Scotia Place | 36.85m | 11s | CSEC | HOK

[Tothewest]

One of the few things I liked about the original design was that it had a glass wall. In this edition it's been replaced by panelling

It wasn't an actual design...it was a concept. Vastly different

It is too bad the inverted bowl capacity caps out in the 15ks. Saves lots of space.

In hindsight with how great the Rossetti concept was, it locked in event centre 1.0 to too small of a site, and led to everyone not being super thrilled and then the new arena.

The inverted bowl was never a part of any formalplan...aside from maybe CalgaryNext. Rosetti clearly used them as a trial client...but that design has gone nowhere in North America, glad we steered clear.

 

[The Familia]

I think Shot Arch is talking about the first design by HOK that fell through. On the Stampede Trail side there was a massive glass wall that overlooked the street. I did like that feature.

 

[Tothewest]

I think Shot Arch is talking about the first design by HOK that fell through. On the Stampede Trail side there was a massive glass wall that overlooked the street. I did like that feature.

I think "massive" might be a mischaracterization...it was a 2 story annex looking thing.

Generally speaking, as an arena design junkie....the problem with massive flat glass walls is they make your building VERY inflexible, as all services have to move to the inside walls (stairs, concessions, elevators, closets, ect...). You normally see these with Atriums and Main Entrance areas...but rarely other portions of the concourse. Our building is also DEEP in the ground, so that effects how much glass you can have....some buildings like Fiserv in Milwaukee and Chase in San Fran...are at grade, where you have way more massing to program.

 

[The Familia]

I really like that Milwaukee arena and the first one from Sacramento. Time will tell how our new arena looks in person. Materials will make or break it. I am happy with how it integrates with the public realm which should be a huge win.

 

[Tothewest]

I really like that Milwaukee arena and the first one from Sacramento. Time will tell how our new arena looks in person. Materials will make or break it. I am happy with how it integrates with the public realm which should be a huge win.

It has a very, foresty-wisconsin look, which is nice and different. But it's an imposing vertical structure, no street activation at all except the primary entrance end,....ours is 35 ft in the ground, so much more visually appealing for the neighborhood. Sacramento's has a cool front, but it's a very cold and uninviting structure otherwise. Hey, everyone likes what they like.

Save for the cost of time passing, regions, and materials, i'd hazard to guess most buildings within that 18,000 capacity are costing ROUGHLY the same in terms of what you get for the investment. You're seeing now almost universal polished concrete concourses, nice finishes in suites, scoreboards of same scale, concessions looking the same, smaller atriums or lobbies....It's essentially, everyone gets 100 lego blocks, arrange them how best you see fit