Page 2 of 94 FirstFirst 1234561252 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 9306

Thread: New Arena | Entertainment | Discussion

  1. #101
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    406

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleisthenis View Post

    You're advocating, um, well, I'm not sure what you're advocating - or smoking.
    Reality my friend....reailty.

    I've lived what we're trying to do here. I'm advocating taking a deep breath and looking at the facts, not some Henny Penny the sky is falling and the traffic will be unbearable I tell you rhetoric.

    I don't need to sell you. Those who need to be sold already are sold. You're just along for the ride my friend...and it will be a good ride!
    You're mistaking my prudence for alarmism or something, and I don't understand that.

    This isn't about rhetoric or selling anything to anyone Richard, it's about sound public policy and development planning.

  2. #102
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469 View Post
    When talking about this with people, those two issues come up extremely frequently, even from quite intelligent people. But once some more thought is given to them, it quickly becomes apparent that they're non-issues, so long as the arena is properly situated in relation to LRT and the major downtown arteries.
    It's too bad people don't think before they talk. Looking on the CBC website and reading the stories, everyone who has left a comment so far has brought up parking and traffic and left negative comments for others to read, just perpetuating this myth that a new downtown arena is doomed to failure. These people are talking about things that they know absolutely nothing about. We have people who have told us directly that there are many more parking spaces downtown than there currently are around Rexall. But yes, I still believe Edmontonians are allergic to change (well maybe not allergic, but afraid of)... because no matter what the issue is, they back away from it 99% of the time, no matter what the issue is and no matter what professionals or experts say about the issue. I find it extremely frustrating to hear people talk about things that they know nothing about.

  3. #103
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Oliver
    Posts
    3,194

    Default

    Don't take this personally Cleisthenis, but now I'm going to give you reasons why ECCA is a complete non-starter as a site for an arena.

    Access to downtown:
    The downtown obviously isn't the be-all-and-end-all of Edmonton, but it's a huge employment node, and many of the people who work there could walk to a downtown arena (after spending an hour or two after work in downtown shops and restaurants). Will the redeveloped muni site have as many employees as downtown and provide as many people with the opportunity to walk to the arena? If not, then why build it there?

    Anyone who can't walk to the muni site will have to drive or LRT instead, and that is basically no different than Rexall's current situation. It's actually worse, because NLRT riders will have to head back into downtown to transfer to NE and SLRT to head home.

    Parking:
    There is currently no parking at the muni site. So let's build it. How much? Rexall apparently has 6,500, but let's say we build 5000 stalls? And of course we want parkades, which are about $50k/stall (that's maybe a bit high, but not by much compared to SLRT). So that means spending $250,000,000 on parking. But that's obviously too much, so let's just surround it with "temporary" surface parking instead. It will be built out as the area develops, right? It worked for Rexall, right?

    The muni is big:
    The muni is really, really big. Like nearly as big as the downtown and Oliver combined. So when you say 100k people, you're not exaggerating. The only problem - Oliver has 20k people, and the downtown has about 12k, and those areas have been populated in one form or another for a century. How long will it take for an urban village with any sort of critical mass to form on the muni site? By the time the muni has grown to be the size of a new Oliver or Millwoods or Sherwood Park the new arena will be as old as Rexall is. So build an urban village, but don't expect an arena to have any significant impact on it's growth.

    The village arena:
    What business does an arena have in an urban village, anyway? Why not stick it in Oliver, which is probably the best example that Edmonton has of an urban village. What would happen then? Would we see explosive growth, or stagnation?

    And how is putting an arena in an urban village different from putting it in any other primarily residential area? Why not put it in Strathern or Glenora? Why not put it in Kanata? Would those sites work? And if not, why is the muni site different?

  4. #104
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    1,045

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Personally, I am so tired of the "Oh my God, the traffic, the traffic, THE TRAFFIC" argument I could puke. Seriously folks. Think.
    Think? Well, nobody ever said that you didn't like to challenge people.

    I find the arguments about escalating "traffic" problems vile myself. Do we have absolutely zero pride in actually believing that we could
    1) develop in such a way so as to encourage more and more people to get rid of their personal vehicles as their primary source of transportation?
    2) engineer our way to providing solutions to any problems that may arise?

    People... Please spare us. We are smart. To say that we don't have the expertise or plain ol' common sense to make this thing work is just insulting. Those who make claims that we are heading towards a path of perpetual traffic snarls are really just insulting themselves as they (A) intentionally disregard facts and/or (B) blatantly demonstrate their bias and/or (C) actually think that we cannot think ourselves out of a wet paper bag.

    Makes me wonder though if any of them are wearing a pair of these:


    Seriously, I'm about as frustrated as Richard is on this one. Makes it a difficult talking point sometimes when it feels as though you're teaching someone the alphabet for the first time. Let's focus on the basics OK. If you say that parking and/or traffic will seriously be a problem, then demonstrate your arguments with clarity. Asserting that you're correct simply isn't good enough. Showing us that you are is. Until now, I haven't really seen or heard any persuasive arguments to that position. Still waiting.

  5. #105
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    406

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newfangled View Post
    Don't take this personally Cleisthenis, but now I'm going to give you reasons why ECCA is a complete non-starter as a site for an arena.

    Access to downtown:
    Will the redeveloped muni site have as many employees as downtown and provide as many people with the opportunity to walk to the arena? If not, then why build it there?


    I've thought about the line switching issue, but unless someone lives within walking distance of the existing LRT line, it's a non-issue, as you'll either drive to the nearest park-and-ride on a new line, take the bus to the nearest station on it, or wait for 5-10 minutes to transfer between lines at a station. This is going to be something that will have to be thought out for our new LRT system anyways, and coordinating that with any new arena is something I've long advocated.

    What we're essentially talking about is developing a large area over one to two decades with a final population greater than Mill Woods in less than a quarter of the area. In terms of land area, most of the Municipal Lands wouldn't be within walking distance (less than a km) from a new arena on Kinsgway/Princess Ave's, unless the highest density was geared towards the Downtown/Kingsway/NAIT side - which might be a good idea and should be explored as part of a comprehensive study.

    This location would enjoy a 2 minute LRT from downtown or 10-15 minutes from anywhere in the city.


    Parking:
    There is currently no parking at the muni site. So that means spending $250,000,000 on parking. But that's obviously too much, so let's just surround it with "temporary" surface parking instead. It will be built out as the area develops, right? It worked for Rexall, right?



    First of all I think your numbers of $50k a stall is way high. I have no idea what it would be but for a large parkade, I wouldn't expect it to cost half that much. I'm not advocating surface parking wastelands at the Municipal Lands location. The boosters for the Colosseum may have at the time assumed or argued that the area would fill-in naturally over -time or whatever you and others have been alluding to , but it was never built as part of an actual area development plan which coded and created incentives for higher density and mixed use urban planning.

    A Municipal Lands mega-project would by definition.

    In terms of parking, I imagine a smaller capacity underground heated parking garage with no more than say 2,000 stalls, which should be subsidized by and paid for by season ticket holders or others that wanted reserved spots and are willing to pay a premium for it.

    I wouldn't be pushing this concept if it weren't for at least one new LRT line being connected directly to the site, and an overall LRT strategy to make it easy for people all across the region to get to it.


    The muni is big:
    How long will it take for an urban village with any sort of critical mass to form on the muni site? By the time the muni has grown to be the size of a new Oliver or Millwoods or Sherwood Park the new arena will be as old as Rexall is... So build an urban village, but don't expect an arena to have any significant impact on it's growth. What business does an arena have in an urban village, anyway? Why not stick it in Oliver, which is probably the best example that Edmonton has of an urban village. What would happen then? Would we see explosive growth, or stagnation?

    And how is putting an arena in an urban village different from putting it in any other primarily residential area? Why not put it in Strathern or Glenora? Why not put it in Kanata? Would those sites work? And if not, why is the muni site different?


    It may take 20 years for the Municipal Lands to be fully developed, but if this became a major centre-piece of our new Development Strategy, (likely a compact growth scenario advocating building up instead of out), then there's no reason to think that it may fill up sooner, with people moving into homes and condos here instead of an unsustainable suburbia.

    And while, the arena in and of itself wouldn't really affect the growth or development of the Municipal Lands directly, if a distinct commercial, retail/market, and entertainment district buffered the bulk of the urban residential village in the north from the arena on the southern-most tip, it wouldn't really have any negative effects on the people living there at all.

    (Imagine the nearest low or medium density residential Municipal Lands developments being at least 5-10 blocks away to the north of an arena.)
    Thanks for the questions, and I look forward to continuing this discussion in the days and weeks ahead.
    Last edited by Cleisthenis; 25-03-2008 at 11:53 PM. Reason: fixed grammar

  6. #106
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    363

    Default

    The report today slays the traffic argument. Frankly, let's move on. If others still bring up ridiculous traffic claims (to be sure, there are some traffic concerns of course, but that actually might be desirable), they are irrelevant. Let's move on to selecting the downtown site, and have it built before 2014.

    I would like to see it finished for the start of the 2012-2013 NHL season in Oct 2012.

  7. #107
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    This discussion would be far more valuable if we considered and discussed what features are neccesary to make an urban arena work....not concentrating on false issues like parking and traffic.

  8. #108
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton - Best in the West
    Posts
    252

    Default

    In my opinion, there are going to be challenges with any of the sites that are being discussed whether it is parking and traffic, LRT access or lack there of, noise violations... and the list goes on and on.

    In my opinion although some of these issues need to be addressed or discussed, once again it seems as though the knives have come out on this forum... NICE.

    In my opinion I would love to see the new building downtown, surrounded by all sorts of new development ranging from the offices in the new Epcor Tower to a variety of housing, restaurants clubs and the like. I would love nothing more than to see something become of a site with what appears to be huge potential... but hey thats JUST MY OPINION!!!

    (takes out shield, donnes helmut and prepares for...)
    Not one of the miserable ones on here... no really.

  9. #109

    Default

    I like how certain people claim that we need planning and due process before we decide on an arena, and then spew out alarmist made up facts, with out ever really even looking at the 45 page report, or the speech that mandel has, or any of the other literature that just came out, providing tons of reasons why and how an arena would work best downtown. They ignore these details completely, Then they come on here, and act like their word is fact, and claim that nobody has researched anything, and claim a bunch of falsehoods, and then go on to say everyone that wants it downtown hasn't done any 1) traffic studies 2) or any studies at all. Some people need to realize that this city just doesn't dream up an idea overnight, and then try to sell it with out due process first.

    Good lord some of you need to give your collective heads a shake man.

    I suggest you take the day off from this forum, and read the links on this page

    http://www.edmonton.ca/portal/server...wnFacility.htm

  10. #110

    Default

    Why Downtown?
    It has to be downtown. The greatest opportunity for
    Edmonton lies in developing a new facility that will
    revitalize our downtown and add to the excitement that
    is just starting to build in our core.
    This urban renewal model has been employed in many
    cities in North America. In Columbus, Indianapolis and
    San Diego, new downtown sports and entertainment
    facilities have not only thrived, they have driven
    significant economic, social and cultural benefits.
    “What has been learned from the experiences of numerous
    U.S. cities across more than four decades of building new
    sports facilities, is that stand-alone arenas surrounded by
    acres of open parking lots tend to become lost opportunities
    for development and the building of a city’s image.”*
    The expected economic growth and population influx to
    the city provides an opportunity for Edmonton to create
    a place downtown for people to live, work, play and
    thrive. The development of a new sports/entertainment
    facility and associated multipurpose activity area can
    be the catalyst for ensuring Edmonton’s downtown is
    successful and vibrant well into the future.
    “In the competition for human capital that is driving the 21st
    century economy, vibrant urban cores and downtown areas
    are vital assets. The companies that will define the future
    growth of every nation choose to locate where the best and
    brightest workers wanted to live. Increasingly this is in or
    near downtown areas of urban centers which have invested
    to make their core areas vital and unique.”*

    The city’s core has existing infrastructure, tremendous
    parking capacity, superior transportation and transit
    access, and a concentration of shops and restaurants
    that can provide a base for creating a walkable, thriving
    urban district that defines our city.
    Access into and out of downtown can readily
    accommodate crowds, and it regularly does. On New
    Year’s Eve 2007, for example, more than 35,000 people
    gathered in Sir Winston Churchill Square without
    overcrowding, creating parking challenges, or causing
    any traffic problems as the crowds dispersed.

    The architectural significance of a sports/entertainment
    facility, and the strong design of the surrounding
    community will influence downtown land use and
    community development patterns for many years to
    come. It can be a true urban gathering place and create a
    strong “brand” for Edmonton.
    The challenge for Edmontonians, and for the city of
    Edmonton, is to grasp the scope of opportunity, and take
    full advantage of a rare time in our city’s history.
    The decision Edmonton needs to make is whether it
    has enough faith in its own potential that it, too, can
    gain the maximum benefit from this type of real estate
    development opportunity.
    In the end, this is only partly a discussion about an
    arena. It is wholly a discussion about Edmonton.

  11. #111

    Default

    Parking
    There is ample existing parking infrastructure in the
    downtown area and in proximity to other areas reviewed.
    There are currently 36,000 parking stalls within
    Edmonton’s downtown with the greatest commercial
    demands between 9:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on weekdays.
    If any additional parking is considered, it should be
    underground or at the perimeter of the district to enable
    walkable spaces and the creation of a stylized main street
    where storefronts and play areas are incorporated into
    the district’s design.

  12. #112

    Default

    Findings/Recommendations for Edmonton
    A sports/entertainment facility could be an integral part
    of an ongoing mixed-use development project. It could
    be an exciting destination that adopts creative means
    to address a number of needs, including office space
    and housing, into a broader development concept. This
    facility presents an opportunity to take Edmonton to a
    new level and it could not be more timely, exciting and
    worthy of pursuit. The following recommendations are
    made by the Community and Design Subcommittee:
    1. That a sports/entertainment facility be designed as
    part of a multipurpose activity district.
    2. That the design and programming of the facility
    include ways in which it can revitalize and
    develop the surrounding urban district and spur
    redevelopment of Edmonton’s downtown core.
    3. That design principles be developed which ensure
    residential growth supports retail development and
    encourages businesses to relocate to or expand into
    the area. Parks, shops, artist spaces, public grass
    areas, pubs, cafes, meeting areas and water features
    should blend with the sports/entertainment facility.
    4. That linkages to the unique cultural and business
    communities in the area be developed to foster
    meaningful contact and a sense of comfort within
    diverse populations of age and culture.
    5. That the activity district be seen in context of all
    its users, residents, tourists and frequent users
    from across the capital region and from central and
    northern Alberta.
    6. That design principles encourage transit use,
    maximize existing parking infrastructure and
    encourage walkability.

    7. That the sports/entertainment facility be
    environmentally sustainable, using Leadership in
    Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria.
    8. That the following development features be included
    in planning in order to leverage this development to
    define and foster Edmonton’s identity:
    n Design elements that acknowledge our fourseason
    climate and celebrate Edmonton’s status
    as a ‘winter city;’ in particular, features that
    address indoor and outdoor connectivity during
    extreme weather conditions.
    n Public art, visual and performing arts and other
    forms of cultural expression.
    n Architecture as art.
    n Characteristics that respect and celebrate
    Edmonton’s heritage or renew the heritage of
    activities, buildings, districts and landscapes.
    n Cost accessibility for young and lower-income
    individuals and groups.

  13. #113
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT View Post
    ....not concentrating on false issues like parking and traffic.
    It will be a false issue only if we take it into consideration now and plan accordingly for 30 years down the road as all the surface lots around downtown are hopefully and thankfully developed.

    As in most situations, the truth seems to lie somewhere between the two extremes. The "parking in dowtown Edmonton is impossible" stance is dead wrong, but so is the idea that there would be no problems with the inclusion of a new arena and continued development.

    Indeed, intense studies beyond preliminary checks will have to be done once a green light is given for the project.
    Last edited by MylesC; 26-03-2008 at 08:28 AM.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  14. #114

    Default

    "Things that were considered before the report was created"

    Evaluation Criteria for Potential Sports/Entertainment Facility Sites

    Urban Design
    Facilities that are successful in revitalizing downtown areas fit into existing cityscapes and enhance them. Three types of evaluations are considered under this element:
    • Analysis of the site in relation to the framework ofthe city.
    • Identification of civic design potential. Consideration of the overall “fan experience.”
    • Evaluation Criteria — Facility/Design/Urban Fit
    • Proximity to downtown Edmonton.n Image/visibility.
    • Adjacent land uses/compatibility.
    • Proximity to existing convention facilities.
    • Proximity to existing hotel facilities.
    • New development opportunities adjacent to area retail/entertainment).
    • Potential to enhance nearby existing businesses.
    • Potential to spur broader community renewal.
    Transportation

    This element focuses on the convenience a site offers for pedestrians, ease of vehicle access, and availability of parking and transit.

    Evaluation Criteria — Transportation/Parking
    • Vehicular access.
    • Adequate entry and exit paths.
    • On-site parking.
    • Off-site parking.
    • Proximity to public transit.
    • Access for service.
    • Pedestrian movement.
    Site Factors

    This element focuses on site characteristics that influencethe design and overall cost such as site size, zoning, regulatory issues and infrastructure.

    Evaluation Criteria — Site Factors
    • Site size and configuration.
    • Topography (potential benefits/advantages).
    • Utilities (adequacy/relocation/improvement).
    • Demolition issues.
    • Environmental issues.
    • Design restrictions/limitations.
    • Zoning and regulatory factors.
    • Displacement of existing users.
    • Historic structures.
    Project Costs
    • Land acquisition and business/residential relocation.
    • On-site/off-site infrastructure.

  15. #115

    Default

    I don't get why people always act like the city doesn't do any planning or thought in to the ideas they present us.

    Its as if they think the city just proceeds with out due process or planning, or considering the needs and wants of an area....

    This is why one of the reasons we pay taxes folks, and we elect people which represent our views...

  16. #116
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    I don't get why people always act like the city doesn't do any planning or thought in to the ideas they present us.
    /cough

    Our beloved Planning and Development department has given us numerous reasons that would all serve as precedence to be just a little bit skeptical of any plan that comes out.

    Or shall we try to remember the first BRT meetings where senior transportation planners tried to convince me BRT was waaay better than LRT b/c there will be latte machines at the stations?



    People are allowed to question. If anything, throwing the questions out is what makes sure the departments are actually doing their jobs. If due process has been carried out, the answers will be available. If not....CAUGHT YA!
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  17. #117

    Default

    No, I understand there has been some planning in the past that doesn't make sense, but what I'm trying to say is that some people think ideas are just thrown out there with out any sort of planning or thinking first off.

  18. #118
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT View Post
    ....not concentrating on false issues like parking and traffic.
    It will be a false issue only if we take it into consideration now and plan accordingly for 30 years down the road as all the surface lots around downtown are hopefully and thankfully developed.

    As in most situations, the truth seems to lie somewhere between the two extremes. The "parking in dowtown Edmonton is impossible" stance is dead wrong, but so is the idea that there would be no problems with the inclusion of a new arena and continued development.

    Indeed, intense studies beyond preliminary checks will have to be done once a green light is given for the project.

    Of course we're all expecting some major changes in regards to surface parking lots over the next 30 years in the downtown core. But I'm fairly confident that whatever new buildings are built, they will have to include parking, much of it underground, and several of the other parking lots will likely be built up into new parkades to replace some of the existing lots that have been used for new buildings etc... Supply and demand... if Impark and other parking lot companies see a need for more spaces because too many stalls have been eliminated due to new construction in the core, chances are they will find a way to make more spaces available in one way or another.

  19. #119
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleisthenis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleisthenis View Post

    You're advocating, um, well, I'm not sure what you're advocating - or smoking.
    Reality my friend....reailty.

    I've lived what we're trying to do here. I'm advocating taking a deep breath and looking at the facts, not some Henny Penny the sky is falling and the traffic will be unbearable I tell you rhetoric.

    I don't need to sell you. Those who need to be sold already are sold. You're just along for the ride my friend...and it will be a good ride!
    You're mistaking my prudence for alarmism or something, and I don't understand that.

    This isn't about rhetoric or selling anything to anyone Richard, it's about sound public policy and development planning.
    that's an interesting approach and one that i like so lets play that game with both the airport and rexall...

    if the airport was vacant land today and someone came in and said "what a wonderful place to build an airport", what do you think the response would be?

    if the rexall place lot was a vacant lot today and someone proposed it as a location for a new arena, what do you think the response would be?

    so why should we settle for the status quo just because it is the status quo? if something is wrong, it's wrong and if the opportunity is there to correct it, we should take it in a heartbeat. i love this city but i sure don't want it to be the same city in thirty years that it is today - we have some truly unique opportunities here today to help address that. no "be-all/end-all" solutions but some very key pieces to the puzzle and it would be criminal to squander them.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  20. #120
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Oliver
    Posts
    3,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    if the airport was vacant land today and someone came in and said "what a wonderful place to build an airport", what do you think the response would be?

    if the rexall place lot was a vacant lot today and someone proposed it as a location for a new arena, what do you think the response would be?
    Or, what if the UofA gave up the University Farms? Would that be a perfect place for a new arena?

    But since this thread is supposed to be about arena announcements, I figured I'd take my thoughts about the muni over to the Muni redevelopment thread here. Anyone care to join me?

  21. #121
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    it has been bugging me for a day now... What does the word Ann in the thread title mean?

    ps forget about the Muni. Let's look for land in the downtown where the arena should be located.

  22. #122
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,066

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    it has been bugging me for a day now... What does the word Ann in the thread title mean?

    ps forget about the Muni. Let's look for land in the downtown where the arena should be located.
    Announcement
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  23. #123
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    west downtown
    Posts
    673

    Default parking

    lets make a seperate thread to gripe /praise the parking issue specifically....lol

  24. #124
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    A few new articles:

    1

    Think big: Let's create a landmark

    A new arena should be city's Yankee Stadium
    John MacKinnon, The Edmonton Journal
    Published: 8:30 am

    EDMONTON - All right, if they're going to build a new showpiece home for the Oilers -- and they are -- and it has to be downtown -- and it does -- then let it be arrestingly grand without being merely grandiose.

    Build the Sydney Opera House of hockey rinks, only make it as functionally beautiful on the inside as that Australian Chateau of Song is on the exterior. Famously, the builders made a hash of the auditorium down there.

    Build an ice-bound retort to the new Yankee Stadium right here in the Heartland of Hockey. Only build it for way less than the estimated $1.3 billion it's costing George Steinbrenner's Pinstripes to construct a new home just north of the House That Ruth Built.

    If they're going to build it, then erect an unforgettable hockey mecca that doubles as an integrated urban hub in an increasingly vibrant downtown.

    (cont'd at Journal website)

    2

    Provincial politicians cool to talk of financial aid for arena

    Sports project not the place for tax dollars
    Jason Markusoff, The Edmonton Journal; With files from the Calgary Herald
    Published: 8:44 am
    EDMONTON - The provincial government has no intention of contributing money to a downtown Edmonton arena, a spokesman for Premier Ed Stelmach says.

    "We haven't seen any facts or figures .... but the premier has maintained and continues to maintain that this is an inappropriate use of tax money, that provincial taxpayer dollars will not go towards a professional sporting arena," Tom Olsen said Tuesday.

    Edmonton's arena committee, which estimates a new downtown area will cost $450 million, wants a minimum of $35 million from the private sector whatever the two seniors levels of government will contribute.

    Businessman Daryl Katz, who is waiting for NHL approval to take over the Oilers, has said he will contribute $100 million to a new facility. The rest of the money would be borrowed.

    "If we raise $200 million from equity, all the better. It reduces the risk for the project," said Charlotte Robb of the arena panel's finance subcommittee.

    Twenty-five years and an inflationary lifetime ago, by comparison, the province kicked in $31 million to help Calgary build its Saddledome.

    (cont'd at Journal website)

    3

    Yet earlier in the print edition of the Journal:

    Governments MVPs in arena game plan

    Need for subsidies 'highly probable' in proposed $450M downtown project
    Susan Ruttan, The Edmonton Journal
    Published: 9:30 am
    EDMONTON - Edmonton can have a new downtown arena only if the private and government sectors work together, say the authors of a new report.

    The nine-member committee created last year by Mayor Stephen Mandel estimates an 18,000-seat arena could be built for $450 million and the cost of land.

    Rexall Place has 16,680 seats.

    Mandel said the next steps are up to the Edmonton Oilers and Northlands, the city agency that runs Rexall Place.

    "It's up to Northlands and the Oilers to see what they can put together," he said after giving a luncheon speech to the Downtown Business Association.

    "If at the end of the day they need to come for other kinds of government support ... we'll go from there."

    Mandel repeated his past assurance that property taxes won't be raised to pay for an arena.

    The 38-page report suggests providing the land would be one way senior governments could assist the project.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  25. #125
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT View Post
    ....not concentrating on false issues like parking and traffic.
    It will be a false issue only if we take it into consideration now and plan accordingly for 30 years down the road as all the surface lots around downtown are hopefully and thankfully developed.

    As in most situations, the truth seems to lie somewhere between the two extremes. The "parking in dowtown Edmonton is impossible" stance is dead wrong, but so is the idea that there would be no problems with the inclusion of a new arena and continued development.

    Indeed, intense studies beyond preliminary checks will have to be done once a green light is given for the project.

    30 years down the road? Whats the point. it would be impossible to predict with any accuracy...and to base what might be the most important debate of the decade based on something as fluid and qualitative as that would be foolish.

    How many long term (30 + years) transportation studies have you seen that have been somewhat accurate. Not many, maybe some intercity highway plans, doubtful any intracity stuff is that accurate and certainly not plans in dense urban environments like a downtown where there are countless variables.

    Plus, how many years do you think the lifetime of this building is? 30, Maybe 40?? Look at how rapidly our expectations on arena's have changed in the last 30 years.

    As it stands now parking and traffic are not issues. The only way it is, is if your one of those people who's only goal in life is to get from home to your destination to back home as quickly as possible, with the exception of a 30 minute wait in the drive through line at tim hortons. If you are (I know your not Myles) too bad. Maybe you shouldn't live 25km's from your destinations.

  26. #126
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    It would appear (from the chit-chat here and everywhere) that the whole crux of whether or not the new arena becomes reality is the parking issue.

    Parking is NOT an issue. No, non, nada, nyet.

    Now, let's look at the BIGGER picture....

    Take a look at this link -> Arena District

    Now, is this something that could benefit DT Edmonton?

  27. #127
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    That looks like something that was definitely done right... they even have "arena district gift cards." How cool is that?

  28. #128
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    It would appear (from the chit-chat here and everywhere) that the whole crux of whether or not the new arena becomes reality is the parking issue.
    I disagree. That may be the first issue that pops to most people's mind, but after a bit of thought and convincing I see that as being a pretty easy one to address. The biggest issue will be paying for the darn thing.

  29. #129
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    567

    Default

    You have to spend money to make money. As long as its done right, everyone should benefit from a project like this. Just like the Columbus example, there can be high end hotels and condos, other types of entertainment such as cinemas, restaurants, and even maybe a good casino, not like the ones in Edmonton now, that can help finance not just the arena, but the neighbourhood.

    If this happens in the Post Office area, obviously anything is better then what is there right now.

  30. #130
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT View Post
    Whats the point.
    The point is that we want to bring people downtown and parking, whether it truly is or not, is perceived as a problem by many Edmontonians and visitors.

    Again, I'm not saying build massive surface lots or anything, but proper underground and integrated lots will be needed as projects like this go ahead.

    Kind of like what jamrt just said...it comes down to doing the project right and parking will play a role. All I am saying is that it can't simply be ignored with the ol' line of 'parking ain't a problem' thrown about willy-nilly.

    So, two parts. A) build activity centres/etc/etc that people won't mind parking five blocks away from and walking and B) provide facilites for those that want to be close and will pay for a premium spot.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  31. #131
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC View Post
    All I am saying is that it can't simply be ignored with the ol' line of 'parking ain't a problem' thrown about willy-nilly.
    All many of us are saying is that even though parking is an integral part of the project, it isn't an issue that should be dwelled upon. It can easily be resolved with some minor creativity.

    Again, going back to the Nationwide model....

    There are more than 15,000 parking spaces available within a 10-minute walk of Nationwide Arena. All surrounding parking lots and garages offer spaces for guests with disabilities. The designated drop-off site for guests with special needs is at the corner of Nationwide Blvd. and John H. McConnell Blvd. on the west plaza near the Nationwide Arena Ticket Office.

    Arena District parking facilities are adequately staffed to assist in directing traffic in and out of lots and garages. All lots and garages will be pre-pay to avoid delays in exiting.
    Non-Event Parking
    The Nationwide Arena Parking Garage is also open on non-event days for $5 all day with in and out privileges.


    Now that we have the parking issue resolved, let's discuss the concession foods!

    :]

  32. #132
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,737
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT View Post
    Whats the point.
    The point is that we want to bring people downtown and parking, whether it truly is or not, is perceived as a problem by many Edmontonians and visitors.

    Again, I'm not saying build massive surface lots or anything, but proper underground and integrated lots will be needed as projects like this go ahead.

    Kind of like what jamrt just said...it comes down to doing the project right and parking will play a role. All I am saying is that it can't simply be ignored with the ol' line of 'parking ain't a problem' thrown about willy-nilly.

    So, two parts. A) build activity centres/etc/etc that people won't mind parking five blocks away from and walking and B) provide facilites for those that want to be close and will pay for a premium spot.
    MylesC...

    To think that parking is not being considered in this overall plan is foolhardy, and why people are, as you put it, willy nilly dismissing the "parking issue". Any potential sites I've seen have ALL involved using both existing lots and additional parking created with the facility.

    Parking is a boogyman of extraordinary porportions. If people are worried about walking a bit outside, then there would be NO ONE parking near the Spectrum for Oilers games. The existing towers offer $2 and $3 parking after 6 right now, and more than likely will marginally increase to the $5 to $10 bit depending on the proximity to the stadium.

    Parking is not an issue. Period.
    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.

  33. #133
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    363

    Default

    To change the subject now, I'd like to talk about the potential design of the arena. Another pyramid? People used to speculate about a glass roof (maybe a glass pyramid). From what I've heard though, a glass roof would not be good for big shows because it can effect the lighting tech that's a part of some of these shows..

  34. #134
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Any potential sites I've seen have ALL involved using both existing lots and additional parking created with the facility...Parking is a boogyman of extraordinary porportions.
    I've never said parking is a boogyman of extraordinary proportions. I've been trying to raise it from this "let's ignore it" to being at least considered b/c we all know the guy writing into the SUN WILL complain about this.

    Soycd had a very good response that is what I was hoping to draw out without just ignoring the situation all together.

    It's lovely that you've seen sites and plans, but most of the population of Edmonton hasn't.

    I clearly am not getting my point across so I'll just leave it be.
    Last edited by MylesC; 26-03-2008 at 06:15 PM.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  35. #135
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NINTman View Post
    To change the subject now, I'd like to talk about the potential design of the arena. Another pyramid? People used to speculate about a glass roof (maybe a glass pyramid). From what I've heard though, a glass roof would not be good for big shows because it can effect the lighting tech that's a part of some of these shows..
    i had a 7.00 meeting this morning in one of sutton place's meeting rooms and parked across the street on the surface parking lot between 103 and 103a streets. if you look east crossing 103 avenue you see city hall's west wall sitting below that asymetrical pyramid. if you look at and and think about an arena being below it instead of council chambers and central hall, you can't help but think "how cool is that...". council chambers has the abiltiy to close itself off when either reflections or the need for low light levels dicates the need and i'm sure an arena could do the same (if we can build retractible roofs over football stadiums, i'm sure we could figure out a horizontal rolling blind). the pyramid is symbolic not only over city hall but over muttart and was symbolized in much of hemingway's work as an edmonton image for a northern, winter city (they're already mirrored at the top of the enbridge building and in the winning entry feature design...). we should build on that the same way sydney builds on the image of their opera house. is that the only shape that would work? not by a long shot and there are many better than i when it comes to design but i do know what i like (even when many think i should keep my opinions about what i like or don't like to myself).
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  36. #136

    Default

    Rather than repeat a theme, I'd prefer to the city step out in a new direction. Something bold yet grounded in Edmonton. In general, and, unfortunately, I find glass pyramids a bit over done (see new louvre entrance).

  37. #137
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,212

    Default

    Please don't make another Pyramid.
    The City is comprised of numerous landmark buildings, not all carrying a theme. The new AGA will join such ranks and in no way relates to the theme of City. It contributes its own unique style.
    I hope the new arena continues that trend.

  38. #138
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    567

    Default

    It would be cool to have lighting on the outside of the arena similar to the Allianz Arena, not the same shape of course though.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allianz_Arena

  39. #139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Please don't make another Pyramid.
    The City is comprised of numerous landmark buildings, not all carrying a theme. The new AGA will join such ranks and in no way relates to the theme of City. It contributes its own unique style.
    I hope the new arena continues that trend.

    Pyramid or not, I really like the idea of a glass roof.

  40. #140
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,004

    Default I like pyramids

    I like the idea of a pyramid like city hall. It's one of my favourite buildings, and it's a cool theme that fits with our northern city for some reason. I don't think of it as a pyramid, but as a diamond coming out of the ground. At least until I remember what's inside of it

  41. #141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleisthenis View Post
    First of all I think your numbers of $50k a stall is way high. I have no idea what it would be but for a large parkade, I wouldn't expect it to cost half that much. I'm not advocating surface parking wastelands at the Municipal Lands location. The boosters for the Colosseum may have at the time assumed or argued that the area would fill-in naturally over -time or whatever you and others have been alluding to , but it was never built as part of an actual area development plan which coded and created incentives for higher density and mixed use urban planning.
    FYI, the parkade at Century Park was estimated at $40-$50k a stall.

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/st...t-parking.html

    So the estimate of spending that amount on parking is reasonable.

  42. #142

    Default

    ^ That's my understanding as well, but the arena report has already taken parking into more than a superficial examination, and said only 400 parking spaces would be needed as part of the structure. I don't see much hope of a larger parking lot reclaiming its construction costs, and thus I don't think any more should be built.

    As for what plays out in 30 years, we can actually wait and see. The current parking will be adequate for a decade of evening usage at least, but if for some reason evening usage demand outstrips the daytime usage construction to the point that it actually needs more in the future (a very bizarre but I suppose possible eventuality) then we can just bite the bullet and build more parking capacity at that time. We don't need to build parking lots today if they wouldn't be justified for decades.

    Furthermore, I'm skeptical that the evening parking will ever exceed the daytime availability. In addition to the arena, that would require something along the lines of an additional WEM of entertainment in the core just in order to absorb the parking we now have, and in the time it takes to achieve that, we would have to see no additional office towers (with requisite parking) constructed. If both happen (while both seem unlikely) we would then be at the point of having to build parking for evening entertainment venues. (And even that assumes no impact from the SLRT, let alone NLRT, WLRT, and MLRT.) To me it is just such a non-starter.

  43. #143
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christopherj View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleisthenis View Post
    First of all I think your numbers of $50k a stall is way high. I have no idea what it would be but for a large parkade, I wouldn't expect it to cost half that much. I'm not advocating surface parking wastelands at the Municipal Lands location. The boosters for the Colosseum may have at the time assumed or argued that the area would fill-in naturally over -time or whatever you and others have been alluding to , but it was never built as part of an actual area development plan which coded and created incentives for higher density and mixed use urban planning.
    FYI, the parkade at Century Park was estimated at $40-$50k a stall.

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/st...t-parking.html

    So the estimate of spending that amount on parking is reasonable.
    centrury park was an "open air" above grade parkade. underground stalls downtown could easily be in the $60 - 75K per stall range depending on the infrastructure being built above them... the difference is that surface parking and above grade parkades don't "support" the same level of infrastructure and activities as underground parking and that is the issue. and our downtown already has good examples of both of thos things and why we should not be repeating those mistakes downtown or elsewhere.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  44. #144
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    And we have to remember there will be some parking stalls built underground for Stationlands too. So add a few more to the list.

  45. #145

    Default

    And, theres already more surfacing parking spaces in closer walking distance to the post office site then there is at Rexall...

    Parking is a red herring. So is getting in and out of downtown.

  46. #146
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default Downtown Edmonton Arena could drive our rodeo: CFR

    Downtown Edmonton arena could drive out rodeo: CFR

    Last Updated: Thursday, March 27, 2008 | 10:13 AM MT CBC News

    A new downtown Edmonton arena to replace Rexall Place could threaten one of the biggest annual events in the city, say officials with the Canadian Finals Rodeo.

    Full Story: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/st...ena-rodeo.html

  47. #147
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,004

    Default Parking

    It's funny, but my initial reaction to the news they were considering an arena downtown was "what about parking"? I pictured a huge moat around a drab building. When I mentioned it to my mom - same reaction. My co-workers - same reaction. Everyone seems to have the same concern, so it's a problem, even though it's not a problem. A little common sense and some reasonable reporting should go a long way towards putting this concern to rest.

    After actually thinking it through of course, I think the parking problem is best handled by putting it downtown where there is already lots of parking unused at night, and LRT/Bus access from all over the city. Downtown is the solution to the parking "problem".
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  48. #148
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    Downtown Edmonton arena could drive out rodeo: CFR

    Last Updated: Thursday, March 27, 2008 | 10:13 AM MT CBC News

    A new downtown Edmonton arena to replace Rexall Place could threaten one of the biggest annual events in the city, say officials with the Canadian Finals Rodeo.

    Full Story: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/st...ena-rodeo.html
    Its funny wasn't it a few years ago that the CFR was threatening to leave Edmonton, and one of the places mentioned was Vancouver to move it to.

  49. #149
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    Yes, I believe you are right... That was during the NHL lockout I believe. So 3 years ago now?

  50. #150

    Default

    2 main points....

    If shuttling cattle back and forth downtown proves to be too complicated and costly, they will consider moving elsewhere, said Pippilo.
    The owners of Rexall Place, Edmonton Northlands, are ruling out the possibility of keeping it open as is, if a new arena is built.
    "We can't have two competing large-scale facilities," Jerry Bouma, chair of the board, said Wednesday.
    "Rexall will change in terms of its purpose and obviously its scale."

  51. #151

    Default

    If rexall is changed so its no longer an ice rink... it would save lots of money on the cost of running said facility.

    If rexall is kept, in limited functions, it could still serve the CFR there... ? Couldn't it?

  52. #152
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    But my understanding is that the city and Northlands have no interest in keeping to large facilities open. Would the curren Rexal Place stay? Or would it be demolished and the land sold to private developers for housing. It would make a great TOD with the LRT right there.

  53. #153
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Well the NFR in Las Vegas every year is about a mile from The Strip and is right next to the University campus there, but they dont seem to be in a hurry to move there.

    I know its a much smaller scale, but they seem not to have a problem getting cattle downtown for that cattle drive for the past few years....I am sure the city would be accommodating to the CFR if it was in an arena downtown.

  54. #154

    Default

    You could herd the cattle from northlands along the LRT row across the 97st bridge into stationlands and the north side of the potential post office arena site!!!

    I'm only 1/4 serious...

  55. #155
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    You could herd the cattle from northlands along the LRT row across the 97st bridge into stationlands and the north side of the potential post office arena site!!!

    I'm only 1/4 serious...
    as owner of the bridge, i'm sure we could accomodate a cattle trail along with the bike path and pedestrian sidewalks so move that 1/4 up to 1/2...
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  56. #156
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    183

    Default

    I would buy a ticket to watch this urban cattle drive
    Non semper erit aestas

  57. #157
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    C'mon people, don't cows and horses and bulls etc get transported by truck? All you need is a proper loading dock and some place to park the trailers don't you?

  58. #158
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    But my understanding is that the city and Northlands have no interest in keeping to large facilities open. Would the curren Rexal Place stay? Or would it be demolished and the land sold to private developers for housing. It would make a great TOD with the LRT right there.
    Without the ice plant operating costs would drop, and the space could be useful for other convention/tradeshow activity. I think TOD opportunities are overrated for the time being, what with being hemmed in by gretz drive, nothlands and the tracks, and the iffy reputation of the area.

  59. #159

    Default

    You could always put bells on them, but them in a giant cage for two days; then release them along little italy; and let the citizens of edmonton run from them...

    I'm only 1/2 serious. We don't have a little spain, so that's the closest thing I could find.

  60. #160
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Considering the arena report states that generous loading/marshalling areas would be needed I don't see how the CFR would have a problem.

    OR would the expanded Agricom serve the purposes of CFR?
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  61. #161
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    lol ya have bulls running through the streets. it would be hilarious to see what Eastern canadians would say when they see it on the news(im assuming here that it will be one of the rare days that something west of ontario makes it onto any national news programs Jeez i HATE canadian news)

  62. #162
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,755

    Default

    I love this quote from the CFR guy:

    "I'm not saying new buildings aren't even better, for sure they are a lot of times. But it's … going to take a lot of extra work to have it in a different facility away from where we're at right now."
    Yeah, like you're not already going to have that extra work if you do move to a different city.
    “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

  63. #163
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    I know this is probably totally inaccurate, but sounds like someone is just lazy if you ask me.

  64. #164

    Default

    I think the CFR is having a knee jerk reaction to the report. It will still be possible to have the CFR in the new arena and more spectators will be able to view it and celebrate in the many downtown pubs and restaurants before and after the rodeo. A parade down Jasper Ave. towards the new colosseum will also be possible.

  65. #165

    Default

    and theres already tons of related CFR events downtown anyways....

  66. #166
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default new arena

    new hockey arena presentation/animation will be on citytv's noon news today. looks quite good
    Last edited by DTrobotnik; 24-11-2008 at 03:15 PM.

  67. #167
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    Good to know... hopefully someone can find it on youtube and post the link on here. I would love to get a good look.

  68. #168

    Default

    if only my PVR had remote access...

  69. #169
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    571

    Default

    Looks quite impressive a very innovative design.

  70. #170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oscar View Post
    Looks quite impressive a very innovative design.
    I hope you'll forgive me, as I didn't catch it myself, but are you being serious?
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  71. #171
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    IS there anything online about it? I can't find anything.

  72. #172
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    74

    Default

    It is honestly the nicest looking arena I have ever seen. it is a copper bowl open to the outside and above the street.

  73. #173
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,269

    Default

    Well hopefully someone can post the info online... with pics, etc. I can't find anything online about it at the moment.

  74. #174

  75. #175
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Summerside
    Posts
    1,577

    Default

    Any pictures would be great. Can't access that page at work.

  76. #176
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    insert image function asks for url. i cant just upload...
    http://robotwithhumanbrain.com/x
    Last edited by DTrobotnik; 24-11-2008 at 12:48 PM.

  77. #177

  78. #178

    Default

    I'm uploading the video to youtube for you all...

  79. #179

    Default















    If it's real and not a joke - that's awesome.
    Last edited by moahunter; 24-11-2008 at 12:54 PM.

  80. #180
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Summerside
    Posts
    1,577

    Default

    Looks Great! Will fill in the downtown area very nice.

  81. #181

  82. #182
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    cool thanks

  83. #183

    Default

    Is that the Brownlee Building I see across the street from it?!!!

    edit- watching the video now (thanks DTRobotnik & MEdwards) the location is clear, but not the post office. What a surprise nonetheless!
    Last edited by JayBee; 24-11-2008 at 01:00 PM.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  84. #184
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    would be cool if those were solar panels on the roof

  85. #185

    Default

    I was wondering if it might be some sort of see-through plastic roof? Maybe a green roof though per the photo in the middle, would be fun to kick a ball around on it.

  86. #186
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    they only talked about the functionality of the building within the neighbourhood/community. no details on structural components. also, no word from katz.
    no details from city.

  87. #187
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The corner of 89th and 89th.
    Posts
    328

    Default

    Wow, my clinic would be NEXT DOOR to the country's largest Rexall, I hope I don't have to work late on any game nights.

  88. #188
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    yes, a walk to the game after work would be sweet

  89. #189
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The Big E
    Posts
    1,205

    Default

    Interesting building. Hopefully, we'll hear soon what Katz and the city says about this.

  90. #190
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    i dont' believe the estimated quote of 300 million though. but it is a fluid merge with quarters area
    Last edited by DTrobotnik; 24-11-2008 at 01:10 PM.

  91. #191
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Royal Gardens
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    I like it. What a way to fill up a giant portion of parking lots in one shot. What an architectural piece, if it gets built. Has it only been shown on CityTV? Kind of a wierd that all the bigger stations were not given this info. And the two towers west of the arena, would one of those be a hotel and another a condo?
    Last edited by booster; 24-11-2008 at 01:12 PM. Reason: added two towers phrase
    My antidepressent drug of choice is running. Cheaper with less side effects!

  92. #192
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    1,198

    Default

    Is this something official or just Dubs version of what the arena should be?

  93. #193
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by booster View Post
    Has it only been shown on CityTV? Kind of a wierd that all the bigger stations were not given this info.
    nice surprise from the little guys they win as many AMPIA awards as the rest of em!

  94. #194
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,469

    Default

    That is a wicked vision for the arena. Interesting that it is in the East Jasper location. I still think this on Baccarrat would be thee best.

  95. #195
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisD View Post
    That is a wicked vision for the arena. Interesting that it is in the East Jasper location. I still think this on Baccarrat would be thee best.
    new quarters area needs this more. good way of renewing the neighbourhood from different angles. i think baccarat area is better for high rises. also, this arena has 2000 underground parking spaces. i'll post cross section pics if i have time later.

  96. #196

    Default

    DTrobotnik - are you some how involved in all this?

  97. #197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DTrobotnik View Post
    i dont' believe the estimated quote of 300 million though. but it is a fluid merge with quarters area
    I expect that would be the cost of the arena only, not including the towers and other adjunct facilities.

    Agreed though, it fits in beautifully. They're keeping every heritage building on 97th, and it will re-anchor 97th wonderfully. When they hinted that the post office was out of contention I was a little sad for 97th, but this absolutely works even better.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  98. #198
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Royal Gardens
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    I think this East Jasper location is because the Army and Navy building is owned by Dub. He might own some of the parking lots behind them as well.
    My antidepressent drug of choice is running. Cheaper with less side effects!

  99. #199
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    DTrobotnik - are you some how involved in all this?
    im just a pixie

  100. #200
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DTrobotnik View Post
    i dont' believe the estimated quote of 300 million though. but it is a fluid merge with quarters area
    I expect that would be the cost of the arena only, not including the towers and other adjunct facilities.

    Agreed though, it fits in beautifully. They're keeping every heritage building on 97th, and it will re-anchor 97th wonderfully. When they hinted that the post office was out of contention I was a little sad for 97th, but this absolutely works even better.
    expenses seem to be supplemented with shops and cafes on street level to make this a multi-functional city area for day and night - excellent planning/cost-return.

Page 2 of 94 FirstFirst 1234561252 ... LastLast

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
  •