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

MalcolmTucker
Sep 23, 2014, 9:18 PM
I am fine with this 5 minutes from my place.

hulkrogan
Sep 23, 2014, 9:19 PM
I really want it on the east end, but I know for a fact some work has been done with arena/stadium footprints on the west end. I don't know how much that means, as I'm sure they've done work like that for a couple locations.

Luk_o
Sep 23, 2014, 9:49 PM
Would not be a fan of that spot west of Crowchild, too removed from DT. Hoping for Greyhound - really is the perfect spot for this development. Can still walk from Core or the west end of 17th, transit right there, demo an existing eye soar, good vehicle access, on & on...

If it is indeed going to be a multi-development and the Stamps move to this location as well, will be cool that they are returning close to Mewata where it all started.

O-tacular
Sep 23, 2014, 9:55 PM
I wonder if it will be one building or if they will just have 2 venues adjacent to each other. Somehow I wouldn't be surprised if we get a cheap out solution.

Full Mountain
Sep 23, 2014, 9:57 PM
I'm going with 15th west at minimum to WB bow, but possibly all the way to pumphouse

Could be quite the complex if done right: Condos, retail, etc. along the river, put the roadways & parking under the building(s) as it steps up and over the rail tracks to meet the C-Train platform then step down to 10th ave

MasterG
Sep 23, 2014, 10:02 PM
I'm going with 15th west at minimum to WB bow, but possibly all the way to pumphouse

Could be quite the complex if done right: Condos, retail, etc. along the river, put the roadways & parking under the building(s) as it steps up and over the rail tracks to meet the C-Train platform then step down to 10th ave

I would suspect this proposal would be a impetus for some of the realignment and redevelopment of the 14th Street & Bow Trail RoW?

Allan83
Sep 23, 2014, 10:22 PM
I would look to build the stands overtop of Bow Trail, and snug the stadium up to the LRT a little more. You could perhaps sink Bow Train down a bit too, and maybe change the alignment a bit.

simster3
Sep 23, 2014, 10:23 PM
Could we build bow trail underneath the facilities? That way it would be out of the way, could lead to underground parking for all the structures.

MasterG
Sep 23, 2014, 10:25 PM
Is there enough room at the Greyhound site? I did this a while ago using McMahon stadium and it looks pretty tight, especially if you want to have anything around a stadium. I assume an arena only would be smaller.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/stadium1.jpg

Interesting. McMahon I think has a fairly large footprint compared to other stadiums, they probably can do something more efficient. Same with the Saddledome, which is wider than a lot of the more modern designs.

I think realigning the Bow Trail connectors and converting the wide high-way style to more of a major boulevard feel will go a long way to open the area up and make it feel more connected. The whole West End is challenged with the myriad of barriers - CPR, Bow Trail flyovers, 14th Street, Bow River. I hope they go some way into trying to mitigate some of these factors and integrate the area better to the surroundings. Some residential and retail elements will go a long way to help this.

You Need A Thneed
Sep 23, 2014, 10:27 PM
I would assume that a big factor of the Flames wanting to build in the west village location is that it would be immediately connected to the Sunalta LRT station.

It's almost certainly going to be on the Greyhound site (and likely pretty much everything north of the CP rail tracks between Crowchild and 14th.)

If I had a guess, I think there's a good chance that Bow Trail gets completely realigned, and the 14th Street interchange get completely redone. Both Directions of Bow trail would likely be squished up against the CP tracks, because that barrier already exists.

MasterG
Sep 23, 2014, 10:28 PM
I would assume that a big factor of the Flames wanting to build in the west village location is that it would be immediately connected to the Sunalta LRT station.

It's almost certainly going to be on the Greyhound site (and likely pretty much everything north of the CP rail tracks between Crowchild and 14th.)

If I had a guess, I think there's a good chance that Bow Trail gets completely realigned, and the 14th Street interchange get completely redone. Both Directions of Bow trail would likely be squished up against the CP tracks, because that barrier already exists.

Dare to dream of a 2-way 9th Ave all the way through the core? ;)

Chadillaccc
Sep 23, 2014, 10:32 PM
I would assume that a big factor of the Flames wanting to build in the west village location is that it would be immediately connected to the Sunalta LRT station.

It's almost certainly going to be on the Greyhound site (and likely pretty much everything north of the CP rail tracks between Crowchild and 14th.)

If I had a guess, I think there's a good chance that Bow Trail gets completely realigned, and the 14th Street interchange get completely redone. Both Directions of Bow trail would likely be squished up against the CP tracks, because that barrier already exists.

That's a really good idea.

fusili
Sep 23, 2014, 10:41 PM
Re: buying up properties in Sunalta area, is there any way they could carve enough space here?

https://maps.google.com/?ll=51.045731,-114.115688&spn=0.004378,0.010568&t=h&z=17

No. It would be a transportation nightmare. Single lane access from 10th avenue westbound? For a stadium. Never, ever, ever going to happen. The light industrial they have there is probably all you will every see. Access is terrible.

Calgarian
Sep 23, 2014, 10:47 PM
Isn't the plan for the West Village to realign Bow Trail to open the area up for development? If the arena district is going there, the Bow Tr would probably have to move first. Anyone know if there is any movement on the Bow Trail realignment?

Colin
Sep 23, 2014, 10:47 PM
Is there enough room at the Greyhound site? I did this a while ago using McMahon stadium and it looks pretty tight, especially if you want to have anything around a stadium. I assume an arena only would be smaller.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/stadium1.jpg

Someone on Calgary Puck brought up a good point, that the new stadium will likely need to run N-S and not W-E, so that one team isn't always facing the sun. Therefore, if the new stadium does get built in the west village, it can really only fit N-S in the location of the current Pumphouse theatre (on the left of Bow Trail), while the arena can fit in the location of the Greyhound station. This might not be a problem if they do in fact reallign Bow Trail.

flipstah
Sep 23, 2014, 10:54 PM
I am fine with this 5 minutes from my place.

:cheers::haha:

Greyhound site = walking distance for me.

Luk_o
Sep 23, 2014, 11:05 PM
Is there enough room at the Greyhound site? I did this a while ago using McMahon stadium and it looks pretty tight, especially if you want to have anything around a stadium. I assume an arena only would be smaller.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/stadium1.jpg

That stadium location super-imposed over the greyhound site, with the arena component of the development tacked on / overlapping in a common facility to the east over Hyatt would be perfect. Could overlap quite a bit at that current position E-W as the Stamps Club house and parking lot is currently occupying that space in the image, an architect / designer could get really interesting with a common space between the two clubs in a common facility with this component. This still gives space for tailgating to the west and along the tracks across Bow. Move the whole thing north to the river if re-aligning the Bow and 14th needs to happen.

MalcolmTucker
Sep 23, 2014, 11:13 PM
Isn't the plan for the West Village to realign Bow Trail to open the area up for development? If the arena district is going there, the Bow Tr would probably have to move first. Anyone know if there is any movement on the Bow Trail realignment?

A long ways away. Money to come from a CRL, but it is much riskier than East Village, where they expanded the zone to include planned developments. Also the infrastructure costs are way higher, including industrial remediation to allow for residential.

Luk_o
Sep 23, 2014, 11:15 PM
Someone on Calgary Puck brought up a good point, that the new stadium will likely need to run N-S and not W-E, so that one team isn't always facing the sun. Therefore, if the new stadium does get built in the west village, it can really only fit N-S in the location of the current Pumphouse theatre (on the left of Bow Trail), while the arena can fit in the location of the Greyhound station. This might not be a problem if they do in fact reallign Bow Trail.

They could still do a stadium N-S over Greyhound. McMahon currently occupies alot of space beyond either end-zone that could easily be made more compact given a re-design. If you play with the dimension of just the field itself, the stadium infastructure can be altered to accomodate around that.

Tills13
Sep 23, 2014, 11:47 PM
Is there enough room at the Greyhound site? I did this a while ago using McMahon stadium and it looks pretty tight, especially if you want to have anything around a stadium. I assume an arena only would be smaller.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/stadium1.jpg

If they bulldozed that Greyhound terminal I would be so happy. That thing is a downright dump.

CorporateWhore
Sep 23, 2014, 11:50 PM
I really want it on the east end, but I know for a fact some work has been done with arena/stadium footprints on the west end. I don't know how much that means, as I'm sure they've done work like that for a couple locations.

Have you ever walked from your house to the Dome? Curious how long it takes. I'm thinking it wouldn't be a terribly long walk, but probably a lot less enjoyable in the winter (especially over the river).

One of the good things about it being in the West End, is that it would be relatively easy to get there from the Bridgeland station.

bt04ku
Sep 24, 2014, 12:00 AM
I'd rather the Railtown, but wouldn't be disappointed with West Village either.

With Railtown, you'd have massive build up of Vic Park, East Village, and East Vic Park at once.

West Village is a good location, but still the second best location (IMO).

While WV is next to Sunalta station, that still means the people who use the busiest line need to transfer because the walk from any downtown stations across the wall known as 14th St. isn't great. It has a lot of road access but they'd require a lot of upgrades etc.

To me Railtown is just so much better. Close walk from a downtown station (which means no need to transfer for either line and would be right on an eventual Green Line station). Easy to walk, no less driving infrastructure than we have now and as mentioned, can build on and feed off of the stuff already happening on the East side, helping tie a lot of areas together.



That said, as big as the Railtown is I don't think there's as much potential for Flames owned developments beyond a stadium and arena. A West Village site could create far more potential for a much more lucrative 'sports and entertainment district.' This could also play to the idea that they are accepting they aren't getting public money and need to maximize their earning potential and diversify.

When you consider that the East Village is developing anyway and will drag as much of the East Beltline along with it as it can, not having the key entertainment complex in the city in their backyard it might actually force the Stampede to join in and develop the area and make up for their loss in parking revenue. The West Village getting developed would fix a blight that doesn't seem poised to be fixed otherwise and the other side of downtown would develop anyway and (hopefully) not carry any stigma of city money coming along with it.

I still prefer Railtown simply because it would help carry East Village, Inglewood and East Beltline to the next level, and be easier to get to. Seriously, never mind Crowchild, how do you fix the 14th St/BowTr/9St mess to integrate the WV with pedestrian traffic coming from the West Beltline and West Downtown so that a potential district isn't just an island accessible by one transit station (as nice as it is).

Chadillaccc
Sep 24, 2014, 12:13 AM
Also, let's not forget that the east option would be served by all three LRT lines, two of which will have large subway sections within walking distance of Railtown.

craner
Sep 24, 2014, 1:49 AM
Oh man just thinking of the possibilities is getting me so energized.
This would become my most anticipated project in this city probably ever.
God I hope they get it right and go all the way.
This too exciting - I might just spontaneously combust.
:fingerscrossed::banger::new:

milomilo
Sep 24, 2014, 1:59 AM
I guess this project and the 'West Village Area Redevelopment Plan' are incompatible?

http://wpmedia.blogs.calgaryherald.com/2010/04/west_village_arp.pdf

Which seems a shame, as that seemed like a great project.

Full Mountain
Sep 24, 2014, 2:57 AM
I guess this project and the 'West Village Area Redevelopment Plan' are incompatible?

http://wpmedia.blogs.calgaryherald.com/2010/04/west_village_arp.pdf

Which seems a shame, as that seemed like a great project.

I would highly doubt that a revision to that ARP wouldn't be approved if a private party was able to consolidate land and came forward with a plan to redevelop much of the area.

Spring2008
Sep 24, 2014, 3:08 AM
Ken King mentioned a field house in the vid. Wouldn't be surprised if that big field house proposal gets tied into a new stadium with a retractable roof.

He also mentioned a very big owner equity contribution as well as unique funding model, so some positive signs there.

Tills13
Sep 24, 2014, 3:19 AM
Ken King mentioned a field house in the vid. Wouldn't be surprised if that big field house proposal gets tied into a new stadium with a retractable roof.

He also mentioned a very big owner equity contribution as well as unique funding model, so some positive signs there.

Someone posted a bunch of renders in the general thread, not sure how recent they are but they look pretty slick.

J-D
Sep 24, 2014, 3:20 AM
Someone posted a bunch of renders in the general thread, not sure how recent they are but they look pretty slick.

http://www.calgaryfieldhouse.ca/

The Urbanist
Sep 24, 2014, 3:33 AM
I've heard the leases for the dealerships surrounding the Greyhound station are up in the next few years and the City of Calgary is the landowner. I also heard from one of the major stakeholders of the Cowboys Casino that they were 'guaranteed' the Flames would build the new Stadium near the Stampede grounds. :shrug:

tomthumb2
Sep 24, 2014, 3:35 AM
Wow - finally! Of course we've waited so long that expectations are going to be sky high. Lets hope this promise of it being "unlike anything we've ever seen" is more than a sales pitch. Would love to see one building like VTB in Moscow - anyone else agree that would be less expensive than 2 separate buildings? (super huge footprint though) Love the idea of West Village (with Crowchild and Bow trail cluster f**k being fixed) but East might be good too - especially with both LRT lines serving it. As long as its in/near the dt core!

http://photo.championat.net/4/4196/full/150362.jpg

RyLucky
Sep 24, 2014, 3:55 AM
Also, let's not forget that the east option would be served by all three LRT lines, two of which will have large subway sections within walking distance of Railtown.

This is key.

MalcolmTucker
Sep 24, 2014, 3:57 AM
Note: this is entirely speculation and does not reflect any inside knowledge from my role at the university, as I have no knowledge on this file. I would also prefer if this post is not quoted in replies.

In theory, build a football stadium, field house, and hockey arena on the combined University of Calgary and City parcel at McMahon Stadium.

Any money donated to the university is matched by the provincial Access to the Future fund.

Donate a good chunk of the capital cost of the arena, and get a huge tax break, and double the money. The university uses the combined funds to build the infrastructure, and owns the assets. The city captures additional spin off tax revenue through a CRL from a TOD built on surplus land, and development spurred in motel village. The city also contributes whatever it had been planning to contribute to redevelop the atheletic park. The Flames lease their part of the facility at the cost of maintaining the assets in day 1 condition and/or build up a replacement value over the life of the asset in exchange for full control and full revenue.

Benefits:

The province contributes funds indirectly, but it really isn't a loss as the province owns the asset, though at arms length.
The university benefits from a big infusion into the endowment.
The Flames have to put up less capital and get a huge tax write off.
The City gets a shiny TOD/arena district.
The district would be on the LRT, two BRT/alternative rapid transit lines, and two major roads
Facilities may enable the scope of the redevelopment of the recreation complex at the university to be significantly reduced


Negatives:

Outside the core
Limited parking should TOD develop (thought the university has plans to build more structured parking and could change the plans to along 24th Ave)
Uncertainty over legality of the arrangement
May require significant political capital to negate opposition from spend thrifts, neighbours, and overcome the Noah's Ark problem

Surrealplaces
Sep 24, 2014, 4:06 AM
Insiders in the thread at Calgarypuck say that West Village it where it will be, likely a football stadium and a hockey arena, as part of an entertainment district.

Not too surprised. That seems to be where all the rumors are pointing to.

I would have preferred something right down around the grounds if just an arena, but if a Stadium is involved then West Village makes more sense.... I'm not surprised if a stadium is in the planning. Soon Calgary will be the only CFL city with a crappy stadium.

Surrealplaces
Sep 24, 2014, 4:15 AM
14th is ugly, and right now is a major block to the pedestrian realm, but I think it can be overcome. If that clusterfuck intersection beside Hyatt Auto got blown out and realigned which it supposedly will in the longterm plan, you could make a nice wide pedestrian corridor that led right into downtown. The WV plan shows a promenade going along the river for a stretch, but not all the way into downtown. It might be better to have the promenade along the 8th ave/6th ave corridor....even though that will be a busy corridor.

West Village is a good location, but still the second best location (IMO).

While WV is next to Sunalta station, that still means the people who use the busiest line need to transfer because the walk from any downtown stations across the wall known as 14th St. isn't great. It has a lot of road access but they'd require a lot of upgrades etc.

To me Railtown is just so much better. Close walk from a downtown station (which means no need to transfer for either line and would be right on an eventual Green Line station). Easy to walk, no less driving infrastructure than we have now and as mentioned, can build on and feed off of the stuff already happening on the East side, helping tie a lot of areas together.

eggbert
Sep 24, 2014, 4:34 AM
GSL is currently doing renos to the dealership. Hard to imagine they go ahead with that now if an announcement was iminent.

bt04ku
Sep 24, 2014, 4:36 AM
14th is ugly, and right now is a major block to the pedestrian realm, but I think it can be overcome. If that clusterfuck intersection beside Hyatt Auto got blown out and realigned which it supposedly will in the longterm plan, you could make a nice wide pedestrian corridor that led right into downtown. The WV plan shows a promenade going along the river for a stretch, but not all the way into downtown. It might be better to have the promenade along the 8th ave/6th ave corridor....even though that will be a busy corridor.

I'd imagine the people coming from the NW would be SOL with all the southern folks hopping on those westbound "Blue Line" trains at City Hall in order to stay out of the cold on game days. The 1km+ walk from 8th St Station is farther from the West Village site than either City Hall or Vic Park stations are from the Railtown site.

Then after the game it will be a nightmare for everybody wanting to go NW, NE and South on the train wanting to wait on the same platform (unlike Vic Park where is at least a split of the north and south platforms). If there isn't good pedestrian infrastructure then I don't think the station could possibly handle it.

Surrealplaces
Sep 24, 2014, 4:43 AM
I'd imagine the people coming from the NW would be SOL with all the southern folks hopping on those westbound "Blue Line" trains at City Hall in order to stay out of the cold on game days. The 1km+ walk from 8th St Station is farther from the West Village site than either City Hall or Vic Park stations are from the Railtown site.

Then after the game it will be a nightmare for everybody wanting to go NW, NE and South on the train wanting to wait on the same platform (unlike Vic Park where is at least a split of the north and south platforms). If there isn't good pedestrian infrastructure then I don't think the station could possibly handle it.

Ultimately Railtown area would be the best location IMO, but if they did decide to go with WV, I think WV can still be quite viable. Of course the pedestrian realm would need to be beefed up immensely.

Good point about the cold weather days. It is a fair distance from the core of downtown.

Trans Canada
Sep 24, 2014, 4:52 AM
Does anyone have that WV redevelopment concept pdf that has been floating around for a while (might be a couple years old)?

Any idea how much leeway will there be to realign roads etc? Ideally the entire network of roads, particularly the ramps on/off 14th, would be redesigned - certainly it can be done better than how it is now (though the time in limbo between old and new would be a major traffic nightmare).

Also, I have the impression that stadia/arenas generally kill vibrancy of a neighbourhood rather than enhance it. A big single-use structure that is only used a couple times per week. Two in the same neighbourhood would pose a big challenge to developing WV into a vibrant mixed-use (mainly residential) neighbourhood. I think these would be better placed beside a vibrant neighbourhood (say Railtown next to EV) rather than right in the middle.

milomilo
Sep 24, 2014, 5:57 AM
Does anyone have that WV redevelopment concept pdf that has been floating around for a while (might be a couple years old)?

Any idea how much leeway will there be to realign roads etc? Ideally the entire network of roads, particularly the ramps on/off 14th, would be redesigned - certainly it can be done better than how it is now (though the time in limbo between old and new would be a major traffic nightmare).

Also, I have the impression that stadia/arenas generally kill vibrancy of a neighbourhood rather than enhance it. A big single-use structure that is only used a couple times per week. Two in the same neighbourhood would pose a big challenge to developing WV into a vibrant mixed-use (mainly residential) neighbourhood. I think these would be better placed beside a vibrant neighbourhood (say Railtown next to EV) rather than right in the middle.

I actually asked this a few posts ago - http://wpmedia.blogs.calgaryherald.com/2010/04/west_village_arp.pdf :). Unfortunately completely incompatible.

I agree - I don't want something so massive and single purpose in such a prime location. It wouldn't be so bad if the site was wider, but a stadium will dominate the area and create a wall on the western edge of downtown.

Surely any sort of arena will have a ton of parking lots - anathema to the majority of posters here?

Innersoul1
Sep 24, 2014, 6:17 AM
Are there any shadowing issues with the WV location? BC Place and the GM centre might be good to superimpose over the WV map for size comparison (if possible).

Fuzz
Sep 24, 2014, 11:57 AM
I actually asked this a few posts ago - http://wpmedia.blogs.calgaryherald.com/2010/04/west_village_arp.pdf :). Unfortunately completely incompatible.

I agree - I don't want something so massive and single purpose in such a prime location. It wouldn't be so bad if the site was wider, but a stadium will dominate the area and create a wall on the western edge of downtown.

Surely any sort of arena will have a ton of parking lots - anathema to the majority of posters here?

Doesn't Crowchild already create a wall? If the stadiums replace all the crap that is there, it's probably better. Even with a realignment of Bow Trail, Its surrounded by the C-train line, Crowchild, 14th st...There are a lot of barriers already. The only thing going for the whole west area is the river.

RyLucky
Sep 24, 2014, 12:37 PM
I agree - I don't want something so massive and single purpose in such a prime location. It wouldn't be so bad if the site was wider, but a stadium will dominate the area and create a wall on the western edge of downtown.

Surely any sort of arena will have a ton of parking lots - anathema to the majority of posters here?

Doesn't Crowchild already create a wall? If the stadiums replace all the crap that is there, it's probably better. Even with a realignment of Bow Trail, Its surrounded by the C-train line, Crowchild, 14th st...There are a lot of barriers already. The only thing going for the whole west area is the river.


Any idea how much leeway will there be to realign roads etc? Ideally the entire network of roads, particularly the ramps on/off 14th, would be redesigned - certainly it can be done better than how it is now (though the time in limbo between old and new would be a major traffic nightmare).

Also, I have the impression that stadia/arenas generally kill vibrancy of a neighbourhood rather than enhance it. A big single-use structure that is only used a couple times per week. Two in the same neighbourhood would pose a big challenge to developing WV into a vibrant mixed-use (mainly residential) neighbourhood. I think these would be better placed beside a vibrant neighbourhood (say Railtown next to EV) rather than right in the middle.

To the bolded parts: totally. We should absolutely not build a stadium unless it incorporates a wide variety of uses. Ideally, it should be something with a huge residential and retail component and limited surface parking. If we build in WV, it would be a massive waste if we don't reconfigure the roads, clean up the creosote, fix 14th st, create residential and commercial TOD, and free-up the waterfront. I think we should even think about a new Bow River bridge at 19th st and a new CPR underpass somewhere. There are 111 acres of prime real estate just waiting for a chance to develop. If we simply plop a stadium on the Greyhound terminal, the area is going to be just as bad as it is now for another 30 years.

Riise
Sep 24, 2014, 3:15 PM
Also, I have the impression that stadia/arenas generally kill vibrancy of a neighbourhood rather than enhance it. A big single-use structure that is only used a couple times per week. Two in the same neighbourhood would pose a big challenge to developing WV into a vibrant mixed-use (mainly residential) neighbourhood. I think these would be better placed beside a vibrant neighbourhood (say Railtown next to EV) rather than right in the middle.

While I do think stadia can be integrated into vibrant areas, I'm not sure if it could be done with an arena and a stadium. That's more of a stadium district than entertainment district.

McMurph
Sep 24, 2014, 4:17 PM
While I do think stadia can be integrated into vibrant areas, I'm not sure if it could be done with an arena and a stadium. That's more of a stadium district than entertainment district.

I completely agree. An arena can be slotted into a vibrant neighbourhood. A stadium much less so. The West Village may not have much going for it now, but it has huge potential. I can think of no stadium in the world that would optimize that site. Improve it, sure. But the area redevelopment plan was aiming for a whole lot more. I'm open to the idea of a multi use facility, but I'm skeptical.

Shadowing of the river would be a big problem. Although a N-S configuration might help, the height of the thing would still be a problem. Nothing there could be built much below grade... unless the Stamps want to offer their new stadium as a storm water retention pond.

I'd love to see a few more mocked-up maps of assorted stadia in various configurations in both the WV and Railtown. That would help pass the time while we wait for King to make a real announcement.

hulkrogan
Sep 24, 2014, 4:43 PM
Have you ever walked from your house to the Dome? Curious how long it takes. I'm thinking it wouldn't be a terribly long walk, but probably a lot less enjoyable in the winter (especially over the river).

One of the good things about it being in the West End, is that it would be relatively easy to get there from the Bridgeland station.

I've done it a few times, and it depends if you want the pre-4st E underpass answer when we split up because 2 of us decided over the CP tracks and their accompanying barb wire fences was the most direct route, or post-4st E underpass.

It's about 30 minutes now.

I never thought of the train option if it's on the west side. I have such a good free parking spot going now it'd be tough to adjust for $6 in train fare every time, but I guess I could do it :p

googspecial
Sep 24, 2014, 5:27 PM
There is a small spur off the westbound tracks before going up on the viaduct. Maybe they could extend this bit over (or under) 14 St to behind where the Greyhound station is now. One track back and forth to city hall as a game day shuttle?

MalcolmTucker
Sep 24, 2014, 5:34 PM
^ Would not buy you any extra capacity, unless it turns around at Kerby.

googspecial
Sep 24, 2014, 5:37 PM
^ Would not buy you any extra capacity, unless it turns around at Kerby.

Was thinking to facilitate transfers to NW-S line. So maybe 8 ST?


[EDIT] Afterthought: it would be a nightmare to have trains changing direction on 7 ave

MasterG
Sep 24, 2014, 5:45 PM
If they imagine a world where 14th Street is not such a barrier, I think there is a lot they could do with a redesign of that terrible section near the bus terminal.

It's too bad the site is even more constrained to the South with the CPR lines. What would be really nice is a Beltline access route across the tracks but South to 12th Ave and east towards Vic Park Station. A Street-car / well implemented bus system perhaps. Connects the proposed entertainment district the the existing one where everyone will still be before and after the game along 17th Ave and in the Beltline. Eventually make it cross the river and head north towards North Hill to act as a medium capacity by-pass perhaps? :shrug:

YYCguys
Sep 24, 2014, 7:05 PM
King keeps dangling that stick in front of the public every once in a while and it's bloody annoying! I wish he would get it all his ducks in a row and make a formal announcement already! At this rate, I'll be dead before the thing is announced and built!

Ice Cream Man
Sep 25, 2014, 12:56 AM
Bow Trail will be realigned away from the river, tight against the tracks. If I were a betting man, I'd say a new pedestrian bridge over the river gets built as well.

tomthumb2
Sep 25, 2014, 6:59 AM
Man I wish there was some way to get rid of those ugly ass tracks once and for all! They really are a pain and they divide the core from the beltline. Time to re-route and get into the 21st century Calgary! Oh and while you're at it - blow up the Bow Trail/Crowchild so called interchange and start again. Whoever designed that disaster should be publicly flogged. Anyone who's ever had to merge left onto Crowchild, then instantly merged right to make the Memorial turnoff knows what I mean.

And if anyone can break into Ken King's office, it would be nice if they could post those blueprints he's been hiding since 2007.

flipstah
Sep 25, 2014, 1:12 PM
Man I wish there was some way to get rid of those ugly ass tracks once and for all! They really are a pain and they divide the core from the beltline. Time to re-route and get into the 21st century Calgary! Oh and while you're at it - blow up the Bow Trail/Crowchild so called interchange and start again. Whoever designed that disaster should be publicly flogged. Anyone who's ever had to merge left onto Crowchild, then instantly merged right to make the Memorial turnoff knows what I mean.

And if anyone can break into Ken King's office, it would be nice if they could post those blueprints he's been hiding since 2007.

The train line was there first and it shouldn't go anywhere.

speedog
Sep 25, 2014, 2:06 PM
Man I wish there was some way to get rid of those ugly ass tracks once and for all! They really are a pain and they divide the core from the beltline. Time to re-route and get into the 21st century Calgary! Oh and while you're at it - blow up the Bow Trail/Crowchild so called interchange and start again. Whoever designed that disaster should be publicly flogged. Anyone who's ever had to merge left onto Crowchild, then instantly merged right to make the Memorial turnoff knows what I mean.

And if anyone can break into Ken King's office, it would be nice if they could post those blueprints he's been hiding since 2007.
So put on your thinking cap and tell us where you think the CPR tracks should be relocated to because most people realize it's not even remotely feasible.

tomthumb2
Sep 25, 2014, 3:32 PM
So put on your thinking cap and tell us where you think the CPR tracks should be relocated to because most people realize it's not even remotely feasible.

Unfortunately you're right. It seems like I've also pissed off a train enthusiast. ;)

speedog
Sep 25, 2014, 4:13 PM
Unfortunately you're right. It seems like I've also pissed off a train enthusiast. ;)
Not a train enthusiast in any way - just am very realistic that there is no economical alternate routes around Calgary to which one could relocate the CPR main line that runs through Calgary. Going north or south of the city will just run the CPR into too many expensive land ownership issues - even in Lethbridge (where they relocated the main rail yards to the west of that city), they still have a main line running though the center of that city.

In fact, I can't think of one instance in western Canada where a main line has been rerouted around a town of any size - there isn't any real financial incentive to do so and history has resulted in infrastructure being built around these mainlines. Yeah, the CNR in Calgary has created a new yard to the northeast of Calgary but they still have their large yard in Calgary and the tracks servicing that yard will not disappear in the time you or me have left on this big ball of dirt.

McMurph
Sep 25, 2014, 5:40 PM
I quite like the tracks and appreciate the clear distinction between the Beltline and Downtown which wouldn't have happened without them. The problem isn't that we have a railway per se, it's that we have constitutionally entitled railway that uses the downtown as a rail yard and has little interest in being a partner with the community. If the trains always moved, the controlled access land had a smaller footprint and there were more crossings (pedestrian, bike, level and grade separated) then the railway could become a cool part of our inner city. Jack London Square in Oakland (not a place to emulate generally) has a mainline freight and passenger line running right down the middle of a street like it were the Queen Street streetcar.

There is a good chance that the new arena (+/- stadium) will abut the tracks, either on the east or west side of downtown. It would be a great opportunity to rethink not the location of the CPR but rather the nature of its relationship with the city. I'm just not sure there is any incentive for them to do anything differently.

Policy Wonk
Sep 25, 2014, 6:05 PM
^ Would not buy you any extra capacity, unless it turns around at Kerby.

Ideally the ingress and egress times for a stadium wouldn't coincide with peaks.

There is a transit agency in the US that wants to build storage tracks near a station serving a stadium to stage a bunch of trains so they can just have one empty train after another ready to go when a large event lets out at say 11PM when they would otherwise be running every thirty minutes or so.

Policy Wonk
Sep 25, 2014, 6:10 PM
In fact, I can't think of one instance in western Canada where a main line has been rerouted around a town of any size.

Edmonton got rid of the CN track through downtown, although it had been effectively abandoned for decades at that point other than the occasional VIA Outhouse on Rails passing through.

*Stardust*
Sep 25, 2014, 6:10 PM
Just wrote a friendly yet detailed email to Ken King on why the new arena should be located at Railtown and the benefits of having it there in terms of transit, walking distance to east village, etc.

Don't know if he'll write back or if he even cares, but it makes me feel better. Who knows, maybe he'll listen :)

Policy Wonk
Sep 25, 2014, 6:25 PM
I would really like to see it go somewhere that really needs the outside boost.

Firestone is horribly desolate and in the US the West Village would be a Superfund site. The potential uses for those locations are limited.

The L.A. Convention Center, Staples Center and L.A. Live were built over top of a slum of rundown apartments, used car dealerships, disreputable motels and an abandoned transit garage. And left to their own devices they would probably still be there.

Opportunities to scrape something bare that needs to be scraped shouldn't be wasted.

suburbia
Sep 25, 2014, 6:36 PM
Just wrote a friendly yet detailed email to Ken King on why the new arena should be located at Railtown and the benefits of having it there in terms of transit, walking distance to east village, etc.

Don't know if he'll write back or if he even cares, but it makes me feel better. Who knows, maybe he'll listen :)

I would really like to see it go somewhere that really needs the outside boost.

Firestone is horribly desolate and in the US the West Village would be a Superfund site. The potential uses for those locations are limited.

The L.A. Convention Center, Staples Center and L.A. Live were built over top of a slum of rundown apartments, used car dealerships, disreputable motels and an abandoned transit garage. And left to their own devices they would probably still be there.

Opportunities to scrape something bare that needs to be scraped shouldn't be wasted.

I agree with Policy Wonk that this is an opportunity to do something great for a different area. My vote remains Firestone, with West Village as #2.

Railtown needs development, but there are better things to do with that area than stadium + arena.

I may need to write Ken King also.

Riise
Sep 25, 2014, 6:41 PM
I agree with Policy Wonk that this is an opportunity to do something great for a different area. My vote remains Firestone, with West Village as #2.

While selecting Firestone would provide an excellent opportunity for the regeneration of an area in need, it would be also represent a lost opportunity to build off of the energy and amenities emerging in the Core and Beltline. We shouldn't select one option simply because it provides us with an opportunity to engage in regeneration.

fusili
Sep 25, 2014, 6:43 PM
I agree both West Village and Railtown will do well without a stadium. But we also need to consider how well the stadium will be served by transit and how well it integrates into other areas. Firestone may be a nice location, but any services built nearby would be dead 95% of the time. A railtown location, on the other hand will have restaurants and pubs that would be supported by the local population otherwise. The same goes for the Big 4, and West Village, to a lesser extent. I think Firestone Park should be a TOD office cluster.

H.E.Pennypacker
Sep 25, 2014, 6:50 PM
A stadium at Railtown, done right, could really boost the pedestrian link between Inglewood/downtown and better the connection between the EV/Victoria Park

*Stardust*
Sep 25, 2014, 6:58 PM
A stadium at Railtown, done right, could really boost the pedestrian link between Inglewood/downtown and better the connection between the EV/Victoria Park

Amen brother. I mentioned that in my email to Mr. King
Send him an email as well! Haha

Luk_o
Sep 25, 2014, 7:09 PM
Firestone would be a huge mistake. Must have this in the core area within walking distance to the good stuff.

UofC.engineer
Sep 25, 2014, 7:30 PM
I agree both West Village and Railtown will do well without a stadium. But we also need to consider how well the stadium will be served by transit and how well it integrates into other areas. Firestone may be a nice location, but any services built nearby would be dead 95% of the time. A railtown location, on the other hand will have restaurants and pubs that would be supported by the local population otherwise. The same goes for the Big 4, and West Village, to a lesser extent. I think Firestone Park should be a TOD office cluster.

I can't see that happening without a boost as Policy Wonk stated.

I don't know much about the subject , but if a stadium/arena were built in Firestone park would the surroundings property value increase? If so, by how much? 10%? 50%? 100%+? Couldn't the CMLC step in and finance the redevelopment for the area based around the arena/stadium?

speedog
Sep 25, 2014, 8:35 PM
Edmonton got rid of the CN track through downtown, although it had been effectively abandoned for decades at that point other than the occasional VIA Outhouse on Rails passing through.
Yes, but I'm not sure if what was taken out in Edmonton would be considered a main line - this was more a case of a yard being shut down, no?

fusili
Sep 25, 2014, 9:28 PM
I can't see that happening without a boost as Policy Wonk stated.

I don't know much about the subject , but if a stadium/arena were built in Firestone park would the surroundings property value increase? If so, by how much? 10%? 50%? 100%+? Couldn't the CMLC step in and finance the redevelopment for the area based around the arena/stadium?

I think Firestone suffers from contamination and sanitary sewer capacity issues, not a lack of needing a "boost".

UofC.engineer
Sep 25, 2014, 9:55 PM
I think Firestone suffers from contamination and sanitary sewer capacity issues, not a lack of needing a "boost".

Yeah, makes sense, it was an industrial site. So do the issues(sewer & contamination) need to be addressed if this site were to become a TOD office cluster?

P.S. Here I go again, rehashing an old, pointless debate and derailing a thread, my speciality lol :cheers: I say pointless because nothing will happen to this site until the rapture.

suburbia
Sep 25, 2014, 10:21 PM
I think Firestone suffers from contamination and sanitary sewer capacity issues, not a lack of needing a "boost".

Those can be dealt with. Railtown suffers from contamination also. Any site, downtown or otherwise, would likely require sewer upgrades. It is a particularly major challenge where there is high density in areas originally constructed for modest density.

Barnes
Sep 25, 2014, 10:59 PM
Those can be dealt with. Railtown suffers from contamination also. Any site, downtown or otherwise, would likely require sewer upgrades. It is a particularly major challenge where there is high density in areas originally constructed for modest density.

Ken King will normally write back but I'm not sure that writing him about locations is of any benefit. If after 7+ years they haven't picked a site by now we may as well concede to playing in the dome for another 25 years.

Spring2008
Sep 25, 2014, 11:54 PM
Firestone?? Why would the owners sink hundreds of millions or even billions and chose a remote location in the NE?

I can't see this going anywhere but Railtown or West Village. Though I prefer Railtown, my instincts are telling me this is getting built in WV.

Policy Wonk
Sep 27, 2014, 6:45 AM
Yes, but I'm not sure if what was taken out in Edmonton would be considered a main line - this was more a case of a yard being shut down, no?

The original CN line through Edmonton was of massively diminished importance after merger of the Grand Trunk Railroad was merged into CN and it's remaining importance diminished gradually as passenger rail itself diminished and after the final round of cuts to VIA Rail there was just no point in maintaining the line. VIA Rail moved to the Edmonton Amshack and the track and associated facilities were eliminated.

Policy Wonk
Sep 27, 2014, 6:52 AM
Firestone?? Why would the owners sink hundreds of millions or even billions and chose a remote location in the NE?

Ten minutes from downtown by C-Train is remote?

bt04ku
Sep 27, 2014, 7:10 AM
Ten minutes from downtown by C-Train is remote?

You couldn't build a very big TOD on that site with an arena or stadium never mind both so the relative lack of amenities would just create a place where people commute in and commute out as quickly as possible (which wouldn't be quick at all really because everybody who lives in the southeast, southwest and northwest would be standing on the same platform waiting for the same train) and because you've completely isolated the population that would be willing to walk to a downtown arena but now can't walk to Firestone.

Policy Wonk
Sep 27, 2014, 7:10 AM
I agree both West Village and Railtown will do well without a stadium. But we also need to consider how well the stadium will be served by transit and how well it integrates into other areas. Firestone may be a nice location, but any services built nearby would be dead 95% of the time. .

Because a hypothetical facility at Firestone would be something along the lines of the Silverdome? Even something like whatever the area around the US Airways Centre and Chase Field is called wouldn't be too bad for that location.

I don't see how plopping a giant concrete bunker into a location like Railtown, or worse... two of them... is anything but a waste of space.

Policy Wonk
Sep 27, 2014, 7:22 AM
You couldn't build a very big TOD on that site with an arena or stadium never mind both so the relative lack of amenities would just create a place where people commute in and commute out as quickly as possible (which wouldn't be quick at all really because everybody who lives in the southeast, southwest and northwest would be standing on the same platform waiting for the same train) and because you've completely isolated the population that would be willing to walk to a downtown arena but now can't walk to Firestone.

L.A. Live doesn't empty out until well after 1:00 in the morning, even when nobody is playing. Any new stadium is going to be planned as an entertainment district rather than as a stand-alone building with acres of surface parking. It will be a destination itself.

And by the time there is a SELRT, we're going to be debating the location of the next Flames arena.

bt04ku
Sep 27, 2014, 7:38 AM
L.A. Live doesn't empty out until well after 1:00 in the morning, even when nobody is playing. Any new stadium is going to be planned as an entertainment district rather than as a stand-alone building with acres of surface parking. It will be a destination itself.

They certainly can't put something like that at Firestone. Definitely not with a stadium involved. Between those footprints and required parking you're not going to have much more room for anything people would want to go to.

This also ignores how areas don't generate new entertainment spending, only directs it. Why would we want to direct all this entertainment spending to Firestone and not downtown where the focus has been to liven up in the past 10-20 years?

And LA Live is pretty close to downtown LA.

And by the time there is a SELRT, we're going to be debating the location of the next Flames arena.

People in the SE still take the current LRT to games. These new arenas have pretty long life spans (they need to be for what they cost) so you're looking at 50+ years based on what leases the teams who built new arenas in the early 90s are signing on to. They'll at least have a transitway by then I'd hope.

Policy Wonk
Sep 27, 2014, 8:15 AM
In the 1970's the redevelopment of the Firestone plant was a subject of much interest. There was to be a hockey arena known as the "Don MacKay Centre" that was to anchor a development that included a mall, an aquarium for the Calgary Zoo, a hotel and convention centre and a concert hall. A "second downtown" conveniently enough linked by C-Train.

*Stardust*
Sep 27, 2014, 3:57 PM
Ken King will normally write back but I'm not sure that writing him about locations is of any benefit. If after 7+ years they haven't picked a site by now we may as well concede to playing in the dome for another 25 years.

Do you know how long he takes to write back? Maybe he could drop some hints ;)

Spring2008
Sep 27, 2014, 3:58 PM
You couldn't build a very big TOD on that site with an arena or stadium never mind both so the relative lack of amenities would just create a place where people commute in and commute out as quickly as possible (which wouldn't be quick at all really because everybody who lives in the southeast, southwest and northwest would be standing on the same platform waiting for the same train) and because you've completely isolated the population that would be willing to walk to a downtown arena but now can't walk to Firestone.

Exactly, there's no synergies with Firestone, nothing notable around there.

A large Fieldhouse, Stadium, arena plus whatever other venues require a super regional draw with location that is most convenient to the most amount of people - inner city.

Plus their primary markets (corporate, people with higher disposable income) are almost all inner city plus west side of the city. Firestone just sounds ridiculous, not opposed to a TOD there though.

DizzyEdge
Sep 27, 2014, 8:21 PM
L.A. Live doesn't empty out until well after 1:00 in the morning, even when nobody is playing. Any new stadium is going to be planned as an entertainment district rather than as a stand-alone building with acres of surface parking. It will be a destination itself.

And by the time there is a SELRT, we're going to be debating the location of the next Flames arena.

Which brings up the question: if it goes West Village will the stampede entertainment district be dead as a doornail?

*Stardust*
Sep 27, 2014, 10:18 PM
Which brings up the question: if it goes West Village will the stampede entertainment district be dead as a doornail?

An entertainment district would most likely have a Casino I'm guessing. It would make more sense to have it closer to the Cowboys Casino, Elbow River Casino and the Big Four. Having it out in West Village would be so out of place.

The Fisher Account
Sep 27, 2014, 11:46 PM
An entertainment district would most likely have a Casino I'm guessing. It would make more sense to have it closer to the Cowboys Casino, Elbow River Casino and the Big Four. Having it out in West Village would be so out of place.

Or the Flames owners would build it on their own land and retain 100% of the revenue and just shrug at the notion of you thinking it being out of place

Policy Wonk
Sep 28, 2014, 1:09 AM
A large Fieldhouse, Stadium, arena plus whatever other venues require a super regional draw with location that is most convenient to the most amount of people - inner city.

Plus their primary markets (corporate, people with higher disposable income) are almost all inner city plus west side of the city. Firestone just sounds ridiculous, not opposed to a TOD there though.

A Flames arena would be just as well attended if it were built next to Stoney Trail with no transit service what-so-ever. It's going to be built where it makes financial sense and it doesn't look like the city is inclined to buying themselves a seat at the table.

bt04ku
Sep 28, 2014, 12:45 PM
A Flames arena would be just as well attended if it were built next to Stoney Trail with no transit service what-so-ever. It's going to be built where it makes financial sense and it doesn't look like the city is inclined to buying themselves a seat at the table.

The Senators are the least financially successful team in Canada right now in no small part because they built their arena in the middle of nowhere. Attendance will always be good during the good times but drops off faster when things aren't as good and the corporate support is just as fickle. The city doesn't need to buy a seat at the table to put the arena downtown, all that is really known about the project is that is where it's going, it is if the city wants to dictate which side of downtown it will go on.

PlanZ
Sep 28, 2014, 6:16 PM
With Edmonton's new arena going downtown, all the Canadian NHL arenas will be located in the inner city, with exception of Kanata, which has proven to be disastrous. The ACC, Bell Centre, and MTS Centre are all within the top 20 of busiest arenas in the world. Expect to see the new Edmonton arena and Calgary inner city arena in this range when they open as well.

Gone are the days when we'd consider building an arena out by Stoney trail near Airdrie to save money.

Spring2008
Sep 28, 2014, 6:51 PM
A Flames arena would be just as well attended if it were built next to Stoney Trail with no transit service what-so-ever. It's going to be built where it makes financial sense and it doesn't look like the city is inclined to buying themselves a seat at the table.

The land value would be a small $ amount relative to total construction costs; prob 5% and the variance between a peripheral downtown location, say Railtown vs. Firestone land value wouldn't be huge.

The flames may be a little more location inelastic, but how about the other events at the arena plus stadium and fieldhouse?

Lower commercial rents for office/retail out there too compared to inner city.

You don't sink billions of dollars into a huge multipurpose sporting and entertainment district and chose a crappy location.

Full Mountain
Sep 28, 2014, 9:08 PM
The land value would be a small $ amount relative to total construction costs; prob 5% and the variance between a peripheral downtown location, say Railtown vs. Firestone land value wouldn't be huge.

The flames may be a little more location inelastic, but how about the other events at the arena plus stadium and fieldhouse?

Lower commercial rents for office/retail out there too compared to inner city.

You don't sink billions of dollars into a huge multipurpose sporting and entertainment district and chose a crappy location.

The Flames organization is likely looking well beyond just sports revenue here, there is likely much more money to be made from concerts and other entertainment items (clubs, casinos, etc.). You don't put an entertainment venue anywhere but the most central location possible, this is particularly true in Calgary with the very centralized nature of the office space.

RyLucky
Sep 28, 2014, 9:27 PM
The Flames organization is likely looking well beyond just sports revenue here, there is likely much more money to be made from concerts and other entertainment items (clubs, casinos, etc.). You don't put an entertainment venue anywhere but the most central location possible, this is particularly true in Calgary with the very centralized nature of the office space.

I'd like if the new arena incorporated residential and office uses right at the site. Also, it would make sense to put the stadium right next to transit instead of making everyone wander through a labyrinth like now.

If we build it at Rail Town, it should be oriented around the SELRT from the start, and should probably even be built concurrently.

If we build it at the West Village, it should be built concurrently with road network redesign.

Surface parking should not be included.

Policy Wonk
Sep 28, 2014, 10:17 PM
I'm not actually suggesting the new Flames arena would be built in a suburban location. Only that in the absence of subsidies (which I don't really favour) the decision making process might not be stacked the way you might prefer.

Although I just role my eyes at people speaking as though the West Village and Firestone are Venus and Mars respectively. Seeing as when the plant was closing and the LRT was being built it was presented as a natural extension of downtown.

RyLucky
Sep 28, 2014, 11:21 PM
I'm not actually suggesting the new Flames arena would be built in a suburban location. Only that in the absence of subsidies (which I don't really favour) the decision making process might not be stacked the way you might prefer.

Although I just role my eyes at people speaking as though the West Village and Firestone are Venus and Mars respectively. Seeing as when the plant was closing and the LRT was being built it was presented as a natural extension of downtown.

I see what you mean, but much like the Stampede grounds, West Village can and will be integrated into Downtown and the surrounding area. Firestone's isolation is at a whole other level. If you are seriously considering Firestone, you might also consider Lion's Park, 39th Ave South, Banff Trail, the Zoo Parking lot, or Brentwood. The advantage of being stumbling distance from downtown is vital.

outoftheice
Sep 29, 2014, 12:06 AM
I'm not actually suggesting the new Flames arena would be built in a suburban location. Only that in the absence of subsidies (which I don't really favour) the decision making process might not be stacked the way you might prefer.

Although I just role my eyes at people speaking as though the West Village and Firestone are Venus and Mars respectively. Seeing as when the plant was closing and the LRT was being built it was presented as a natural extension of downtown.

I know this is off topic (apologies to everyone) but you've mentioned this several times in this thread. I've never heard of a plan to make Firestone a "second downtown" and why it failed to actually see the light of day and would genuinely be interested in learning more. If you have any access to plans or renders, perhaps you could either start a new thread, post them here, or pm them to me? I've always found it interesting looking at the "what could have been" type plans for Calgary and trying to learn why they failed. Especially when looking at some of the large scale current day civic improvement plans (ie: Eau Claire 7 tower project or even as a more contextually appropriate example the Stampede Trail proposal that is still in limbo). I know you have this approach towards the NCLRT portion of the Green Line (plans are just plans... they can be continually changed until construction is under way) and would love to learn more about how/why you've come to develop this perspective over the years.

Policy Wonk
Sep 29, 2014, 12:17 AM
I see what you mean, but much like the Stampede grounds, West Village can and will be integrated into Downtown and the surrounding area. Firestone's isolation is at a whole other level. If you are seriously considering Firestone, you might also consider Lion's Park, 39th Ave South, Banff Trail, the Zoo Parking lot, or Brentwood. The advantage of being stumbling distance from downtown is vital.

I don't understand by what standard a location that is situated around Deerfoot, Memorial and Barlow and is ten minutes from downtown by LRT is "isolation at a whole other level".

Policy Wonk
Sep 29, 2014, 12:49 AM
I know this is off topic (apologies to everyone) but you've mentioned this several times in this thread. I've never heard of a plan to make Firestone a "second downtown" and why it failed to actually see the light of day and would genuinely be interested in learning more. If you have any access to plans or renders, perhaps you could either start a new thread, post them here, or pm them to me? I've always found it interesting looking at the "what could have been" type plans for Calgary and trying to learn why they failed. Especially when looking at some of the large scale current day civic improvement plans (ie: Eau Claire 7 tower project or even as a more contextually appropriate example the Stampede Trail proposal that is still in limbo). I know you have this approach towards the NCLRT portion of the Green Line (plans are just plans... they can be continually changed until construction is under way) and would love to learn more about how/why you've come to develop this perspective over the years.

When the Firestone plant closed the site was purchased by a German investor named Werner Ehret who proposed redeveloping the site with the LRT in mind. The project got bogged down in the recession of the early 80's and then the investors walked after a protracted pissing contest with City Hall and after a few failed attempts at restarting the project Ehret sold the site to Yale Properties.

I just don't take radical proposals set out by people who have absolutely zero ability to execute on them very seriously because they have no responsibility or accountability. That isn't planning, it's political theatre. But the problem with political theatre is it can breathe life to controversies that have no reason to exist. Public discussions such as whether the SELRT or NCLRT should come first or just how dysfunctional a Centre Street LRT should be designed to be are completely unproductive, largely because there are no decisions of those types to be made today, tomorrow or even a decade from now. But also because I guarantee there is going to be a bunch of simpletons running for office with vague promises of subways, they too comfortably under the umbrella of zero-responsibility.

McMurph
Sep 29, 2014, 1:13 AM
I don't understand by what standard a location that is situated around Deerfoot, Memorial and Barlow and is ten minutes from downtown by LRT is "isolation at a whole other level".

I think Firestone could be pretty cool if built out in complete LA Live style and I would almost prefer a stadium and field house up there to one downtown, but there is virtually no comparison of the community integration and pedestrian access of that site to either of the downtown sites. An arena slotted in somewhere within easy walking range of all that downtown and beltline offer and already house is a completely different beast than something up there, no matter how well-accessed the site is by LRT and high volume roads.

RyLucky
Sep 29, 2014, 1:24 AM
I don't understand by what standard a location that is situated around Deerfoot, Memorial and Barlow and is ten minutes from downtown by LRT is "isolation at a whole other level".

Because it's not Downtown.