New Downtown Calgary Arena

[polishavenger]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

McMahon is outside of the scope. There is no plan from the city side, as it is university land and the university has not initiated a plan. The city cannot initiate a plan on the land.

There was an initial plan to put some retail development on the lots next to crowchild, anchored by a grocery store.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

McMahon is outside of the scope. There is no plan from the city side, as it is university land and the university has not initiated a plan. The city cannot initiate a plan on the land.

The University must have done it then, definitely remember seeing the plan for that land, and it kept the football and baseball stadiums.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

The University must have done it then, definitely remember seeing the plan for that land, and it kept the football and baseball stadiums.

I believe that while McMahon is on U of C property, the baseball stadium (and Foothills athletic park) is on city land. So, they can't fall onto the same plans unless the city and U of C work together.

Sounds like a job for the CMLC. But they have well over a decade of sorting out the Stampede's mess first. Then West Village. Then Westbrook. Then TODs. They should start hiring more people.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Barnes

There are plenty of hockey related challenges. Limited suites, small lower bowl, and not much club or premium seating. These not only generate more revenue because they just cost more but the team keeps more money as they carry a lower percentage of HRR.

None of those are "hockey" challenges. What those are - are ways to make even more money. Between the appreciation on the team, the positive cash flow over the decades, and the massive profits from entertainment at the dome (leveraging the low rent agreed to by the city based on hockey) the owners of the entertainment corporation have made well over $1,000,000,000.00 on their original $16M investment. What you've articulated is that the city should thrown in more tax payer money to subsidize the owners increasing their already astronomical rate of return.

[MalcolmTucker]

I'll grant that there has been appreciation in the value of the teams. There is no evidence of massive profits from the other things. If there was, there would be lots of private rink proposals.

And unrealized gains are just that.

Does the city really want to end up in a Colisée Pepsi, Winnipeg Arena situation?

[s211]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Does the city really want to end up in a Colisée Pepsi, Winnipeg Arena situation?

What happened in those instances?

[esquire]

Serious question: is the possibility of a Euro-style phased one-stand-at-a-time rebuild of McMahon in the cards at all? i.e. build a new south stand, then demolish and replace the west stand, then demolish and replace the east stand. Could be done over the course of a decade.

When you have as good a site as McMahon is, it may be worth finding a way to keep it. IGF's location in Winnipeg probably knocks per game attendance down by a couple thousand a game simply because of the hassle involved in getting there.

[Socguy]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

...
Does the city really want to end up in a Colisée Pepsi, Winnipeg Arena situation?

Colisee Pepsi: sat 15,176, Winnipeg Arena: sat 15, 393, Saddledome: seats 19, 289 which is down from it's high of 20, 230 (as the flames demanded the city renovate and install more luxury boxes.)

By comparison the new Edmonton arena will only seat 18, 641.

Considering the Flames are comfortably in the top half of league revenue, there is less than zero percent chance of them leaving for greener pastures. A new arena is simply a shiny new toy for the well-heeled that makes no sense from a city/taxpayer perspective.

[craner]

Some great ideas for renovating the old gal (McMahon).
I agree it could be done in phases over a number of seasons. I just really hope they do more SUBSTANTIAL renovations (and not just SOME renovations as mentioned in the article).
Perhaps the Stamps could use the adjacent new Field House as a practice facility (as I think the Eskimos do in Edmonton).
And lastly - I'm glad the Stamps are staying outdoors.

[People.talking]

McMahon isn't a renovate type project, Its a tear down and rebuild type project.

[craner]

^I agree, but it could be done in phases over say 4 seasons (south, east, west north) for example.
They should do something with the field as well as I've heard the crown is too high to host FIFA sanctioned events.
I think the location of McMahon is great. Just need to upgrade the C-Train station and walkway over Crowchild as well.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by People.talking

McMahon isn't a renovate type project, Its a tear down and rebuild type project.

Problem with that is there is nowhere for them to play during this teardown and rebuild...

Originally Posted by craner

^I agree, but it could be done in phases over say 4 seasons (south, east, west north) for example.
They should do something with the field as well as I've heard the crown is too high to host FIFA sanctioned events.
I think the location of McMahon is great. Just need to upgrade the C-Train station and walkway over Crowchild as well.

If McMahon is to remain, this is pretty much how it will have to be done, 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 thing is all the work will have to happen over winter.

[artvandelay]

Bringing McMahon to an acceptable standard will cost the same or more than building a new, modern stadium. It's a foolish endeavour and it's unfortunate to see our municipal leaders leading us down a path that will ultimately cost more to the taxpayer in the long run versus a facility combined with a new arena.

[The Fisher Account]

What you're not hearing is that U of C likely REALLY wants McMahon demolished so they can redevelop the site. No need for the Dinos to play in a 40k stadium

[RyLucky]

The biggest change that McMahon ought to undertake is to respond to how its neighbourhood has changed since 1960, when McMahon was first built.




In 1960, the UofC (then called the University of Alberta, Calgary; or the University of Alberta at Calgary) had about 3 buildings and <1000 students. The first building at Foothills Medical Centre opened around 1965. There was virtually no development on 3 sides of McMahon, and only low-density bungalows on grassy prairie where there was any development at all. There was no C-train, no Olympics, no Hockey Team. In 1960, Calgary's population was 262 000! Calgary was Regina.

Calgary's population in 1960 was Regina's population in 2016. Calgary's population in 2016 was Toronto's population in 1960. What will Calgary's needs be in 2060?

If McMahon is to avoid being a blight on the surrounding neighbourhoods over the next 50 years, in addition to building more capacity and ways to extract revenue from fans, it needs to do this:
-Find a way to keep busy from 7 am - 2 am. Amateur/varsity sports, walking and biking shortcuts between Banff Trail Station and Foothills etc, game-day entertainment/restaurants/pubs, residential high-density development for students/employees. Be flexible to allow for future improvements to Foothills Athletic Park. Develop partners in UofC and the city. McMahon ought to be and could be an absolute selling point when attracting students or local development. Consider partnership and connections to Winsport, COP, and an athletic gateway to the Rockies and Bow River.
-Find a way to maintain mobility as ever-increasing traffic in the area becomes more and more of a problem. In the future, as now, most people will travel to the area by transit, walking or biking. It's a great location for all three of these modes, and with a few subtle improvements, it could improve even more. We need seamless pedestrian and cyclist connection in all directions, as well as through the grounds. Consider eventual upgrades to Crowchild (lights will probably eventually go out at 14th, Kensington, and 5th - but this could mean a variety of things). Consider access to 16th Ave BRT. Consider one day a gondola overhead.

[Innersoul1]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Problem with that is there is nowhere for them to play during this teardown and rebuild...

We might just need to think outside of the box a bit. When BC place was being renovated the Lions played out of a fully temporary stadium (Empire Stadium) built in the middle of a parking lot. It was actually quite nice. The sightlines were awesome and there was a great atmosphere in the stadium. The Lions did a great job with temporary washrooms and the food an beverage facilities were pretty good. Give what we are used to in terms of washrooms and food and beverage this actually wouldn't be that bad.

Credit to the Edmonton Journal

Credit to Asset. inhabitat.com

Credit to lionsbackers.com

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by People.talking

McMahon isn't a renovate type project, Its a tear down and rebuild type project.

I'm not suggesting this could be done on the same scale as the two leagues are night and day different, but both Lambeau Field in Green Bay and Soldier Field in Chicago were heavily renovated and in the case of Soldier field the stadium was essentially replaced. So yes, a reno is possible rather than a full tear down.

I still think McMahon could be nicely updated by doing it in phases without affecting the Stamps too much. Hamilton and BC are not the same because they had other stadium options to play in while their fields were being built. There is nothing equivalent in Calgary that the Stamps could use.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Innersoul1

We might just need to think outside of the box a bit. When BC place was being renovated the Lions played out of a fully temporary stadium (Empire Stadium) built in the middle of a parking lot. It was actually quite nice. The sightlines were awesome and there was a great atmosphere in the stadium. The Lions did a great job with temporary washrooms and the food an beverage facilities were pretty good. Give what we are used to in terms of washrooms and food and beverage this actually wouldn't be that bad.

That's not bad actually, I thought they played out of the stadium at UBC.

[Innersoul1]

I am not so worried about the arena. I figure whatever we get will be "world class." The big question is whether it will turn out as marvelous as Edmonton's new barn, which I think is a benchmark league wide.

McMahon really has me worried and so much hinges on this stadium. Not only will it be home to the Stampeders but it will be our major outdoor venue to host a multitude of other sports like soccer and rugby. I won't be making friends with this comment but I absolutely deplore the new Mosaic Stadium. It's big, but it just looks so awkward and disjointed.

In our new stadium we have the ability to build something wonderful and functional. I think that not sharing the space with a field house is the best thing to happen.

Watching the Euros I was reminded how many of the stadia being used were also used for World Cup 1998 when France hosted. Toulouse's stadium municipal is a great example of a simple yet graceful stadium with a capacity of 33,000:

Credit: Cafefootball.eu
For something more modern we can look at Nice's Allianze Rivera with a capacity of 35,000:

Credit: FCbarcelona.com

Credit: Cafefootball.eu

[People.talking]

The Allianz Riviera is what I would want the new stadium to look like. I'd love to see something like that in Calgary, Or even a scaled down version of the Allianz Arena in Munich
credit to Wikipedia