The Stampede would have to relinquish some control (revenue) though. From what I understand, eveything at the Dome has to go through them including the food services...
Not at all true. The only thing is parking, but it's hard to consider that too much of a stumbling block when their new proposal doesn't include any.
Of course there are some other minor issues here and there, but no more than would be expected from two major events facilities located in uber-close proximity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Flames ownership is looking for development opportunities around the new facility, not just getting a new arena or football stadium. The real money is in the real estate around these new buildings and the redevelopment opportunities that will exist once these anchor tenants are established. With the Stampede board owning most of the land around the grounds it is highly unlikely the Flames have any interest in building anywhere near the grounds.
This. Wonder how they roped Brett Wilson into pumping the project's tires in crappy youtube videos right away? (Hint - he's involved in real estate). It's a lot like building a ski resort - the resort operation may or may not break even, but the real-estate around it makes the big money.
I have barely posted anything with regards to this project.
All I can say at this point, is that I went from being "Super Duper Excited" to "screw it, perhaps the Saddledome isn't all that bad... new paint will suffice".
.
I'm with you on that one. I don't even care anymore.
This. Wonder how they roped Brett Wilson into pumping the project's tires in crappy youtube videos right away? (Hint - he's involved in real estate). It's a lot like building a ski resort - the resort operation may or may not break even, but the real-estate around it makes the big money.
What is also lost on most people is the west end needs something that will draw people in. The district has been a dump for as long as I can remember, which is back to the Alberta Wheat Pool building being the tallest building in the city. With the contamination it will require a lot of work, which is why it has been vacant for 50 years. A public works project is going to have to drive the cleanup and revitalization of this area as no one has stepped up and bothered with it in that time. People can talk about valuable the land is, but if it had the value people are suggesting someone would have jumped in an ate the cleanup cost. The best way to generate the development around this district is to establish an anchor that will draw people consistently to area. This is what this plan proposes. Cry all you want about bad renderings and poor presentation, but it is a high concept at the moment. As a concept I like where they are going. I see great value to Calgary and an opportunity to finally get the west end development kicked off.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
What is also lost on most people is the west end needs something that will draw people in. The district has been a dump for as long as I can remember, which is back to the Alberta Wheat Pool building being the tallest building in the city. With the contamination it will require a lot of work, which is why it has been vacant for 50 years. A public works project is going to have to drive the cleanup and revitalization of this area as no one has stepped up and bothered with it in that time. People can talk about valuable the land is, but if it had the value people are suggesting someone would have jumped in an ate the cleanup cost. The best way to generate the development around this district is to establish an anchor that will draw people consistently to area. This is what this plan proposes. Cry all you want about bad renderings and poor presentation, but it is a high concept at the moment. As a concept I like where they are going. I see great value to Calgary and an opportunity to finally get the west end development kicked off.
It's been said time and again on here and in studies that arena projects are not good community anchors.
What does East Village have that made it such a great spot for redevelopment besides being close to the river and DT. that is really all West Village needs once the area is started.
You even stated as much in your previous post about the Stampede wanting to develop their area and not have an arena/stadium taking up the space. Why should WV be any different?
Those new "renderings" make the project look even worse. Still can't believe how badly they are botching this. Looks like a very depressing and sterile facility devoid of any exciting public spaces, plazas, and gathering spaces. The river is cut off from the stadium and the C-Train overpass will ensure the street level remains bare. Funny how they have not shown a single rendering of what the arena part will look like. That is a huge mistake as the driving force behind this whole concept is a new arena.
In my opinion, this "field house/stadium" idea will become a huge regret if they go with it. Poor renderings aside, I am of the belief that the facility will be a little of everything but a lot of nothing. It won't excel as a football/soccer stadium and it won't excel as a field house. I'm envisioning a giant gymnasium with high school roll out bleachers that will suck the life out of Stampeder's games. It's been proven time and time again that these "multi-sport" facilities and stadiums do not work. Look at all the stadiums and facilities in the states that have been imploded in favor of sport specific facilities. I can't think of any facility in the world that has successfully done what the Flames propose. I know they are not the final drawings, but what they have shown leaves me with little faith they can execute this properly.
I would rather they take extra time (God knows they already have), and do each facility separate and properly. I'd build the arena first along the lines of Edmonton's new arena. Spend what needs to be spent. The owners should be able to pay for the arena on their own and with the ticket tax. Once the arena is complete and the economy has rebounded, I'd proceed on a new football stadium. Something along the lines of Winnipeg or Saskatchewan. A mini retractable roof stadium would be nice, but that is a pipe dream. This building would have to be publicly funded most likely. I'd leave the field house for last. Scale it down and build a moderate facility for a 1/4 of the proposed price. Just my 2 cents.
__________________
Stanley Cup - 1989
Clarence Campbell Trophy - 1986, 1989, 2004
Presidents Trophy - 1988, 1989
William Jennings Trophy - 2006
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to The Familia For This Useful Post:
It's been said time and again on here and in studies that arena projects are not good community anchors.
What does East Village have that made it such a great spot for redevelopment besides being close to the river and DT. that is really all West Village needs once the area is started.
You even stated as much in your previous post about the Stampede wanting to develop their area and not have an arena/stadium taking up the space. Why should WV be any different?
And yet the real life examples fly in the face of those opinions.
Look at what is happening around the new arena in Edmonton.
Look at what the arena did for the surrounding area in downtown WPG.
Look at what the new arena is doing in Detroit.
People hate on the location in Glendale Arizona, but compare the area today to what was there prior (in was mostly fields).
Development begets development. WV is a barren eyesore right now. Arguing that the project would do nothing for the area is flat out folly.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
I like the 'of course we have to figure out access/egress and parking, but just trust us...we will'
They mention 2400 parking spots; as "plenty" of parking. Does anybody know how many parking spots are available now; both in the Flames' parkade as well as the Stampede Grounds?
I seem to recall around 5000, but I don't have any numbers to back that up. That could be an issue, people don't want to go 2-4 km back to work to get their car; especially after an 8:00 Wednesday game that ended closer to 11:00.
And yet the real life examples fly in the face of those opinions.
Look at what is happening around the new arena in Edmonton.
Look at what the arena did for the surrounding area in downtown WPG.
Look at what the new arena is doing in Detroit.
People hate on the location in Glendale Arizona, but compare the area today to what was there prior (in was mostly fields).
Development begets development. WV is a barren eyesore right now. Arguing that the project would do nothing for the area is flat out folly.
Edmonton's is being built downtown, and Katz is spending hundreds of millions on the property around it. The demand was there for that type of development in Edmonton, regardless of the stadium. Why would an oil company want their office next to a stadium outside of the fact that its downtown.
I don't want to get into the sources of the other ones mentioned (you forgot the tries and true Columbus and LA examples ;-)) as they have been discussed at length here.
Development begets development. Why does that have to be an arena?
WV will be fine as soon as CMLC takes care of the development of East Village. It's not news that the City wants to hold off on WV until the East Village is built up.
"330 Million dollar saved by not separating stadium, arena and event centre"
That is misleading as no one is talking about building an event centre as a separate building.
Also I don't understand what they mean when they say amazing event centre. They have not outlined that at all, expect for saying it's amazing.
I believe the event centre and the arena are the same thing.
The $330 million in savings represents the synergies gained by building a combined facility rather than a separate stadium and arena, both of which are required in the near term. Regardless of ultimate location, it makes sense to combine the facilities.
I believe the event centre and the arena are the same thing.
The $330 million in savings represents the synergies gained by building a combined facility rather than a separate stadium and arena, both of which are required in the near term. Regardless of ultimate location, it makes sense to combine the facilities.
King notes in his video that the "synergies" are created by not building the arena, fieldhouse, and event centre as opposed to building all three.
The 300 million figure is very misleading.
If the arena is the event centre, why wouldnt it be the same if the arena was built separately.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cappy For This Useful Post:
Edmonton's is being built downtown, and Katz is spending hundreds of millions on the property around it. The demand was there for that type of development in Edmonton, regardless of the stadium. Why would an oil company want their office next to a stadium outside of the fact that its downtown.
I don't want to get into the sources of the other ones mentioned (you forgot the tries and true Columbus and LA examples ;-)) as they have been discussed at length here.
Development begets development. Why does that have to be an arena?
WV will be fine as soon as CMLC takes care of the development of East Village. It's not news that the City wants to hold off on WV until the East Village is built up.
Doesn't have to be an arena. But an arena works, just like any major development would (which is the point, with respect to the stimulation argument).
And the 'WV will be fine once EV is done' argument is a guess, at best. The fact of the matter is that WV, despite it's fantastic location, has never been developed. And it has a massive headwind against it being developed. It needs a catalyst.
An arena is not the only possible catalyst, obviously. But attempting to argue that it wouldn't be a good catalyst is really reaching, IMO.
Doesn't have to be an arena. But an arena works, just like any major development would (which is the point, with respect to the stimulation argument).
And the 'WV will be fine once EV is done' argument is a guess, at best. The fact of the matter is that WV, despite it's fantastic location, has never been developed. And it has a massive headwind against it being developed. It needs a catalyst.
An arena is not the only possible catalyst, obviously. But attempting to argue that it wouldn't be a good catalyst is really reaching, IMO.
Of course it could be an arena, but why should taxpayers put in over 400 million to make a estimated catalyst when the same thing could be done with far less. Opportunity cost is the issue here more than anything.
The catalyst needed is the infrastructure to be built in the area. That will come when the city determines the area is needed. Its not needed right now.
It's not reaching at all. Look at all the studies mentioned in these threads. they all say the same thing.
Of course it could be an arena, but why should taxpayers put in over 400 million to make a estimated catalyst when the same thing could be done with far less. Opportunity cost is the issue here more than anything.
The catalyst needed is the infrastructure to be built in the area. That will come when the city determines the area is needed. Its not needed right now.
What does 'not needed' even mean? Developing WV would be great for the city.
And saying development will come when the infrastructure comes is disingenuous and not based on anything. There is a massive headwind to developing the area. No development will come until a large enough catalyst emerges that can bridge the problem of getting the cleanup financed.
The city will not do this itself. The economics don't make sense for residential towers to pay for the cleanup. And governments aren't going to do it on behalf of residential developers.
Simply arguing 'it'll happen on its own' is ignoring the issues.
But we're just rehashing the same arguments that have been covered in this thread dozens of times already, so that's enough for me.
Also I don't understand what they mean when they say amazing event centre. They have not outlined that at all, expect for saying it's amazing.
Trust me - Calgary doesn't win anymore. We are going to make Calgary great again. We are going to build an arena, and Nenshi is going to pay for it. We are going to hire the best people and make the best deals. Calgary loves us.
Last edited by troutman; 03-18-2016 at 02:20 PM.
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Of course it could be an arena, but why should taxpayers put in over 400 million to make a estimated catalyst when the same thing could be done with far less. Opportunity cost is the issue here more than anything.
The catalyst needed is the infrastructure to be built in the area. That will come when the city determines the area is needed. Its not needed right now.
Two things:
1.) It's not 400 million, it's 200 million. And the 200 million was going towards a fieldhouse they were going to do anyways.
2.) Opinions like yours is exactly why WV has never been re-developed. Nothing is "needed". It can just sit as a crappy piece of land for the next 50 years if people want it to. No one is going to magically come into that area and make it all nice without the city footing part of the bill. That's just the reality.
The Following User Says Thank You to The Yen Man For This Useful Post:
