I thought that the surrounds of the building was supposed to be restaurants and bars? There was a lot of talk about not having a big wall with nothing on ground level...it feels like the opposite with this rendering as all I have seen are walls that run most of the block.
I don't think the plan has ever been to have stuff all the way around. Everything I've ever seen was focused on livening up the 4th Street and 12th Avenue corridors. The NW and SW corners were always going to be the focal points because that's where the overwhelming majority of people will be approaching the building from. All of the previous renderings were from those two angles.
Also, although it's not obvious from the elevation views, based on the floor plans, there will be a street-level store and restaurant along 12th Ave.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following User Says Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
So only the lead designer at Ferrari could have valid views on a poorly designed car?
An engineer who designs motorcycle engines for Honda probably isn't a leading authority on building heavy trucks. He's informed enough to have an opinion, but if you want to call on an expert so you can sneer at other people's opinions, he's probably not your guy.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
I don't hate it as much as when I saw the that first rendering. I obviously like the west side the best with the retail, etc. The rest is pretty boring and not sure why they even included a rendering of the stupid parking garage. That couldn't have been hidden somewhere else? It doesn't look very big so guessing it might be for players/staff but who knows.
And now that I've taken a step back and thought about it, is there an arena in the NHL with a real wow factor in terms of exterior design? Or are Vegas, Staples Center, Seattle, Detroit, etc THAT awe inspiring? I'll be happy if they can make that street/area a cool place where people will wanna hang out all year round - even when the Flames aren't playing.
Would love to get some opinions from fans in other cities or people on here who have been to other NHL arenas the past few years. How do they think their arena is better or worse that what we're getting?
I expected 600 mil would blow me away but maybe I'm just jaded now. I remember going to the Saddledome open house in '83 with friends and and we really couldn't believe it. The size of it compared to the Corral, the cool roof, etc. Even the "modern" scoreboard with the clapping Mickey Mouse hands was cutting edge,lol.
Anyway, it sounds like what's done is done and we can't do a thing about it now except for pay for half of it. Hopefully the inside has big concourses (which it looks like it does) and maybe even a hint of the inverted bowl. Although I'm not sure how that could be done.
And who knows, maybe I'll get lucky and see a Stanley Cup parade down that street before I die.
Last edited by Scary Eloranta; 08-05-2021 at 01:02 AM.
So, is the footprint of the building itself quite a bit bigger than the Saddledome? I am looking at this on my phone.
Yes. Basically, if you remove the upper 300 level seats (behind the walkway) from the Saddledome, the seating bowls are basically the same size. The extra room in the new building is all concourse space, plus it has 2 public concourse levels (plus the suite level) instead of just one.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following User Says Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
Yes. Basically, if you remove the upper 300 level seats (behind the walkway) from the Saddledome, the seating bowls are basically the same size. The extra room in the new building is all concourse space, plus it has 2 public concourse levels (plus the suite level) instead of just one.
This I like. The Saddledome would have lasted longer if it had that kind of interior space outside the seating bowl.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Doesn’t really matter, honestly. The architect who designed this building is more accomplished than the strip mall architect, so their opinion doesn’t matter anyways if the measure is professional accomplishment.
But I didn’t say that. I just said their opinion means about as much. And it does.
And how do you know I meant one game? Maybe I meant one season. One championship season when the coach, let’s say he was a former lawyer, brings together a rag-tag team of kids who just need someone to believe in them and, more importantly, to believe in themselves, as he coaches them from worst of the bunch to state championships. In comparison, strip mall guy kind eats dirt, honestly. They don’t make movies featuring strip mall guy.
Well in your example, regardless of it being 1 game vs 100, it’s still amateur sport so it doesn’t really matter honestly. A professional carries more weight, and yes I’d love to hear the arena designers thoughts over the strip mall designers if you want my ranking, but I’m sure both could offer some kind of insight I didn’t have before. There are tons of examples of that here on CP as well, where I have learned plenty of things from people who live that life and I’m simply just taking in what I can.
Let me just make it clear though, these aren’t opinions on what the building looks like aesthetically that I’m valuing, because that’s entirely subjective. I’m talking about the objective issues with this proposal, because you only need to look about 200 yards to the south to see what happens to the area around an arena when you neglect 75% of the exterior space. When was the last time anybody went behind the dome? There is a beautiful river there but you wouldn’t even know it.
I’m just disappointed that the arena district is looking a lot more like an arena street. Feels like a missed opportunity, and one we won’t get a redo on for decades to come.
This I like. The Saddledome would have lasted longer if it had that kind of interior space outside the seating bowl.
The roofline is problematic too, but, yeah I was surprised when I did the overlay and they match up almost exactly. Even the sizes of the upper and lower bowls seem to be about the same size as the original Saddledome layout.
By my count, the lower bowl of the new arena will be about 28 rows and the upper bowl will be about 14 rows.
The only significant difference between the original Saddledome seating layout and the new arena's layout is that the Saddledome's suite level was/is at the very top of the upper bowl. In the new arena, the suite level will be between the two main seating bowls.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The roofline is problematic too, but, yeah I was surprised when I did the overlay and they match up almost exactly. Even the sizes of the upper and lower bowls seem to be about the same size as the original Saddledome layout.
Apropos of which, where did you get the plans for the overlay? I tried downloading the PDF from developmentmap.calgary.ca, but nothing, and I mean nothing, will cause the plans to download. All I can get is the ‘Written Submission’, which is a load of PR crap that I'm not interested in.
Can anyone throw me a bone?
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
And now that I've taken a step back and thought about it, is there an arena in the NHL with a real wow factor in terms of exterior design? Or are Vegas, Staples Center, Seattle, Detroit, etc THAT awe inspiring?
Nope. We've been spoiled with the Saddledome. Scotsman's Hill + Saddledome (pre-Scotia sign on the roof) + Calgary Skyline (pre-Guardian) might have been the best viewpoint + arena + background combination ever. But that's the bar, because that's what we're replacing.
It's like a cat who lifts its tail and shows you its butthole when you point a camera at it.
It should be noted that the design of the parkade envelope is not final in the renders. The renders that shows each side of the building elevation indicates that a SAIT style parkade design is intended there.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Joborule For This Useful Post:
Apropos of which, where did you get the plans for the overlay? I tried downloading the PDF from developmentmap.calgary.ca, but nothing, and I mean nothing, will cause the plans to download. All I can get is the ‘Written Submission’, which is a load of PR crap that I'm not interested in.
Can anyone throw me a bone?
I would be interest in the download also since the cities site doesn't have a drawings link working properly. Can only download the written submission.
I don't hate it as much as when I saw the that first rendering. I obviously like the west side the best with the retail, etc. The rest is pretty boring and not sure why they even included a rendering of the stupid parking garage. That couldn't have been hidden somewhere else? It doesn't look very big so guessing it might be for players/staff but who knows.
And now that I've taken a step back and thought about it, is there an arena in the NHL with a real wow factor in terms of exterior design? Or are Vegas, Staples Center, Seattle, Detroit, etc THAT awe inspiring? I'll be happy if they can make that street/area a cool place where people will wanna hang out all year round - even when the Flames aren't playing.
Would love to get some opinions from fans in other cities or people on here who have been to other NHL arenas the past few years. How do they think their arena is better or worse that what we're getting?
I expected 600 mil would blow me away but maybe I'm just jaded now. I remember going to the Saddledome open house in '83 with friends and and we really couldn't believe it. The size of it compared to the Corral, the cool roof, etc. Even the "modern" scoreboard with the clapping Mickey Mouse hands was cutting edge,lol.
Anyway, it sounds like what's done is done and we can't do a thing about it now except for pay for half of it. Hopefully the inside has big concourses (which it looks like it does) and maybe even a hint of the inverted bowl. Although I'm not sure how that could be done.
And who knows, maybe I'll get lucky and see a Stanley Cup parade down that street before I die.
I'm not really a travel for sporting events guy, but I did count it up a few years ago and I've been to 35+ different stadiums now...the ones that stick out as "good* have the following:
1. Can get a beer, take a whiz and get back to your seat fast (new buildings do this)
2. No parking lots and they have a bar / restaurant district surrounding the building. (Wrigley is a good example... Phoenix is a manufactured version)
3. Integrated public transport / ride sharing (taxis) / central in the city so the building can clear in 30mins (the big US NFL stadiums are a dumpster fire for this...Suncorp in Brisbane holds 55k, has a train, a bar district on 2 sides, they run buses like crazy and ride sharing...it's not perfect but the stadium pukes people out post game. It took me 3hrs to get out of the NFL stadium in Houston by contrast.)
...please get the bathrooms right in the new barn at minimum.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Rutuu For This Useful Post:
That's a rather narrow view. Why does an architect have to have worked on a billion dollar arena to have an educated opinion on it? Project values don't necessarily determine an architect's talent or ability to interpret the design challenge.
Nor do hockey fans have had to be an NHL GM to have educated opinions on NHL teams...
So only the lead designer at Ferrari could have valid views on a poorly designed car?
yes that's exactly what I said...
It is yet another example that everyone is an expert in everything on the internet. It is the exact same as the CP armchair GMs who get mad that Tre didn't offer x when another team offered y and traded for a player. The fans who get made we didn't sign player x who signed elsewhere for less money. It's the same fans who get mad that we didn't hire coach x and instead signed coach y.
This isn't NHL 2020 and it isn't sim city. You can't just do whatever you want all the time with no concerns for reality, budget etc.
It's not just people saying the building is ugly, it's a bunch of internet architects claiming that the design is an objective failure. It's hilarious.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
