TELUS Convention Centre Expansion

MalcolmTucker · #1 Posted **Aug 29, 2012, 12:48 AM**

[del]

suburbia · #2 Posted **Aug 29, 2012, 1:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Received this in my mail today:

The Survey:

Nice

[EDIT]

Question #20 says "at least 200,000 gross square feet". I'm wondering if they are also counting the current hall and saying it would be 200K sf of exhibition space but not in one place (that would be dumb and I'm sure they are not saying that, but just putting it out there). Also, as it is gross square feet, does that mean they are counting more than just the exhibition hall proper? Would like the single exhibition hall, with minimum pillar interference, to be in that range (the main hall in Vancouver is 220,500sf - 735'x300').

I agree that 400K sf gross for the convention centre overall could work.

TallBob · #3 Posted **Aug 29, 2012, 8:06 AM**

That's a pretty interresting survey! The thing is what do companies/organizations think in other cities in Canada, US & worldwide? But I'm glad their moving on this... 400,000 sq. ft. I think is doable, & in a few years the city will be glad they went "BIG"!

CorporateWhore · #4 Posted **Aug 29, 2012, 3:11 PM**

Go big or don't even bother.

AB Born · #5 Posted **Aug 30, 2012, 6:16 AM**

I've been to the one in DC once (absolutely massive) & San Diego twice (looks great from the outside). If Calgary can build something like that then WOW. I hear Anaheim has a great center too although I've never been inside it.

jsbertram · #6 Posted **Aug 31, 2012, 9:26 PM**

The Firestone Site is just sitting there with room to build a new Convention Centre, along with the new CFL Stadium, the new NHL Arena, and some new hotels & office space.

If you Absolutely HAVE to get downtown, the CTrain is right there.

Deerfoot gets you to & from the Convention Centre (until the CTrain link to the airport is built).

suburbia · #7 Posted **Aug 31, 2012, 10:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbertram

The Firestone Site is just sitting there with room to build a new Convention Centre, along with the new CFL Stadium, the new NHL Arena, and some new hotels & office space.

If you Absolutely HAVE to get downtown, the CTrain is right there.

Deerfoot gets you to & from the Convention Centre (until the CTrain link to the airport is built).

The issue with fire-park for a convention centre is *quality* hotel rooms. I do agree that the site could work for sporting facilities though, and I also agree that in absence of other considerations, locating a convention centre by certain types of sporting facilities is an advantage.

DizzyEdge · #8 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 12:07 AM**

There have been good reasons give not to build at firepark for various uses (mainly that the use would be there all alone without a critical mass of services to support it), but what if ALL of these potential uses were built at the same time? Arena, stadium, convention centre.. would a skydome-like hotel that has both football and hockey 'rooms' overlooking the games have any legs at all?

MalcolmTucker · #9 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 12:11 AM**

[del]

suburbia · #10 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 12:32 AM**

Overtime, IE looking into future potential and not assuming opening day will have the same limited services as today, Firepark could certainly work for sports.

I think the convention centre should really be closer in. If nothing else was planned, I'd say stick it on the Eau Claire site, else, land along the tracks + over top the tracks North of the Stampede connecting it to East Village.

McMurph · #11 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 1:18 AM**

I think somewhere between Macleod and Sixth St SE, close to or over the tracks is the only place I'd want to put a big convention centre. While I agree they're crucial for economic development and business, they also often blow a hole in the urban fabric. Even in the rare cases that they are interesting architecture they usually suck in visiting business people and squeeze out money without adding much of anything to the vibrancy of the neighbourhood.

That east village / vic park area has everything it needs: transportation (including future HSR), good hotels, neighbourhoods and stampede nearby, empty sites and easy access to our other two convention centres. It also has one main (future) amenity in the Riverwalk that will be accessible to conventioneers without the convention centre itself imposing on it. I think it's such a good site that going anywhere else would be crazy.

MalcolmTucker · #12 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 1:24 AM**

[del]

TallBob · #13 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 5:00 AM**

Convetion center has to have close/easy access to hotels. And Calgary, at least right now, doesn't have a lot of larger hotels. 400,000 sq. ft. minimum!

DizzyEdge · #14 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 3:01 PM**

Can anyone name some good examples of a large convention centre which actually interfaces nicely with the city?

RyLucky · #15 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Can anyone name some good examples of a large convention centre which actually interfaces nicely with the city?

This is a challenge with any building that needs 2 000 000 sqft on 2-4 levels and unlimited capacity for future expansion. Vancouver's convention centre interfaces beautifully with the city.

Given the footprint of a lot of these buildings, I'd like if more designs incorporated more uses. For example, hotels, parks, office towers, grocery stores, etc, built on top of and within the building. It goes without saying that it needs superb access to public transit and the airport. A lot of convention centres tend to insist that you walk a mile to find something to eat too. A dumb move when you have 20 000 captive guests with per diems.

MalcolmTucker · #16 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 6:03 PM**

[del]

suburbia · #17 Posted **Sep 1, 2012, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Vancouver has the advantage of only needing to interface on 1 side, which concentrates pedestrian traffic. The Vancouver centre also has underground access routes which removed the need for street level vehicle access.

Montreal's centre is huge and has pretty reasonable city interactions, at least on a couple sides.

Montreal's centre is actually smaller than Vancouver's and the ground level is retail. It is right up against Old Montreal (Notre Dame is just a couple blocks away). Montreal's also goes over tracks. Personally though, Vancouver is a much, much better convention centre. Vancouver's centre has the advantage of an awesome view and large outdoor spaces (including restaurants / outdoor patios) overlooking the water / stanley park, etc. Both of these have many, many very large hotels immediately in the vicinity. That is critical as it invigorates the area with a lot of people, and thus there is a ton of other restaurants and services. To put this in perspective, expedia finds 33 hotels within 1000m of the vancouver convention centre, of which 10 are within 500m!

Good point about there being a separate level for vehicle access in Vancouver. This could be done with our plan over top of the tracks, as the loading docs could actually be from the ground, perhaps on the 'inner' portion of the building immediately beside the tracks and unseen form outside, and the main entry could be via vast stairs to a large +15 level courtyard level. This could also facilitate easy +15 access from hotels in the area. Really though, the key is to create a convention centre with a broader site-plan in mind, so understanding interfaces and points of integration with Olympic Way, East Village, etc. will be critical.

Toronto's is somewhat isolated, but the longer-term plan is to change that with massive re-development of their South building, so over time it will become much better. There is a lot of development around there, including the large new aquarium, etc.

BTW - here is a good article about how Vancouver's convention centre is attracting business:
http://www.bcbusinessonline.ca/vanco...finds-its-feet

TallBob · #18 Posted **Sep 3, 2012, 3:03 AM**

Vancouver's good, so is San Fransisco.... Las Vegas, Seattle's real good. Chicago has a huge facillity, but lousy when it comes to accessibility to hotels.... Good for Cab drivers though! I just hope Calgary does something special and big!

suburbia · #19 Posted **Sep 3, 2012, 5:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TallBob

Vancouver's good, so is San Fransisco.... Las Vegas, Seattle's real good. Chicago has a huge facillity, but lousy when it comes to accessibility to hotels.... Good for Cab drivers though! I just hope Calgary does something special and big!

At 3.2M sf, the Las Vegas Convention Centre might not be a good touchstone for Calgary!

The one is Seattle is nice (and the Pike street area closer to the water is awesome), though their exhibition space is broken into two. The largest single rectangular room they actually have is less than 100K sf.

EDIT:

Clarification - I think we can do better / bigger than the one in Seattle. Vancouver's is probably the sweet spot. Las Vegas size would be dumb.

TallBob · #20 Posted **Sep 4, 2012, 4:27 AM**

suburbia: I know, but sometimes it's nice to plan "Big" or "Special"! Cautioun/Conservative may be the order of the day, but once in a while you gotta take a gamble and just do the spectacular! That's what great cities do! IMO