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

suburbia
Dec 1, 2014, 10:27 PM
I think in my opinion firepark would be ok, but only as part of a complete giant development, so that the after-game bars and restaurants are built along with the area/stadium. If not then I think it will suck.

Fully agreed. King says they are thinking big. Well, they better be. And they shouldn't do a Bow on us either.

Joborule
Dec 1, 2014, 10:30 PM
Yeah, good plan. Leave a large, dedicated market and move to Tulsa or some crap.

The Flames don't want to pay unnecessary funds if they can avoid it. If pushed enough, they could sell the team to someone else who wants to move it, and then Calgary would be without a team for a while. (Like Minnesota, Denver, and Winnipeg)

I think a major component in having the arena located around downtown rather than Firepark is that there will always be a large amount of people within the vicinity since people live, work, and socialize around the downtown region. Even for non-game goers, people may be more inclined to visit surrounding business around the arena than to go out to the Firepark/Max Bell area if they weren't going to the game. The amount of money that could be spent in a 24hour period has to be greater in the downtown region than the Firepark region, since the former is the heart of the city, while the latter is a destination.

Firepark is a good alternative, but if I was the owners, it would be my least desirable option; trailing behind downtown locations.

suburbia
Dec 1, 2014, 10:57 PM
Firepark is a good alternative, but if I was the owners, it would be my least desirable option; trailing behind downtown locations.

The above is only true if all things were even, but they are not. Major push back from City on West Village due to opportunity cost. Stampede grounds are horrible due to parking. Would you rather pay $16 for parking (which will increase) or go for a bite to eat? The attractiveness for the City of Firepark, in addition to the positives already mentioned, is the rejuvenation factor that a major commercial, entertainment, sports and residential development would have at Firepark and the MaxBell lands.

Calgarian
Dec 1, 2014, 11:15 PM
The Flames aren't going to leave Calgary, they make way more money here than they would in any other market (aside from another Canadian city) and they know that.

Firepark has the room and could logistically work, there is nothing in the area though so I really, really don't want it going there. They could build up an arena district, but that's a lot of work and outside game night, those bars and restaurants would all be closed as there is no one in the area to make them viable at any other time. I give Firepark a 5% chance of happening.

bap1989
Dec 1, 2014, 11:32 PM
Isn't the point of revitalizing the downtown to make it more vibrant during all hours of the day. I disagree about the opportunity cost of putting the new arena in the west village, since if you only build condo and office towers and force people to leave downtown for entertainment the whole idea of revitalization is moot. In my mind the building the arena in the west village presents the city with a great opportunity to rehabilite the area (road realignment, land rehabilitation, kickstart development) without providing funds directly to the Flames ownership. I guess that's why I'm so confused with the city's statement that West Village would be nuts.

Calgarian
Dec 1, 2014, 11:51 PM
Isn't the point of revitalizing the downtown to make it more vibrant during all hours of the day. I disagree about the opportunity cost of putting the new arena in the west village, since if you only build condo and office towers and force people to leave downtown for entertainment the whole idea of revitalization is moot. In my mind the building the arena in the west village presents the city with a great opportunity to rehabilite the area (road realignment, land rehabilitation, kickstart development) without providing funds directly to the Flames ownership. I guess that's why I'm so confused with the city's statement that West Village would be nuts.

The point is they anticipate they would need 12000 residents (I think that was the number) in order to recoup the money spend through a CRL. If they have a large amount of that land as a stadium / arena complex, that would probably be about half the room required and would eliminate the possibility of having that many residents.

suburbia
Dec 2, 2014, 1:02 AM
The point is they anticipate they would need 12000 residents (I think that was the number) in order to recoup the money spend through a CRL. If they have a large amount of that land as a stadium / arena complex, that would probably be about half the room required and would eliminate the possibility of having that many residents.

What Calgarian is saying is that if the arena, stadium and fieldhouse project went in there, there wouldn't be any room for the 12,000 people, which were the ones needed to keep the area from being a ghost town when games were not on.

Max Bell lands, on the other hand, in addition to Firepark, are massive, and would have fantastic residential opportunities for 15,000 people in addition to the commercial, sports and entertainment district being envisioned.

Socguy
Dec 2, 2014, 1:09 AM
We should be careful about thinking that simply plunking an arena down somewhere will cause rejuvenation. It won't, unless a great deal of care and attention is paid from the design through the construction in both the building and the surrounding area.

This leads to higher construction costs and what incentive would the Flames have to pay those costs? Why would they not simply plunk down a fancy concrete shell surrounded by acres and acres of parking? The only way the extra money gets spent is if the city kicks in. Right now, that's not going to happen.

suburbia
Dec 2, 2014, 4:49 AM
We should be careful about thinking that simply plunking an arena down somewhere will cause rejuvenation. It won't, unless a great deal of care and attention is paid from the design through the construction in both the building and the surrounding area.

Obviously.

This leads to higher construction costs and what incentive would the Flames have to pay those costs? Why would they not simply plunk down a fancy concrete shell surrounded by acres and acres of parking? The only way the extra money gets spent is if the city kicks in. Right now, that's not going to happen.

The city and community has say in the design. Regarding higher construction costs for the arena itself, I think you're confused. Any other development is a golden egg for the Flames owners if done well (think of the Edmonton scenario).

BTW - moving major roadways in West Villiage would be "higher construction costs".

Socguy
Dec 4, 2014, 6:42 PM
The city and community has say in the design.

Why would the city want the arena to move away from downtown? All over North America the trend is to move them closer. Why would the community want an arena/entertainment district next door with all the drunken loutish behaviour that will follow? Calgary already tries to contain it on the stampede grounds.

Regarding higher construction costs for the arena itself, I think you're confused. Any other development is a golden egg for the Flames owners if done well (think of the Edmonton scenario).

I don't think I'm confused. If the goal is redevelopment then you need a well designed and integrated piece of architecture. This is much more expensive than the concrete shell and expansive parking lots which, frankly, can facilitate the on ice product fine. So what incentive do the Flames have for spending their own money on top quality architecture? The answer is none. Tossing out redevelopment and fancy designs is nothing more than a hook to try to entice the city to pony up, something Nenshi wisely poo poo-ed.

Now, if the Flames decided that there is a business case for them go it alone to construct their own massive entertainment district in Firepark then great, fancy new arena! ...But don't make the mistake of thinking it would come close to emulating the Edmonton model. In Edmonton the arena is only a part of the redevelopment. There is the Alberta art gallery, the winspire center and so much more that's being integrated in an attempt to liven a dead downtown. They are creating multiple destinations for multiple types of people at all times of day. That's why public money makes more sense up in Edmonton, but not in Calgary. Calgary has a thriving downtown, a profitable NHL team and so many other higher priorities, (like transit!)

BTW - moving major roadways in West Villiage would be "higher construction costs".

Yes, west village would have much higher construction costs, but presumably the Flames would expect the city to condition the site East Village style.

craner
Dec 4, 2014, 8:03 PM
The point is they anticipate they would need 12000 residents (I think that was the number) in order to recoup the money spend through a CRL. If they have a large amount of that land as a stadium / arena complex, that would probably be about half the room required and would eliminate the possibility of having that many residents.

Just build taller residential towers in order to get the required number of residents . . . right Tallbob. :D

bt04ku
Dec 4, 2014, 11:57 PM
Yeah, good plan. Leave a large, dedicated market and move to Tulsa or some crap.

At the time the lease deal was made Denver, Phoenix and Minneapolis/St. Paul were all actively courting NHL teams. It wasn't a time to start gouging. That's a big reason why Winnipeg left the first time (the worst arena deal imaginable).


EDIT: Not to say things should be the same now, just commenting on why it was the way it was.

The Fisher Account
Dec 10, 2014, 5:31 PM
The Senators are looking to potentially relocate to downtown Ottawa.

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/12/10/ottawa-senators-actively-considering-the-opportunity-to-move-downtown/

Here's a great thread for arena discussions that aren't about the Flames:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=152997&page=484

The Fisher Account
Dec 10, 2014, 5:59 PM
There was talk about non-downtown locations for the Flames new arena, including speculation that if the City didn't play ball with the Flames organization that they might move to a different jurisdiction, and I was showing that the few that have attempted it are not thrilled with the results.

Sorry for my ham-fisted attempt to contribute to the Flames thread regarding the location of the arena.=

That's a lot of inferring to do by posting a link to a news article

WaitWhat?
Dec 10, 2014, 6:15 PM
There was talk about non-downtown locations for the Flames new arena, including speculation that if the City didn't play ball with the Flames organization that they might move to a different jurisdiction, and I was showing that the few that have attempted it are not thrilled with the results.

Sorry for my ham-fisted attempt to contribute to the Flames thread regarding the location of the arena.=

This is very relevant to the discussion. Thanks 5seconds.

artvandelay
Dec 10, 2014, 6:43 PM
That's a lot of inferring to do by posting a link to a news article

This is a discussion forum. Happenings with respect to arenas in other Canadian cities are obviously relevant to the discussion.

suburbia
Dec 10, 2014, 7:35 PM
I don't think there was anything wrong with the Ottawa post. Completely relevant to look at best practices or happenings in general elsewhere at a time when arena development is being considered in Calgary.

The Ottawa situation is interesting though. It is not like they are in a location like Firepark. They're way out there at the outskirts of Cochrane. Single road, no train, major challenges.

I enjoyed my visit to the then Corel Centre. The building still has lots of life IMHO.

With Calgary's downturn, will be curious to see how the Flames play it. Go full speed ahead and take advantage of cheaper construction costs, or slow down given development dollars risk.

Riise
Dec 10, 2014, 9:02 PM
With Calgary's downturn, will be curious to see how the Flames play it. Go full speed ahead and take advantage of cheaper construction costs, or slow down given development dollars risk.

If they design it correctly, the development will come. Might as well take advantage of the cost savings and build the arena when its cheapest. While the development will make the project profitable, it is not required to make the arena operational.

Calgarian
Dec 10, 2014, 11:35 PM
Why are people mentioning the cooling of the economy right now as if it is a factor in a building that is YEARS away?

Socguy
Dec 11, 2014, 2:13 AM
If they design it correctly, the development will come. Might as well take advantage of the cost savings and build the arena when its cheapest. While the development will make the project profitable, it is not required to make the arena operational.

Of course as the article shows, that's not necessarily the case. Being that the Ottawa arena was designed to be the "centerpiece of a new commercial development that never materialized".

Having said that, if the Flames have the money and decide to take a run at moving the arena and locate a spot they think they can redevelop, then I agree with your point that now, with cheaper labour, would be a good time to get the ball rolling.

Socguy
Dec 11, 2014, 2:18 AM
Also, any post about Canadian cities changing arenas is totally relevant to the current speculation regarding a new arena in Calgary. What has worked and not worked elsewhere should always be considered.

Thanks for the link 5seconds!:tup:

O-tacular
Dec 11, 2014, 5:46 PM
I was just in Vegas and staying at the Monte Carlo. Right beside me they were building that city's new arena. It actually looks really nice. I know they are trying to attract an NHL team and that UFC needs another facility they can use. Since there is no existing team involved I assume it is being funded by the city.

In Calgary's case I think the Flames should fund it 100%. The argument that they need help is bullshit and if they do it themselves they can reap the most rewards as parking, concessions etc. will all fall into their pockets. I'm not holding my breath though. Didn't Ken King just say like 2 weeks ago that we would be seeing plans this month or next?

bt04ku
Dec 11, 2014, 6:33 PM
In Calgary's case I think the Flames should fund it 100%. The argument that they need help is bullshit and if they do it themselves they can reap the most rewards as parking, concessions etc. will all fall into their pockets. I'm not holding my breath though. Didn't Ken King just say like 2 weeks ago that we would be seeing plans this month or next?

It has been in "the next couple of months" phase for three or four years now I think.

O-tacular
Dec 11, 2014, 6:40 PM
It has been in "the next couple of months" phase for three or four years now I think.

Yep. I'll believe it when I see it. All I can say is that if Ken King is waiting for them to get all of their ducks in a row there better not be any empty hat holding during the presentation.

Riise
Dec 11, 2014, 7:18 PM
Of course as the article shows, that's not necessarily the case. Being that the Ottawa arena was designed to be the "centerpiece of a new commercial development that never materialized".

I was debating editing my post to say 'designed and located' correctly. You are correct but I think an inner-city arena has much more draw than the area surrounding the CTC.

tomthumb2
Dec 11, 2014, 7:30 PM
It has been in "the next couple of months" phase for three or four years now I think.

No kidding. I've actually given up on this ever happening. Too many obstacles I suppose. I guess we are stuck with an 80's state of the art arena and a way past its due date, US high school stadium.

Socguy
Dec 11, 2014, 10:39 PM
I was debating editing my post to say 'designed and located' correctly. You are correct but I think an inner-city arena has much more draw than the area surrounding the CTC.

In that case I do agree with you.

As far as Calgary is concerned, I'm having a hard time thinking of a better location for an arena, than near where it is now.

H.E.Pennypacker
Dec 12, 2014, 8:50 AM
So didn't we hear that something would be out about a new arena by years end awhile back? Only a few weeks until the end of December, what are the chances something is released? ;)

Calgarian
Dec 12, 2014, 5:52 PM
No kidding. I've actually given up on this ever happening. Too many obstacles I suppose. I guess we are stuck with an 80's state of the art arena and a way past its due date, US high school stadium.

McMahon could easily be renovated to be a great venue, it just needs to be gutted and completely rebuilt with stands, concessions and washrooms on the north and south ends. The Saddledome is limited by it's design, and to renovate it to where it can be a competitive building with Rexall and MTS (both destroy the Dome in terms of revenue despite being much smaller) you would practically have to demolish everything and start over.

That being said, I do love the idea of having an arena district comprising both an arena and stadium.

suburbia
Dec 12, 2014, 7:15 PM
McMahon could easily be renovated to be a great venue, it just needs to be gutted and completely rebuilt with stands, concessions and washrooms on the north and south ends.

LOL!

Yeah - that's like consultant speak. When you ask them for stuff, the standard response is "it can be done". Well no guff - of course it is "possible".

:jester:

93JC
Dec 12, 2014, 8:29 PM
The Saddledome is limited by it's design, and to renovate it to where it can be a competitive building with Rexall and MTS (both destroy the Dome in terms of revenue despite being much smaller) you would practically have to demolish everything and start over.

I'm sure you're relying on Pollstar rankings for this assertion. Don't. Their rankings are based on "reported numbers to Pollstar", and that's not a clear number by any means.

E.g. Pollstar says Rexall had 214,833 concert tickets sold in the first half of this year, compared to the Saddledome's 71,756.

Concerts and other events at Rexall:
Justin Timberlake (two nights)
Pink
Keith Urban
Lady Antebellum
Kings of Leon
Hedley
Steve Miller Band
Florida Georgia Line
Black Sabbath
Investors Group Stars on Ice
Luke Bryan (two nights)
Backstreet Boys
City and Color
Lady Gaga
Doctor Oz
Michael Bublé
Cher
Queen + Adam Lambert

Saddledome:
CHL Top Prospects Game
Keith Urban
Harlem Globetrotters
Kings of Leon
Florida Georgia Line
Black Sabbath
Luke Bryan
Investors Group Stars on Ice
Backstreet Boys
City and Color
Lady Gaga
Doctor Oz
Michael Bublé (two nights)
Cher
Queen + Adam Lambert

The Pollstar numbers almost certainly don't take into account the Top Prospects game, and that's fine, but that's still 15 events at the Saddledome vs. 20 at Rexall. I find it very hard to believe that the concert crowds at the Saddledome average a paltry 4800...

Surrealplaces
Dec 12, 2014, 8:47 PM
Agreed. Something doesn't look right with the stats, not a whole lot of difference in events between the two venues. I wonder if there are numbers for just total revenue only?

I'm sure you're relying on Pollstar rankings for this assertion. Don't. Their rankings are based on "reported numbers to Pollstar", and that's not a clear number by any means.

E.g. Pollstar says Rexall had 214,833 concert tickets sold in the first half of this year, compared to the Saddledome's 71,756.

Concerts and other events at Rexall:
Justin Timberlake (two nights)
Pink
Keith Urban
Lady Antebellum
Kings of Leon
Hedley
Steve Miller Band
Florida Georgia Line
Black Sabbath
Investors Group Stars on Ice
Luke Bryan (two nights)
Backstreet Boys
City and Color
Lady Gaga
Doctor Oz
Michael Bublé
Cher
Queen + Adam Lambert

Saddledome:
CHL Top Prospects Game
Keith Urban
Harlem Globetrotters
Kings of Leon
Florida Georgia Line
Black Sabbath
Luke Bryan
Investors Group Stars on Ice
Backstreet Boys
City and Color
Lady Gaga
Doctor Oz
Michael Bublé (two nights)
Cher
Queen + Adam Lambert

The Pollstar numbers almost certainly don't take into account the Top Prospects game, and that's fine, but that's still 15 events at the Saddledome vs. 20 at Rexall. I find it very hard to believe that the concert crowds at the Saddledome average a paltry 4800...

monocle
Jan 29, 2015, 6:06 PM
So... a month and a half with no new news??? I'm dying here, somebody throw me a bone. Anything please...

Here's my conspiracy theory: CP is advertising during Flames games. Why in the hell does CP need to advertise? Because they are working with the Flames to build the arena on/over CP land, right? Ergo, Railtown is the obvious location.

O-tacular
Jan 29, 2015, 6:13 PM
So... a month and a half with no new news??? I'm dying here, somebody throw me a bone. Anything please...

Here's my conspiracy theory: CP is advertising during Flames games. Why in the hell does CP need to advertise? Because they are working with the Flames to build the arena on/over CP land, right? Ergo, Railtown is the obvious location.

I love how every few months Ken King says a design will be revealed in a few months, only to repeat the same cycle again when the time comes to reveal.

H.E.Pennypacker
Jan 29, 2015, 6:17 PM
IIRC we were told by the "end of the year" we'd hear an announcement.

Should have specified which year.

monocle
Jan 29, 2015, 6:26 PM
Possibly, we are getting a bigger better building than the original plan? That's how these things work right? Underpromise, overdeliver.

Bigtime
Jan 29, 2015, 6:34 PM
Well if part of their plan involved funding from the different levels of government it's going to be pretty quiet on that front this year...

O-tacular
Jan 29, 2015, 10:11 PM
Well if part of their plan involved funding from the different levels of government it's going to be pretty quiet on that front this year...

I figured their plan all along was to put out their beggars' cap. Corporate Calgary won't be too eager to donate millions of dollars right now either.

bt04ku
Jan 29, 2015, 10:57 PM
Perfect time for these oil barons to diversify their portfolio with a big real estate and entertainment push.

The Fisher Account
Jan 30, 2015, 12:18 AM
Apparently Gary Bettman was in town today and met with Nenshi...

bt04ku
Jan 30, 2015, 1:10 AM
Apparently Gary Bettman was in town today and met with Nenshi...

Bearing the faded and tattered logos of the Nordiques and old Jets no doubt.

suburbia
Jan 30, 2015, 1:17 AM
Apparently Gary Bettman was in town today and met with Nenshi...

Yeah - I didn't run into Nenshi, but when I met Bettman and Prentice, it was all about arena from mr. business and bottom-line.

H.E.Pennypacker
Jan 30, 2015, 3:14 PM
Apparently Gary Bettman was in town today and met with Nenshi...

Article about it in the Herald today

http://calgaryherald.com/sports/hockey/this-is-a-building-that-needs-to-be-replaced-bettman-on-the-antiquated-saddledome

O-tacular
Jan 30, 2015, 4:11 PM
Yeah - I didn't run into Nenshi, but when I met Bettman and Prentice, it was all about arena from mr. business and bottom-line.

Prentice? I can't see that. When and where was this?

Spring2008
Jan 30, 2015, 5:46 PM
The broadcasters yest. kinda unofficially confirmed this is being built as part of the west village redevelopment.

I'm thinking CMLC will be involved, maybe even CP with their new development partnership.

On one hand, there's already so much going on in the inner-city, does the city really want to add another big brownfield site to the mix, might have to shift growth closer to 75% in existing communities.

On the other, the downturn might be a good time to put the infrastructure etc in place with lower construction costs, similar to what CMLC did with EV.

suburbia
Jan 30, 2015, 6:12 PM
Prentice? I can't see that. When and where was this?

The Jewish community was recognizing a couple of their own, IE Al Libin and Gary Bettman. These were strategic choices for recognition this year, as it got the politicians invited in a room comprising a powerful business block including Flames owners and exec, banking leaders and investment firms, and major law firms, and where Bettman could speak to this group and politicians from the stage about how the owners have done amazing things for the city and its people. Prentice was seated between Al (one of the owners) and Bettman, with King and Edwards at the same table. The value of the arena to this group, directly connected via ownership, upper management (King, etc.) and other businesses (EG broader entertainment industries, from Feldman entertainment managers to Freeman av production, as but two examples), is massive. Heck, Flames entertainment likely do $100M in just entertainment events outside of sports themselves. It was a show de force, with every seat, 700 of them, decked out with a Flames logo. In addition to owner Libin and commish Bettman speaking, also at the mic were Ken King, and kingpin Edwards. All other owners were there. Nenshi and city council always attend these dinners, but none of them were there. He probably saw through the forest, and avoided like the plague. The Nenshi meeting, therefore, happened behind closed doors separately.

It is not just diamonds my friends!

MasterG
Jan 30, 2015, 6:26 PM
The Jewish community was recognizing a couple of their own, IE Al Libin and Gary Bettman. These were strategic choices for recognition this year, as it got the politicians invited in a room comprising a powerful business block including Flames owners and exec, banking leaders and investment firms, and major law firms, and where Bettman could speak to this group and politicians from the stage about how the owners have done amazing things for the city and its people. Prentice was seated between Al (one of the owners) and Bettman, with King and Edwards at the same table. The value of the arena to this group, directly connected via ownership, upper management (King, etc.) and other businesses (EG broader entertainment industries, from Feldman entertainment managers to Freeman av production, as but two examples), is massive. It was a show de force, with every seat, 700 of them, decked out with a Flames logo. In addition to owner Libin and commish Bettman speaking, also at the mic were Ken King, and kingpin Edwards. All other owners were there. Nenshi and city council always attend these dinners, but none of them were there. He probably saw through the forest, and avoided like the plague. The Nenshi meeting, therefore, happened behind closed doors separately.

It is not just diamonds my friends!

I would think the recent political and economic climate in Alberta would make public dollars for a stadium - already highly doubtful at the municipal level - next to impossible to procure. Are the billionaires going to have to pay their own way?

I could see the city meeting them on certain land-use changes, general infrastructure like transit upgrades etc. but I would be very surprised if it amounts to any significant amount of public dollars. Too much political blow-back is possible right now, with cuts to everything else in the provincial budget looming.

suburbia
Jan 30, 2015, 6:41 PM
I would think the recent political and economic climate in Alberta would make public dollars for a stadium - already highly doubtful at the municipal level - next to impossible to procure. Are the billionaires going to have to pay their own way?

I could see the city meeting them on certain land-use changes, general infrastructure like transit upgrades etc. but I would be very surprised if it amounts to any significant amount of public dollars. Too much political blow-back is possible right now, with cuts to everything else in the provincial budget looming.

Fully agree. I think the strategic move of bringing Bettman in and highlighting the contributions of Flames ownership within the context of a whose who of Calgary business and with politicians captive and cornered, was initiated some time ago. The issues with resources and the dollar were subsequent.

One has to understand that the power of these types of business blocks, be it construction / development related such as with housing here or sidewalks in Montreal, faith-based or not, it does connect back to political financing and votes. Nenshi is so above all that (relying on votes from the masses and not connected to projects/dollars ; scratching backs), however, and it does frustrate these blocks when they can't get what they want.

Fuzz
Jan 30, 2015, 7:23 PM
Maybe Prentice was their to beg some of these billionaires for some money for a new Cancer Centre?

joe498
Jan 30, 2015, 10:11 PM
Out of all the things this city and province need in a time of a low dollar, low oil prices in the midst of a possible recession with talk of higher taxes and job losses this is crazy, especially the fact that the Flames organization is expecting the city to subsidize this.

I like sports and all but if the owners of a sports team can't afford to build the infrastructure needed to support such a business talk like this makes me want to say sell the team.

MalcolmTucker
Jan 30, 2015, 10:13 PM
It would be interesting to see the value of our current subsidy. Then could make a rational case either way.

joe498
Jan 30, 2015, 10:19 PM
It would be interesting to see the value of our current subsidy. Then could make a rational case either way.

If we had a sales tax I could buy the argument that it helps our economy but without a such a method it's a much weaker argument, mostly trickling into the pockets of the owners and performers.

Most people in this city outside of oil and gas can't regularly afford to attend events at the Saddledome. Pretty silly to expect those that don't even like sports or concerts or have lower incomes to subsidize this. If you have to, raise ticket prices. The people that want a new arena can pay for it and probably still will go.

I am not sure how subsidizing an arena is feasible given:

- the oil patch is issuing layoffs
- we are in discussions of wage rollbacks
- in discussions of higher taxes and service cuts
- in need of 50 new schools right away $2B
- people want a $1.6b Cancer Center
- $5B ring road is potentially delayed further and when we miss the time frame for it to be built as per contract terms pay an even higher price
- needed savings to fund a $5B Green line LRT long term and likely pricier when it happens
- day to day infrastructure that is already behind is lacking money
- other cities sports team owners pay the price themselves
- low Canadian Dollar

Policy Wonk
Jan 30, 2015, 10:48 PM
I'm not in favour of subsidies, but if the city wants to influence this in a constructive way they're going to have to bring something to the table other than interference of whatever transpires independently and pithy twitter comments.

Ramsayfarian
Jan 31, 2015, 12:06 AM
Apparently Gary Bettman was in town today and met with Nenshi...

Are you sure it was Bettman and not the Penguin?

jsbertram
Jan 31, 2015, 12:34 AM
Maybe Prentice was their to beg some of these billionaires for some money for a new Cancer Centre?

Can you imagine these headlines?

"New Cancer Centre Delayed by oil royalties shortfall of $ Billions in Edmonton and Ottawa"
"New Flames Arena to be built with partial funding from new provincial sales tax"

.... ain't gonna happen in an election year (federal nor provincial).

We'll have to wait until it's normal to sip champagne and nibble caviar from a strippers' belly-button again.

Socguy
Jan 31, 2015, 12:38 AM
At the end of the day, Bettman works for the owners not vice-versa. This means that if Bettman is talking to Nenshi about a new arena it's because the Flames want him to. This tells us the the Flames are still pushing for a new arena, which I think comes as a shock to absolutely no one.:rolleyes:

Too bad for Bettman and the Flames that this has got to be one of the worst times they could possibly pick to try and get city help for a new arena.

The Flames keep trotting out the 'old building' routine but that's going to be a hard sell when people actually see the numbers. According to Forbes, the Flames are 11th in the league when it comes to revenue, despite the age of their building. Granted, they could be making even more with a new building but I don't see that as a city concern.

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/#page:1_sort:2_direction:desc_search:

suburbia
Jan 31, 2015, 3:21 AM
At the end of the day, Bettman works for the owners not vice-versa. This means that if Bettman is talking to Nenshi about a new arena it's because the Flames want him to. This tells us the the Flames are still pushing for a new arena, which I think comes as a shock to absolutely no one.:rolleyes:

Too bad for Bettman and the Flames that this has got to be one of the worst times they could possibly pick to try and get city help for a new arena.

The Flames keep trotting out the 'old building' routine but that's going to be a hard sell when people actually see the numbers. According to Forbes, the Flames are 11th in the league when it comes to revenue, despite the age of their building. Granted, they could be making even more with a new building but I don't see that as a city concern.

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/#page:1_sort:2_direction:desc_search:

It is actually particularly unfortunate for them that Nenshi will not bend over for anyone. He is no hypocrite. Not righteous in public and undermining under cover. Instead, he is the real deal.

I'm not saying something might not be possible, but it would need to be on true merit and of value to Calgary.

The Fisher Account
Mar 5, 2015, 2:06 AM
Rumblings on calgarypuck about a possible announcement as early as this week from a reliable insider...

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpost.php?p=5169480&postcount=3264

craner
Mar 5, 2015, 3:51 AM
^:gaah:
I can't take anymore teases. I really hope they go for it with the whole SHED development. At the very least a new home for both Flames & Stamps.

WaitWhat?
Mar 5, 2015, 6:36 PM
"Weeks away", apparently.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/flames-poised-to-reveal-plans-for-downtown-arena

craner
Mar 5, 2015, 7:33 PM
Man I'm pumped for the reveal.
Glad to see they are referring to a "Downtown" arena. :)

kev_427
Mar 5, 2015, 9:02 PM
Playing around with Google Earth. Yellow is mixed use, orange is hotel, blue is lrt station, grey is parkade, and red is public buildings. The stadium sits where GSL currently sits, arena at Greyhound, and a new Glenbow museum at Renfrew. A new museum would allow the current site to be remodeled as convention space.

Also redesigned Crowchild and Bow for fun.

Just my fantasy. all pics are mine.

http://i.imgur.com/fsYJUqa.jpg (http://imgur.com/fsYJUqa)

http://i.imgur.com/ayRvuIw.jpg (http://imgur.com/ayRvuIw)

http://i.imgur.com/HxuUTMd.jpg (http://imgur.com/HxuUTMd)

http://i.imgur.com/8hTi8Xc.jpg (http://imgur.com/8hTi8Xc)

tomthumb2
Mar 5, 2015, 9:57 PM
Kev 427, you should be in charge - great job, especially the Crowchild disaster. Whoever designed that originally should be shot.

It would be amazing if they build something like this:

http://www.stadiumguide.com/wp-content/gallery/vtbarena/vtbarena1.jpg

Does anyone think it would save any money to have arena and stadium under one roof? That is of course, if they're planning on a stadium too....

MonctonGoldenFlames
Mar 5, 2015, 10:12 PM
Kev 427, you should be in charge - great job, especially the Crowchild disaster. Whoever designed that originally should be shot.

can't wait for the NIMBYs to come out again when that interchange finally gets fixed.

simster3
Mar 5, 2015, 10:20 PM
I still want Bow Trail underground as much as possible. The ground has to all be dug up anyway.

Govertical
Mar 5, 2015, 10:24 PM
I really hope is both a football and hockey stadium in the CENTRE of the city, that would be wicked to see finally happen...

Fuzz
Mar 5, 2015, 10:58 PM
Rumour has it* it's going to be next to the South Health Campus. Cheap land and expensive parking!



*all rumours started by me

Luk_o
Mar 5, 2015, 11:38 PM
Rumour has it* it's going to be next to the South Health Campus. Cheap land and expensive parking!



*all rumours started by me

The one thing we know for sure is that its definately going to be downtown. This is one thing King made sure to confirm today :tup:

Coldrsx
Mar 5, 2015, 11:47 PM
You guys should resurrect Edmonton's 'Omniplex' design.

http://citymuseumedmonton.ca/wp-content/uploads/Omniplex1-1128x846.png
(http://citymuseumedmonton.ca)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_jZrUb2_0WQc/TLumakxD8yI/AAAAAAAAAF8/YBdmQKgL_Ls/s1600/omniplex+cutaway.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com

Calgarian
Mar 5, 2015, 11:47 PM
So apparently we are a few weeks away from a reveal of the Flames plans for the new barn, I feel like I have heard this a couple times before haha.

suburbia
Mar 6, 2015, 12:37 AM
It would be amazing if they build something like this:
http://www.stadiumguide.com/wp-content/gallery/vtbarena/vtbarena1.jpg

Couldn't work that (easily) into either of the potential downtown locations. Would quite easily work at Firepark, but as you know, latest info all point to downtown.

Spring2008
Mar 6, 2015, 4:12 PM
"Weeks away", apparently.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/flames-poised-to-reveal-plans-for-downtown-arena

This is good news:

“Before any of your listeners have conniptions, when you see our project, people are just going to love it. And we’re not going to sneak in here and steal money from the city,” King told the radio hosts.

Reading between the lines, looks like ownership won't be getting a dime to pay for the arena and they know it, but instead looking for land and public money on surrounding public amenities such as a field-house. Seems like a fair pitch. They can't really sell us on "revitalization" as we currently have by far the most of revitalization going on across the entire inner-city for a city our size in NA.

He refused to elaborate on what he deems public benefit. King has said he’ll pitch an “extremely ambitious” project and has hinted it will offer more than an arena, to give it wider appeal. The rumour mill has brimmed with ideas such as an amateur sports field house and a new Stampeders football stadium.

Innersoul1
Mar 6, 2015, 4:24 PM
If only we still had an insider from the mayor's office to give us perspective on the proposal!

suburbia
Mar 6, 2015, 7:03 PM
I wonder if this is connected to the lobbying Bettman and King were doing with the Premier at the Jewish community event late January? Any bets on the rules around accessing the new dollars include provisions for sports and entertainment facilities? Let's see - but depending what it is, that "look in the mirror" comment could have been foreshadowing in addition to 20/20 hindsight!
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-hikes-funding-for-cities-towns-by-400m-1.2984539

MalcolmTucker
Mar 6, 2015, 7:07 PM
The city can spend untied grant money on the arena if it wants. It is the city's call. True under Redford too.

The province refused to create extra special net new money for arenas, just as the province refused to create extra special net new money for the airport tunnel.

suburbia
Mar 6, 2015, 8:14 PM
The city can spend untied grant money on the arena if it wants. It is the city's call. True under Redford too.

The province refused to create extra special net new money for arenas, just as the province refused to create extra special net new money for the airport tunnel.

Fair enough. I'm sure it will all look very clean at the end of the day. Handshakes aren't recorded.

speedog
Mar 6, 2015, 8:22 PM
Downtown and it is still rumoured to be a multi-use facility. Hmm, the lands north of Stampede Park still look promising - throw in the field house that people have been fundraising for and trying to get built in Calgary plus have the Flames pay to have the existing bus barns moved to some vacant city owned land to the SW of the Crossroads Market and voila. Everything will fit, both a new stadium and arena placed there will be within easy walking distance to all LRT lines plus the SELRT will go right by this location.

Please note that this is someone else's marked up picture from these forums.

http://i.imgur.com/6bL24Qj.png

Spring2008
Mar 6, 2015, 8:35 PM
Heard from a PDA worker awhile ago that the lands north of Stampede grounds are still in play. Not sure how reliable their sources were.

Downtown and it is still rumoured to be a multi-use facility. Hmm, the lands north of Stampede Park still look promising - throw in the field house that people have been fundraising for and trying to get built in Calgary plus have the Flames pay to have the existing bus barns moved to some vacant city owned land to the SW of the Crossroads Market and voila. Everything will fit, both a new stadium and arena placed there will be within easy walking distance to all LRT lines plus the SELRT will go right by this location.

speedog
Mar 6, 2015, 8:48 PM
Better yet, if it's an outdoor stadium then the field is situated N-S which is preferable for most football fields in Canada - reduces the negative effects of a setting sun on the playing field. Situating a football field in the west side with a N-S orientation would be very difficult.

Surrealplaces
Mar 6, 2015, 9:07 PM
So apparently we are a few weeks away from a reveal of the Flames plans for the new barn, I feel like I have heard this a couple times before haha.

So Brad Lamb will be making the announcement? ;)

Spring2008
Mar 6, 2015, 9:13 PM
So Brad Lamb will be making the announcement? ;)

lol glad he's kept it a lot more reasonable with Orchard. Seems like every week with 6th and 10th for a good couple years we heard of how amazing and successful that project was, and that construction was ready to start the following week.

Coldrsx
Mar 6, 2015, 9:14 PM
Source was telling me it was include demo of a good size building on the grounds...

Surrealplaces
Mar 6, 2015, 9:18 PM
I'm pretty sure you've hit the nail on the head. The way he said they would be sneaking in and stealing the money, sounds like they'll be asking for some in some sort of form. I'm fine with some creative solution to help this get going.

This is good news:

Reading between the lines, looks like ownership won't be getting a dime to pay for the arena and they know it, but instead looking for land and public money on surrounding public amenities such as a field-house. Seems like a fair pitch. They can't really sell us on "revitalization" as we currently have by far the most of revitalization going on across the entire inner-city for a city our size in NA.

Surrealplaces
Mar 6, 2015, 9:20 PM
Source was telling me it was include demo of a good size building on the grounds...

I wonder if it's the Big Four Building? I wouldn't mind seeing the BMO centre/corral go. They could build it there, and then re-do the BMO centre to be more like the one in Edm.

suburbia
Mar 6, 2015, 10:09 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing the BMO centre/corral go. They could build it there, and then re-do the BMO centre to be more like the one in Edm.

Big4 needs to go, but the BMO Centre? The BMO centre includes one 150,000sf hall, one 100,000sf hall, the Palomino Room, lots of additional rooms and support spaces, a commercial kitchen, the Corral and a threatre - and the facility is very much booked. You'd want to destroy all that so we could have an arena?

What does "re-do the BMO centre to be more like the one in Edm" mean? In Edmonton, they have some new additions, but their spaces are not as large as ours.

Anyway - that would be like adding another $300M to a project that already isn't funded, and with no continuity plan for the years there would be a gap.

craner
Mar 7, 2015, 12:30 AM
I'm pretty sure you've hit the nail on the head. The way he said they would be sneaking in and stealing the money, sounds like they'll be asking for some in some sort of form. I'm fine with some creative solution to help this get going.
Just to clarify:
King said they wouldn't be sneaking in and stealing money from the City - correct?

Interesting info about demolishing a building on the Stampede grounds - I thought building there was a no go. Would love to see it where the Big 4 sits.
:yes:

Socguy
Mar 7, 2015, 12:59 AM
Hopefully the proposal is for the Stampede grounds. Situating it in the West Village only blocks the city from redeveloping that land East Village style in the next decade or so.

Surrealplaces
Mar 7, 2015, 1:35 AM
Just to clarify:
King said they wouldn't be sneaking in and stealing money from the City - correct?

Interesting info about demolishing a building on the Stampede grounds - I thought building there was a no go. Would love to see it where the Big 4 sits.
:yes:

Yup, King said they wouldn't, and I too meant to say 'wouldn't'

Surrealplaces
Mar 7, 2015, 1:41 AM
Ultimately my first choice would be the Big Four building, but I believe it's already been ruled out. The BMO building, while booked solid is an exhibition hall, and it's an easy building to replace.

Big4 needs to go, but the BMO Centre? The BMO centre includes one 150,000sf hall, one 100,000sf hall, the Palomino Room, lots of additional rooms and support spaces, a commercial kitchen, the Corral and a threatre - and the facility is very much booked. You'd want to destroy all that so we could have an arena?

What does "re-do the BMO centre to be more like the one in Edm" mean? In Edmonton, they have some new additions, but their spaces are not as large as ours.

Anyway - that would be like adding another $300M to a project that already isn't funded, and with no continuity plan for the years there would be a gap.

suburbia
Mar 7, 2015, 5:59 AM
Ultimately my first choice would be the Big Four building, but I believe it's already been ruled out. The BMO building, while booked solid is an exhibition hall, and it's an easy building to replace.

So three challenges:
1. You'd have to replace it before knocking it down
2. The new BMO centre would need way more space than the arena, and it would need access to things like public transit just like the arena
3. Overall, doing it this way would be a net increase of cost, probably in the $300M range, and that is on top of the arena that is already unfunded

At a general level, I agree it is a good location, but so are various other $100M+ buildings beside one of several downtown LRT stations that are in high demand use. Doesn't make sense in my mind to even go there.

DAVEinEDMONTON
Mar 8, 2015, 5:16 PM
Source was telling me it was include demo of a good size building on the grounds...

That is what I heard as well. Knocking down the Saddledome and rebuilding on the same site to coincide with the opening of new arena opening in Edmonton in 2016. The Oilers would move out for the 2016-2017 season and the Flames move into Rexall temporarily for two seasons until the new arena is completed in Calgary.

Part of the plan would entail Calgary McMahon stadium hosting up to 8 to 10 "heritage classics" hosting mostly the Canadian NHL rival teams. Perhaps a couple games in Regina and Saskatoon as well. And/or up to 10 to 15 games hosted in Copps coliseum in Hamilton or the new arena in Quebec city as a partial test of the waters for an eventual NHL team in those cities. The balance would be held in Edmonton.

Calgary fans would be drive, fly or take special busses to the games that would held mostly on the weekends to allow them to easily travel to the games.

The additional income earned from higher attendance at the outdoor venues would be used to cover extra travel costs to operate in the eastern venues.

Win -win situation. NHL fans in non-NHL cities get to see some NHL games live. Edmonton Rexall gets to continue to house NHL games for another couple of years while displaced Calgarians living in Edmonton get to watch their beloved Flames live and close by. And Edmonton Oiler fans get to watch some decent hockey for a change...:tup:

Socguy
Mar 8, 2015, 5:26 PM
That is what I heard as well. Knocking down the Saddledome and rebuilding on the same site to coincide with the opening of new arena opening in Edmonton in 2016. The Oilers would move out for the 2016-2017 season and the Flames move into Rexall temporarily for two seasons until the new arena is completed in Calgary.

Part of the plan would entail Calgary McMahon stadium hosting up to 8 to 10 "heritage classics" hosting mostly the Canadian NHL rival teams. Perhaps a couple games in Regina and Saskatoon as well. And/or up to 10 to 15 games hosted in Copps coliseum in Hamilton or the new arena in Quebec city as a partial test of the waters for an eventual NHL team in those cities. The balance would be held in Edmonton.

Calgary fans would be drive, fly or take special busses to the games that would held mostly on the weekends to allow them to easily travel to the games.

The additional income earned from higher attendance at the outdoor venues would be used to cover extra travel costs to operate in the eastern venues.

Win -win situation. NHL fans in non-NHL cities get to see some NHL games live. Edmonton Rexall gets to continue to house NHL games for another couple of years while displaced Calgarians living in Edmonton get to watch their beloved Flames live and close by. And Edmonton Oiler fans get to watch some decent hockey for a change...:tup:

If this is true, I'd be blown away. Props for thinking outside the box. The Saddledome location is far and away the best for an arena and this would get a new arena there.

DAVEinEDMONTON
Mar 8, 2015, 5:34 PM
If this is true, I'd be blown away. Props for thinking outside the box. The Saddledome location is far and away the best for an arena and this would get a new arena there.

No, not true...just my thoughts...would blow me away as well if they decided to do this!

Habanero
Mar 8, 2015, 7:52 PM
The flames could play in the Corral for a couple of seasons. They can charge extra for tickets to help subsidize the shortfall.

Calgarian
Mar 8, 2015, 8:36 PM
I wonder if it's the Big Four Building? I wouldn't mind seeing the BMO centre/corral go. They could build it there, and then re-do the BMO centre to be more like the one in Edm.

I think the Stampede board still wants to convert that into another entry point into the grounds.

Barnes
Mar 8, 2015, 8:55 PM
The flames could play in the Corral for a couple of seasons. They can charge extra for tickets to help subsidize the shortfall.

No way in hell the league or the PA allows this without major construction for CBA required minimum facility standards. All new ice plant, dehumidifier system, seamless glass, new boards and dashers, new dressing rooms, workout facilities, and medical facilities would be required. The lighting sucks and there's probably nowhere near anything resembling the required broadcast facilities needed.

MTS Centre didn't even meet league minimum requirements before the Thrashers moved.

Thunderball
Mar 8, 2015, 11:14 PM
That is what I heard as well. Knocking down the Saddledome and rebuilding on the same site to coincide with the opening of new arena opening in Edmonton in 2016. The Oilers would move out for the 2016-2017 season and the Flames move into Rexall temporarily for two seasons until the new arena is completed in Calgary.

Part of the plan would entail Calgary McMahon stadium hosting up to 8 to 10 "heritage classics" hosting mostly the Canadian NHL rival teams. Perhaps a couple games in Regina and Saskatoon as well. And/or up to 10 to 15 games hosted in Copps coliseum in Hamilton or the new arena in Quebec city as a partial test of the waters for an eventual NHL team in those cities. The balance would be held in Edmonton.

Calgary fans would be drive, fly or take special busses to the games that would held mostly on the weekends to allow them to easily travel to the games.

The additional income earned from higher attendance at the outdoor venues would be used to cover extra travel costs to operate in the eastern venues.

Win -win situation. NHL fans in non-NHL cities get to see some NHL games live. Edmonton Rexall gets to continue to house NHL games for another couple of years while displaced Calgarians living in Edmonton get to watch their beloved Flames live and close by. And Edmonton Oiler fans get to watch some decent hockey for a change...:tup:

Not sure if this is serious, but there is absolutely no way this is entertained by the Flames organization. They would be risking tens (hundreds?) of millions in gate revenue and alienating their season ticket holder base while spending hundreds of millions building the the new arena. Huge risk for little benefit. The NHLPA would never accept this either.

Everything I've heard from sources is that the Flames do not want to be on Stampede Park due to the amounts of revenue they lose.

The only way the Flames abandon Calgary for any period of time would be preseason, or for a short period of time on an emergency basis (ie: if the Saddledome wasn't ready on time after the flood). Never for a two + year construction schedule. Organizing several "heritage classics" at McMahon would be a nightmare too.

I highly doubt the NHL would allow a team in the top third of revenues to be a guinea pig for gauge interest in marginal Canadian markets to the detriment of one of its top Canadian markets either. Seattle maybe, but not Quebec, Saskatoon, Regina or even Hamilton.

I'm not convinced the Saddledome gets torn down either... I suspect it gets renovated (reduce capacity and other reductions to lower costs, and potentially add in features to serve the purposes of the Big 4), while the Big 4 and/or the Corral get torn down and those lands repurposed.

Plus, if Calgary ever wants to bid for the Winter Olympics again, they may need the new arena, the new football stadium and the Saddledome as a secondary venue to be seriously considered.

The Fisher Account
Mar 9, 2015, 12:47 AM
I'm not convinced the Saddledome gets torn down either... I suspect it gets renovated (reduce capacity and other reductions to lower costs, and potentially add in features to serve the purposes of the Big 4), while the Big 4 and/or the Corral get torn down and those lands repurposed.


Who on earth agrees to own that building and let it sit empty with no tenants?

The Saddledome will be demolished.

bt04ku
Mar 9, 2015, 12:49 AM
I am going to go out on a limb here, but I doubt the arena management contract the Flames have allows for demolition of the building they are only leasing.

bt04ku
Mar 9, 2015, 12:57 AM
Who on earth agrees to own that building and let it sit empty with no tenants?

The Saddledome will be demolished.

The same people who own it now? They still have the Stampede to try and cash in on some big events even if there is no anchor tenant. The operational costs would be minimal once the ice is taken out so it wouldn't be too big a burden to keep up in the grand scheme.

And as mentioned, if there is any Olympic aspirations, then it is pretty much a given that it would have to be maintained until at least then to hold the figure skating and short track events.


EDIT: This also doesn't take into account the heritage aspect of the building. If any building that was only built in the 80s deserves such a distinction, it would be the Dome, wouldn't it? So with that in mind, public sentiment would be the real deciding factor on the fate of the building. Would at least prompt a look into what refurbishing could be done to it (big box stores, theatres, convention space, leisure space etc.). I think there would be a lot of public support to at least keep the exterior of the Dome intact.