[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I believe the ACC was built in a somewhat unique way, at least for its time.

The lower bowl angles upward at a higher rate than normal, going up not out, which puts fans closer to the action.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I believe the ACC was built in a somewhat unique way, at least for its time.

The lower bowl angles upward at a higher rate than normal, going up not out, which puts fans closer to the action.

I thought that was the Bell Centre while the ACC angled away quicker because it was originally designed for basketball and that was the more desirable viewing angle.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Yeah, Prudential is a beautiful facility, but it's the opposite of intimate. The action was so far away, it felt more like a football stadium than a hockey arena.
The lobby is fantastic, but I wasn't a huge fan of the game experience. I'd much rather be in an arena where it feels like you are on top of the action.

Were you hammered when you were there?

I just went to Prudential for the first time last Friday, and that is the oldest looking 10 year old rink I've been to.

I'm still blown away by how old the Honda Center is considering how nice it is compared to many rinks newer than it. Especially mind blowing is the Shark Tank is newer, yet still uses the 80s design standards.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Were you hammered when you were there?

I just went to Prudential for the first time last Friday, and that is the oldest looking 10 year old rink I've been to.

I went there the first couple of season it was opened, but haven't been in about 5 years. Has it aged that badly? I remember the lobby being quite nice with all the local-hockey team banners and displays, and the arena/ concourse being nice but somewhat clinical and devoid of personality (kind of like the Devils).

Keep in mind I was used to going to the Meadowlands... which is basically the Jersey versions of Northlands Coliseum.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I'm still blown away by how old the Honda Center is considering how nice it is compared to many rinks newer than it. Especially mind blowing is the Shark Tank is newer, yet still uses the 80s design standards.

I found the Honda Center to be nice, but like an indoor version of a Tanger outlet mall or something. But it kind of goes with the area I guess.

In general would like to see a bit more effort to be put into making arena's more timeless instead of so of-the-moment. Why do these things have to look old after a decade? Great architecture aims to be timeless, even if it doesn't necessarily have that life span.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I went there the first couple of season it was opened, but haven't been in about 5 years. Has it aged that badly? I remember the lobby being quite nice with all the local-hockey team banners and displays, and the arena/ concourse being nice but somewhat clinical and devoid of personality (kind of like the Devils).

Keep in mind I was used to going to the Meadowlands... which is basically the Jersey versions of Northlands Coliseum.

It may be that they stripped down some of the things such as the banners that dressed it up, because besides the entrance lobby, it was just white drywall everywhere, total sterile and plain.

In the seats, the foil insulation of the ceiling and upper walls was a nice touch too.

Don't get me wrong, it achieves its purpose perfectly, it's a fine place to go watch hockey, buy beer and use a bathroom. They just put minimal effort in ambiance or making it stand out or have a distinctive feel to it.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

It may be that they stripped down some of the things such as the banners that dressed it up, because besides the entrance lobby, it was just white drywall everywhere, total sterile and plain.

The banners gave the lobby a ton of personality...but I agree the rest of the building once you went in to the arena portion was quite clinical and cold even then (the cavernous bowl didn't help).

I find a lot of the newer buildings have that quality...functionally more efficient, but devoid of character. I wish someone would take a chance on something like a Davos arena. Too bad it won't be the Flames with the fuddy-duddys running the team.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The banners gave the lobby a ton of personality...but I agree the rest of the building once you went in to the arena portion was quite clinical and cold even then (the cavernous bowl didn't help).

I find a lot of the newer buildings have that quality...functionally more efficient, but devoid of character. I wish someone would take a chance on something like a Davos arena. Too bad it won't be the Flames with the fuddy-duddys running the team.

Taking a chance got Calgary the Saddledome. Was great in its initial years but difficult to renovate and a roof that was more a great idea at the time than great idea. I personally never liked how in the upper tiers that you were separated from seeing the other side of the building and the fact that many concerts have bypassed Calgary because of the roof. That said the new Edmonton arena's tin can exterior is going to look pretty silly in a decade or so with that silver tin can look.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That said the new Edmonton arena's tin can exterior is going to look pretty silly in a decade or so with that silver tin can look.

Doubt it.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Doubt it.

I find it ugly as #### right now, never mind in a few years.

[Ozy_Flame]

I find it rather nice in an otherwise drab downtown.

[RM14]

^ Anything new is looking nice in that downtown

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I dunno. I tend to agree with him. The business model for the NHL is a bit screwy because their costs are too high (players make too much IMO).

Professional hockey should go the way of the NFL, where all owners pool an annual sum that helps subsidize stadiums.

In this instance the owners will put in a pile of their money to build a new building, but don't forget the massive equity growth they'll get for the team. They'll sink $200MM into the building, but if they turned around the day it was built they'd massively profit.

The biggest problem is that 'Buildings' are a Depreciating Asset while 'Franchises' are Appreciating Assets.

So yeah, guess which one you want someone else to pay for and which one you want to be sure to own?

[RM14]

If the NFL is subsidizing their own stadiums then why have St.Louis, San Diego, and Oakland all had huge issues getting a new stadium built lately?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by RM14

If the NFL is subsidizing their own stadiums then why have St.Louis, San Diego, and Oakland all had huge issues getting a new stadium built lately?

Because they didn't play ball like Minneapolis did. The Twins and Expos need new stadiums? Threaten contraction and move one of them to Washington and boom: sales tax increase to fund $300+M for a baseball stadium. The Metrodome is too good a deal for the city that they can waive the rent for the Vikings to playable still be a winning deal for the city? Demand a new stadium and threaten relocation to LA? Well I guess we can subsidize the stadium as long as $500M more is coming from the government (with the $200M+ naming rights deal going to the private funding side because the public funding side is already accounted for with taxes and user fees).

That's how you get this stuff subsidized.

[Dr. Pepper]

So what's the consensus of location in victoria park - north near the tracks or just west of the youth campus? North part is private land (owned by a developer), and the last just west of the youth campus is owned by the Stampede.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pepper

So what's the consensus of location in victoria park - north near the tracks or just west of the youth campus? North part is private land (owned by a developer), and the last just west of the youth campus is owned by the Stampede.

If there is one thing I know about CP, it's that consensus is rarely reached.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Table 5

A lot more public good could be derived from putting public money into things the general public has cheap (or better yet, free) access too. More bike paths, more hockey arenas (so people don't have to play at 11pm on a Tuesday), more swimming pools, soccer centers, skate parks....those are things that help the public good.

NHL games are a luxury good for a privileged few. This scam of giving sports teams public money has to stop. The NHL could easily fix it's own money issues by putting an arena fund into it's operating budget... by why do so when cities and governments bend over every couple of decades?

Unless we get a cut of the profits too, the only thing our governments should be doing for the Flames is giving them special treatment when it comes to processing their proposals.

I'd say that supplying transportation infrastructure to support the stadium would fall into the cities scope. Though that should be done as part of the overall neighbourhood revitalization. So the city does have a role to play in a similar way it does with the east village.

[sureLoss]

@Kristen_Odland: "There's an ongoing process/discussion with the city," -- Gary Bettman, regarding a new arena.

@Kristen_Odland: Bettman met with Mayor @nenshi today. "Everybody knows that a new arena is important for a whole host of reasons."

@Kristen_Odland: "This building needs to be replaced," -- Gary Bettman.

@Kristen_Odland: "Seriously?"Bettman said re: the Dome's inefficiencies. "This building was built in the 80's. They don't build buildings like this anymore."

@Kristen_Odland: ... but these aren't the facilities that hockey teams typically has."

@Kristen_Odland: He also used the adjective "antiquated."

[Canada 02]

Bettman coming up on FAN 960