After 9 hours of digesting this proposal, it's not sitting very well with me. I would like a downtown arena and I think great facilities are a necessity but the funding and building model worries me.
The building idea: Gluing two buildings together does offer possible operational efficiencies, but could seriously hamstring the owners/operators when conflicts come up (be it scheduling, maintenance, or even the desire to sell one or more of the sports teams). I'd rather see standalone facilities, but clearly cramped space and reduced development costs are a factor. In addition, it somehow bothers me to think of our premier sports franchise being a tenant in a much larger facility. I know it's stupid and emotional, but teams' identities always include their arenas, and this proposal makes me feel as if the Flames were going to be nothing more than a user of (less than half of) a giant municipal megaplex. Yes, they lease the dome now, but for all intents and purposes you know it's theirs and only theirs.
On funding -- offering the city ownership of a depreciating asset seems like a bit a stretch. The value in such a stadium/arena is in revenue, not in the ownership of a venue with only one viable tenant. If the eventual StadiaRena is well designed to have a good 50 year life without becoming obsolete (and how could know this?) then let's go! Make the Flames also sign a 50 year lease.
Yup, I really don't know how I feel about this.
|