[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Nothing. But it's a logical place to start from a CSEC standpoint isn't it?

Expanding on this further, in the lead up to the unveiling of CalgaryNext, city council representatives were making it abundantly clear that they were not going to be following Edmonton's lead. The city had discussed the issue of public funding for arenas where every councillor save 1 or 2 was against the idea. Nenshi as well kept iterating his public dollars for public benefit.

In essence, they were clearly telegraphing to CSEC to not waste their time going for a deal that Edmonton got.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by kermitology

Does a poor performance despite a lot of effort demand respect? The concept was poorly delivered, poorly represented, and in the opinion of many, poorly thought out, and finally the numbers were unreasonable. No matter how much effort was exerted, that doesn't automatically deserve respect.

You can interpret it however you want, that is totally your right. But, what I get aggravated about is comments like 'five pages long' in describing an absolutely massive concept like CalgaryNEXT, even moreso when nothing of this magnitude has been done before. This is why I rarely post in this thread anymore because of all the vitriol, hate and self-purported 'experts' that weigh their own opinion in gold. It'd be akin to me going into the Oil and Gas Discussion thread in the off topic forum and telling people how to do their job in there. This is the equivalent in this thread.

I abstain from funding discussion in this thread. However, from a development standpoint, something like this isn't easy, and if you believe the concept was released prematurely you absolutely have that right. I just want people to understand this project was not conceived on a napkin in a dingy burger joint.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Then reject it with reasons and never look back. Have said that was a preferred option from the start.

"The money would be better spent elsewhere" work for you?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Expanding on this further, in the lead up to the unveiling of CalgaryNext, city council representatives were making it abundantly clear that they were not going to be following Edmonton's lead. The city had discussed the issue of public funding for arenas where every councillor save 1 or 2 was against the idea. Nenshi as well kept iterating his public dollars for public benefit.

In essence, they were clearly telegraphing to CSEC to not waste their time going for a deal that Edmonton got.

We are worlds apart in logic here.

It's a starting point, a logical one from the CSEC perspective. Expanding further doesn't change that.

I would never expect the city to just take it, and I've never suggested anything like that.

Look I just want our mayor to be more professional. Why does that seem to have so many people angry on this site?

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Bingo

So counter without the CRL, or reduce the numbers.

This isn't all that tough. The Flames used the Oilers funding model right down to the CRL as an opening proposal. Respond to it with what works and what doesn't.

The biggest problem with a CRL here was that the arena took up such a high percentage of the prime developable land, without paying any property tax to actually pay that loan back. On top of putting $200 million towards CalgaryNext, the CRL would have to pay for the environmental cleanup, infrastructure upgrades, and other projects to make the rest of the area developable. All in, that CRL would be way more than half a billion - at least double the value of the East Village CRL, which was artificially guaranteed to work because they included the just underway BOW tower in the CRL area.

The Remaining land in the CalgaryNext plan would have been disconnected from everything, due to the size of the arena/stadium, making it pretty much impossible to actually make attractive to developers.

On top of that, if you read the city's report on the proposal, pretty much all of the sports organizations that the city talked to had strong concerns about the adequacy of the feildhouse. The amount of time where the field house would be unavailable, plus concerns about compromises made to get the stadium to convert, etc.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Not at all. You're just going to the politics again.

Unfortunately when you lobby for public funds, politics plays into it

(Nevermind that pretty much every example of a public funded sports arenas has been a giant net loss for the municipality involved)

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Muta

I abstain from funding discussion in this thread. However, from a development standpoint, something like this isn't easy, and if you believe the concept was released prematurely you absolutely have that right. I just want people to understand this project was not conceived on a napkin in a dingy burger joint.

I don't think it was released prematurely, I actually think the opposite. They waited far to long to release it, but if you listen to Bunk they were told years before releasing the concept that the West Village was a bad idea, and chose to pursue it anyway.

And just so I'm clear, what exactly was provided by the CalgaryNEXT team? From what I recall it was a website with concept drawings, a presentation (including budget breakdown) and a vague inspirational video.

Also, I have to question the visionary/transformative quotes about this project as it's never been clear to me how exactly CalgaryNEXT was supposed to be visionary or transformative. It's a sports complex.

Finally, why has the CESC never come to the table offering the city a share of revenue from the operation of the building? They seemed to put all the repayment monies into the CRL basket.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

"The money would be better spent elsewhere" work for you?

He's fixing for an Olympic bid, he will need facilities. They have an ugly west of downtown and this was a potential partner in that clean up that could have been explored. They have a need for a fieldhouse and they could have found a way to leverage that get what they need at a reduced cost.

So no a bumper sticker isn't an answer.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by stone hands

Unfortunately when you lobby for public funds, politics plays into it

(Nevermind that pretty much every example of a public funded sports arenas has been a giant net loss for the municipality involved)

Have never said public funds needs to go to this.

I would expect politics to "play into it", what's sad however is that politics "was it"

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Look I just want our mayor to be more professional. Why does that seem to have so many people angry on this site?

Because you're completely obsessed with that and it's clouding your judgment on actual issues.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That doesn't even make sense.

The city said it's not dead. The mayor has said it's dead because he loves tv cameras.

Look it was a starting point, a professional response would have had the "bad idea" answer arrived upon 12 months ago.

Instead it was all politics and bloviating with nothing by way of tangible reasons why a project like that wouldn't work.

As I said I have no problem with the city rejecting it. But do so with reasons and move on.

How dead does the parrot have to be for you to give me a refund for it?

Seriously though, CalgaryNext is dead.

And the city very professionally spent money and time to conduct a detailed review of the project to conclude that it was going to cost alot more to the city that the Flames were saying. You may disagree but they handled it seriously when it landed, minus some political points scored by Nenshi. In either case, he commissioned the review of the project so he still took it seriously.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Muta

You can interpret it however you want, that is totally your right. But, what I get aggravated about is comments like 'five pages long' in describing an absolutely massive concept like CalgaryNEXT, even moreso when nothing of this magnitude has been done before.

Very simple question then: For a "massive concept" of the "magnitude that has never been done before", why was the initial presentation so pathetic? We all know you only get one chance for a first impression, so if tons of time and effort went into developping the project, why did it seem like 15 minutes went into the presentation, aka the single most important part of getting this project done. Was it arrogance that the city would simply accept it because it was a "massive concept" of the "magnitude that has never been done before"? Or did they really think that was a good presentation? I'd be a lot more worried if it's the latter.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Have never said public funds needs to go to this.

I would expect politics to "play into it", what's sad however is that politics "was it"

Then what are we even talking about here?

Nenshis response to being railroaded by billionaires?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Bingo

We are worlds apart in logic here.

It's a starting point, a logical one from the CSEC perspective. Expanding further doesn't change that.

I would never expect the city to just take it, and I've never suggested anything like that.

Look I just want our mayor to be more professional. Why does that seem to have so many people angry on this site?

My point is that the City was publicly telling CSEC not to go for the Edmonton special and King still went for it. Who's being unprofessional and political here?

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

"The money would be better spent elsewhere" work for you?

But the money won't be spent elsewhere. All we have received from this mayor and city council are pet projects for the councilors. This city has raised property taxes every year and the services have gone downhill since the late '70s. So please don't use this disingenuous line to try and prove your point.

The arena funding has nothing at all to do with the ability of the city to get other projects done. The CRL is created for the express purpose of getting development done in the area for work that is not going to be done. This city council has already shown how faithless they are to get a CRL approved by adding the Bow Building to the East Village to secure the financing.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He's fixing for an Olympic bid, he will need facilities. They have an ugly west of downtown and this was a potential partner in that clean up that could have been explored. They have a need for a fieldhouse and they could have found a way to leverage that get what they need at a reduced cost.

So no a bumper sticker isn't an answer.

How exactly was CalgaryNEXT going to leverage a reduced cost for the fieldhouse? City wants $200 million for the fieldhouse. Flames want....$200 million for CalgaryNEXT. Difference is CalgaryNEXT would never be a 100% public access facility, and the fieldhouse would be. For the mayor the optics would be atrocious to let that happen.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He's fixing for an Olympic bid, he will need facilities. They have an ugly west of downtown and this was a potential partner in that clean up that could have been explored. They have a need for a fieldhouse and they could have found a way to leverage that get what they need at a reduced cost.

So no a bumper sticker isn't an answer.

This is also the second attempt (that I'm aware of) to clean up that area. A few years ago there was a pretty ambitious plan that centered in part around the Pumphouse Theater.
That also feel apart.
Part of my criticism is that I have no idea what the city's long-term plan is for that area. I think it needs to be cleaned up and it needs to be re-developed. How and when?
I would like the city to find a way to get that done.
Per your comments - this was one way. Perhaps not THE way, but what is the plan for the west village? Is there one?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Because you're completely obsessed with that and it's clouding your judgment on actual issues.

Everyone has their thing in this and they hit the same button 13 times a day, so don't call me obsessed.

And what issues are clouded for me? I'd like to know as I don't think I've come out and said I'm for or against anything.

I think you're confusing your dislike for my opinion with my opinion being clouded.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Very simple question then: For a "massive concept" of the "magnitude that has never been done before", why was the initial presentation so pathetic? We all know you only get one chance for a first impression, so if tons of time and effort went into developping the project, why did it seem like 15 minutes went into the presentation, aka the single most important part of getting this project done. Was it arrogance that the city would simply accept it because it was a "massive concept" of the "magnitude that has never been done before"? Or did they really think that was a good presentation? I'd be a lot more worried if it's the latter.

I don't know about the presentation side. I have my opinions on that too. My point, is that this was a concept, was always a concept, and it was transformational in the sense that it was literally building a entire new neighborhood (with commercial and residential towers, a fieldhouse, public space, etc.) from scratch with a rarely-seen dual football stadium / hockey arena as the anchor.

Like I said, I have my opinions on the presentation too, but don't think for a second that the planning and conceptual design for something like this didn't have alot of work that went into it. I have to reiterate that the arena / stadium design were always conceptual (two iterations were released). There were never final, and should never have been interpreted as such. People need to understand that.

EDIT: I've seen another completely different concept for the West Village as well, something that was done a while ago and that I preferred more actually. There was more work completed than just the one you saw ending up on the CN website.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

But the money won't be spent elsewhere. All we have received from this mayor and city council are pet projects for the councilors. This city has raised property taxes every year and the services have gone downhill since the late '70s. So please don't use this disingenuous line to try and prove your point.

The arena funding has nothing at all to do with the ability of the city to get other projects done. The CRL is created for the express purpose of getting development done in the area for work that is not going to be done. This city council has already shown how faithless they are to get a CRL approved by adding the Bow Building to the East Village to secure the financing.

The money doesn't technically exist right now. The fieldhouse is not in any budget at present, so it's not even possible for it to be spent elsewhere. As far as property taxes go, yeah I don't like that they're high, and giving the Flames $200 million only ensures they'll be higher going forward. So if you hate property tax increases you should be against this.