CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Psytic]

Is Ken King the Project Manager on this one? Maybe he should get some consultants that have worked on arena projects recently in other cities to come give some input. No shame in getting help from those that have already been successful.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I don't know if I agree with this. I think the city has come along way in defining what type of city it wants to be and aiming high. There are so many projects that have been embraced by the people here, among those you mentioned, like the Bow building, East Village, River Walk, the green corridor, etc., and the people have more to be excited about on the horizon!

I think most Calgarians have just matured when it come to what makes the city great, and what it takes to make a great city. We focus now on quality of life, street-scapes, parks, public art, and public/free goods rather than the monoliths of years past. We have also become more discernable on what and how we expect the government to spend our money.


This is not aimed at you but I can't help shake the feeling that the people criticizing opponents of CalgaryNEXT as "small-minded" or "small-city oriented" as a bit of a reverse.

Small-city people are the ones who think a city needs a grand vision of something. A monolith or some defining event to establish credibility. They think that to be a Paris/NY, you need an Eiffel Tower / Empire State Building; but the opposite is true. What people love about those cities, what makes them world class is the streetscapes, the density, the vibe of the place. CalgaryNEXT (in whatever form) won't change that in Calgary.

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why are only the things that you value important?

I agree with much of what you posted here. But I also want to see a cutting edge arena and gathering area, like LA and others. They also add to a city.

A vibrant city needs parklands, AND streetscapes, AND an arts community, AND museums, AND sports facilities, AND...

Listing subsets and claiming they are what is important seems to me to be what is small-minded. (not directed at you)

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Next person to mention LA live gets shot.

I was just in Glendale for the Coyotes/LA game. I'd settle for the Westgate Entertainment District.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why are only the things that you value important?

I agree with much of what you posted here. But I also want to see a cutting edge arena and gathering area, like LA and others. They also add to a city.

A vibrant city needs parklands, AND streetscapes, AND an arts community, AND museums, AND sports facilities, AND...

Listing subsets and claiming they are what is important seems to me to be what is small-minded. (not directed at you)

I wasn't say that Calgarians' dont want those things, I'm just providing examples of how we have changed as a city and the initiative we show has changed since the 1980s. We want ALL of that stuff, but just like everything else, we have priorities. In the 1980's a new arena and olympics was probably highly sought after. Now, people are looking for other things first. It merely shows the mentality of the city has changed, not the big-picture thinking.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I wasn't say that Calgarians' dont want those things, I'm just providing examples of how we have changed as a city and the initiative we show has changed since the 1980s. We want ALL of that stuff, but just like everything else, we have priorities. In the 1980's a new arena and olympics was probably highly sought after. Now, people are looking for other things first. It merely shows the mentality of the city has changed, not the big-picture thinking.

What evidence leads you to be speaking on behalf of Calgarians? How do you know what they want?

[RM14]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I was just in Glendale for the Coyotes/LA game. I'd settle for the Westgate Entertainment District.

coyotes love their district so much that they are planning on leaving to join the suns in a brand new building

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by RM14

coyotes love their district so much that they are planning on leaving to join the suns in a brand new building

Just saying the district was packed with people having a good time. Including me.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I wish they could just take a carbon copy of LA Live and plop in down in either downtown CGY or where the current Saddledome is.

Nice modern arena, a plaza, a convention center, hotel and surrounded by restaurants. Easy peasy.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I was just in Glendale for the Coyotes/LA game. I'd settle for the Westgate Entertainment District.

The problem with these concepts is sustainability. To keep these venues sustainable you need constant traffic. LA has 250 events and 4 million people visit their complex. That steady flow of customers keeps that district viable. Glendale is not quite so fortunate. On game nights that area is great. On other nights, its a ghost town. City of Glendale is not seeing the revenues they had hoped which is why they renegotiated the management contract for the arena. That district is not holding its own because of its horrible location and lack of traffic on non-event nights. It also gets crushed for concert events because of the number of other facilities available for this purpose. So when you wish for something like this you need to understand how this is going to be made sustainable.

To me, this is why the field house plays a major role in the development. You may not get the 10s of thousands of people every night but it guarantees foot traffic each and every night when the major events are not taking place. That constant traffic is what will make the district viable in the long term. That is the difference between a LA district and a Glendale district.

[badger89]

Originally Posted by RM14

coyotes love their district so much that they are planning on leaving to join the suns in a brand new building

The entertainment district isn't the problem (it's great!), it's the location.

[polak]

What I find hilarious about this situation is that they are proposing an absolutely epic premise. A nearly 1 billion dollar stadium and arena combo. You know how much potential to design something seriously cool there is in an idea like that? They should have come out with some crazy renderings that got everyone excited about the project. Something truly world class.

Instead they gave us a bubble with the interior of an outdated YMCA.

Add this to the epic fail of a season and the Flames are just having a disaster of a year.

[ken0042]

I still think that this whole proposal is just a way of trying to get the Stampede Board onside with the real "Plan A."

And I think that plan is as follows:
- Bulldoze the Big 4- build the new Flames arena there.
- Once the new arena opens, bulldoze the Saddledome and use that land and some to the north for the new Stamps stadium. That is assuming they want to keep the Corral around.

Rough image, I used the same scale to grab McMahon Stadium:

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

What evidence leads you to be speaking on behalf of Calgarians? How do you know what they want?

I didn't say i was speaking for Calgarians, I was responding to reasons why people's thoughts may be changing. I am basing my examples on situations where the majority of people have generally supported projects.

My comments were not fact, and I didn't pose them as such. It was merely a theory for why projects like CalgaryNEXT and the olympics have gained so little traction among Calgarians.

Feel free to disagree, or provide evidence that rejects my theory, but based on the level of support CalgaryNEXT is seeing in this forum, the lack of support the olympics is seeing in other cities, I think my theory is atleast plausible.

[rayne008]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I still think that this whole proposal is just a way of trying to get the Stampede Board onside with the real "Plan A."

And I think that plan is as follows:
- Bulldoze the Big 4- build the new Flames arena there.
- Once the new arena opens, bulldoze the Saddledome and use that land and some to the north for the new Stamps stadium. That is assuming they want to keep the Corral around.

Rough image, I used the same scale to grab McMahon Stadium:

I've wondered before if they could combine a stadium with the track, and make the football field the rodeo grounds for stampede week? Have the chucks finish line right at the 50 yard line. Pretty far fetched, but would see the area used more. Plus then you could have some mother big outdoor concerts.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I still think that this whole proposal is just a way of trying to get the Stampede Board onside with the real "Plan A."

And I think that plan is as follows:
- Bulldoze the Big 4- build the new Flames arena there.
- Once the new arena opens, bulldoze the Saddledome and use that land and some to the north for the new Stamps stadium. That is assuming they want to keep the Corral around.

Rough image, I used the same scale to grab McMahon Stadium:

I think you and Ken King use the same high tech paint and screenshot software.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I still think that this whole proposal is just a way of trying to get the Stampede Board onside with the real "Plan A."

And I think that plan is as follows:
- Bulldoze the Big 4- build the new Flames arena there.
- Once the new arena opens, bulldoze the Saddledome and use that land and some to the north for the new Stamps stadium. That is assuming they want to keep the Corral around.

Rough image, I used the same scale to grab McMahon Stadium:

I really hope what you predict ends up happening. The Stampede grounds is really the ideal location for the new arena IMO, and it would be in the best interest of both parties to work together. It's easily accessible by both c-train and car, and it's got ample room to create a nice entertainment district to tie it all in with the East Village.

[Tyler]

You guys are missing the key crucial point of not having it on the Stampede grounds - condo development. The Flames owners want to develop all the condos and shops around the West Village, because that's where the REAL money is. That can't and won't happen on Stampede grounds.

That's precisely why there is no plan B.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Tyler

You guys are missing the key crucial point of not having it on the Stampede grounds - condo development. The Flames owners want to develop all the condos and shops around the West Village, because that's where the REAL money is. That can't and won't happen on Stampede grounds.

That's precisely why there is no plan B.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by RM14

It's the same reason the Acquilini's bought the Canucks. The real estate.

The Flames, and I'm assuming most of the guys they have shilling for the project like Bret Wilson, want to turn this into a mega project and develop the riverfront real estate into luxury condos.

All these deals ever seem to be about is land.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by RM14

The Flames are jamming the current version of CalgaryNEXT down our throat as the only option because its the only option where they can grab a sweet slice of real estate and develop it later. That is not possible on the Stampede Grounds.

This is why I call out everyone who says the Stampede Board is some meddling evil group who won't work with the Flames. That's not the case at all. The Stampede would freakin love to have the new arena on the Grounds. It's the Flames who don't want to be there because they can't make as much money.

Ken, why do you think the Stampede needs to be convinced of Plan A? Why wouldn't they love the idea of Plan A?

[Envitro]

So, who exactly is getting this land for free for condo/commercial development? And how??

The Flames have said from the very beginning that the ~$1 billion pricetag of the project includes the fact that all of the project is publicly owned.