riverfront, TOD development full of medium to high density residential an middle to high end retail and services to bring some much needed life to the west side of the core.

So, put the arena where the bus terminal currently is, then put the bus terminal at Firepark. Those are better locations for both of those structures. Doing it the other way around and having the arena at Firepark and the bus terminal remaining on the west side of the core is simply wrong.

speedog
Oct 19, 2013, 7:20 PM
K, what about NNW of the TELUS World of Science? Plenty of room there but access might be a bit of a bear although with the right kind of monies some off-on ramps could be made off of the Deerfoot .

Or what about the big vacant plot of land on the south side of Blackfoot Trail sandwiched between Highfield Road, 26th Ave SE and thew Crossroads Market - not ideal but certainly a chunk of land that is big enough.

Better yet, bulldoze the Sears at North Hill and put it on the east side of that site. Good road access, transit on your doorstep and enough room to add in a hotel or two as well.

suburbia
Oct 21, 2013, 1:37 AM
Firepark should be where the Calgary bus terminal is relocated to when it is finally removed from the downtown core. I has great transit access, is right off of Deerfoot which is extremely handy for Alberta bus travel, and it has ample room to expand as the city grows.

I cannot think of a better location for a bus terminal in this city

That's silly. All of what you've said makes it a perfect location for a sports complex and rejuvenating development all around.

Hmmm ... wonder if the arena could replace max bell instead of be up in firepark, and then the stadium could be accompanied by development on the actual firepark site.

Tills13
Oct 21, 2013, 1:44 AM
That's silly. All of what you've said makes it a perfect location for a sports complex and rejuvenating development all around.

Hmmm ... wonder if the arena could replace max bell instead of be up in firepark, and then the stadium could be accompanied by development on the actual firepark site.


the issue I see with the Max Bell site is that there's no transit to that area... and there's not enough room for a stadium, parking lot, and everything else.

speedog
Oct 21, 2013, 2:48 AM
the issue I see with the Max Bell site is that there's no transit to that area... and there's not enough room for a stadium, parking lot, and everything else.
Actually the Saddledome would fit where Max Bell currently is, LRT is directly on the north side and there would be tons of room for parking at Fire park.

artvandelay
Oct 21, 2013, 2:54 AM
I can't see the Flames moving that far from downtown. Corporate ticket sales are their bread and butter.

joe498
Oct 21, 2013, 2:09 PM
Probably to small of a lot but the YWCA has been in talks of relocating recently to a new facility.

Calgarian
Oct 21, 2013, 5:59 PM
They aren't going to demolish Max Bell, especially since they just renovated it a few years ago (which looks stupid to me). Firepark could work, but they would need major upgrades to the road network and probably the utilities in the area to make it work, and with the city vowing no public money will go towards the new building, the costs to CSEC to do the upgrades would be a major obstacle. If they go in the West Village, the city will probably eat a lot of the infrastructure costs as they want to make major changes already anyway.

speedog
Oct 21, 2013, 7:24 PM
Don't believe anyone suggested demolishing Max Bell - all that was made was a comment that a new arena couldn't fit on that space.

Now someone made a comment earlier that a new arena would have to be near the downtown because of corporate ticket sales - that I call BS on because I would bet that most people who buy or use these corporate tickets aren't just casually walking to the Saddledome. They are most likely ether taking transit or some other motorized form of transport and as such, the 'right' out of the core location might work - hello, east side of North Hill Mall?

Coldrsx
Oct 21, 2013, 7:48 PM
Just for context/reference, the DP for Edmonton's arena has been officially submitted.

evolv
Oct 22, 2013, 5:26 PM
Don't believe anyone suggested demolishing Max Bell - all that was made was a comment that a new arena couldn't fit on that space.

Now someone made a comment earlier that a new arena would have to be near the downtown because of corporate ticket sales - that I call BS on because I would bet that most people who buy or use these corporate tickets aren't just casually walking to the Saddledome. They are most likely ether taking transit or some other motorized form of transport and as such, the 'right' out of the core location might work - hello, east side of North Hill Mall?

I think you would bet wrong. A lot of people going to the game go from work to beers/supper at a downtown restaurant to the game. Or from work and rush to the game. Especially on weeknights. I think it would be a huge mistake to move out of the core for the Flames, thing is ownership gets that dynamic; most work or have worked downtown Calgary.

H.E.Pennypacker
Oct 22, 2013, 5:32 PM
I think the location will depend on when the Flames want to get this thing built ... Cooperation from the City will be a lot easier if it's in the EV for example, but if they want to build it in the West Village (which needs a lot of roadwork and change) it would have to wait awhile

I think the City will want an arena on the LRT line too .. So unless ownership wants to spend all the money themselves (which is doubtful) then they'll have to cater towards the City's demands

artvandelay
Oct 22, 2013, 7:16 PM
Hopefully we hear something concrete now that the election is over.

freeweed
Oct 22, 2013, 8:47 PM
Better yet, bulldoze the Sears at North Hill and put it on the east side of that site. Good road access, transit on your doorstep and enough room to add in a hotel or two as well.

This is actually a fantastic idea, except for 2 things:

1. Locals would be up in arms about it. This is pretty close to the McMahon NIMBYs, remember. I can't think of any recent situation where someone proposed a sports complex in a residential area, that wasn't met by insane opposition.

2. The LRT stations there are nowhere near adequate for a hockey game. You'd have to close down 14th Ave just to deal with the crowds that would mill about everywhere. But yeah, given a radical alteration to the community, it could work.

Plus, it gets rid of that horrible Sears.

bigcanuck
Oct 22, 2013, 9:10 PM
Plus, it gets rid of that horrible Sears.

Based on recent performance, I think Sears is getting rid of itself rather nicely...

Joborule
Oct 22, 2013, 10:02 PM
Consider the the Flames owners are not just making a new arena. By the smoke that's been blowing, it seems they're making a new arena, plus a new football stadium, plus more. (Commercial projects such as hotels, conventions, ect.) It's a massive district project they're undertaking here. Firepark easily has the space to do this, but the economic return may not be justifiable compared to doing in in the heart of the city, which is downtown. This complex is a given to be located in the west village (most likely) or east village.

The Fisher Account
Oct 22, 2013, 10:47 PM
No chance there's enough room in the East Village for the arena and all that they're planning on building given the East Village master plan.

West Village for sure. Excited for this to get announced.

GoflamesGo
Oct 25, 2013, 11:46 PM
Did anyone ever discuss building the arena/ stadium/ over the tracks? With a few levels of parking underground and a few retail/ office above ground facing the streets? Maybe Having multiple entrances and exits to each underground parkade? Might make for a killer canyon look if done right, and would be very central with multiple ctrain stations only a few blocks away.

TallBob
Oct 26, 2013, 7:20 AM
Seattle has their convention center built over Interstate 5 (all 8 lanes and the medium)! Target Field & parking ramp in Minneapolis is partially built over I-394..... So it can be done! Both of those expanses are much, much wider than the CP tracks.

WaitWhat?
Oct 26, 2013, 8:38 PM
Did anyone ever discuss building the arena/ stadium/ over the tracks? With a few levels of parking underground and a few retail/ office above ground facing the streets? Maybe Having multiple entrances and exits to each underground parkade? Might make for a killer canyon look if done right, and would be very central with multiple ctrain stations only a few blocks away.

I hate to think this way but would putting an arena over top of train tracks be a security risk? Consider the devestation of Lac Megantic with only a few cars exploding. We have trains full of diluent running through downtown, I wouldn't think having 19,000 people sitting on top of that would be a good idea.

Full Mountain
Oct 26, 2013, 10:59 PM
I hate to think this way but would putting an arena over top of train tracks be a security risk? Consider the devestation of Lac Megantic with only a few cars exploding. We have trains full of diluent running through downtown, I wouldn't think having 19,000 people sitting on top of that would be a good idea.

People keep bringing this suggestion of building x (convention centre, Greenway, etc.) over the tracks, one CP won't let it happened and have said as much in the past, and two see above the safety/security risk would be huge.

GoflamesGo
Oct 27, 2013, 1:36 AM
Yeah a possible catastrophe would be a big issue. Would be a great use of that space tho.

TallBob
Oct 27, 2013, 6:16 AM
If something that catastrophic happened (on the Cp tracks)most of the entire downtown & Beltline would be in deep shyte!

The Urbanist
Oct 27, 2013, 6:41 AM
They should cap over the rail tracks running through downtown and build a large park on it:D

H.E.Pennypacker
Oct 27, 2013, 6:52 AM
They should cap over the rail tracks running through downtown and build a large park on it:D

This guy gets it

Allan83
Oct 27, 2013, 5:53 PM
I hate to think this way but would putting an arena over top of train tracks be a security risk? Consider the devestation of Lac Megantic with only a few cars exploding. We have trains full of diluent running through downtown, I wouldn't think having 19,000 people sitting on top of that would be a good idea.
I think it’s good to think about worst case scenarios, but in this case I don’t think a Lac Megantic type accident is very likely. That was caused by a runaway train rolling down hill which ended up going so fast it jumped the tracks. The train accordioned when it derailed and I think several dozen cars at least exploded and burned. We’re not likely to ever have a train moving at high speed going through downtown Calgary, so if one did derail it would likely be only a small number of cars. Still, theoretically one or more could explode, but I think the underside of concrete stands would stand up to that kind of explosion and fireball quite well. You’d probably want to make sure the stands were concrete and not steel, however. Tunnels and fires can be bad news as well, but if you made this tunnel big, say starting at right at the LRT stop and extending over the tracks and one leg of Bow Trail, with large openings at either end, I’m guessing that would be fine. Obviously you’d need to do all the right calculations, but my first thought is that it would be doable.

I think this is a good idea in general. It would make use of otherwise unusable space. It would give you access from both the top and the bottom, which would allow you to get people in and out quickly. It would also create some very interesting and unique views. Offhand I can’t think of another stadium where you enter at the top. There would be opportunities for some great views of both the stadium bowl and field, and the downtown skyline, and in fact much of the greater downtown area. I like it.

vinny28
Nov 1, 2013, 4:48 PM
heard that the new arena/sports complex will be at COP.
owners of Cowboys are fumed because they spent million dollars renovating cowboys and now the sports arena will be no where close to downtown.

O-tacular
Nov 1, 2013, 5:12 PM
heard that the new arena/sports complex will be at COP.
owners of Cowboys are fumed because they spent million dollars renovating cowboys and now the sports arena will be no where close to downtown.

I'll believe that when I see it.

Calgarian
Nov 1, 2013, 5:26 PM
Why would they build where there is no transit access?

Spring2008
Nov 1, 2013, 5:30 PM
I don't think the city would approve this kind of complex out there. I'm still thinking their going to build a new complex around the Sunalta station.

fusili
Nov 1, 2013, 5:52 PM
heard that the new arena/sports complex will be at COP.
owners of Cowboys are fumed because they spent million dollars renovating cowboys and now the sports arena will be no where close to downtown.

Why would they build where there is no transit access?

I'll believe that when I see it.

I don't think the city would approve this kind of complex out there. I'm still thinking their going to build a new complex around the Sunalta station.

Agreed with everyone. No way in hell the City (especially transportation) will approve an arena where there is no transit. Planning Commission will most certainly refuse the application.

unibrain
Mar 29, 2014, 5:44 PM
Seems like theres a little more information on a new/refurbished arena(s) front.

It was mentioned on the Global News hour last night.

http://globalnews.ca/video/1238266/news-hour-mar-28-8

fast forward ahead to the 11:15 mark.

RyLucky
Mar 29, 2014, 6:18 PM
Seems like theres a little more information on a new/refurbished arena(s) front.

It was mentioned on the Global News hour last night.

http://globalnews.ca/video/1238266/news-hour-mar-28-8

fast forward ahead to the 11:15 mark.

To summarize:
-hockey and/or football arena plans will be revealed this year
-the owners are suggesting that we might have a shot at another olympic bid if a stadium is funded
-no new details on location or design