[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Why would it be attractive?

Because it's right across the street from a major arena/stadium complex. Thought that would have been obvious. Guess not.

[karl262]

Considering city council put $175m towards the new central library while the CRL contributed $70m, this arena/fieldhouse project is actually proportionately less expensive to city council. I see no reason why anyone who's happy with the new library (I'm one of them) could be unhappy with this project, considering the city would pay only $25m more (thats only one peace bridge!) and wind up with a far superior use of that land than currently. This project checks off a lot of boxes.

The only concern I have with this is the increased reliance on the CTrain. Hopefully it can handle lots of people getting out after a game or concert.

Regarding the creosote, get those studies and estimates done ASAP, at least then the reclamation cost discussion can be had with specifics.

[Flabbibulin]

Can any Stamps season ticket holders guess/speculate on how many games, on average, would be better suited indoors because of the weather? Subjective question of course, but I only go to maybe one game a year and really have no idea. Even the midsummer game I went to this year was borderline. My guess would be maybe 50%, but the difference is a lot more people will decide not to go to an outdoor game on a cold/rainy day than an indoor game on a hot day.

Either way, too bad the roof wasn't the biggest concern in this first step- not even close.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Because it's right across the street from a major arena/stadium complex. Thought that would have been obvious. Guess not.

It isn't.

Why would I want to work next to an arena? Very serious question. Why would my office move from the Core to West village because of an arena/fieldhouse?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Regorium

I also don't agree that the only risk is the Flames moving out of town. I think if the facilities only had 60% attendance due to whatever reason (too expensive, flames sucking, no corporate sponsors etc.), then the facility would lose money.

If the ‘event centre’ only has 60% attendance, then the Flames will be leaving town.

If there are no corporate sponsors, it means one of two things: either (1) the entire local economy has collapsed – I don't mean gone into a recession, I mean dried up and blown away – or (2) corporations generally have stopped sponsoring sports teams and entertainment venues. I don't see either of those things in the cards.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cappy

It isn't.

Why would I want to work next to an arena? Very serious question. Why would my office move from the Core to West village because of an arena/fieldhouse?

Perhaps you're not aware of this, but commercial development does not necessarily or exclusively mean offices.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by karl262

The only concern I have with this is the increased reliance on the CTrain. Hopefully it can handle lots of people getting out after a game or concert.

Do people say 'Oh, I am concerned about the Skytrain, with all the people wanting to go to Rogers Arena or BC Place?

Nope. 4 car trains will also help.

[Jacks]

I was distracted at work and only saw 1/2 of that conference, have to watch it again.

The concept seems great to me. The clean up of that site has to be done eventually and the longer we wait the more it will cost. That and the incorporating of the fieldhouse make for a good start when it comes to funding. As for the idea that the city might make more tax money developing that land into other commercial/housing, I doubt that development ever gets off the ground without a major player like the Flames leading the charge getting that cleanup done first.

I have no problem with tax dollars being involved same as I have no problem funding libraries, museums, arts venues, etc. The benefits short and long term to the city are huge.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Do people say 'Oh, I am concerned about the Skytrain, with all the people wanting to go to Rogers Arena or BC Place?

Nope. 4 car trains will also help.

Four car trains, and a lot of people parking throughout downtown. They will be either shorthopping one or two stations, or just walking.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Perhaps you're not aware of this, but commercial development does not necessarily or exclusively mean offices.

who said i work in an office?

Like i said before, commercial development beside a stadium does not guarantee increased revenue for the businesses. One cannot assume that an arena attracts commercial development. This isn't Sim City. There needs to be an incentive that isn't closed to the public for 250 days a year.

[Locke]

At the moment I think the Ticket Tax funding is effectively irrelevant. CSE could get it or the City could front it, it doesnt really matter because the ticket taxes will be paid and so whomever fronts the cash will be able to repay the liability.

The real question is whether or not theres money to be made from fronting the cash.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The sweet spot for a stadium is to have capacity slightly below demand. 30,000 is ideal for the CFL in this city.

True, but it also doesnt make much accommodation for future growth.

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I'd like to see that too. Unfortunately, there are so many ways to doctor those numbers that we're very unlikely ever to see an honest accounting.

If you're in favour of the development (and also a liar), you can discount the cost of city services to the new development and pretend that more of the new tax receipts can go to amortize the project cost than is actually the case.

If you're against the development (and also a liar), you can pretend that the cost of upgrades to Bow Trail and rebuilding the Bow-Crow nightmare should all be charged specifically against the cost of this development, rather than being a separate infrastructure issue that the city would have to pay for in any case.

If I were a forensic accountant, I might have the expertise to go at the raw numbers and figure out what the true costs and benefits of the project are… but if I were a forensic accountant, nobody involved – pro or anti – would be stupid enough to let me see the raw numbers in the first place.

Nobody has asked me, but here's my general opinion so far: The project looks like a good idea. Ken King has a definite point about lower cost if the various facilities are combined. Remediation and road upgrades are going to have to be done in any case and should not be included in the cost of the project. The ‘ticket tax’ is kosher and does not amount to public funding (unless the city subsidizes the interest payments, which I would oppose).

The CRL money raises some yellow flags for me, and I really would like to see CSEC pay a bigger chunk than $200m. At present, the Flames need a new building a lot more than the City of Calgary does, and the city should use that leverage to get the best possible deal on the project. But the project itself, on its merits, likely does deserve to go through.

No doubt both sides will attack me as an idiot for saying all this.

In lieu of the recently disabled 'Thanks:'

Thanks.

[TopChed]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

Can any Stamps season ticket holders guess/speculate on how many games, on average, would be better suited indoors because of the weather? Subjective question of course, but I only go to maybe one game a year and really have no idea. Even the midsummer game I went to this year was borderline. My guess would be maybe 50%, but the difference is a lot more people will decide not to go to an outdoor game on a cold/rainy day than an indoor game on a hot day.

Either way, too bad the roof wasn't the biggest concern in this first step- not even close.

Probably close to 50/50, but then there's also the time of game. When kickoff is at 8 pm, it needs to be a really nice night to stay warm until it's over. I think the TSN scheduling bothers me more than weather usually does.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cappy

who said i work in an office?

You did:

Originally Posted by Cappy

Why would my office move from the Core to West village because of an arena/fieldhouse?

Now as to the rest:

Like i said before, commercial development beside a stadium does not guarantee increased revenue for the businesses. One cannot assume that an arena attracts commercial development. This isn't Sim City. There needs to be an incentive that isn't closed to the public for 250 days a year.

Gee, then it might be a good idea if they had a public venue in the project that was open every day. Like a fieldhouse or something.

[CedarMeter]

Missed the presser. When do they plan on unveiling the rest of the designs (interior) ?

[FaFaFlamey]

Is the football stadium and field house one or are they separate?

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

Can any Stamps season ticket holders guess/speculate on how many games, on average, would be better suited indoors because of the weather?

Almost all playoff games, Western Final games are usually colder than a witch's *** and there is nowhere to get warm except the overcrowded stinky bathrooms.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You did:





Gee, then it might be a good idea if they had a public venue in the project that was open every day. Like a fieldhouse or something.

Oh, the gymnasium. Yes. People will flock to this. Commercial development abounds around the Talisman Centre as we speak!

[You Need a Thneed]

People need to realize that the interior renderings of the feildhouse show the view from the side with the majority of the seating - viewing the side that has far less seating. There appears to be a large wall of glass above the seating on the lower side. Because they are only showing the lower side, it looks a lot more like a large gymnasium then what actually is conceptualized.

What it looks like to me from that one rendering posted is that it might be possible to open up the stadium right up into the arena floor.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

People need to realize that the interior renderings of the feildhouse show the view from the side with the majority of the seating - viewing the side that has far less seating. There appears to be a large wall of glass above the seating on the lower side. Because they are only showing the lower side, it looks a lot more like a large gymnasium then what actually is conceptualized.

What it looks like to me from that one rendering posted is that it might be possible to open up the stadium right up into the arena floor.

I would assume so. They probably want to share concessions, concourses, amenitites, etc in order to cut down on duplication and maximize revenue

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Oh, the gymnasium. Yes. People will flock to this. Commercial development abounds around the Talisman Centre as we speak!

Your sarcasm is duly noted. Your lack of any substantive argument is also duly noted.

Funny, isn't it, how every new arena complex built in the last decade or so comes surrounded by new commercial development, and yet somehow there is no value in putting commercial development near an arena?