Results 1 to 39 of 39

Thread: Arena conceptual drawings

  1. #1
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,711
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Arena conceptual drawings

    For your review.










    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  2. #2

    Default

    Brilliant imo
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  3. #3
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Where ever Visa is accepted
    Posts
    4,483

    Default

    Hey is that Diana Krall in the bottom right corner of the first picture ?
    Go ahead, speed pass me... I'll meet you at the next red light.

  4. #4
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    Actually I like the tower in the concept
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  5. #5
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Silverberry, Edmonton
    Posts
    189

    Default

    Modify the top slightly so it doesn't look exactly like a bicycle seat and I'm happy. I think the tower is unique and like it as well. It reminds me of those those wind powered spinning towers in dubai.
    Wouldn't that be something if we got one of those!!! That would really be iconic. Whatever the final design is, I hope it's as distinctive as say the birds nest in Beijing , that stadium is just plain amazing imo.


    http://oursurprisingworld.com/wp-con...r_dubai_01.jpg

  6. #6
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Oliver
    Posts
    1,769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanW9 View Post
    Modify the top slightly so it doesn't look exactly like a bicycle seat and I'm happy....
    They could name it the Bicycle-Saddledome?
    Last edited by andy8244; 08-05-2010 at 07:36 PM.

  7. #7

    Default

    Cheesy and looks like something ripped off from Total Recall. The only useful element is the brick facade in the second picture and the rest is just lame.

    Concept designs are generally meant to assist selling the actual cad drawings.
    For me, that's not enough since usually what you see in the pictures is 99% of the time not as it turns out. All I see is this stupid arena and it overtakes everything.

    What in the world is the point of an ultrawide assembly hall when we already know Churchill is a collosal waste of space?

    The waterpark called. They want their umbrellas back.

  8. #8
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Silverberry, Edmonton
    Posts
    189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andy8244 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AlanW9 View Post
    Modify the top slightly so it doesn't look exactly like a bicycle seat and I'm happy....
    They could name it the Bicycle-Saddledome?
    Haha. We should built a larger and fancier saddledome just to **** Calgary off, LOL! In all seriousness though I'm sure the final design will be quite a bit different than this so I will wait for the next concept design, and the next....

  9. #9
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    Actually I like the tower in the concept
    i like the idea that apparently Katz wants to build the tallest of the towers 60 stories! good luck! i have the feeling the city will dumb it down to 40 stories. too bad! but the roof of the arena should be changed, looks quite odd to say the least.

  10. #10
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,726

    Default

    I think it would be great to have a 60-storey building in Edmonton, and this one would not add a significant amount to the office space market in Edmonton. For many years, Edmonton's downtown has had the same look, and something like this would have a huge impact on the skyline. Many buildings have been limited in height because of the City Centre Airport, and the closure of the airport would mean that this could go ahead as part of the EAD. Also, a building like this could be a catalyst for other construction in Edmonton.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  11. #11
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    ^^^^true, but the city has only shut down one strip at the airport, right? typical of the city to make a half-a$$ed decision so as to not offend either the pro airport people or the no airport people. can't PO half of the voters now can we? we should be building them higher. might not have to build so many of them if we could go higher.

  12. #12
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,643

    Default

    So we can now assume that the Oilers are in favor of Muni shutdown to accommodate their downtown arena concept? When Cal Nichols jumped onboard the pro-Muni camp, people assumed he was secretly batting for the hockey club.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  13. #13
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,726

    Default

    OilTastic/BCD, the whole airport would have to be shut down to accommodate the 60-storey tower. The arena is within the 2 km (or whatever designated) radius of the airport.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  14. #14
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    OilTastic/BCD, the whole airport would have to be shut down to accommodate the 60-storey tower. The arena is within the 2 km (or whatever designated) radius of the airport.
    ya, that's true! that's why i wish the city had the [email protected] to do it, and not just half of it. despite what old Cal might want, i'm in favour of it closing completely.

  15. #15
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    So we can now assume that the Oilers are in favor of Muni shutdown to accommodate their downtown arena concept? When Cal Nichols jumped onboard the pro-Muni camp, people assumed he was secretly batting for the hockey club.
    Cal's made it quite clear he's pro-Muni, and i didn't think for one minute he was speaking on behalf of the Oilers, he's speaking on behalf of his own opinion. it must have worked with city counsel and the mayor because he succeded in keeping one of the runways open....for now at least. i think eventually it will be closed completely. to me it's a waste of space to be building many shorter highrises when taller ones might keep us from needing to build so many.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by armin View Post
    Cheesy and looks like something ripped off from Total Recall. The only useful element is the brick facade in the second picture and the rest is just lame.

    Concept designs are generally meant to assist selling the actual cad drawings.
    For me, that's not enough since usually what you see in the pictures is 99% of the time not as it turns out. All I see is this stupid arena and it overtakes everything.

    What in the world is the point of an ultrawide assembly hall when we already know Churchill is a collosal waste of space?

    The waterpark called. They want their umbrellas back.

    WOW Armin can I get your address so I can send you some happy pills, ...not this, waste of that, stupid... grump grump grump, you can still provide constructive criticism and sound half educated doing it you know
    Evolution beats Revolution every time!

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andy8244 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AlanW9 View Post
    Modify the top slightly so it doesn't look exactly like a bicycle seat and I'm happy....
    They could name it the Bicycle-Saddledome?
    It looks like a "cup" to me if you catch my drift

    .. not the best design, but these are trial balloon drawings to test the waters... so I won't get to excited yet. overall nice idea (minus the bridge gotta work on that one)... you can tell it just a concept sketch 'cause other than the fancy tower the rest are boxes to show you where some would go eventually...

    Good first steps!
    Evolution beats Revolution every time!

  18. #18

    Default

    The_Cat

    "OilTastic/BCD, the whole airport would have to be shut down to accommodate the 60-storey tower. The arena is within the 2 km (or whatever designated) radius of the airport."

    The Arena and the proposed tower could be built as is as neither are on approaches.

    Tom

  19. #19
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    ah, that IS good news, TH, but you know what it seems to be like in this city....maybe 39 stories max. a 60 story tower would define our skyline so i'd be all for it. even dummied down to 50 would be fine, but not more of the same, height wise.

  20. #20

    Default

    OilTastic/BCD

    Just wanted to keep things accurate is all...I'm not wading into it.

    As far as defining the skyline...well I figure market forces will decide that for us, if there is a demand it will happen.

    A Skyline to me does not define a city...what the city/community does defines the city.

    Tom

  21. #21
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    The_Cat

    "OilTastic/BCD, the whole airport would have to be shut down to accommodate the 60-storey tower. The arena is within the 2 km (or whatever designated) radius of the airport."

    The Arena and the proposed tower could be built as is as neither are on approaches.

    Tom
    "...as neither are on approaches" might be technically correct but the proposed tower could not be built under the constraints and height restrictions presently imposed as a result of airport operations.

    whether those constraints and height restrictions could be amended/changed is a different discussion but as things stand, saying "The arena and the proposed tower could be built" is incorrect.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  22. #22
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    OilTastic/BCD

    Just wanted to keep things accurate is all...I'm not wading into it.

    As far as defining the skyline...well I figure market forces will decide that for us, if there is a demand it will happen.

    A Skyline to me does not define a city...what the city/community does defines the city.

    Tom
    tom,

    you can't get your feet wet and at the same time say you're not wading into it...

    and you can't say "if there is a demand it will happen" without acknowledging that even if there is a demand, that demand will not define the skyline past the point where "no man has gone before" because it's not allowed, demand notwithstanding.

    as for what defines a city, what the city/community does will certainly be part of what defines the city but what the city/community does not do will also be part of what defines the city (and i know that the consequences of either of those can be either positive or negative, that's a different discussion entirely).

    and while a skyline per se might not define a city, it is certainly an integral part of a city, an integral part of the perception of a city by others and an integral part of a city's own self-image. those perceptions and that self-image might not be universal (some may hate what others love) regardless of whether that skyline is high or whether it is not, but that doesn't mean they are not affected or defined by that skyline either way.

    ken
    Last edited by kcantor; 11-05-2010 at 11:09 AM.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    The_Cat

    "OilTastic/BCD, the whole airport would have to be shut down to accommodate the 60-storey tower. The arena is within the 2 km (or whatever designated) radius of the airport."

    The Arena and the proposed tower could be built as is as neither are on approaches.

    Tom
    "...as neither are on approaches" might be technically correct but the proposed tower could not be built under the constraints and height restrictions presently imposed as a result of airport operations.

    whether those constraints and height restrictions could be amended/changed is a different discussion but as things stand, saying "The arena and the proposed tower could be built" is incorrect.
    There is not reason in the Canadian Air Regulations that the proposed site would be affected as it is not in the reaches of the approach.

    Using the same comment as a guide the question would be why has the city not adapted it's overlay?

    But we are going off topic.

    "as for what defines a city, what the city/community does will certainly be part of what defines the city but what the city/community does not do will also be part of what defines the city (and i know that the consequences of either of those can be either positive or negative, that's a different discussion entirely)."

    Here we agree.

    Here we don't

    "and while a skyline per se might not define a city, it is certainly an integral part of a city, an integral part of the perception of a city by others and an integral part of a city's own self-image. those perceptions and that self-image might not be universal (some may hate what others love) regardless of whether that skyline is high or whether it is not, but that doesn't mean they are not affected or defined by that skyline either way."

    As I stated above...

    " A Skyline to me does not define a city...what the city/community does defines the city."

    There are many larger more internationally known cities that Edmonton that have chosen to limit height for whatever reasons, but have achieved recognition by what they do and what they are...which is where my opinion comes from.

    Those that think making buildings taller and iconic will solve our image problems simply by their creation are barking up the wrong tree in my mind.

    You want to be a great city...do great things and great things will come to you...those are my thoughts.

    Tom

  24. #24
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    OilTastic/BCD

    Just wanted to keep things accurate is all...I'm not wading into it.

    As far as defining the skyline...well I figure market forces will decide that for us, if there is a demand it will happen.

    A Skyline to me does not define a city...what the city/community does defines the city.

    Tom
    i absolutely agree with you, Tom. that's why i mentioned defining the skyline and not the city.

  25. #25
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    303

    Default

    I kind of have mixed thoughts on the whole project, though I definitely support the downtown arena. The tower on the south side of the complex is at least interesting and unique, but the other 4 towers are as generic as one can build an office tower. I hope the actual towers end up having a much bolder and interesting design.

    I don't mind the enclosed walkway over 104 Avenue. While I agree it may serve to hinder street level development in the area, the benefits of being able to use that walkway year round in all weather conditions will be great. Lets face it too, this facility will get most of it's use during the winter when the hockey season is going strong, so I'd personally be inside rather than out. The downtown core already has a decent pedway system going that this could connect to. And they have incorporated some outdoor street level interaction for pedestrians on the south side of the development.

    As for the height of the tower, I doubt we will see anywhere near 60 storeys, though that would be great if it were to happen. I'm not well versed on the Airport closure, but I don't really understand why they decided to close the north south runway versus the one which runs northwest/southeast over the downtown core. The approach for the remaining runway is right over the central business district, preventing anything over 150M until the airport shuts down. Why didn't they leave the north-south runway open where there are no tall buildings?

    I too will wait till we see more concrete development plans prior to making a final judgement.

  26. #26
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,368

    Default

    ^all of the drawings are "generic" in that no architect has yet been chosen. Hence "conceptual." Looking at the specific details of the buildings is a waste of time since they have little or no relation to what will be built, only roughly where and how big. Even the arena will likely be very, very different from what is shown.

  27. #27
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    ^bingo... although from all accounts, this is very much want Katz would like as a finished product.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  28. #28
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    "conceptual drawings " = "Emporer's New Clothes"

  29. #29
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    "Let's run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it."
    "Let's put it in a saucer and see if the cat licks it up."

  30. #30
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    west downtown
    Posts
    673

    Default

    can something look worse than that "concept" ?
    "fake old" with no intresting features meets a glass bicycle seat ( as mentioned )
    the "concept " as I see it is an embarassing mess and I think ,no wait ...I KNOW we can do better than that !

  31. #31
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    looks very good.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IGNITERS View Post
    can something look worse than that "concept" ?
    "fake old" with no intresting features meets a glass bicycle seat ( as mentioned )
    the "concept " as I see it is an embarassing mess and I think ,no wait ...I KNOW we can do better than that !
    There is ways to combine old styles to new architecture. It just means using the right materials to blend it all in and tie it all together.
    Like a nice rug that ties a room together.

    http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...33.11,,0,-12.6

    This style is very similar to the Strathcona Bus Barns which is a nice building and is a well designed space. They want to put that thing right in the middle of the oldest spot to the building and they'll cheap out on the facade and barely have a plan for the surrounding area. We'll wind up with strip mall architecture instead of something we can actually appreciate and develop more personally.

    One thing I've noticed is how our strip malls don't lend themselves to using colour or matierials any differently than the next store over. It makes everything extremely generic and boring and that's something we need to avoid on this project which is essentially looking like a strip mall wrapped around a coliseum complex.

    We have two perspectives. Street View and Distance. From a distance you can only see the top portion of the arena so you want that to be unique, but it also needs to remain distant from the street view or at least not overpowering. Street view rules is pretty much limited to 2 or 3 story commercial shops so you want the focus to be on the street and the facades of those buildings.

    They need to be cohesive in at least the facade veneers using commonly related materials and styles that works with the community style.
    Personally, I'd be using a lot of black steel stone, wood, and brick.
    Textures and colours that consist of a pallete taken from the river valley and the prairie. Mix that with an early victorian pallete that relates to the age of the neighborhood. Throw all that stuff in with LED streetlights that look like old gaslights and wrought iron inspired signage and combine the technology to blend with the environment.

    They can blend much of the newer 'tron' lighting in with the semi villagescape and it would be absolutely cool looking. having the arena as the backdrop.

  33. #33

    Default

    This is closer to what I mean.

    http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...315.62,,0,0.99

    Notice the covered canopy and windbreaking panels. I just think that's a neat idea.
    At night time if the coliseum was bottom lit and mix that with an open street space filled with little shops and restaurants that had patios and trees and ambient lighting, it would be sexy. Thats one of the best things about Rice Howard Way is the night time patio ambience. It's lively enough to be invigorating but it's also quiet enough to be romantic. Outside of hockey season we have to use this thing and for hot summer breezy nights, it'd be great to have. You can still have the arena and it's complex as well as parkade and hotel access. This way can include some green space as well as a drop off point for the arena station.

  34. #34
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    armin....the new Tiger stadium seems to be located in a charming looking district. i like it!

  35. #35
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    edmonton, alberta
    Posts
    20

    Default

    How much would it have cost to have build a roof over Commonwealth Stadium when they built it; $10M, I beleive. Short sighted thinking has cost us!! Check out skyscraperpage.com and combine the Alberta towers; Edmonton/Calgary.......We're dust suckers... The Art Gallery made the same amount of money in one month, compared to the entire year of the former. People complained about the costs before it was built as well. Building that arena! $270M on the 23 ave overpass, no taxes will be collected from that.

  36. #36
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stinger View Post
    How much would it have cost to have build a roof over Commonwealth Stadium when they built it; $10M, I beleive. Short sighted thinking has cost us!! Check out skyscraperpage.com and combine the Alberta towers; Edmonton/Calgary.......We're dust suckers... The Art Gallery made the same amount of money in one month, compared to the entire year of the former. People complained about the costs before it was built as well. Building that arena! $270M on the 23 ave overpass, no taxes will be collected from that.
    could you paraphrase/ translate/ explain what you have written?

  37. #37
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    edmonton, alberta
    Posts
    20

    Default

    There are a lot of people here, C2E, that lust over really cool developements (myself included) and it would be rather dissapointing if most of these proposals never move forward. The Katz group is trying to build "something" downtown. There are many developers who have proposals on the table that are stale. If the developers, Katz group, COE, etc. combine their efforts, then maybe we could have a skyline like Calgary has. The City will spend billions on LRT. If Katz spent $200M for the Oilers, I'm sure the brain waves in City Hall can swing a deal, 50/50 or whatever, but don't let a big fish swim away....we don't have too many of them around here. What would Edmonton look like if WEM wasn't built....a little more boring and placid than it is now. What if the cheap skates didn't win their arguement about spending $10M for a roof over CWS. We'd have a year round facility today. Like attracts like. We desperately need this project to move ahead.

  38. #38
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    "The Katz group is trying to build "something" downtown."

    yes, but how do you support something without knowing what?

    "If the developers, Katz group, COE, etc. combine their efforts, then maybe we could have a skyline like Calgary has. "

    could improve the skyline and density, but apples and oranges

    "we don't have too many of them around here. What would Edmonton look like if WEM wasn't built....a little more boring and placid than it is now."

    some would argue the exact opposite with whyte and downtown far more active and expanded in terms of retail, hotel, and entertainment.


    .... I want to support the arena project, but i need to have more certainty in certain items along with a better idea of funding and associated infrastructure upgrades.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stinger View Post
    The Katz group is trying to build "something" downtown.
    No they aren't, they want the City to pay for it and they will only build the rest of it if taxpayers pay for the arena itself. This means they don't get to be in the driver's seat.

    Quote Originally Posted by stinger View Post
    then maybe we could have a skyline like Calgary has.
    A city's skyline has absolutely nothing to do with whether it is a good place to live or the quality of life of its citizens.

    Quote Originally Posted by stinger View Post
    What would Edmonton look like if WEM wasn't built....a little more boring and placid than it is now.
    WEM is what killed downtown btw, and why you seem to think we need the arena proposal so badly. You can't have it both ways. It took downtown 25-30 years to start to recover from this blow.

    Quote Originally Posted by stinger View Post
    We desperately need this project to move ahead.
    We don't need it that desperately that we need to be willing to give away the "baby with the bathwater" to do it. There is a reasonable way to do it, but unfortunately this process that the Katz Group has put together isn't it. Trust me, if they get turned down, they'll be back. We don't need to approve a flawed application just because we're so scared or being manipulated to think it's our only opportunity, ever. It isn't.
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 28-05-2010 at 11:33 AM.
    www.decl.org

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •