[Report] RT calls out ownership for no practice facility

[Elias Pettersson]

1 minute ago, dougieL said:

There is a parkade below the rink. You'd build it below the parkade. I'm kind of spitballing here, but I'm sure there is precedent for adding a structure beneath an existing structure. There are buildings near Rogers that have parkades that extend farther below ground than the parkade at Rogers, so I would imagine the depth is not an issue.

 

I agree that Aquilini most likely would have looked into it. I'm wondering whether it's a cost or feasibility issue. Obviously, building it at SFU would be much cheaper than building it below Rogers Arena, as it would be far less complex of an operation.

Yes, I'm aware there is a parkade under the building, I have parked there many times while attending games when my buddy had club seats.  First off, you can't just eliminate the parking, that is basically VIP parking for everyone that is paying big bucks to go to a game.  You can't ask those people to park on the street.  Parking is attached to the club seats.  Also, that is where the players, coaches and everyone else parks.  Do you expect Petey to park his car at the impark lot across the street?

 

In order for your proposal to work, you'd have to dig deep to get underground parking below a second rink.  There are zoning bylaws attached to that.  You are looking at 4-5 years of dealing with the City of Vancouver to ever approve such a concept.  

[Petey Castiglione]

Why'd the plaza of nations development not go through again? It's seems like a win-win-win for everyone.

[dougieL]

53 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Yes, I'm aware there is a parkade under the building, I have parked there many times while attending games when my buddy had club seats.  First off, you can't just eliminate the parking, that is basically VIP parking for everyone that is paying big bucks to go to a game.  You can't ask those people to park on the street.  Parking is attached to the club seats.  Also, that is where the players, coaches and everyone else parks.  Do you expect Petey to park his car at the impark lot across the street?

 

In order for your proposal to work, you'd have to dig deep to get underground parking below a second rink.  There are zoning bylaws attached to that.  You are looking at 4-5 years of dealing with the City of Vancouver to ever approve such a concept.  

As I said, build it below the parkade.

 

As I mentioned, there is a building near Rogers that has a parkade that goes a few levels further below ground than the parkade at Rogers. I'm not sure where the 4-5 year estimate comes from, but that seems to be at least equal to the amount of time the Canucks have spent trying to decide on where to build it. If they had taken action 4-5 years ago, maybe it would be approved by now 

 

[dougieL]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Yes, I'm aware there is a parkade under the building, I have parked there many times while attending games when my buddy had club seats.  First off, you can't just eliminate the parking, that is basically VIP parking for everyone that is paying big bucks to go to a game.  You can't ask those people to park on the street.  Parking is attached to the club seats.  Also, that is where the players, coaches and everyone else parks.  Do you expect Petey to park his car at the impark lot across the street?

 

In order for your proposal to work, you'd have to dig deep to get underground parking below a second rink.  There are zoning bylaws attached to that.  You are looking at 4-5 years of dealing with the City of Vancouver to ever approve such a concept.  

BTW...I suspect Petey would prefer having to park across the street over having to drive 30mins each way to and from practice at SFU...

[Elias Pettersson]

56 minutes ago, dougieL said:

As I said, build it below the parkade.

 

As I mentioned, there is a building near Rogers that has a parkade that goes a few levels further below ground than the parkade at Rogers. I'm not sure where the 4-5 year estimate comes from, but that seems to be at least equal to the amount of time the Canucks have spent trying to decide on where to build it. If they had taken action 4-5 years ago, maybe it would be approved by now 

 

You obviously are not familiar with how the zoning bylaws work and how long it takes to get a permit for new construction in the City of Vancouver.  It takes up to one year just to get a permit to build a house.  4-5 years to get a permit to build a hi-rise.  If you are talking about building a practice facility below the parking, then you are going 4-5 levels deep at least.  That's the equivalent of a hi-rise in Vancouver.  You most likely need to re-zone the land in order to do that.  Re-zoning takes probably 3-4 years at least...

[24K PureCool]

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

As I said, build it below the parkade.

 

As I mentioned, there is a building near Rogers that has a parkade that goes a few levels further below ground than the parkade at Rogers. I'm not sure where the 4-5 year estimate comes from, but that seems to be at least equal to the amount of time the Canucks have spent trying to decide on where to build it. If they had taken action 4-5 years ago, maybe it would be approved by now 

 

Dude adding levels below existing structure is not easy to do. You are literally digging below the foundation. You are looking at closing down Rogers for like 3 seasons which is not feasible. 

[stawns]

11 hours ago, dougieL said:

But assuming the visiting team has first dibs on the time, we'd basically be at the scheduling mercy of the other team...

 

I wonder if there is any way to find out how many times the Canucks practiced/skated away from Rogers Arena last season. Seeing as how many teams around the league have a permanent practice facility (I think we're one of only two that don't), it seems that having a permanent one has to be important.

 

 

That hardly seems worthy of spending millions of dollars for a facility that will sit empty most of the time.

[dougieL]

8 hours ago, 24K PureCool said:

Dude adding levels below existing structure is not easy to do. You are literally digging below the foundation. You are looking at closing down Rogers for like 3 seasons which is not feasible. 

Yeah definitely agree - never said it would be easy to do. But if the options are 1) build a rink in SFU for relatively cheap, 2) buy new land to build a facility, or 3) build one beneath Rogers, I feel like (3) is not completely ridiculous given how desirable the outcome would be for the players (practice rink right where they play their games), how expensive (2) would be, and what a terrible option (1) seems to be. 

 

I guess this relates to my initial question...has there been precedent anywhere for adding a structure beneath an existing structure? I honestly can't imagine that it hasn't been done before (e.g., adding additional levels of parking), and I wonder if the above structure would have to be shutdown for that long. I mean, couldn't you build additional temporary supports while you excavate below?

[dougieL]

9 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

You obviously are not familiar with how the zoning bylaws work and how long it takes to get a permit for new construction in the City of Vancouver.  It takes up to one year just to get a permit to build a house.  4-5 years to get a permit to build a hi-rise.  If you are talking about building a practice facility below the parking, then you are going 4-5 levels deep at least.  That's the equivalent of a hi-rise in Vancouver.  You most likely need to re-zone the land in order to do that.  Re-zoning takes probably 3-4 years at least...

Why do you seem so irritated...I was just throwing an idea out and asking a few questions. It reminds of when Holden Caulfield was in a cab and asked the driver where the ducks go in the winter when the lagoon in Central Park freezes over. The cab driver got all sore at him for no reason and basically told Holden to buzz off...

 

Anyway...I indeed don't know anything about zoning bylaws in Vancouver, but I also didn't know from where you got your timeline estimates, which is why I asked. Even so, it seems to me they'd need to get a similar permit no matter where they built (below Rogers or elsewhere), unless they renovate an existing structure. I suppose that's where the SFU option comes in, but that is a horrendous idea. I wonder by how much players would even prefer the SFU option to the current arrangement, or if they would prefer it at all.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

Why do you seem so irritated...I was just throwing an idea out and asking a few questions. It reminds of when Holden Caulfield was in a cab and asked the driver where the ducks go in the winter when the lagoon in Central Park freezes over. The cab driver got all sore at him for no reason and basically told Holden to buzz off...

 

Anyway...I indeed don't know anything about zoning bylaws in Vancouver, but I also didn't know from where you got your timeline estimates, which is why I asked. Even so, it seems to me they'd need to get a similar permit no matter where they built (below Rogers or elsewhere), unless they renovate an existing structure. I suppose that's where the SFU option comes in, but that is a horrendous idea. I wonder by how much players would even prefer the SFU option to the current arrangement, or if they would prefer it at all.

 

I’m not irritated at all. I  can just tell from your questioning that you probably don’t know a lot about construction and building in Vancouver. My buddy builds houses for a living so I know exactly what is entailed in getting permits from the City of Vancouver and my other buddy also owns a real estate company of which I work directly with him through my own company so I’ve had dealings with developers in the city for a long time. 
 

Zoning bylaws and permit procedures are different depending on location. City of Vancouver is the worst, although the new mayor Ken Sim is trying to fix that. Burnaby is way easier to get a permit than Vancouver but still a pain in the butt. 
 

All the land that Aquilini currently owns is already zoned for this type of use, or is in the process of rezoning. Going out and getting new land would restart the timeline, which is several years. SFU already has sports facilities on its lands, so correct zoning is probably already there.   
 

In terms of Rogers Arena, most likely the land would need to be rezoned for a higher use and more density if you are wanting to build beneath a current structure. Plus, as someone already pointed out, that structure, i.e, Rogers Arena, will probably need to be shut down for several years while they are building underground. 
 

I’ve never heard of a building being built below another building in Vancouver, however the transformation of Brentwood Mall included building several floors of new underground parking around an existing structure. That project took over 3 years just for the underground parking. They are doing the same thing at Oakridge Mall but are having challenges due to the soil and water levels around that area. 

Edited September 10, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[dougieL]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

That hardly seems worthy of spending millions of dollars for a facility that will sit empty most of the time.

I can see that point of view. I'd point to Edmonton's arena as an example though. Obviously a very different situation, but they built a practice rink right beside the arena. Much easier to do, of course, than trying to build one below an existing arena, but they clearly thought it was worth the millions to put the practice rink there.

[dougieL]

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I’m not irritated at all. I  can just tell from your questioning that you probably don’t know a lot about construction and building in Vancouver. My buddy builds houses for a living so I know exactly what is entailed in getting permits from the City of Vancouver and my other buddy also owns a real estate company of which I work directly with him through my own company so I’ve had dealings with developers in the city for a long time. 
 

Zoning bylaws and permit procedures are different depending on location. City of Vancouver is the worst, although the new mayor Ken Sim is trying to fix that. Burnaby is way easier to get a permit than Vancouver but still a pain in the butt. 
 

All the land that Aquilini currently owns is already zoned for this type of use, or is in the process of rezoning. Going out and getting new land would restart the timeline, which is several years. SFU already has sports facilities on its lands, so correct zoning is probably already there.   
 

In terms of Rogers Arena, most likely the land would need to be rezoned for a higher use and more density if you are wanting to build beneath a current structure. Plus, as someone already pointed out, that structure, i.e, Rogers Arena, will probably need to be shut down for several years while they are building underground. 
 

I’ve never heard of a building being built below another building in Vancouver, however the transformation of Brentwood Mall included building several floors of new underground parking around an existing structure. That project took over 3 years just for the underground parking. They are doing the same thing at Oakridge Mall but are having challenges due to the soil and water levels around that area. 

Thanks - that's what I was most interested in, actually - whether there was precedent for building beneath existing structures. Did they have to shut down Brentwood Mall for it?

[RWJC]

SFU emerging as option for Canucks' practice facility 

It's far from a certainty, but a partnership between the Vancouver Canucks and Simon Fraser University isn't out of the question.
 

With land at a premium in the city of Vancouver, it appears the Vancouver Canucks are starting to look further afield in their search for a practice facility.

As first reported by hockey news website CanucksArmy, Postmedia has confirmed with several sources that Canucks chairman Francesco Aquilini has spoken several times in recent months with officials at Simon Fraser University about the possibility of the Burnaby campus hosting a new ice rink which would serve as a training centre for the Canucks as well as a home to a varsity hockey program.

 

It’s understood that Aquilini attended a fundraiser for the SFU men’s hockey team, which does not have full varsity status but has a healthy series of backers and the team itself has been making strides to raise its profile — including scheduling a series of games this season against NCAA Division 1 competitions — with the ambition of becoming a fully-funded varsity program.

 

Aquilini, who graduated from SFU in 1985 with a business degree, has also met with top university officials, including president Joy Johnson, sources confirmed.

 

Canucks president of business operations Michael Doyle decline to comment specifically on the SFU option.

 

“We have nothing to say right now but this remains a priority for ownership and management and we continue to explore many options. When we have something to disclose, we surely will,” the told Postmedia in a statement.

 

SFU did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The Canucks have been talking about building their own dedicated practice facility since at least 2010, when they ended a rental agreement with Burnaby 8 Rinks, now known as Scotia Barn, that had been in place since 1995. Instead, the team has had temporary deals to use the rinks at the University of B.C., as well as back at Scotia Barn in recent seasons.
 

There was a deal to manage a rink that’s planned to be built as part of the redevelopment of the Plaza of Nations, practically across the street from Rogers Arena, but the Canucks walked away from that deal in early 2020.

 

One of the first things president of hockey operations Jim Rutherford identified as a team need after he took over as the Canucks’ top hockey person in December 2020 was a practice facility and Doyle has been in plenty of talks around Vancouver about possibilities, but to date nothing firm has materialized. There are still a few options in the city, but most are projects that wouldn’t come to fruition for many years and the Canucks would like to have a new facility in place within two or three years.

 

And so while Burnaby Mountain may not be convenient for the team’s players, who mostly live on the west side of Vancouver or in Yaletown, it does have sites, especially an old, mostly unused gravel parking lot that was once intended to be the 2010 Olympic speedskating oval, that are just about shovel-ready.
 

Also, while some NHL teams, like Edmonton, Columbus and New Jersey, have their practice rink right next to their game arena, most NHL teams have their practice facilities in the suburbs, 20 or 30 minutes away from their downtown arena. The Canucks would likely still like to find a location that’s closer to Rogers Arena, but if they don’t, it’s not like they’d be straying from the league norm — indeed by not having a practice facility at the moment, they are already straying from the league norm.

 

SFU athletics are also in a state of flux. A report on the future of the mothballed men’s football program is due to be delivered soon.

 

That’s where men’s hockey comes in. There are many backers who would like to see SFU men’s hockey elevated to varsity status and if SFU were to stick with the NCAA, that program could become a Division 1 program. There would likely be a Division 1 women’s program established concurrently.
 

You would think a Canadian-based NCAA Division 1 team would have no trouble recruiting players.

 

That said, SFU’s future in the NCAA isn’t a lock. There’s lots of feeling from senior leadership that SFU’s athletics programs should return to U-Sports, that there’s been little benefit to the university by having their teams compete in the United States since being accepted as a Division II school by the NCAA more than a decade ago.

 

Also, if football is abandoned, would SFU want to switch to a similarly pricey program in hockey?

 

In the end, it can be said that SFU certainly is a possibility for a Canucks training centre, but it’s still far from a certainty. A lot has to happen.

 

pjohnston@postmedia.com

 

 

 

[Crimson-JH]

12 hours ago, dougieL said:

BTW...I suspect Petey would prefer having to park across the street over having to drive 30mins each way to and from practice at SFU...

It didn’t affects any other NHL players. Almost 60% of NHL arenas and practice facilities are about 20-40 mins driving distances. 

Edited September 10, 2023 by Crimson-JH

[Elias Pettersson]

6 minutes ago, dougieL said:

Thanks - that's what I was most interested in, actually - whether there was precedent for building beneath existing structures. Did they have to shut down Brentwood Mall for it?

No the mall was never shut down. However, the underground parking is mostly in the area where there was parking already above ground, so they shut down most of the parking area for that. 
 

For Rogers Arena they probably need to close off the street for all of the excavation that would be needed as well as reinforcement of the current structure. So that site is probably all closed off for a year or two. 
 

They also built the Skytrain underground on Cambie and are doing the same on Broadway, so you can drive by and take a look at the mess on Broadway. It won’t be complete until 2026. 

[Elias Pettersson]

32 minutes ago, dougieL said:

I can see that point of view. I'd point to Edmonton's arena as an example though. Obviously a very different situation, but they built a practice rink right beside the arena. Much easier to do, of course, than trying to build one below an existing arena, but they clearly thought it was worth the millions to put the practice rink there.

Edmonton built an entire “ice district” downtown. It was like a $3 billion project with developers building hi rises around the area. Also, the City of Edmonton funded 50% or more of the project. So in the course of redeveloping downtown Edmonton they added a practice facility to the site. 
 

We don’t have the land to do that. And even if we did it would cost billions. Downtown Vancouver is much more expensive than downtown Edmonton. 
 

Most NHL practice facilities are not next door to the actual rink. Edmonton is an exception as they built an entire community from scratch. 

Edited September 10, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[Dr. Crossbar]

6 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Downtown Vancouver is much more expensive than downtown Edmonton. 
 

Most NHL practice facilities are not next door to the actual rink.

Well, that settles things ... the practice facility should be in Edmonton.

[Citizen Erased]

12 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Well, that settles things ... the practice facility should be in Edmonton.

And then all of a sudden players will be demanding trades to Winnipeg.

[RWJC]

2 minutes ago, Citizen Erased said:

And then all of a sudden players will be demanding trades to Winnipeg.

...with the caveat that they get to play for free. 

and each contract comes with a performance bonus that if you reach it you earn a free colony of pet mosquitoes.

[Citizen Erased]

2 minutes ago, RWJC said:

...with the caveat that they get to play for free. 

and each contract comes with a performance bonus that if you reach it you earn a free colony of pet mosquitoes.

And if they stay they get a free colony of egg laying insects from a certain Tim Hortons in Burnaby.