New Downtown Calgary Arena

[Riise]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

Same could be said about the West Village (Sunalta)area which is closer to the core.

True but I'm pointing out the benefits of an Athlete's Village in Westbrook not the West Village. In a different post earlier, I was talking about a few of the benefits of putting the arena in the West Village.

[bt04ku]

Originally Posted by Riise

Wouldn't an arena in the West Village basically be on the doorsteps of Sunalata Station?

It would be, but the NW-S line doesn't go to Sunalta which makes it less convenient for them, it's easier to walk the extra 2-300m than transfer onto another train downtown with everybody else, the trains are packed enough as it is.

A Vic Park location isn't very far from either line (making it more convenient than Stampede Station is for people) and would be on the doorstep of a future line to boot.

[*Stardust*]

How about this idea...

Tear down the Big Four, then build the new arena in that spot. Then have the LRT go under the arena. Having a stop underground. Better than getting off of Vic park station and walking forever on the +15 to the Dome. It would also be steps away from 17th ave. eventually it would be nice to have a connection from the grounds/arena to 17th ave.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

How about this idea...

Tear down the Big Four, then build the new arena in that spot. Then have the LRT go under the arena. Having a stop underground. Better than getting off of Vic park station and walking forever on the +15 to the Dome. It would also be steps away from 17th ave. eventually it would be nice to have a connection from the grounds/arena to 17th ave.

Easy answer - because the Stampede owns the land and all the parking.

If you were a Flames owner tasked with building a half a billion dollar arena, would you want to put it in a place where you make no money on all the vehicles coming to your brand new arena?

It's all about maximizing revenue. Which is why I don't think this can possibly be built on or near the Grounds.

[tdurden5573]

^^^ Good point about the Stampede owned land. Ideally the stadium would replace the big 4, but I also dont see that happening. King said he was committed to an 'inner city' stadium, but word on the street is the flames have been looking at Max Bell and as far away as Cross Iron.

It would be a shame for it to not be connected directly to the ctrain line. Its the Saddledome has been such and iconic landmark of the city, would be a loss if the stadium wasn't in the core.

After going to games in Vancouver, Toronto, LA and Pittsburgh (inner city stadiums) vs. Phoenix, Anaheim, or Ottawa - there is no comparison to the vibe the inner city stadiums provide to the city.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Vancouver has a train between the city and Whistler?

They do... but it takes longer than driving, it's a tourist attraction.

[Riise]

Originally Posted by bt04ku

It would be, but the NW-S line doesn't go to Sunalta which makes it less convenient for them, it's easier to walk the extra 2-300m than transfer onto another train downtown with everybody else, the trains are packed enough as it is. A Vic Park location isn't very far from either line (making it more convenient than Stampede Station is for people) and would be on the doorstep of a future line to boot.

Both the Saddledome and McMahon are currently serviced by only one line and it seems to work. In regards to the transfer, waiting on a platform is infinitely better than walking even a short distance. Also, being grade-separated Sunalta is better equipped to handle the mass disembarking during events.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

You have to remember the Olympics are a game of one-up-manship, Sochi had a train all future bids will now need trains that are faster and better. People aren't going to sit on a bus for 1-2hrs to get to the mountains (sure it was great in '88, attention spans are far shorter now). People aren't going to want to commit to a full day in the mountains, get it down to a 30 min train trip people can go see a alpine event in the morning and a speed skating or hockey event in the afternoon and 1.5hr bus ride doesn't allow that in the same way.

....

Sochi also nearly bankrupted the Russian government, a government which immediately after the games began fostering civil war in its neighbours. Point is, there is zero evidence nor precedent for this "everything must be like the last Olympics, and moreso!". The suggestion is, frankly, nonsensical.

And out of the thousands, millions (?) of people who actually were spectators at the Sochi games... exactly how many do you think are going to come to Calgary to compare? The overwhelming majority will be Calgarians, who are already used to driving to the mountains, followed by Albertans, same, followed by Canadians who probably drove 1000+km to get here in the first place. The hardcore Olympic tourist is already well aware that each venue offers a completely different experience, and if you think a few thousand diehards are suddenly going to stop going to the Olympics just because we don't have a billion dollar train built for a 3 week event....

There is literally no indication that anyone would want nor expect a train to the mountains for a successful games, other than "Russia did it!". Yeah, they did a whole lot of things we're not gonna repeat.

Also... the laws of physics prevent every single Olympics from hereafter having a "faster, better train" every single time. People seem to have the impression that the "bigger, better!" mantra can keep going indefinitely, but the laws of economy and reality itself will eventually put a stop to that, by definition. I mean unless we'll someday have an Olympics with 50,000 events that takes 18 months to complete.

Anyway, we'll be just fine without a train. The US would, by that logic, never ever hold a games again. Nor would any really mountainous areas, not if you want any speed out of it.

[Fuzz]

Has the stance of Parks Canada changed? They didn't allow the Olympics in Lake Louise last time, I can't imagine they would now, though maybe they could use the money...

Last I heard Nakiska's downhill wasn't up to par for world cup standards, so they would need to figure something out. I think it was too short.

Standards have changed though, I remember Canmore's Athlete's Village was just a bunch of ATCO trailers, can't imagine that'd fly now.

[MalcolmTucker]

There is a plan for nakiska to trade some land near the valley bottom for some land near the top, to requalify for world cup status I believe.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Has the stance of Parks Canada changed? They didn't allow the Olympics in Lake Louise last time, I can't imagine they would now, though maybe they could use the money...

Last I heard Nakiska's downhill wasn't up to par for world cup standards, so they would need to figure something out. I think it was too short.

Standards have changed though, I remember Canmore's Athlete's Village was just a bunch of ATCO trailers, can't imagine that'd fly now.

ATCO trailers have changed too, though

[bt04ku]

Originally Posted by Riise

Both the Saddledome and McMahon are currently serviced by only one line and it seems to work. In regards to the transfer, waiting on a platform is infinitely better than walking even a short distance. Also, being grade-separated Sunalta is better equipped to handle the mass disembarking during events.

There's what works now, and what would be ideal. The West Village has less service than what is currently available, and waiting on a platform isn't great when you have a full train of people waiting to get onto another full train of people.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by freeweed

....

Sochi also nearly bankrupted the Russian government, a government which immediately after the games began fostering civil war in its neighbours. Point is, there is zero evidence nor precedent for this "everything must be like the last Olympics, and moreso!". The suggestion is, frankly, nonsensical.

And out of the thousands, millions (?) of people who actually were spectators at the Sochi games... exactly how many do you think are going to come to Calgary to compare? The overwhelming majority will be Calgarians, who are already used to driving to the mountains, followed by Albertans, same, followed by Canadians who probably drove 1000+km to get here in the first place. The hardcore Olympic tourist is already well aware that each venue offers a completely different experience, and if you think a few thousand diehards are suddenly going to stop going to the Olympics just because we don't have a billion dollar train built for a 3 week event....

There is literally no indication that anyone would want nor expect a train to the mountains for a successful games, other than "Russia did it!". Yeah, they did a whole lot of things we're not gonna repeat.

Also... the laws of physics prevent every single Olympics from hereafter having a "faster, better train" every single time. People seem to have the impression that the "bigger, better!" mantra can keep going indefinitely, but the laws of economy and reality itself will eventually put a stop to that, by definition. I mean unless we'll someday have an Olympics with 50,000 events that takes 18 months to complete.

Anyway, we'll be just fine without a train. The US would, by that logic, never ever hold a games again. Nor would any really mountainous areas, not if you want any speed out of it.

Absolutely it will, but at the same time, every games have strived to be better than the last.

Second thought, are the Olympics still worth the investment? i.e. does the tourist and venue value exceed the investment? And how long does it take to make that happen? If Calgary had to put up $5-$10B to host the games (venues, housing, transportation projects, etc.) are we going to see $20-$30+B in economic returns within 10 years? Keep in mind the total cost for '88 was ~$900M (~$1.7B in today's dollars).

Keep in mind this is the city that has spent more time debating $12M in cycle tracks than the federal government has spent debating the elections act (C-23), something that will fundamentally change how elections occur going forward.

[Riise]

Originally Posted by bt04ku

There's what works now, and what would be ideal. The West Village has less service than what is currently available, and waiting on a platform isn't great when you have a full train of people waiting to get onto another full train of people.

Service levels can be modified according to demand and I still hold that standing and waiting is better than being forced to make a walking transfer.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Riise

Service levels can be modified according to demand and I still hold that standing and waiting is better than being forced to make a walking transfer.

I don't think the community would be all that happy to have a stadium and an arena plopped down there, given the drunkenness and loud concerts and traffic nightmares that go with these venues. I'm not sure there is enough space either, given the need for parking.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Second thought, are the Olympics still worth the investment? i.e. does the tourist and venue value exceed the investment? And how long does it take to make that happen? If Calgary had to put up $5-$10B to host the games (venues, housing, transportation projects, etc.) are we going to see $20-$30+B in economic returns within 10 years? Keep in mind the total cost for '88 was ~$900M (~$1.7B in today's dollars).

This one I ain't gonna bet on. From my perspective, absolutely no sporting event or facility in the history of mankind has ever "paid back the investment". However, neither has any museum, art gallery, or concert hall. Yet we invest billions into those each year. Did the Peace Bridge show a fiscal return for Calgary? Sometimes it ain't just about "how much money will this make us?".

I also think that very soon, we're going to see a "smaller" Olympics. Where a city convinces the powers-that-be that this ever-escalating cost is unsustainable. Eventually cities will be literally bankrupting themselves to host these games. I think 15-20 years from now will be right around the time we start scaling back substantially on all of the excess.

The bigger problem in Calgary is, how are we gonna bus out all the homeless people to Vancouver, with such leftist hippies as Nenshi in charge?

[Chadillaccc]

Eventually bankrupting themselves? Cough - Sochi - cough. Russia is going to be paying back that blunder for decades, possibly generations $52 billion in 2013 dollars. That is fucking crazy... but since it's Putin's Russia, it's also awesome and hillarious

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by freeweed

This one I ain't gonna bet on. From my perspective, absolutely no sporting event or facility in the history of mankind has ever "paid back the investment". However, neither has any museum, art gallery, or concert hall. Yet we invest billions into those each year. Did the Peace Bridge show a fiscal return for Calgary? Sometimes it ain't just about "how much money will this make us?".

True, wonder when that will become an accepted societal norm? I for one hope we make it there soon. That said we can't go spending money on items just so we have them if they have don't have benefits to the city in the future, i.e. is spending money on a new rink (to bring this back on topic) going to have a long term benefit to Calgary, that wouldn't exist with the Saddledome?

Originally Posted by freeweed

I also think that very soon, we're going to see a "smaller" Olympics. Where a city convinces the powers-that-be that this ever-escalating cost is unsustainable. Eventually cities will be literally bankrupting themselves to host these games. I think 15-20 years from now will be right around the time we start scaling back substantially on all of the excess.

The bigger problem in Calgary is, how are we gonna bus out all the homeless people to Vancouver, with such leftist hippies as Nenshi in charge?

I agree, at some point the constant escalation will have to stop, but when will rational sense over rule national pride and ego?

IMO the 5-10B would be far better spent housing our homeless and vulnerable population, along with significant increases in efficiency of our transportation system.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by freeweed

This one I ain't gonna bet on. From my perspective, absolutely no sporting event or facility in the history of mankind has ever "paid back the investment". However, neither has any museum, art gallery, or concert hall. Yet we invest billions into those each year. Did the Peace Bridge show a fiscal return for Calgary? Sometimes it ain't just about "how much money will this make us?".

Where is the billions in investment for museums, art galleries and concert halls taking place? I suppose we are getting the new RAM and just got a new Art Gallery in Edmonton, but what is their total costs? Is it as high as the amount Edmonton is investing in their new arena? And we haven't seen anything in Calgary. As well, I don't think museums and art galleries can be considered the same as sports venues, as they are usually not for profits with the goal of educating the public. If we subsidize an arena, why not subsidize a movie theater?

I also think that very soon, we're going to see a "smaller" Olympics. Where a city convinces the powers-that-be that this ever-escalating cost is unsustainable. Eventually cities will be literally bankrupting themselves to host these games. I think 15-20 years from now will be right around the time we start scaling back substantially on all of the excess.

I think we are already starting to see this. Didn't Rome pull out of the 2020 bid because the city agreed it simply couldn't afford to host the games?

[Riise]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I don't think the community would be all that happy to have a stadium and an arena plopped down there, given the drunkenness and loud concerts and traffic nightmares that go with these venues. I'm not sure there is enough space either, given the need for parking.

I don't believe Sunalta would have much of a say as the arena would not be going in their community and the Flames Organization would only consult with the out of courtesy. Also, the Flames Organization would have to provide parking underground in Victoria Park as permanent new surface parking lots are not allowed in Beltline. Consequently, the Flames Organization would have to pay the same amount to reduce parking concerns in Sunalta as they would have to pay to provide new lots in Beltline.