Stadiums and Arenas of Canada part 2

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Two-level ice facility could be the future of Rexall Place



http://globalnews.ca/news/2515249/two-level-ice-facility-could-be-the-future-of-rexall-place/

Considering the age of the facility and the fact that it is not a particularly nice building, I'm surprised they wouldn't just tear it down and sell the land. Interesting concept none-the-less. We've seen a good variety of adaptive re-use of old arenas (Forum, Maple Leaf Gardens and now Rexall).

The owner of the Senators will be revealing his plans for the Palladium/Corel Centre/Scotiabank Place/Canadian Tire Centre by the end of February.

[tomthumb2]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

Jesus do you Calgarians believe that you're the only city on earth with over crowding issues? IGF is brand new and has crowding issues. Commonwealth half empty has over crowding issues. You put 20,000-30,000 blatters springing for bathrooms at the same time it doesn't matter how many bathrooms you have they will be over crowded.

If you were at the Heritage Classic or Grey Cup or any time the Riders are in town you would see that its more than just over crowding - it's actually shoulder to shoulder jam packed. Of course these are only isolated events but they prove that McMahon isn't fit for large events. Like someone said, it was originally designed for 20,000 so maybe the solution is to actually remove some seats. The corner seats rarely get filled anyway so that could be a start.

I must say that I've completely changed my thinking about McMahon these days. It probably serves its purpose for a second tier league (even as a STH I'll still probably get ripped for that, lol) and only gets used 9 or 10 times a year anyway. Just don't hold major events there.

[BenTheGreat97]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Considering the age of the facility and the fact that it is not a particularly nice building, I'm surprised they wouldn't just tear it down and sell the land. Interesting concept none-the-less. We've seen a good variety of adaptive re-use of old arenas (Forum, Maple Leaf Gardens and now Rexall).

The owner of the Senators will be revealing his plans for the Palladium/Corel Centre/Scotiabank Place/Canadian Tire Centre by the end of February.

Ottawa resident here, it might be a good idea to do something like the Rexall plan but for the Canadian Tire Centre once the new downtown rink is built.

The Kanata/Stittsville area around the rink is growing rapidly and they always seem to be in need of minor hockey rinks, even though there are 2 separate ice rinks totaling 6 sheets of ice just down the road from CTC.

Another 6-sheet Sensplex-type rink would alleviate the need for a few more years and would allow them to renovate some of the older neighborhood rinks too, without making it tough on scheduling.

I DO NOT want it to be turned into more retail. The whole of Kanata seems to be just neighborhoods and big box stores. CTC already has the huge parking lot size to handle 6 ice sheets being used by minor hockey at once.

[Oilkountry]

It's not the fact that Calgary doesn't deserve a new arena. The question is, has the saddledome reached it's shelf life? You have to look through the rest of Canada's eyes. predecessors to today's arenas lasted 40-60 years the dome is hardly into its 3rd decade. So has it served Calgary well? I don't think Edmonton needed a rink at all. Rexall is still a fine home for an NHL team 42 years later and it lacks way more than the saddledome ever will in every way.

I have a hard time understanding as tax payers why you are so eager to spend a billion of your tax dollars to fund an arena and stadium when you could easily renovate the stadium and bring the arena up to standards. So you miss a few concerts here and there? Can you imagine constructing a new arena every 35 years? Honestly if the flames are paying then hell yeah!! all for it! but they are asking you as tax payers to invest a billion dollars of a 1.3B project for a field house they could build for 80M dollars on their own. How you don't have a problem with this is baffling

[speedog]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

It's not the fact that Calgary doesn't deserve a new arena. The question is, has the saddledome reached it's shelf life? You have to look through the rest of Canada's eyes. predecessors to today's arenas lasted 40-60 years the dome is hardly into its 3rd decade. So has it served Calgary well? I don't think Edmonton needed a rink at all. Rexall is still a fine home for an NHL team 42 years later and it lacks way more than the saddledome ever will in every way.

I have a hard time understanding as tax payers why you are so eager to spend a billion of your tax dollars to fund an arena and stadium when you could easily renovate the stadium and bring the arena up to standards. So you miss a few concerts here and there? Can you imagine constructing a new arena every 35 years? Honestly if the flames are paying then hell yeah!! all for it! but they are asking you as tax payers to invest a billion dollars of a 1.3B project for a field house they could build for 80M dollars on their own. How you don't have a problem with this is baffling

I, as a Calgary tax payer, am not eager to spend a shit load of tax dollars on any new arena or stadium as I believe there are things that tax monies can be better spent on.

In the end, some tax monies will go to such facilities at least up front because money has to come from somewhere that will be paid back by CRL levies and ticket taxes or am I wrong on this assumption. In Edmonton's new arena deal, there are tax monies being used up front to fund the arena that will be paid back over time with the hopeful end net result being in the black.

Personally, I don't think that there's that many Calgary tax payers who want to own such facilities although I could be wrong - certainly no one in my circle of friends and family thinks so. A field house would be nice but I believe Calgary will get by quite fine without one if that happens to be the final outcome.

[Oilkountry]

More plans for rexall

When Rexall was built, the roof system was designed to hold significant weight, which Caterina said lends itself to the two-level idea.

http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/two-level-tournament-centre-proposed-for-rexall-place-1.2776886
I actually remember reading about this. When the arena was designed they thought the roof would sag 15 inches when the centre support was removed after they removed it the roof didn't move a centimeter. Even when they hung the originally scoreboard which was a giant brick the roof barley budged.

One thing I'm surprised about is that they aren't selling the naming rights. Northlands retaining the name seems sort of dumb to me

[tomthumb2]

Originally Posted by speedog

I, as a Calgary tax payer, am not eager to spend a shit load of tax dollars on any new arena or stadium as I believe there are things that tax monies can be better spent on.

In the end, some tax monies will go to such facilities at least up front because money has to come from somewhere that will be paid back by CRL levies and ticket taxes or am I wrong on this assumption. In Edmonton's new arena deal, there are tax monies being used up front to fund the arena that will be paid back over time with the hopeful end net result being in the black.

Personally, I don't think that there's that many Calgary tax payers who want to own such facilities although I could be wrong - certainly no one in my circle of friends and family thinks so. A field house would be nice but I believe Calgary will get by quite fine without one if that happens to be the final outcome.

I think most people here would agree with your assessment. Since the land the Flames want is a polluted wasteland I could see the city thinking about just giving it to them and then they could do whatever they want with it but that's not going to happen either.

[Jay in Cowtown]

Originally Posted by speedog

I, as a Calgary tax payer, am not eager to spend a shit load of tax dollars on any new arena or stadium as I believe there are things that tax monies can be better spent on.

I (and everyone I know) pay our taxes to RVC or Cochrane... so we're 100% fine with your taxes going towards both!

What I'm not fine with is the proposal! An arena in the west village is ok I suppose... but build a stadium somewhere you have space for parking at the end of a train line, or renovate McMahon.

See the BC Lions, Toronto Argonauts & even St. Louis Rams if you'd like to know what happens to teams in an enclosed downtown dome with zero parking!!!

[GernB]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

Jesus do you calgarians believe that you're the only city on earth with over crowding issues? IGF is brand new and has crowding issues. Commonwealth half empty has over crowding issues. You put 20,000-30,000 blatters springing for bathrooms at the same time it doesn't matter how many bathrooms you have they will be over crowded. The big O is the only venue I can think of that has enough concourse space for it's patrons. If you can relieve some of that stress on McMahon by adding a well thought out %30-40 capacity of washrooms in the endzone It will go a long way You wouldn't be forcing everyone to walk from their sideline seats to the endzone because the existing washrooms would still be in place. If it cost 100M than so be it! better than 300M for a new one or 500M for CalgaryNext. I would rather see them dump 145M into McMahon then build a THF for the same price. 100M is a bargain as far as I'm concerned

Miss your coffee this morning, did you?

As is clearly stated in the header, I am not from Calgary. And adding some presently trendy bar-cum-nosh-pit with a couple of bathrooms and concessions in the end zone to complement the four extant is not going to solve the problems in the rest of the stadium. The point is moot in any event, as neither the City nor the University is going to put any money into McMahon any time soon.

[Oilkountry]

Originally Posted by GernB

Miss your coffee this morning, did you?

As is clearly stated in the header, I am not from Calgary. And adding some presently trendy bar-cum-nosh-pit with a couple of bathrooms and concessions in the end zone to complement the four extant is not going to solve the problems in the rest of the stadium. The point is moot in any event, as neither the City nor the University is going to put any money into McMahon any time soon.

If/When calgaryNext fails I can almost guarantee you something will be done with McMahon between a partnership with the flames group the city and the university. You're kind of contradicting yourself

"The problem with McMahon is that the concourses are cramped and their is not enough washrooms,But You can't simply solve the problem by adding more concourse space and bathrooms that's just so trendy... what you need to do is expand the concourses and add more washroom facilities to the current stands"

If you add these "rum hut" type gathering areas at McMahon you will pull a lot of people from the existing concourses to this area. How you can deny that adding %40 more concourse space wont help the congestion at McMahon?

[GernB]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

If/When calgaryNext fails I can almost guarantee you something will be done with McMahon between a partnership with the flames group the city and the university. You're kind of contradicting yourself

"The problem with McMahon is that the concourses are cramped and their is not enough washrooms,But You can't simply solve the problem by adding more concourse space and bathrooms that's just so trendy... what you need to do is expand the concourses and add more washroom facilities to the current stands"

If you add these "rum hut" type gathering areas at McMahon you will pull a lot of people from the existing concourses to this area. How you can deny that adding %40 more concourse space wont help the congestion at McMahon?

Because not everyone wants to stand in an end zone with a drink in hand trying to catch a glimpse of the game over/around/through a milling crowd. Most people want a decent seat on the sidelines with quick access to concessions and washrooms, so they can get back to the game.

As for contradicting oneself...since you seem to be able to read minds, perhaps you could tell us why no one with the City/University/Stamps/Flames has yet been able to come with a workable plan such as you envision despite proposals being floated for decades.

[Oilkountry]

Originally Posted by GernB

Because not everyone wants to stand in an end zone with a drink in hand trying to catch a glimpse of the game over/around/through a milling crowd. Most people want a decent seat on the sidelines with quick access to concessions and washrooms, so they can get back to the game.

As for contradicting oneself...since you seem to be able to read minds, perhaps you could tell us why no one with the City/University/Stamps/Flames has yet been able to come with a workable plan such as you envision despite proposals being floated for decades.

dude, that's exactly what I'm saying. Me at 28 would be over their in a heart beat most people my age would which will open up the existing concourses for people like you who don't want to take part in that younger crowd.

Because they would rather have a Brand new arena and Stadium paid for by the city, I think it's clear that has always been the plan. When that plan fails they will have to do something with mcmahon. Any upgrades prior to the CalagryNext pitch would have hurt them substantially.

[Oilkountry]

Moose dressing room at MTS Centre (nicer than the jets IMO)

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

More plans for rexall


http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/two-level-tournament-centre-proposed-for-rexall-place-1.2776886
I actually remember reading about this. When the arena was designed they thought the roof would sag 15 inches when the centre support was removed after they removed it the roof didn't move a centimeter. Even when they hung the originally scoreboard which was a giant brick the roof barley budged.

One thing I'm surprised about is that they aren't selling the naming rights. Northlands retaining the name seems sort of dumb to me

Trust me; if they haven't sold the naming rights by the time it opens, it will come soon after. Placing the Northlands name for is just good PR.

We've seen this countless times in Ottawa; the CTC was originally called the Palladium up until a month after it opened when it was renamed the Corel Centre. The Ottawa Convention Centre was named the Shaw Centre a few years after it opened. TD Place, which was once known as the Civic Centre (arena) and Frank Clair Stadium (for a former Rough Riders coach), had its soul sold to the highest bidder during construction.

As for who should fund an arena, I hope that Ottawa will serve as an example. Due to the split fan base, we arguably have the smallest market (maybe second smallest after Winnipeg) in the country, yet the owner of the NHL team is ready to fund 100% of his arena project. And it's not like he's getting free land. The NCC will sell the land to whomever wins the process, for market value. Not only that, but the land is highly contaminated. It will cost upwards of 200 million to remediate (granted that has an impact on market value, and the City has programs to help remediate sites in the form of tax breaks).

Although Edmonton's formula for Rogers doesn't seem terrible, I take issue with Detroit's approach (not my problem) and Québec, who don't even have an NHL team and built the facility on a mid-90s type suburban location surrounded by parking and a complete lack of any other sort of supporting development.

In the case of new CFL stadiums, we need to take into consideration the fact that their is little money to be made owning a team, so municipal support is for the most part needed.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by BenTheGreat97

Ottawa resident here, it might be a good idea to do something like the Rexall plan but for the Canadian Tire Centre once the new downtown rink is built.

The Kanata/Stittsville area around the rink is growing rapidly and they always seem to be in need of minor hockey rinks, even though there are 2 separate ice rinks totaling 6 sheets of ice just down the road from CTC.

Another 6-sheet Sensplex-type rink would alleviate the need for a few more years and would allow them to renovate some of the older neighborhood rinks too, without making it tough on scheduling.

I DO NOT want it to be turned into more retail. The whole of Kanata seems to be just neighborhoods and big box stores. CTC already has the huge parking lot size to handle 6 ice sheets being used by minor hockey at once.

Definitely agree that retail should not be in the mix, or at least have a very small part in the plan. I wouldn't mind seeing something similar to, well, DCDLS's proposal for LeBreton Flats. Just a bunch of museums and attractions that close at 5 pm. Nice family destination during the day, but quiet during the evening and night.

[oiler-dude]

More plans / information on the Northlands renovations have been made public.

Additional info & renderings can be found at: http://www.northlands.com/vision2020/

[Black Star]

This will be amazing. Great concepts.

Northlands management has sure did a 180 from a couple of years ago.

[esquire]

^ Seems like it would make a great community asset. I guess the big question is how much does it cost to repurpose the Coliseum vs. demolition and new build?

[oiler-dude]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Seems like it would make a great community asset. I guess the big question is how much does it cost to repurpose the Coliseum vs. demolition and new build?

Preliminary numbers for this are:

Renovating Rexall: $85 million
New festival space: $45 million
Hall D concert space: $35 mill

Total overhaul: $165 million

I believe it was mentioned somewhere, at some point in the last year (but I have no source other than memory) that it would be ~$10M to prep & demolish Rexall.

[Oilkountry]

Way to go Edmonton and Ottawa on these aggressive revitalization projects. Northlands and the city centre Airport are definitely in need of it. Combine that with the downtown projects. Edmonton is becoming a more and more livable city again everyday.