HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > General Discussions, Culture, Dining, Sports & Recreation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 4:20 PM
tomthumb2's Avatar
tomthumb2 tomthumb2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fisher Account View Post
Stop putting money into this dump and build a new goddamn stadium already!
Amen!!! There is nothing about McDump that I find appealing. Old football stadiums def do not hold as much charm as baseball parks (ie: Fenway Park).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:19 PM
Riise's Avatar
Riise Riise is offline
City Maker
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary | London
Posts: 3,195
When we talk about replacing McMahon we, not unexpectedly, usually discuss possibilities for a new stadium. Last week I saw MLSE’s plans for an expanded BMO Field and it got me pondering what would be in the realm of possibility for a massive refurbishment of McMahon. While I wasn’t overly impressed with the aesthetics of the plan for BMO Field, I was thoroughly impressed with the plans to renovate and expand Stade Vélodrome in Marsielle. Architects love to embrace challenges, could they do something equally impressive with McMahon?


Stade Vélodrome – Before


Source: StadiumGuide.com

Stade Vélodrome – Proposed After




BMO Field – Current


Source: CBC.ca


BMO Field – Proposed


Source: SSC.com
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:38 PM
CorporateWhore's Avatar
CorporateWhore CorporateWhore is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Purgatory
Posts: 4,685
Every time I see a Canadian stadium proposal (this BMO one or all the new CFL stadiums..apart from perhaps BC Place), the word "cheap" always seems to be the first thing that comes to mind. Everything always has that tacked-together-from-existing-playground-equipment, look to it. It seems like our design standards for stadiums are a lot lower than they are for things like condos and office towers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:43 PM
speedog's Avatar
speedog speedog is offline
Moran supreme
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riise View Post
When we talk about replacing McMahon we, not unexpectedly, usually discuss possibilities for a new stadium. Last week I saw MLSE’s plans for an expanded BMO Field and it got me pondering what would be in the realm of possibility for a massive refurbishment of McMahon. While I wasn’t overly impressed with the aesthetics of the plan for BMO Field, I was thoroughly impressed with the plans to renovate and expand Stade Vélodrome in Marsielle. Architects love to embrace challenges, could they do something equally impressive with McMahon?
The problem is with whom owns McMahon. The Flames organization gets none of the parking revenues at McMahon and only lease the facility - the concessions are all run by the Flames but there very well may be some kickback to the U of C out of concessions as well.

I am quite sure that McMahon could be re-engineered into a wonderful facility but do the Flames really have any interest in a facility they don't own. As far as the U of C, the Dino's home opener attracted less than 6,000 people so McMahon easily meets their needs and three concession stands were easily able to service those same 6,000 patrons. Just can't see the Flames willing to put large amounts of money into something they don't own.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:46 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Do you mean the Stampeders?
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:49 PM
speedog's Avatar
speedog speedog is offline
Moran supreme
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadillaccc View Post
Do you mean the Stampeders?
The Flames organization owns the Stampeders - the Flames organization operates all of the concession stands at McMahon. Flames also own the Hitmen and the Roughnecks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:49 PM
CorporateWhore's Avatar
CorporateWhore CorporateWhore is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Purgatory
Posts: 4,685
nm - beaten to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 4:51 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Ohhh I didn't realize that. I thought you may have mixed them up, as I used to do that all the time
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 6:08 PM
Riise's Avatar
Riise Riise is offline
City Maker
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary | London
Posts: 3,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedog View Post
The problem is with whom owns McMahon. The Flames organization gets none of the parking revenues at McMahon and only lease the facility - the concessions are all run by the Flames but there very well may be some kickback to the U of C out of concessions as well.

I am quite sure that McMahon could be re-engineered into a wonderful facility but do the Flames really have any interest in a facility they don't own. As far as the U of C, the Dino's home opener attracted less than 6,000 people so McMahon easily meets their needs and three concession stands were easily able to service those same 6,000 patrons. Just can't see the Flames willing to put large amounts of money into something they don't own.
At this point in time, I’m just interested in what kind of designs we could see if this route was ever selected.

Any type of replacement would be dependent on financing becoming available and I think that would require Calgary being a host city for a World Cup in Canada. If this were to happen, a refurbishment could possibly beat out a new build in terms of cost and re-development potential. It would require the University to sell-off their parking to the City/Province as they would be the major financier and looking to recoup some of their costs via TOD. It would also present an opportunity for the Flames as they could step in, build parkades where the footy pitches are currently located and replace the pitches by locating them atop the parkades.[/Fantasy]
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 7:08 PM
speedog's Avatar
speedog speedog is offline
Moran supreme
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,579
Of note, there are already plans afoot to bulldoze some of the footy pitches to the north of McMahon with a new fieldhouse and another one of the footy pitches has some proposal for another hockey rink or two to the south of the existing two rinks.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 8:43 PM
bt04ku's Avatar
bt04ku bt04ku is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 291
The footprint of McMahon is so ridiculously big for a stadium that provides so little (both for seating and amenities) that a refurbishment just doesn't make any sense. If parking and development is a concern then tearing it down and buiilding something better would open up a lot of better opportunities for both.

The Saddledome may be an obsolete building, but at no point was McMahon ever a good stadium, tearing it down is the only way you can get something good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 9:40 PM
tomthumb2's Avatar
tomthumb2 tomthumb2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 682
Flames/Stamps have said a few times now that both the Saddledome and McMahon are obsolete and would like to replace both (and also own both ideally). So I don't see anything changing at McMahon aside from the minor improvements they've made this year.

What I find somewhat frustrating is that we never hear of ANY plans or even ideas on what might happen down the road. I guess you have to assume that nothing is in the works at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2014, 11:30 PM
Luk_o's Avatar
Luk_o Luk_o is offline
Traditional Ale User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ramsay,CGY
Posts: 446
I think you can safely assume that there are indeed plans in the works. Ken King has confirmed this publicly for years and from what I hear this is one of his primary tasks at hand now that Burke has lightened his load from the hockey operations end of things. I attend any open house I can for the Flames / Stamps and this subject is always brought up during the Q&A session - While of course we wont hear anything about the location / design details until they're certain which site they want to land on after due evaluations and negotiations are complete, you know they are working diligently on it. As an avid supporter / season ticket holder of both teams I am perfectly fine with them taking their time. I would much rather this be done right than fast. The small improvments to McMahon have been a great addition this season and both venues are by no means in need of DIRE replacement. A large scale West Village / Greyhound site type development is for sure the most common rumor I hear circulate around the fan forum events (take that for what its worth). Personally, I would love for this to be true as given the popular options it would be my pick.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 1:46 AM
RyLucky's Avatar
RyLucky RyLucky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,498
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 3:55 AM
tomthumb2's Avatar
tomthumb2 tomthumb2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luk_o View Post
I think you can safely assume that there are indeed plans in the works. Ken King has confirmed this publicly for years and from what I hear this is one of his primary tasks at hand now that Burke has lightened his load from the hockey operations end of things. I attend any open house I can for the Flames / Stamps and this subject is always brought up during the Q&A session - While of course we wont hear anything about the location / design details until they're certain which site they want to land on after due evaluations and negotiations are complete, you know they are working diligently on it. As an avid supporter / season ticket holder of both teams I am perfectly fine with them taking their time. I would much rather this be done right than fast. The small improvments to McMahon have been a great addition this season and both venues are by no means in need of DIRE replacement. A large scale West Village / Greyhound site type development is for sure the most common rumor I hear circulate around the fan forum events (take that for what its worth). Personally, I would love for this to be true as given the popular options it would be my pick.
Thanks for the info Luk. I agree with you - better to wait and do it right. I think everyone is hoping and expecting a "sports complex" so if the delay is because they want to build both an arena and a stadium then thats great. Not sure where funding will come from though - thats probably another big reason for the delay.

Also agree with you 100%, west village would be a great spot for sports and entertainment complex. Whatever we do - it better be at least as good or better than Edmonton and Regina. Tired of playing second fiddle to them!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 4:03 AM
93JC 93JC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by bt04ku View Post
The footprint of McMahon is so ridiculously big for a stadium that provides so little (both for seating and amenities)...


It has to be big enough to fit the field, goof. Its size is commensurate with accommodating over 35,000 people. If you want better seating and 'amenities' it will be even bigger.

Quote:
The Saddledome may be an obsolete building, but at no point was McMahon ever a good stadium, tearing it down is the only way you can get something good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 4:48 AM
The Fisher Account's Avatar
The Fisher Account The Fisher Account is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bridgeland - Calgary, AB
Posts: 1,023
Yeah, not a chance you see the Flames rebuild/renovate on existing land that they don't own.

These two complexes will be built side-by-side on land the Flames own and operate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 5:10 AM
Luk_o's Avatar
Luk_o Luk_o is offline
Traditional Ale User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ramsay,CGY
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthumb2 View Post
Thanks for the info Luk. I agree with you - better to wait and do it right. I think everyone is hoping and expecting a "sports complex" so if the delay is because they want to build both an arena and a stadium then thats great. Not sure where funding will come from though - thats probably another big reason for the delay.

Also agree with you 100%, west village would be a great spot for sports and entertainment complex. Whatever we do - it better be at least as good or better than Edmonton and Regina. Tired of playing second fiddle to them!
I think a West Village area dual venue sports complex development would be the best bet to create something modern & high caliber. I'm not against the stampede grounds as a location but the design quality of a new venue here terrifies me if the Stampede board gets any significant pull into the final product. A set-up similar to Seattle (only scaled down & swapping Safeco with an arena) would be unreal. Heading east on Bow Trail with that to your left and the West Village Towers / Metro Ford development in the back drop would be pretty epic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 1:47 PM
Riise's Avatar
Riise Riise is offline
City Maker
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary | London
Posts: 3,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedog View Post
Of note, there are already plans afoot to bulldoze some of the footy pitches to the north of McMahon with a new fieldhouse and another one of the footy pitches has some proposal for another hockey rink or two to the south of the existing two rinks.
Oh yeah, I remember that proposal. Even if the E-W pitch was removed to accommodate expanding Father David Bauer and Foothills Stadium was demolished to accommodate a Field House, which I feel is still a long shot, the two N-S pitches could be replaced atop a sizable above ground parkade.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthumb2 View Post
Flames/Stamps have said a few times now that both the Saddledome and McMahon are obsolete and would like to replace both (and also own both ideally). So I don't see anything changing at McMahon aside from the minor improvements they've made this year.
Especially in Calgary, people are very quick and probably too quick to turn to the new-build or greenfield solution.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Luk_o View Post
A large scale West Village / Greyhound site type development is for sure the most common rumor I hear circulate around the fan forum events (take that for what its worth). Personally, I would love for this to be true as given the popular options it would be my pick.
Are there any good urban examples of two large scale sporting facilities being located next to each other? I’m most familiar with London where Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park (multiple facilities) and Wembley (one massive stadium poorly integrated into the local neighbourhood) pale in comparison to Craven Cottage, Emirates Stadium, Stamford Bridge, The Valley and Whiteheart Lane that are all integrated into the local neighbourhood.
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 3:03 PM
speedog's Avatar
speedog speedog is offline
Moran supreme
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riise View Post
Oh yeah, I remember that proposal. Even if the E-W pitch was removed to accommodate expanding Father David Bauer and Foothills Stadium was demolished to accommodate a Field House, which I feel is still a long shot, the two N-S pitches could be replaced atop a sizable above ground parkade.
There's already a lot of traction when it comes to this fieldhouse - link. It would better utilize that area than the current sporting facilities that are there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > General Discussions, Culture, Dining, Sports & Recreation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:42 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.