New Downtown Calgary Arena

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

The Flames want to demolish the dome when they build a new arena, that way the new building won't have to compete with the dome for revenue.

I've said it before, I think they should keep the dome and demo the corral.

The Flames don't own the Dome, so I don't think what they want really matters when it comes to the Dome's demolition (or not).

[Calgarian]

I thought the Flames did own the dome, if not them it must be the city?

[93JC]

The City owns the Saddledome. The Flames took over management of the building in 1995, but they don't actually own the building and at the end of the day do not have any direct say in whether or not it is demolished.

The Flames want the Saddledome gone because they want the new arena to be the only venue in Calgary for major concerts, trade shows and other events. They fear the City (presuming they take over the management of the Saddledome) would undercut their bids for these events and drive down the profitability of the new arena (and the whole point of the new arena is so that the Flames can make more money; it has nothing to do with the age of the facility).

This argument is kind of silly on the Flames' part because the Saddledome is inherently not a good concert venue. Major concerts skip Calgary/Saddledome because the structure itself was not designed to have enormous sound riggings hung from the rafters. Where the new arena may face competition from the Saddledome is civic events, minor hockey and other indoor sports (lacrosse, for instance; the Roughnecks may have been in far better financial shape if they could have gotten a better lease from the City rather than having to pay the exorbitant lease the Flames imposed). These are pretty low-margin events though, so again I'm not entirely sure why the Flames are so apparently paranoid about the Saddledome.

[MichaelS]

I thought for sure it was The City that owned it, but not according to this:
http://hockey.ballparks.com/NHL/CalgaryFlames/index.htm

Althought just checking wikipedia, it says owned by The City:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotiabank_Saddledome

So I am pretty sure it is City owned. Maybe someone else can confirm this with a source better than wikipedia?

edit: Thanks 93JC for confirming.

I think the Saddledome could still pose competition to a new arena for some major concerts. Elton John did just play there last Saturday. Yes, some big acts skip us, but many don't.

[Innersoul1]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

European cities do it right, but they have the population density in the area immediately surrounding the stadium to have most people actually walk to the game. Transit is far ahead in Europe too, once again because of the density of the city.

Indeed, the density of most European cities dictate that stadia need to be placed in central locations close to public transportation. Here is a link to the new stadium being built in Valencia spain. It's a pretty amazing stadium but the thread went dead in 2008.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=119962

Turns out that financial difficulties have stalled stadium construction....to bad for such a large project.

[polishavenger]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

I thought for sure it was The City that owned it, but not according to this:
http://hockey.ballparks.com/NHL/CalgaryFlames/index.htm

Althought just checking wikipedia, it says owned by The City:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotiabank_Saddledome

So I am pretty sure it is City owned. Maybe someone else can confirm this with a source better than wikipedia?

edit: Thanks 93JC for confirming.

I think the Saddledome could still pose competition to a new arena for some major concerts. Elton John did just play there last Saturday. Yes, some big acts skip us, but many don't.

What I think would be cool would be to build a row of highrises integrated with the east side of the dome, tear off the roof, remove all the seats and create a tiered outdoor park/garden with a coliseum type seating and performance area.

[kw5150]

I wonder if there is a way that they could keep the rink, fill in the bottom 2 or 3 floors with retail (or something) and then keep the top portion as a convention centre or venue?

They could open up the NW wall and replace it with a window wall with a direct view to the city. The mayor could do speaches while pacing back and forth along the stage area with the city in the background...........

[kw5150]

from: http://www.arcaro.org/tension/album/saddledome01.jpg



The bones of the building are great, but nevermind about opening up the NW wall............lol That may be too much engineering........

Build a geodesic dome over the whole thing and turn it into a biosphere..........

[Airboy]

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...893/story.html


I've posted this on both Arena threads.

[CorporateWhore]

You don't need to be in the design field to realize that the amount of money it would take to convert the Dome into your idea (or any other use) would be pretty damn high.....might as well put that money into a new purpose-built building instead of forcing it into something that would never be ideal. And without consistent usage, that land is too big and valuable to sit empty for most of the year. Let's face it, as soon as there's a new arena, the Dome is a goner.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Airboy

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...893/story.html


I've posted this on both Arena threads.

Good news! I think the money would be better spent on many many other things.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by kw5150

lol, what? Dont be mad just because I said 17th is dead. Are you involved in the design field in anyway? You dont seem to have much of an imagination. Just so you know, you are right, we tend to hit the bong every now and then, but we dont inhale.

Who said anything about being mad? I'm not in the design field, I'm in the common sense field.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by kw5150

from: http://www.arcaro.org/tension/album/saddledome01.jpg



The bones of the building are great, but nevermind about opening up the NW wall............lol That may be too much engineering........

Build a geodesic dome over the whole thing and turn it into a biosphere..........

This is what makes the Dome so valuable to me, it's a pretty unique piece of engineering.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

This is what makes the Dome so valuable to me, it's a pretty unique piece of engineering.

It sure is man!

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by kw5150

They could open up the NW wall and replace it with a window wall with a direct view to the city. The mayor could do speaches while pacing back and forth along the stage area with the city in the background...........

It would be cheaper to demolish the building and build what you are saying than to try and retrofit the dome.

[93JC]

Originally Posted by CorporateWhore

... without consistent usage, that land is too big and valuable to sit empty for most of the year. Let's face it, as soon as there's a new arena, the Dome is a goner.

I think you overestimate the political palatability of demolishing the Saddledome. It would be like tearing down the Calgary Tower. Not quite to that degree, but similar. It's a civic landmark.

[CorporateWhore]

Originally Posted by 93JC

I think you overestimate the political palatability of demolishing the Saddledome. It would be like tearing down the Calgary Tower. Not quite to that degree, but similar. It's a civic landmark.

I don't disagree with you, but at the end of the day someone has to pony up and pay the bills to maintain the thing. My guess is all sentiment will be lost on the owner after the first few million....

It's a civic landmark that unfortunately doesn't have a lot of other realistic uses. Just like with Rexall up north, whatever event/show could go there would be better served by the new arena.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by CorporateWhore

You don't need to be in the design field to realize that the amount of money it would take to convert the Dome into your idea (or any other use) would be pretty damn high.....might as well put that money into a new purpose-built building instead of forcing it into something that would never be ideal. And without consistent usage, that land is too big and valuable to sit empty for most of the year. Let's face it, as soon as there's a new arena, the Dome is a goner.

It was a goddam joke. Thats what we do on here, right? Since, this site is not the final word on everything, I think I have a right to use my creative side once in while and just dream up something ridiculous.

[CorporateWhore]

Originally Posted by kw5150

It was a goddam joke. Thats what we do on here, right? Since, this site is not the final word on everything, I think I have a right to use my creative side once in while and just dream up something ridiculous.

Feel free to put up every silly idea you have, but don't get mad if people respond in kind. This isn't kindergarden, don't expect stickers handed out for creativity.

[93JC]

Originally Posted by CorporateWhore

I don't disagree with you, but at the end of the day someone has to pony up and pay the bills to maintain the thing. My guess is all sentiment will be lost on the owner after the first few million....

It's a civic landmark that unfortunately doesn't have a lot of other realistic uses. Just like with Rexall up north, whatever event/show could go there would be better served by the new arena.

True. I think there are still plenty of uses for the Saddledome beyond Calgary Flames hockey. Vancouver's Pacific Coliseum is still around 15 years after the Canucks moved to GM Place for example.