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

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Memorial and Deerfoot are great, but everybody needing to get from Memorial or Deerfoot onto Barlow isn't what I'd call accessible (based on my Google Maps view of the site, I haven't actually driven up by there in years so people can correct me if I'm wrong).

I think any of the issues in that the area could fall under the easy fix category.

You already have 3 vary high volume roads, and space to expand them if needed. the other areas you have 0 or 1 high volume roads with vary limited space.

But as many have said its kind of a moot point, because we all think its going to the greyhound area anyway.

[Muta]

Pretty sure the fieldhouse will not be attached to the stadium in any way.

[Ryan Coke]

Hey Muta, just curious what kind of seating capacity you think the stadium should have for something like this. Not what this one will have necessarily, just what would be a logical number?

[Muta]

I'd guess around 38,000 - 45,000. Room for expansion, too.

[YYC in LAX]

Can someone please explain a "field house?" Is it essentially a practice facility or is there more to it than that?

[Chill Cosby]

I think Sunalta is the perfect choice. Not only is it going to completely revitalise that area, but it's the perfect size and the traffic flow is going to be significantly better than it would be in the fire park area.

I do have a question that perhaps someone can answer. The project is supposed to have an arena, a stadium, and a field house correct?

EDIT: What is the general value of having a field house?

[drewtastic]

Originally Posted by SinceDay1

He also said that CFL football would be in the fieldhouse and capacity would be in the neighbourhood of 27,000.

The benefit of this would be that we wouldn't have to worry about inclement weather in the playoffs. Of course, the outdoor atmosphere during summer games is really special--that'd be tough to lose.

Was there any discussion about the potential for a future MLS team, also to be housed out of the 'fieldhouse'? In a closed-stadium, I think soccer would have a chance to succeed in the city...

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by YYC in LAX

Can someone please explain a "field house?" Is it essentially a practice facility or is there more to it than that?

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Also, regarding the Field House question - a field house is intended to be a practice/development facility, that can house many different types of sports and activities.

Definitely not the same as a stadium.

http://www.calgaryfieldhouse.ca/

This? I'm still reading it too.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

This? I'm still reading it too.

Good thing the question was answered less than five posts above where I asked it.

I was in need of a good face palm.

[Barnes]

Nm

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

EDIT: What is the general value of having a field house?

Off the top of my head:

- community want for it but no funds for it (gift to the City). Helps with the overall optics
- can be used to help justify any potential subsidies/tax breaks The City may give them
- opportunity to keep the area/facility busy when there are no hockey games/football games/events at the facilitity

[SinceDay1]

drewtastic, there was no mention of MLS. It was a Stampeder function so very football centric.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

This? I'm still reading it too.

For the record, Deadmonton have two field houses, with a third on the way

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

For the record, Deadmonton have two field houses, with a third on the way

And we have none?

[Weitz]

So this project is going to be 100% private I guess?

Didn't people say they weren't announcing anything until it is all settled?

I don't see how they could do this, using public money, without some sort of public consultation process.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Weitz

So this project is going to be 100% private I guess?

Didn't people say they weren't announcing anything until it is all settled?

I don't see how they could do this, using public money, without some sort of public consultation process.

You announce the plans first, including financing, then beg for funds. Unless I'm mistaken, that's how it has gone everywhere else

[Madman]

Originally Posted by Weitz

So this project is going to be 100% private I guess?

Didn't people say they weren't announcing anything until it is all settled?

I don't see how they could do this, using public money, without some sort of public consultation process.

There are plenty of other ways to get Government support without actually putting a dime into the physical structure.

As previous posters have pointed out, land costs, road and transit access and soil reclamation are just a few of the very large costs that multiple levels of governments will likely be helping out with.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

You announce the plans first, including financing, then beg for funds. Unless I'm mistaken, that's how it has gone everywhere else

Yah thats what I thought, just wanted to get it cleared up because I thought I read when they announce it will be a done deal.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Madman

There are plenty of other ways to get Government support without actually putting a dime into the physical structure.

As previous posters have pointed out, land costs, road and transit access and soil reclamation are just a few of the very large costs that multiple levels of governments will likely be helping out with.

And these are the kind of subsidies I support. A land swap or transfer is easy, it may be a loss of potential revenue, but the city wouldn't lose the land at the end of it anyway.

Even if it is a private facility, it will still be the main entertainment hub for the city and where the traffic will go, so whether it is an area that needed the improvement anyway or will need improvement because of the project, it is still the city's sphere of influence to do so, provided it is somewhere that is a benefit to the city.

Soil reclamation is a big ask for a business that had no involvement in the contamination itself. This is what makes the land so undesirable to develop and therefore loses potential revenue for the city on that alone. If public money is what it takes for a project that would fix the problem that has turned an otherwise prime area for development into a blight, then it is definitely worth public investment to drive that.

Property tax breaks to drive development in a certain area is also good, especially if it is to be a catalyst for other development (sacrifice the tax revenue from one building if it will help increase overall tax revenue by 'producing' other buildings).

IMO, these are acceptable forms of public subsidy. They help facilitate construction without actually paying for construction; the key difference being that it is either a loss of potential money (which isn't real) or is something needed for any sort of development, not just an arena, which means it needs to be done anyway.

[Muta]

Field houses usually have some sort of field / rink / playing surface for practice. They can be combined with other sport, health and wellness facilities. For all intents and purposes, you could call them a recreation centre and most people wouldn't notice the difference.

A rec centre / fieldhouse for the downtown west communities would be terrific.

Okotoks just built one for indoor soccer. Here's a picture: