CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Benched

Stamps can play on some other field until she's done.

Where would that be? Cities that have done that have had the luxury of being able to temporarily use the university's stadium. (Seattle, Minneapolis for example.) McMahon is the university stadium, and the Stamps also happen to play there.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Benched

Stamps can play on some other field until she's done.

Solid plan. Foothills Stadium seats about 9k, so that would get about a third of the usual fans in there. Now of course some would say it's a baseball stadium, but I say why can't the QB just throw the football to a receiver at home plate and then he has to run around the bases back to home without getting tackled?

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Solid plan. Foothills Stadium seats about 9k, so that would get about a third of usual fans in there. Now of course some would say it's a baseball stadium, but I say why can't the QB just throw the football to a receiver at home plate and then he has to run around the bases back to home without getting tackled?

It's the CFL, they can just have them be a traveling road show and play home games in Fort McMurray or something because their stadium is in use (or demolished).

[Benched]

who cares? lol. make a temp field in some farmers field....

I'm sure that's one hurdle the brain trust there could figure out if it was the only problem.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Benched

who cares? lol. make a temp field in some farmers field....

I'm sure that's one hurdle the brain trust there could figure out if it was the only problem.

All jokes aside, it isn't a problem that could be overcome, even if it was the only one. Calgary simply doesn't have another place for the Stamps to play and under no circumstances would they be displaced for the 2 - 3 years it would take to build an arena/stadium in place of McMahon. Not even close, non starter.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Benched

who cares? lol. make a temp field in some farmers field....

I'm sure that's one hurdle the brain trust there could figure out if it was the only problem.

Do you know how much a 'temporary' stadium would cost? And by temporary, I mean modular / portable seating, with a turf, full amenities and parking space (because those are required)? For 30,000 people? Not worth it.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Benched

who cares? lol. make a temp field in some farmers field....

I'm sure that's one hurdle the brain trust there could figure out if it was the only problem.

I take it you're ready and willing to donate money, land, and labour to make this happen?

Very easy to spout stuff like that when you're a spectator on the side. You're basically being an armchair developer.

[ken0042]

Serious question, could they replace McMahon by doing one side at a time? Protect the field, demolish one side, and then rebuild it. Then do the same thing on the other side. It would take twice as long, but you'd have 16,000 capacity while doing it. You might even be able to get the U of C to kick in part of the money.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Serious question, could they replace McMahon by doing one side at a time? Protect the field, demolish one side, and then rebuild it. Then do the same thing on the other side. It would take twice as long, but you'd have 16,000 capacity while doing it. You might even be able to get the U of C to kick in part of the money.

Sure, but this current discussion is based off the poster who saw the site of McMahon as the site of a new hockey arena/stadium hybrid. (The idea itself is as far fetched as the location).

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Serious question, could they replace McMahon by doing one side at a time? Protect the field, demolish one side, and then rebuild it. Then do the same thing on the other side. It would take twice as long, but you'd have 16,000 capacity while doing it. You might even be able to get the U of C to kick in part of the money.

I imagine there would be too much liability playing games with construction zones such a short distance away from the field.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Sure, but this current discussion is based off the poster who saw the site of McMahon as the site of a new hockey arena/stadium hybrid. (The idea itself is as far fetched as the location).

The University owns the stadium and land and I'm not sure they would be keen on selling it also I'm not sure if the community of University Heights would be keen on the traffic of 40+ Flames games a year and people parking on their streets weekly.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Serious question, could they replace McMahon by doing one side at a time? Protect the field, demolish one side, and then rebuild it. Then do the same thing on the other side. It would take twice as long, but you'd have 16,000 capacity while doing it. You might even be able to get the U of C to kick in part of the money.

That idea requires serious consideration. Depending on the scale of the work you might even be able to get most of it done during the off season and not even lose an entire season (on each side) although I would suspect that might be pushing it. IF they incorporate end zone seating into whatever design is considered you would not even effectively lose half the capacity as some of that would be gained back by the new end zone seats which could be the first portion of the rebuild, and in place before the real work begins.

[Muta]

I believe the University has plans for that land after the McMahon Stadium story ends. Atleast, they did several years ago. That could have changed.

[manwiches]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

So an epic stadium then..

Just bump the season back a month to start in May like most CFL execs seem to be pushing for anyway, so the season wraps up in October. Then you don't need a silly roof. Wanting a permanently enclosed field for a sport played throughout the summer is what happens when you ask a city full of hockey fans what a football stadium should look like. It's so frustrating.

I guess my take on the roof is shared by people who live in Regina. They don't draw many big acts of any sort, and the closest thing we have to a decent venue is the Brandt Center for the Pats, which holds 6500-7000 people or so. Saskatoon gets all the big acts because they have the right size facility. We get Hedley. Lol

Maybe I don't see it, but I find it would at least generate some more type of revenue and interest in the city if it were to be covered and thus attract different acts etc. Not just be used exclusively for 10 or so games a year, plus the odd university game.

[Joborule]

If you are to build a new stadium where McMahon is, you wouldn't have to tear down McMahon right away. There's plenty enough space that they could build most of the stadium to the south of it, and either remove some of the southern end of McMahon right off the bat, or wait until the moment they have to remove it to complete the new stadium.

Moving the stadium south would probably be preferential in the University mind since all the land where McMahon is would be better served by development.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

McMahon is an awful place for a new stadium.

As soon as the Stamps are done with it, it needs to be demolished ASAP, along with the baseball stadium. Then the city needs to build an overpass at 24th ave. Get rid of the lights right at McMahon. The city can do this as part of their Crowchild/Bow Trail redevelopment that is a black mark on our city that it hasn't been done yet. Then they can develop crowchild to be three lanes both ways from Glenmore to Stoney with no lights. Honestly, as long as that cluster#### of bow/memorial/crowchild exists I consider Calgary a one horse town. How the #### do you have only 1 or 2 lanes on your second biggest N/S thoroughfare through downtown? It is embarrassing. Our city should never hold any world class events until it is fixed. No World Cup, no Olympics etc.

Then u of c can use the land to build a much smaller and more appropriate facility for university athletics and use the rest of the space for campus expansion (or to relocate existing athletic facilities that are currently north of 24th to the McMahon site and those will be used for campus expansion).

While you're at it demolish that crappy strip mall across from McMahon and make Nicks and Big T's relocate. The rest of the businesses in that strip mall aren't needed at all. Leave access to the hotels and dealership via side roads next to overpass. And you know what? Throw in some redevelopment of the ghetto that is 16th ave all the way from Bowness to Deefoot.

[DJones]

I would love if it ended up in Balzac. Probably a terrible idea but for selfish reasons it would be awesome.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by manwiches

I guess my take on the roof is shared by people who live in Regina. They don't draw many big acts of any sort, and the closest thing we have to a decent venue is the Brandt Center for the Pats, which holds 6500-7000 people or so. Saskatoon gets all the big acts because they have the right size facility. We get Hedley. Lol

Maybe I don't see it, but I find it would at least generate some more type of revenue and interest in the city if it were to be covered and thus attract different acts etc. Not just be used exclusively for 10 or so games a year, plus the odd university game.

I'm not sure what you mean. Your take on the roof is shared by people who live in Regina? Roof was a pipe dream. Only works if retractable because no one wants indoor summer football or concerts and the extra several hundred million is only good for a few extra winter events each year. Definitely not worth it.

The stadium will be able to hold large outdoor summer concerts. Regina isn't big enough to draw medium sized acts for arena concerts so it is a moot point that it doesn't have a roof. Acts who play stadium tours will play new Taylor Field. Acts who play 13k arenas wouldn't play in a 85% empty cavernous football stadium regardless of roof or not.

[Frequitude]

Put me firmly in the "no roof" camp. The benefits of being at an outdoor football game in the summer far outweigh being warm inside in the playoffs or the extra shows we might get that don't fit into the arena. There's nothing better in the summer than sitting on the east side of McMahon on a sunny day.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Put me firmly in the "no roof" camp. The benefits of being at an outdoor football game in the summer far outweigh being warm inside in the playoffs or the extra shows we might get that don't fit into the arena. There's nothing better in the summer than sitting on the east side of McMahon on a sunny day.

What about a retractable roof?