One of the councilors mentioned the event center will be designed for all kinds of event types including e-gaming. I am sure there will be video screens everywhere.
I’m hopeful the public space around the event centre will provide a place to activate people in winter with activities on a Saturday independent of going to the game.
A few outdoor ice surfaces complimented with a small ice plant, like the Olympic Plaza, to optimize chinook weather would be wonderful.
Getting young people, especially university students & others active skating and/or playing shinny then throwing their skates over their shoulder & going for a pint at an adjacent pub would be pretty epic.
I’m not sure where they develop or the rail line service connection to Banff/Lake Louise is at, but if it could somehow be incorporated into the area plan it would only add to the experience.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Boreal For This Useful Post:
Whatever it is, hopefully well planned, and properly budgeted.
The Oilers rink got things cut in the end from the original proposal and well after ground was broken on construction.
From all accounts it seems like it ended a 85% completed project, with zero character or atmosphere in physical design and intangible "feeling" , while short on basic amenities and a very stale utilitarian feeling in the building (much like the city itself).
Likely, in part, is the things the original designers had planned in place, that got cut due to budget, was to work in unison with the rest of the planning and design. Once one or two things were cut, suddenly the whole overall design from a aesethic and practical/usability standpoint, is broken, as each peice was supposed to work with the other peices to make the entire design work. Basics like not enough washrooms had to not have been in the original plan, but then had to have been cut...but that's maybe because they had to redesign the concourse becuase something else they planned as part of the structure in or above the concourse was going to cost too much to engineer and include, and thus cut, and then the additional washrooms also fell victim to the engineering redesign of that original cut item, so it was a snowball effect... I don't know...but that arena did not turn out 100% as was planned, ...and we have to avoid that.
City and Flames may have a tugging match on some things that the team wants that the city doesn't think it needs and vice versa, but again, chopping things later in the deaign process would be a bad idea...once the design and amenities are set, go with it and don't second guess or put things on the cutting block, or you'll end up with a half assed project.
Whatever it is, hopefully well planned, and properly budgeted.
The Oilers rink got things cut in the end from the original proposal and well after ground was broken on construction.
From all accounts it seems like it ended a 85% completed project, with zero character or atmosphere in physical design and intangible "feeling" , while short on basic amenities and a very stale utilitarian feeling in the building (much like the city itself).
Likely, in part, is the things the original designers had planned in place, that got cut due to budget, was to work in unison with the rest of the planning and design. Once one or two things were cut, suddenly the whole overall design from a aesethic and practical/usability standpoint, is broken, as each peice was supposed to work with the other peices to make the entire design work. Basics like not enough washrooms had to not have been in the original plan, but then had to have been cut...but that's maybe because they had to redesign the concourse becuase something else they planned as part of the structure in or above the concourse was going to cost too much to engineer and include, and thus cut, and then the additional washrooms also fell victim to the engineering redesign of that original cut item, so it was a snowball effect... I don't know...but that arena did not turn out 100% as was planned, ...and we have to avoid that.
City and Flames may have a tugging match on some things that the team wants that the city doesn't think it needs and vice versa, but again, chopping things later in the deaign process would be a bad idea...once the design and amenities are set, go with it and don't second guess or put things on the cutting block, or you'll end up with a half assed project.
Which is addressed within the proposal.
They share the costs unless the desired facility equally, unless one party or the other wants something specifically then they have to front the costs.
For instance if the CSEC want Golden Bidets in every bathroom then they have to pay for them, etc.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
They share the costs unless the desired facility equally, unless one party or the other wants something specifically then they have to front the costs.
For instance if the CSEC want Golden Bidets in every bathroom then they have to pay for them, etc.
For sure, my concern is with something where it's not just a simple additional charge, rather a fundamental disagreement on what amenities and features are needed for the Flames and hockey vs "events"/a public space, where each side has a different agenda ,and it’s a”one or the other” type decision as far as the design or amenities go.
Such as Flames needing an ice plant area which requires x amount of space, but that means the E Scooter holidng area thst the City wants has to be eliminated. Or a dressing room that the Flames want a certain size but the City thinks that a smaller size is adequate because then 3 additional dressing rooms can go in that space for other events such as public skating...and if the Flames build the big dressing room, there simply is nowhere for 3 smaller rooms to go, once construction started.
Or, the Flames want an extra 10 luxury boxes and the City thinks that design will prevents extra wheel chair spaces, or having those extra boxes restricts some other usability factor that would be more practical and better utilized in the cities eyes (ie additional washrooms) for events that don't need the extra luxury boxes. Further, where the Flames think the extra luxury boxes should he a shared cost, and the City, because it doesn't believe they are required for whatever reason, doesn't want to share in the cost, let alone agree with their inclusion.
Etc. Those would be the battles that they can't afford to have once shovels hit the ground. And you wouldn’t think they would, though ther may be some contentious issues when arguing in the design process...but if cost start to over run and the both sides have to agree on what to cut, that would be worse and that certainly can’t happen.
Last edited by browna; 08-01-2019 at 11:52 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to browna For This Useful Post:
I’m worried that clause will get stupif but also that it leaves the city on the hook for the community rink. The extra rink will be pitched as non-essential to CSEC and require the city to pay up when it doesn’t fit in the budget.
Overall glad it got done. The city should have a venue of arena size so I think the city would end up spending 200-300 anyways on that type of facility. So getting the best deal possible out of the flames makes sense. I didn’t like the spin and the lack of the city presenting a fair evaluation like they did for CalgaryNext and the first arena proposal. Instead the city just presented the Pro argument. They also made nebulous claims of the 140 million in tax revenues that is clearly displaced. So not a fan of the city presentation but overall the deal is about as good as would have happened.
Also buy extending and delaying this process we will get over 40 years out of the building.
I’m worried that clause will get stupif but also that it leaves the city on the hook for the community rink. The extra rink will be pitched as non-essential to CSEC and require the city to pay up when it doesn’t fit in the budget.
Overall glad it got done. The city should have a venue of arena size so I think the city would end up spending 200-300 anyways on that type of facility. So getting the best deal possible out of the flames makes sense. I didn’t like the spin and the lack of the city presenting a fair evaluation like they did for CalgaryNext and the first arena proposal. Instead the city just presented the Pro argument. They also made nebulous claims of the 140 million in tax revenues that is clearly displaced. So not a fan of the city presentation but overall the deal is about as good as would have happened.
Also buy extending and delaying this process we will get over 40 years out of the building.
I may be in the wrong here but I think CSEC also really wan't the community/practice rink as a stable side business and for flexibility.
If they go with community/practice rink that will replace the Corral and have a capacity of 6000? 7500? It will allow them the ability to have more events and take additional business away from other YYC venues. A smaller scale concert that might not be suitable for the Dome and may have gone to Grey Eagle or Jubuliee will now be able to go downtown.
World Jr Hockey or future Olympic bid? All the games and associated revenue go to their coffers without sharing venue's. Big concert in town or a scheduling issue with Hitmen/Flames? Have the Hitmen game and the Flames practice in the community rink while double ending the concert and concession revenue.
This was less and less about the Dome and its viability for watching hockey games and concerts. Did some pass Calgary by? Sure. Were some of the Dome's issues fixable or repairable with say $50 million in renovations? I am sure of it but that would be a waste of the Flames ownership dollars so better get the citizens to chip in.
Ownership is going to make serious serious coin with this new arena and the district around it. Their franchise values will increase significantly and the cash will just flow in.
On a very basic level, the $275 million contribution from the Flames over the course of 35 years works out to less than $8 million a year. For that they get 2 rinks technically (19k+ community). They will get naming rights minus $250k a year to the City of Calgary. According to the link below, Rogers Arena in Vancouver got $6 million a year back in 2010. I couldn't find Rogers Place in Edmonton but assume CSEC get's approx the same come 2024 which I highly doubt as I assume a little more.
The Flames should EASILY be able to generate $5 million a year in revenue from just foot traffic going to their version of Flames Central Bar & Grill (Similar to Real Sports in Toronto) and their own apparel store on non-event nights Very little random foot traffic walking into the Dome now on non event nights. Imagine what the revenue will look like come event nights?
I am kinda getting off topic here but at the end of the day this is going to be a financial windfall for ownership. They are pretending that they are doing us a favor with the $275 million cheque and that we are all big shot owners with the citizens owning the building as if we get some big time say in how things are going to be done or how much they should cost us.
Sorry about the long post!
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to curves2000 For This Useful Post:
For sure, my concern is with something where it's not just a simple additional charge, rather a fundamental disagreement on what amenities and features are needed for the Flames and hockey vs "events"/a public space, where each side has a different agenda ,and it’s a”one or the other” type decision as far as the design or amenities go.
Such as Flames needing an ice plant area which requires x amount of space, but that means the E Scooter holidng area thst the City wants has to be eliminated. Or a dressing room that the Flames want a certain size but the City thinks that a smaller size is adequate because then 3 additional dressing rooms can go in that space for other events such as public skating...and if the Flames build the big dressing room, there simply is nowhere for 3 smaller rooms to go, once construction started.
Or, the Flames want an extra 10 luxury boxes and the City thinks that design will prevents extra wheel chair spaces, or having those extra boxes restricts some other usability factor that would be more practical and better utilized in the cities eyes (ie additional washrooms) for events that don't need the extra luxury boxes. Further, where the Flames think the extra luxury boxes should he a shared cost, and the City, because it doesn't believe they are required for whatever reason, doesn't want to share in the cost, let alone agree with their inclusion.
Etc. Those would be the battles that they can't afford to have once shovels hit the ground. And you wouldn’t think they would, though ther may be some contentious issues when arguing in the design process...but if cost start to over run and the both sides have to agree on what to cut, that would be worse and that certainly can’t happen.
The great thing is the architectural design process, direction and consultations with both parties isn’t going to proceed as anything resembling that.
I don't know how far they've gone down the design path, but I hope they don't go full inverted bowl. I say that selfishly as I want to be able to afford seats still. I also don't think this city can support 19,000 premium seats (at premium prices) which seems to be what they're going for in all of these inverted bowl videos.
If they're all premium then none are. No matter what design we go with there will be a spectrum of prices based on demand. If the inverted bowl is successful you'll just have better value seats... Keeping in mind that prices are going increase across the board with a new arena.
Haven't deep-dived this thread too much yet - but has it been floated that perhaps the reason the Flames want the option on the Calgary Transit yard is that you could use that land (plus a little of the parking lots adjacent) to build a suitable replacement for McMahon?
__________________ The Doctor is in
The Following User Says Thank You to Dr. Pepper For This Useful Post:
Haven't deep-dived this thread too much yet - but has it been floated that perhaps the reason the Flames want the option on the Calgary Transit yard is that you could use that land (plus a little of the parking lots adjacent) to build a suitable replacement for McMahon?
I doubt it. That is, according to one of the councilors during the debate, "one of the most expensive pieces of property in the city".
__________________ https://www.reddit.com/r/CalgaryFlames/
I’m always amazed these sportscasters and announcers can call the game with McDavid’s **** in their mouths all the time.
Haven't deep-dived this thread too much yet - but has it been floated that perhaps the reason the Flames want the option on the Calgary Transit yard is that you could use that land (plus a little of the parking lots adjacent) to build a suitable replacement for McMahon?
It's been discussed a little, and I can't see any possibility whatsoever that the city allows the land to be rezoned for that purpose. It will be for residential/commercial mix.
The Following User Says Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
I wonder if they could somehow turn the grandstand chuckwagons into a dual use stadium/race track. The dimensions work. They'd have to move a lot of dirt in and out, but at least it would make it useful for more than 10 days, and football only plays a handful of games. Maybe get soccer there too, I'm sure more people would go if it was downtown.
I wonder if they could somehow turn the grandstand chuckwagons into a dual use stadium/race track. The dimensions work. They'd have to move a lot of dirt in and out, but at least it would make it useful for more than 10 days, and football only plays a handful of games. Maybe get soccer there too, I'm sure more people would go if it was downtown.
I know for a fact that a feasibility study was conducted for that reason only a couple years ago - to build a roof between the grandstand / infield track, with modern modifications all-around. The cost was simply too prohibitive to do anything like that; you may as well have built a completely new facility for that price.
It's been discussed a little, and I can't see any possibility whatsoever that the city allows the land to be rezoned for that purpose. It will be for residential/commercial mix.
Yeah, they're going to want whatever goes there to be high-density to maximize Property Taxes.
A big giant field probably is not in the plans.
Now, if the CSEC proposed a beautiful lush park, a green-space where a Football team happens to play....well...
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
I know for a fact that a feasibility study was conducted for that reason only a couple years ago - to build a roof between the grandstand / infield track, with modern modifications all-around. The cost was simply too prohibitive to do anything like that; you may as well have built a completely new facility for that price.
How about not building a roof? I'm thinking of doing it on the cheap, since these facilities see a lot less use.
