[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Red: eastbound
green: westbound
blue: pedestrian
gray: buildings

Figured I'd fix a little bit of Crowchild. I'm sure this isn't the best road design, but just showing something could be done by adding an extra lane to the bridge. This fixes the Memorial crossover pain. Traffic circle may need work, that whole area is a bit of a cluster*, but does maintain the same access as before. Primarily I wanted to get the big roads out of the way and open grand pedestrian passageways. Bow speed limits may need to be reduced for safety given there may be lots of traffic at games.

Not sure if the Pumphouse Theatre was staying, so I assumed it was. If it goes, that opens more space to maybe move the arena further west.

The biggest drawback is no direct transit access to the arena. Walking distance is about 500m. Current Saddledome is ~400m. I think it's worth the sacrifice.

An alternative for Bow Westbound would be to burry it, roughly following the pedestrian blue but I actually don't see a huge point to that unless eastbound is buried as well to kind of open up to Sunalta. Still have the railway though. And would be expensive.

Anyway, have at 'er. I'm sure there are vast improvements to be made, but I get the feeling I put more thought into this (an hour) than KK did into his....

I agree. Northbound Crow could use an extra lane or two.

However, I am confused by how you would implement it. Connecting from the left or right side just before the bridge just screams chaos to me. If you added a lane that connected to let's say the Memorial turnoff on the bridge, that creates a weird weave zone for cars on Crow going on Memorial and cars coming from the stadium going on Crow.
I wonder if a bridge that allows Memorial to connect to Crowchild south directly (without the spinorama around Kensington Road) and a route from the stadium that connects to the far right lane where Memorial currently joins to Crowchild...

and/or... adjusting the area by the University drive turnoff to be a 3 lane rather than 2 lane so that the bottle neck is less...


Actually, strike that. I have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm not a road designer, I just know that area is going to be (because it already currently is) a cluster fata.


And as for transit, I'm sure they could have a loading area contrived that has a temporary shuttle bus for events that takes fans to 17th ave or whatever predetermined location everyone deems acceptable? (Core? Chinook?)

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm wondering what, short of a NFL standard stadium, would wow some people here

Wowing people for a CFL stadium is obviously impossible short making it more expensive with more bells and whistles. Frankly what Hamilton and Winnipeg have would be perfectly acceptable, and both of those cost $210 million or less. When you look at what $200 million looks like for the fieldhouse...I mean I'm sorry but it looks like something from a mid to low level Division I NCAA college team.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

It isn't up to the Flames to move roadways, that is up to the city planners. If the city wants roadways moved that will be for them to draw up and come back at the Flames with.

The roads won't be moved anytime soon, the city made that clear a few years ago when the assessment went over a billion dollars, the flames designed the complex around those crappy designed roadways knowing full well it'll force the city's hand down the road. I can see this turning into one of those construction projects that never end.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Then I get stuck on whether this is the right setup and location for a fieldhouse whose primary purpose is amateur sports. I get the cost savings in sharing centralized facilities with the arena/event center but using the fiedlhouse whenever something is going on at the "event center" is going to be a royal pain, isn't it? Parking, congestion, accessibility all seem like issues. This arena is being built to hopefully host much more than just Flames games and so will hopefully be busy. 1500 parking spots doesn't seem like the solution to this issue.

I think 1500 spots is enough for amateur sports events, but for anything bigger, yeah, it's a bit crazy.

However, I do believe many think the idea is to have more cars parked at places like "The Core" and maybe James Short with individuals taking the train to the venue? Perhaps even, Parking at the Saddledome and train over (if the free fare zone can be extended)?

I like you would definitely like more clarity of why 1500. I guess worst case scenario, one future office building should be a parking tower instead?

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

I think 1500 spots is enough for amateur sports events, but for anything bigger, yeah, it's a bit crazy.

However, I do believe many think the idea is to have more cars parked at places like "The Core" and maybe James Short with individuals taking the train to the venue? Perhaps even, Parking at the Saddledome and train over (if the free fare zone can be extended)?

I like you would definitely like more clarity of why 1500. I guess worst case scenario, one future office building should be a parking tower instead?

Can you imagine the cluster if the Stamps and Flames play on the same evening? Wowee.

[SanFranFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's not like a new arena will have people flying in from Vancouver to go to a Pearl Jam concert, so it's really more of a case of consumer spending that would be more spread out in the city being funneled into the west village area. Good for the West Village, bad for everywhere else.

Well, I know of numerous Calgarians who drove up to Edmonton for the Taylor Swift concerts (), or numerous other ones over the years. That's dollars that are kept in Calgary. Also, I can easily see people coming to Calgary from Saskatchewan for various big name shows, booking hotels, etc.

Not saying this is a huge amount of revenue. It's more of a civic pride issue I think. We aren't some piddly little town, we should be able to draw and host the big acts.

[Sec218]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Wowing people for a CFL stadium is obviously impossible short making it more expensive with more bells and whistles. Frankly what Hamilton and Winnipeg have would be perfectly acceptable, and both of those cost $210 million or less. When you look at what $200 million looks like for the fieldhouse...I mean I'm sorry but it looks like something from a mid to low level Division I NCAA college team.

Do you mean something like this?

[BigFlameDog]

It has to have been stated dozens of times in this thread (And by CSE) that the designs are preliminary renderings and not the final look/style/colour/arrangement/roof etc, etc etc. It is getting tiresome that people, and largely the same people over and over and over again, are still whining about design details.

Can we at least put that to bed??? We are really just talking about concepts and location...no one is picking out window coverings for a while.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Spot on. The city's revenue pot is it's revenue pot. Whether you redirect $240M from "just" the taxpayers in the CRL zone or $240M from the entire tax base, you're redirecting $240M of revenue out of the city's revenue pot.

Now, if the present value of advancing a higher West Village tax base up in time minus the present value of any lost potential tax base from development that gets shifted from elsewhere to the new west village exceeds $240M, then it's worth it. If it doesn't then it's not.

I'm not sure if it is but my gut tells me that it's not and that the CRL will end up being negative value for the city's revenue pot and therefore would be considered a handout of public funds.

I don't think that's entirely true.

A CRL creates extra taxes and provincial funds, that wouldn't otherwise be available. Its not a net gain in the end because they borrow first, but it tops up what it takes away. In theory at least.

I also think you have to consider that a CRL for the west village is going to happen with or without the flames and stamps. The city wants to build up not out, and has long ago accepted that they are going to use tax funds to make that happen. Diverting money that would otherwise still be spent is an issue with all CRLs, not just this one, and not just for the stamps and flames.

I think the city and the flames will have to answer whether this is the right time to play that card, and if using it on the stadium project is an effective way to do it. But that land will get developed with a CRL either way.

[JiriHrdina]

The Pumphouse has a pile of historical protection status - it will be very hard for them to get rid of it.
The Pumphouse had a major renovation project proposed 2 years ago, as part of a grander plan to revitalize the west end. But it never got a lot of political support.
Wonder if this breathes new life into a Pumphouse Reno?
It is a fantastic building.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Can you imagine the cluster if the Stamps and Flames play on the same evening? Wowee.

And miss out on the excellent investing opportunity for vehicle body shops?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Can you imagine the cluster if the Stamps and Flames play on the same evening? Wowee.

I imagine they can manage to avoid this.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Can you imagine the cluster if the Stamps and Flames play on the same evening? Wowee.

Except that will never happen.

[Bingo]

Those in the know on city taxation, CRLs etc ...

I've seen this statement, is it true? (guessing I'll hear it is and it isn't )

"If you are a Calgary citizen, not living in West Village the extent of your contribution to this project is the $200M that the city had planned (unfunded) for the field house."

Because I think that's really key in this argument.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

I don't think that's entirely true.

A CRL creates extra taxes and provincial funds, that wouldn't otherwise be available. Its not a net gain in the end because they borrow first, but it tops up what it takes away. In theory at least.

CRL creates extra taxes because of buildings that wouldn't have been there originally, but the issue is with a 250M CRL, you're looking at a HUGE amount of development to service that loan.

Consider that the Flames suggest that the City owns the entire facility - that's a massive amount of property tax that doesn't get paid. If you look at the map, there's like 10 condo buildings there max. Will that pay enough property tax on top of what is actually needed for basic services? Remember that any shortfalls in funding get taken from general revenue.

[1991 Canadian]

This might be somewhat blasphemous since this project has been in the works for so long, but whats the harm in waiting a few more years.

-The Flames can start instituting a ticket tax / save up for a larger percentage of the project cost
-The Saddledome is a viable venue in the short term
-We can see use the Edmonton Ice District as a case study to see how much it transforms the area
-Selfishly, I want to see us win at least one more Stanley Cup in the dome

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Regorium

CRL creates extra taxes because of buildings that wouldn't have been there originally, but the issue is with a 250M CRL, you're looking at a HUGE amount of development to service that loan.

Consider that the Flames suggest that the City owns the entire facility - that's a massive amount of property tax that doesn't get paid. If you look at the map, there's like 10 condo buildings there max. Will that pay enough property tax on top of what is actually needed for basic services? Remember that any shortfalls in funding get taken from general revenue.

If the condos (or any other business) is on the City owned land they will pay rent, not taxes. Like the Burns building downtown.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Those in the know on city taxation, CRLs etc ...

I've seen this statement, is it true? (guessing I'll hear it is and it isn't )

"If you are a Calgary citizen, not living in West Village the extent of your contribution to this project is the $200M that the city had planned (unfunded) for the field house."

Because I think that's really key in this argument.

This is true based on the current funding proposal.

I think the worry though is that the city will be on the hook for more than what is in the proposal (creosote, infrastructure). Then people will also point out that the city may be fronting the funds for the CRL / ticket tax so although they're getting paid back, it's a bit of grey area.

There's a lot of uncertainty tbh.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

This might be somewhat blasphemous since this project has been in the works for so long, but whats the harm in waiting a few more years.

-The Flames can start instituting a ticket tax / save up for a larger percentage of the project cost
-The Saddledome is a viable venue in the short term
-We can see use the Edmonton Ice District as a case study to see how much it transforms the area
-Selfishly, I want to see us win at least one more Stanley Cup in the dome

Some valid points but the Edmonton project seeks to transform the CBD rather than a blighted area on the outskirts of the CBD. Wouldn't make for a good comparison IMO.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

This might be somewhat blasphemous since this project has been in the works for so long, but whats the harm in waiting a few more years.

-The Flames can start instituting a ticket tax / save up for a larger percentage of the project cost
-The Saddledome is a viable venue in the short term
-We can see use the Edmonton Ice District as a case study to see how much it transforms the area
-Selfishly, I want to see us win at least one more Stanley Cup in the dome

They haven't won any there yet.

But mores seriously, given the present team's window, and the construction timeline I think it's fair to say the best shot at a cup may actually come before they are out of the Dome.