[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I am perfectly fine with this happening.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...ticle18924852/

Canada is not Greece.

Do you think the infrastructure used for the World Cup 2006 is crumbling and not being used? Olympics 2012? Think again.

Canada is a G6 nation, remember that. Almost all Canadian cities have modern NHL rinks and CFL stadiums except Calgary. If and when Canada hosts a WC (or other major sporting event), you would be glad to have Calgary miss out because you think "billionaire should pay for his own arena/stadium", while other Canadian cities enjoy international and prestigious events? Calgary is consistently skipped over for concerts as well, it's not just sports.

John Oliver is right about many things, but not all things.

[Tacopuck]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Sunalta has a lot of affordable house and an average income of $32,000. So if by help you mean displace less fortunate people you may be onto something. I live in Sunalta.

Yes that would be a unfortunate consequence however such is Gentrification. There are alot of dumps in that neighborhood that could benefit from their land value increasing to the point where its economically viable to redevelop. I lived in Sunalta for 13 years, great neighborhood, has the potential to be significantly better.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Someone asked about this in the Q&A. They want as little parking as possible. LRT, Cabs, Like Madison Square Garden.

KK knows Calgary isn't Manhattan, right?

[Acey]

Commonwealth had zero parking for the World Cup. Legitimately zero. It was kind of a nightmare.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Someone asked about this in the Q&A. They want as little parking as possible. LRT, Cabs, Like Madison Square Garden.

Sounds like more CITY REVENUE!!!

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by mesaywee

Paying an extra 10-20 bucks on a ticket to enjoy a new arena makes tons of sense. If you can't afford $50 dollars for a ticket to a flames game (I'm a student, I can't) You probably can't afford $40 to go to a flames game. Viewing a hockey game isn't a right.

I doubt there will be $50 tickets to see the Flames in the new arena.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

Running track around the field with retractable stands that extend over the running track for CFL/Soccer games

This sounds great. I hate watching soccer where a track is visible on the perimeter of the field.

[btimbit]

One thing most people are ignoring is that all of this will be owned by the city. It's not strictly public money for a private business. I'll wait for more $$$ details to be released at the 2:30 press conference before I jump to conclusions.

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by Tacopuck

Another thing for the city to consider this development will increase the property values of everyone in Sunalta and the surrounding communities - People get higher value for their homes - City gets to tax more based on higher property values.

The gross amount of property tax doesn't depend AT ALL on property values. The city decides the overall amount it's going to take, and sets the "mill rate" so that the (TAX REVENUE NEEDED = TOTAL PROPERTY VALUE x MILL RATE). The only thing affected by property values in a certain community is the portion of the overall tax revenue paid by owners in that community. Your property value increases by more than the average--you pay proportionally more. Less than the average--you pay proportionally less.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Sunalta has a lot of affordable house and an average income of $32,000. So if by help you mean displace less fortunate people you may be onto something. I live in Sunalta.

But now they have a new income stream, charging for game day parking on their front lawns!

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Cappy

The Flames ownership group just released their main proposal to the world. It is their opportunity to spin the price tag, the funding, everything to look good. And they didn't. The conclusions that people are jumping to are probably correct/well-inferred.

The conclusions are being jumped to after less than 90 minutes, when it has been clearly communicated that additional information will be provided this afternoon.

The conclusions are precisely the opposite of correct/well-inferred, as the entire picture is not yet available.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Canada is not Greece.

Do you think the infrastructure used for the World Cup 2006 is crumbling and not being used? Olympics 2012? Think again.

One doesn't even have to go that far. Every major facility built for the 1988 Olympics remains in use today.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

One big issue that the current proposal does not seem to handle is parking.

Renderings don't show a lot of parking space.

If you look closely you can see the little bird tower where Rollin Stanley will get to shoot people in cars if they try and drive in his city.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Tacopuck

Another thing for the city to consider this development will increase the property values of everyone in Sunalta and the surrounding communities - People get higher value for their homes - City gets to tax more based on higher property values.

Yeah, that's not really how property tax works.

That area would just pay a larger proportion of the overall property tax pool.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

Aiming for a world class facility... Something you'd normally see in New York, Paris.

Paris, home of world class hockey arenas.

[HartAttack]

Originally Posted by firebug

Lets be real here and define tax as something somebody who never attends the facility would be on-the-hook for.

Ticket Levy: No, only those who voluntarily attend will pay this.
CRL - No, Only those who voluntarily own property in the area will pay this

Site clean-up: Yes, but ultimately I'm liable for this already. This shouldn't be factored into the NEXT project (a sunk cost). If anything, as this property is not earning any property taxes, the sooner the site is remediated and generating taxes the better off I am.
Fieldhouse: Yes, but I'm liable for this cost either way as the city will be contributing this amount regardless of the NEXT project.

So how, as a taxpayer am I worse off with this project?

Great post, I fully agree (and thanks are turned off)

[Table 5]

Honestly, this whole thing left me underwhelmed. This is honestly the type of stuff I would've imagined would be ready 2 years ago.

The scope itself is fine, but you'd think after all this time, they'd be able to show a bit of a grander vision than this, both visually and conceptually. I'm not really seeing the wow factor anywhere. Besides a basic map and some hastily gathered buildings, it doesn't seem like very thought and detail has been put into this as a community. It also seems like very little thought when into the long-term transportation vision of Bow Trail, or they just realized it would become to expensive to do it right, so they want to minimize it.

Even the PP presentation itself felt kind of mickey-mouse. They should look at what the East Village is doing with their videos. That's how you get people excited about your vision enough to get on board.

Can we just give this whole thing to CMLC and let them do it right?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Someone asked about this in the Q&A. They want as little parking as possible. LRT, Cabs, Like Madison Square Garden.

Yeah, you can sell more beer that way.

I shudder to think what a beer is going to cost at this place in 10 years or whatever.

Probably a first born child.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

...

CITY OF CALGARY WILL OWN BUILDINGS AND LAND.

...

If 100% true, let's get started tomorrow!

[Ice_Weasel]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

Exactly.



Another will be whats the CRL without project? Is it more or less? (cause its not 0, that land is going to be developed with taxpayers fronting the money no matter what)

Well considering the land has been vacant for over 55 years and no alternative plan put forward, I would say the CRL without the project is roughly nil.