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

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I don't think it's as polarizing as you think. If you held a poll amongst CP members, I would guess that the vast majority of people on here support a new arena, but lean towards minimal public funds to pay for it.

It could actually be a very seamless process for the Flames. All they need to do is buy some land, hire an architect and a construction company, follow the development procedures that everyone else has to, and build the damn thing. The only reason it's complicated, is because they don't want to pay for it. But it's not like they need our or the City's blessing to go ahead!

Agreed. Also, we have the benefit of having seen what happened in Edmonton.

If you polled people I think you'd find that most people think that the taxpayers of Edmonton are taking their arena up the poop-chute and Calgarians, Flames fans or otherwise, arent all that keen on following suit.

[Enoch Root]

I wasn't suggesting they should move it out of town. I was suggesting that the option of having alternatives should be enough to wake city hall up.

It is hilarious to read comments from people saying how horrible or stupid it would be to have the arena outside of downtown, from the same people who are saying the city shouldn't help at all with the project.

Everybody wants it, but no one wants to help pay for it even though they admit to it being beneficial.

As EE said, it really is a polarizing event.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The only reason it's complicated, is because they don't want to pay for it. But it's not like they need our or the City's blessing to go ahead!

Well of course they would want to be afforded what at the very least what lesser cities like Edmonton and Winnipeg have afforded their sports teams. Put yourself in the Flames ownership position and ask yourself why would you foot the entire bill when other owners don't have to. These guys didn't get rich because they are stupid although I have to give it to Katz for being an overachiever.

[Weitz]

Why would you guys want a new arena? Serious question here.

It seems like the average user on here may not go to a lot of games (I may be wrong). A new arena is simply going to make the games much more expensive to go to? So why do you need a new one?

I feel like if the concourses in the saddledome could be made bigger through renovations there would be no need for a new arena outside of management wanting to make more money.

I probably go to 25 games a year, paying for probably 3-4 games. I could see if tickets jump a lot in price the amount I would pay for would drop to 0.

[saillias]

It's old and crowded and ugly. And needs moar bathrooms.

Any sort of plan to just renovate the dome probably nixed after the 2013 flood.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Why would you guys want a new arena? Serious question here.

It seems like the average user on here may not go to a lot of games (I may be wrong). A new arena is simply going to make the games much more expensive to go to? So why do you need a new one?

I feel like if the concourses in the saddledome could be made bigger through renovations there would be no need for a new arena outside of management wanting to make more money.

Aside from its primary reason as a host for sporting and entertainment events, arenas, stadia and their associated districts can spawn significant economic growth and development for that specific location in a multitude of ways.

Renovations are primarily band-aid solutions when it comes to older stadia. There's still many infrastructure issues that would still exist.

Plus, if you think you can renovate the concourse at the Saddledome at a reasonable price, think again. To expand that concourse, renovate and expand washrooms and other amenities, upgrade seating and re-design the roof to carry more snow and precipitation loads, I would think (based on my design and construction background) that could run into the $100M mark.

You might as well pursue a brand new facility at that cost.

[Erick Estrada]

As bad as the Dome is McMahon is way more of a painful experience with any attendance over 25k. You have to go to the washroom during the game or forget it and the concessions are a disgrace. Honestly I would get season tickets but I can only take that stadium in small doses.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I wasn't suggesting they should move it out of town. I was suggesting that the option of having alternatives should be enough to wake city hall up.

No it wouldn't, City Hall would dare them to build it outside the city. It would be a disaster for the Flames to not have the arena within shouting distance of downtown. They'd be better off staying at the Dome. So if the Flames want to threaten to build it in Balzac, City Hall will have a good laugh and wish them the best of luck. It's pretty much an empty threat "Don't pay for our arena and we'll go to a worse location that will!".

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well of course they would want to be afforded what at the very least what lesser cities like Edmonton and Winnipeg have afforded their sports teams. Put yourself in the Flames ownership position and ask yourself why would you foot the entire bill when other owners don't have to. These guys didn't get rich because they are stupid although I have to give it to Katz for being an overachiever.

And as I already mentioned, because Winnipeg and Edmonton are both no good and were idiotic, we should be too? Or maybe we should be like the actually good cities like Montreal and Toronto and Vancouver whose arenas were 100% privately financed.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well of course they would want to be afforded what at the very least what lesser cities like Edmonton and Winnipeg have afforded their sports teams. Put yourself in the Flames ownership position and ask yourself why would you foot the entire bill when other owners don't have to. These guys didn't get rich because they are stupid although I have to give it to Katz for being an overachiever.

Sure, I too would try to get someone else to pay part of my bill if I was an owner and there were plenty of people willing to put up a fight on my behalf. I don't blame them for trying...just like I don't blame the city for saying no thanks.

What I was saying is that this "controversy" is pretty self-manufactured. There would be very little here to argue about if they went ahead with this in the same way as every other private developer goes about putting up a building. How much controversy was there in Vancouver?

[Zarley]

Saddledome tip: If you use the larger washrooms at the southwest or northeast corners of the concourse, there is rarely a queue and if there is it moves quickly. Avoid the NW and SE washrooms.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Sure, I too would try to get someone else to pay part of my bill if I was an owner and there were plenty of people willing to put up a fight on my behalf. I don't blame them for trying...just like I don't blame the city for saying no thanks.

What I was saying is that this "controversy" is pretty self-manufactured. There would be very little here to argue about if they went ahead with this in the same way as every other private developer goes about putting up a building. How much controversy was there in Vancouver?

It is manufactured by the media, and no one else.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

No it wouldn't, City Hall would dare them to build it outside the city. It would be a disaster for the Flames to not have the arena within shouting distance of downtown. They'd be better off staying at the Dome. So if the Flames want to threaten to build it in Balzac, City Hall will have a good laugh and wish them the best of luck. It's pretty much an empty threat "Don't pay for our arena and we'll go to a worse location that will!".



And as I already mentioned, because Winnipeg and Edmonton are both no good and were idiotic, we should be too? Or maybe we should be like the actually good cities like Montreal and Toronto and Vancouver whose arenas were 100% privately financed.

Depends. A place like Balzac might be motivated to put together a pretty enticing deal for them.

Its a negotiation. It amazes me how black and white people can be.

The Flames' ownership wants an awesome arena in downtown Calgary just as much as everyone else. But if the city acts like children, there are options.

If you think hockey fans wouldn't go to Balzac (or Okatoks), well I think you're wrong.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

It is manufactured by the media, and no one else.

Well, it was partially manufactured by Ken King when he said more info would be coming out in a couple of months...several years ago.

The fact that the Flames continue to talk about it despite not publicly revealing anything has created the controversy over public dollars as it stands to reason the funding is the only thing holding back development of the new arena. This is all but confirmed by city hall who have said they have not seen any plans for a proposed development.

So, ya. If you're going to build an arena, build an arena, if you aren't, well, stop talking about it.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I don't think it's as polarizing as you think. If you held a poll amongst CP members, I would guess that the vast majority of people on here support a new arena, but lean towards minimal public funds to pay for it.

It could actually be a very seamless process for the Flames. All they need to do is buy some land, hire an architect and a construction company, follow the development procedures that everyone else has to, and build the damn thing. The only reason it's complicated, is because they don't want to pay for it. But it's not like they need our or the City's blessing to go ahead!

I don't think it is that simple.

If it's really 2 facilities (or more) thats a huge, huge project. The highest profile since the Olympics and maybe ever for Calgary.

There will be big big infrastructure implications for the city.
And there is no way the mayor and his crew would sit dispassionately on the sidelines for that big a deal.

Either the flames find a way to make the mayor look good and onside or they will still be fighting over the cost of street lights and road signs a decade from now. From the herald article it sounds like they are already pissed and the flames may already be pushing that rock uphill.

I think the flames are making a mistake if they think they can be the owners of this project. Just like in Edmonton, where it was dead until it became Mandels legacy project and not Katz/the oilers.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

It is manufactured by the media, and no one else.

The media always like to stir things up, but the Flames have been laying the groundwork for "debate" for a while now. Just read these comments by Burke from a few months ago.

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/...ng-home-arena/

These comments try to make it seem like there's some great controversy about needing a new building, and act like there is some great force trying to prevent it. The Flames were trying to create discussion, and to get people on their side before anyone even knew of any details.

Nobody is stopping them from building an arena. Nobody is saying it's a bad idea. So why the need for strong words to fight for it? If you feel so strongly about your building needing to be replaced, it shouldn't take 7 years to make it happen. You walk down to City Hall and file a development permit application!

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

I don't think it is that simple.

If it's really 2 facilities (or more) thats a huge, huge project. The highest profile since the Olympics and maybe ever for Calgary.

There will be big big infrastructure implications for the city.

My post was obviously simplifying the process, but it wouldn't take 7 years to get to this stage if the Flames just wanted the City to help out with surrounding infrastructure or jump hoops with permits. Nenshi himself has said he'd be more than happy to expedite the process to make things happen.

It's not that simple, but come on, it's also not rocket surgery. Entire Olympics have been built in less time than it has taken the Flames to put out a single official proposal.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Depends. A place like Balzac might be motivated to put together a pretty enticing deal for them.

Its a negotiation. It amazes me how black and white people can be.

The Flames' ownership wants an awesome arena in downtown Calgary just as much as everyone else. But if the city acts like children, there are options.

If you think hockey fans wouldn't go to Balzac (or Okatoks), well I think you're wrong.

I'm sure the few hundred residents of Balzac could prepare an enticing offer indeed. Probably tie into the go-cart track somehow. The flames would be on their own building outside the city. It's a nonsensical argument. Any legitimate threat would Have to include another city, and even that is hollow.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Depends. A place like Balzac might be motivated to put together a pretty enticing deal for them.

Its a negotiation. It amazes me how black and white people can be.

The Flames' ownership wants an awesome arena in downtown Calgary just as much as everyone else. But if the city acts like children, there are options.

If you think hockey fans wouldn't go to Balzac (or Okatoks), well I think you're wrong.

But that's the thing, it'd be suicidal to the success of the arena and by extension the team to have an arena 30 minutes from Downtown, and a 15 minute drive from the closest train station. Hell if they did that the Dome would be wise to renovate and they could steal so many concerts from the new arena. Similar capacities but one is central downtown and the other in the suburbs. The roof won't matter so much then.

The NFL for instance has the hammer and uses it consistently and is doing it right now. St. Louis or San Diego, or both, will build a new stadium with public money or that team (or possibly both even) will move to Los Angeles. The NFL has gotten a new stadium out of Minnesota already, and may get up to 4 new ones due to relocation threats. Impressive to say the least, but they have leverage, Los Angeles (and apparently San Antonio) is a real threat. Threatening to build an arena in Balzac? Not a threat at all, the Flames owners and the fans would be the biggest losers there by a very wide margin.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

So, ya. If you're going to build an arena, build an arena, if you aren't, well, stop talking about it.

I'm pretty sure the flood set things back by a couple years. But besides that, things take time and despite the Flames not making any kind of formal announcement, there are still people complaining about the timeline.

Originally Posted by Table 5

It's not that simple, but come on, it's also not rocket surgery.

Rocket surgery does sound very complex.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

And as I already mentioned, because Winnipeg and Edmonton are both no good and were idiotic, we should be too? Or maybe we should be like the actually good cities like Montreal and Toronto and Vancouver whose arenas were 100% privately financed.

What pains have Winnipeg taxpayers incurred since the erection of the stadium and arena? Seriously how many people's lives have been affected negatively? Maybe people like you are idiotic for not wanting your city to have good things? What are you so afraid of? Taxes going up? Well guess what they have been going up every year for years now. For me I plan on sticking around for a while and I take pride in my city. It's embarrassing that this city will soon have the worst sports facilities in Canada.