Flames to announce plans to announce arena plans in the... future...

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Why?

Do you have something against Calgary's ranching and oil history and traditions?

Stetson hats have eff-all to do with Calgary genuine ranching and oil history tradition. And a lot of cities with traditions far, far longer than Calgary's don't seem to feel a need to hang their whole civic image on their past. Should Munich design its stadiums to look like beer steins? Or showcase that they're a modern, forward-looking city?

[T@T]

Originally Posted by #-3

If you look at the speculated layout, on the map i posted above. they would have to,

knock down GLS Chev, Hyatt, Gray Hound, and some light retail, south of the tracks.

Move Bow Trail

And Rebuild the 14th Over pass.

It would not need to impact the armory, millennium park, or the old science center at all. I could actually see the arena doing something positive for those 3 buildings long term.


edit: and I guess my map had them knocking down the pumphouse theater for parking, but I guess they wouldnt need to do that

It's easy if you say it fast but getting GSL,Hyatt and Greyhound to move would not be an easy task.

Stupid location anyway IMO, without a hockey game the area is a complete nightmare now as far as traffic goes.

There are two or three locations that make sense and all of them are east of center st.

[ExiledFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by T@T

It's easy if you say it fast but getting GSL,Hyatt and Greyhound to move would not be an easy task.

Stupid location anyway IMO, without a hockey game the area is a complete nightmare now as far as traffic goes.

There are two or three locations that make sense and all of them are east of center st.

KK has been quoted as saying the new complex will be near downtown in the inner city. This leaves 2 options:
-West Village
-Railtown area north of the Stampede grounds

West Village obviously needs a lot of work. But we are quickly running out of inner city land and West Village will need to be redeveloped eventually, and this could kick start things.

All of the insider info I've seen here has pointed in the direction of WV.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by T@T

It's easy if you say it fast but getting GSL,Hyatt and Greyhound to move would not be an easy task.

Stupid location anyway IMO, without a hockey game the area is a complete nightmare now as far as traffic goes.

There are two or three locations that make sense and all of them are east of center st.

City owns all these lands. Current users lease from the City. Only thing City doesn't own around here is the Mercedes dealership.

[J epworth]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Stetson hats have eff-all to do with Calgary genuine ranching and oil history tradition. And a lot of cities with traditions far, far longer than Calgary's don't seem to feel a need to hang their whole civic image on their past. Should Munich design its stadiums to look like beer steins? Or showcase that they're a modern, forward-looking city?

I don't know, it kind of looks like a sideways beer stein.

[J epworth]

Originally Posted by Bunk

City owns all these lands. Current users lease from the City. Only thing City doesn't own around here is the Mercedes dealership.

Just a thought, but would public funds towards an arena development there be acceptable to city council if it equals the price of the land needed to be bought? AKA Flames buy the land from the city, and the city pitches in that amount of money into the arena development? Really don't have any idea how stuff like that works so don't know if that would be an option or not (Is it even a significant amount of money?).

[firecenter]

Originally Posted by SinceDay1

I attended a Stampeder season ticket holder luncheon this past Tuesday. Gordon Norrie, the Stampeder's president was in attendance. During the Q&A session, there was concern from a STH that the Stamps would play second fiddle to the Flames and have to wait for a McMahon replacement until after a new arena would be built. Norrie commented that a joint facility would be built comprised of 3 multipurpose components: an arena, an outdoor facility and what he described as a fieldhouse. He could not comment on location other than it would be "centrally" located. An announcement is very likely to be made by the new year. The Flames are waiting to have the deal done before making it public to avoid the mess the Oiler's made of their arena announcement. I later had the opportunity to question him directly as he ended up sitting at our table. He had no specifics about the configuration/capacity of the new arena. He did say the entire complex would have a footprint of approximately 25 acres. Parking would likely be "vertical" and would be partially underground and partially above ground. I took it to mean parkade style. Not crazy about that idea. He also said that CFL football would be in the fieldhouse and capacity would be in the neighbourhood of 27,000.

CFL football in the fieldhouse??

Perhaps you misunderstood, and the outdoor component is the stadium, and the fieldhouse the practice facility, ala EDM??

[SinceDay1]

It's possible I got it wrong but I don't think so. He was quite specific when he made the comment about CFL football in the field house. I guess we'll know for sure when the announcement is made.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Why?

Do you have something against Calgary's ranching and oil history and traditions?

London didn't make Wembley Stadium look like a tudor-style house. Beijing didn't make make their Olympic stadium look like a pagoda. There are cities with 50x time the history of Calgary that aren't afraid to build things that are future-facing.

In the long run, the whole "cowboy" thing will be just a sliver in time for this city (and honestly, Calgary was never the wild west the Stampede would like you to believe). Do we really have to stuck in that mode for the rest of eternity? Nothing wrong with appreciating that part of our past, but that shouldn't define who we are with everything going forward.

Look at the Saddledome...it has a nod to the past with it's shape (that may or may not have been the intention), but the materials and aesthetics don't look old or westerny. It was state of the art at the time, and looked to the future. It's time to do the same.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by J epworth kendal

Just a thought, but would public funds towards an arena development there be acceptable to city council if it equals the price of the land needed to be bought? AKA Flames buy the land from the city, and the city pitches in that amount of money into the arena development? Really don't have any idea how stuff like that works so don't know if that would be an option or not (Is it even a significant amount of money?).

City leases land to the Flames at $1.00 per year. Just a guess.

[taffeyb]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Calgary is a rich city so even if there's government money for a new arena there might be PSLs; but if there's no government money PSL's are a lock. Owners will be passing off the majority of the cost of a new arena to someone, lord knows they won't be paying for it all, they didn't get to be rich by giving their money away.

It's pretty funny who the two teams in the NHL who currently have PSLs: Predictably, Toronto. Not predictably? Columbus. If I had to guess right now without having a clue about government involvement, I'd say there's a 40% chance a new arena here will have PSLs. Fans will say they hate it but more than enough rich fans will fork the cash over. Sucks for the average fan but they aren't building a new arena with the average fan in mind, they're building it for more luxury boxes and to charge more for tickets (and have fewer seats, for more luxury boxes).

I hope that they don't do PSL. If they do, would it include rights to all events including concerts? Do you have to buy season tickets or are the PSL's effectively a right of first refusal for any and all tickets...

[T@T]

So if Gordon Norrie is telling the truth where near downtown is 25 acres (over a million sq ft of land)?

I'm no math freak but no way this is where GSL/Greyhound sits, you would need to take out Bow tr and everything south to 10th ave and likely get rid of Renfrew dodge as well.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by T@T

I'm no math freak but no way this is where GSL/Greyhound sits, you would need to take out Bow tr and everything south to 10th ave and likely get rid of Renfrew dodge as well.

Multiple people in the know have said this is where it's going. Yes it's going to take up a lot of area, and yes, lots of existing things will have to go or be altered. It's definitely not going to be a cheap or easy project to pull off.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by T@T

So if Gordon Norrie is telling the truth where near downtown is 25 acres (over a million sq ft of land)?

I'm no math freak but no way this is where GSL/Greyhound sits, you would need to take out Bow tr and everything south to 10th ave and likely get rid of Renfrew dodge as well.

Yes, Renfrew will be part of this as well. The only thing west of 14th Street that will likely survive is the Pumphouse Theatre, and it will likely be integrated into the overall development. Westbound Bow Trail will also likely be realigned to open up the riverfront.

Those things are all part of the city's long term West Village redevelopment plan that was initially approved when Bronconnier was still mayor.

[getbak]

Using the measurement tool on Google Maps, a straight line from 14th Street to the Pumphouse is about 1km. From the riverbank to the train track is about 250m.

0.25km² is 61.78 acres.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Multiple people in the know have said this is where it's going. Yes it's going to take up a lot of area, and yes, lots of existing things will have to go or be altered.

Like the railroad? or local business like the landmark GSL dealer and the friken Bus depot?

Sorry but who are these people?, I know multiple people "in the know" as well, as tight lipped as they are not one says that area will work or seems to be a consideration.

The two mentioned has and always has been.

1) railway tracks south to 14th ave between Olympic way and 6 st east.

2) Firepark

My take on both.


1) would be costly and would take out 12th ave (not good for traffic) not sure if it's close to the 25 acres Mr Norrie talked about.

2) Firepark because the land is owned by one of the flames owners(Markin) big, close to downtown with LRT and traffic access.

[firecenter]

Originally Posted by T@T

Like the railroad? or local business like the landmark GSL dealer and the friken Bus depot?

Sorry but who are these people?, I know multiple people "in the know" as well, as tight lipped as they are not one says that area will work or seems to be a consideration.

The two mentioned has and always has been.

1) railway tracks south to 14th ave between Olympic way and 6 st east.

2) Firepark

My take on both.


1) would be costly and would take out 12th ave (not good for traffic) not sure if it's close to the 25 acres Mr Norrie talked about.

2) Firepark because the land is owned by one of the flames owners(Markin) big, close to downtown with LRT and traffic access.

Firepark doesnt provide the space or appropriate infrastructure for a development like this. Zero opportunity for a ROI for the owners at this location.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by firecenter

Firepark doesnt provide the space or appropriate infrastructure for a development like this. Zero opportunity for a ROI for the owners at this location.

Sorry can you explain? It's 5 minutes from downtown, it's on the LRT line,next to Deerfoot and it's about 25 acres big. and the "drum roll please" is that a flames owner owns the land!

It's 2 minutes from the Zoo FFS, is that a bad location?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by T@T

Sorry can you explain? It's 5 minutes from downtown, it's on the LRT line,next to Deerfoot and it's about 25 acres big. and the "drum roll please" is that a flames owner owns the land!

It's 2 minutes from the Zoo FFS, is that a bad location?

It's a bad location, yes. Not the worst case scenario, but not ideal, either. I know it's seems close, but in terms of that perfect city vision of having a downtown arena complex where people spill out of the game infiltrate downtown, giving it nightlife, that location fails.

To create that perfect after game "spill" into the downtown you need people to be able to walk from the arena to downtown. Yes, it's right on the C train line, but can you imagine people walking from firepark to downtown? No one would do it.

So therefore, that'd mean 100% of the hockey/football game "spill" into downtown would have to take transit, a taxi or drive to go downtown. And as easy as it sounds to do one of those things, you're going to cause a large portion of the casual "lets walk over to bar X and grab a pint" crowd to say "**** it, let's just go somewhere closer to home, I don't want to drive/hop on the ctrain/pay a taxi, etc".

[#-3]

Originally Posted by firecenter

Firepark doesnt provide the space or appropriate infrastructure for a development like this. Zero opportunity for a ROI for the owners at this location.

Fire park, would provide the space, the tenants displaced would be allot cheaper than the ones at either of the other suggested locations.

It is also just as accessible to the LRT as either of the other options.

and WAY! more accessible for roadways.

The problem with Fire Park is they have been clear they want a vibrant down town location. And Fire Park is not that.

The current McMahon & Balzac are out for the same reasons.

I don't think it will be North of the current building because of the comments that it will be transit accessible, and transit to that area is probably at least 5 years further away than an arena.

And its pretty much been stated returning to stampede park is out.

So that leaves Sunalta. If they only need 25 acres for their development, it will be allot more vertical than I expect, so Sunalta make even more sense. With Land being the biggest concern for that location and the Train Station already being Elevated.