[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I am not only talking about this issue, guy has done nothing for the city other than winning a popularity contest

Route Ahead and the Green Line LRT announcement disagree.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Justin Slimm ‏@justinslimm 2h2 hours ago Our early story: CalgaryNEXT unveiled and could cost millions, if not billions (pic ctsy: @ignitedandroid) http://www.660news.com/2015/08/18/live-blog-calgarynext-unveiled-as-season-ticket-holders-post-pictures-of-plans/ …


I like this tweet. It went from $890MM to "billions".

Project cost is 890M

Plus contamination cleanup
Plus infrastructure re-working

It's not as outlandish as you seem to think.

[Benched]

^ that. what the road work, especially if it includes fixing the bridge would cost....

yikes

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by dino7c

saying "no money" doesn't cut it...get creative

Nenshi will be long gone by the time this happens...all he is gonna do is hold up progress

No kidding. Maybe if we put a lost cat rescue or a hipster bar he will be all over it. Saying "no money" doesn't cut it when this has been in development for years going back to Bronco.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by dino7c

saying "no money" doesn't cut it...get creative

Nenshi will be long gone by the time this happens...all he is gonna do is hold up progress

And the councillors who vote for the project and the funding will be long gone when that money is needed for more pressing issues.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by dino7c

saying "no money" doesn't cut it...get creative

Nenshi will be long gone by the time this happens...all he is gonna do is hold up progress

He's saying no money because the Flames are counting money that doesn't exist to help pay for the project.

IE: He's saying no money because there's no money.

I hope he holds up progress if it prevents us from bending over like those idiots up north did.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Route Ahead and the Green Line LRT announcement disagree.

Handling of one of the biggest disasters in Canadian history.

dino7c is basically the anti-Cappy.

[Regorium]

While slanted, I had no idea this is what CRL actually is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TIF_graph.pdf

Property owners in the west village do not pay any "extra" tax - it's just that the extra tax that they pay on top of whatever day the CRL starts goes back to the City/Partnership (the red triangle in the picture) until it hits 240M.

Assuming the City is the one fronting the 240M for CRL, that means that again it'll be the City that is basically borrowing from itself to pay itself.

As that graph shows, though perhaps not that dramatically, any increase in actual infrastructure spending due to the CRL area must be paid for from other revenues.

Here's a quote from the CRL bylaw

19. Shortfall Funding If a situation were to arise where insufficient revenues were generated from the Community Revitalization Levy, general tax revenues would be a backstop to fund any borrowing costs that remain.

Also, the City is probably fronting the 250M for ticket tax as well - and of course collecting it over a long period of time. That's the structure of the edmonton deal.

Basically, the City fronts 200M for the fieldhouse, and 490M in additional loans given to the developer for free.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

No kidding. Maybe if we put a lost cat rescue or a hipster bar he will be all over it. Saying "no money" doesn't cut it when this has been in development for years going back to Bronco.

A development project that the city had no say in.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Regorium

While slanted, I had no idea this is what CRL actually is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TIF_graph.pdf

Property owners in the west village do not pay any "extra" tax - it's just that the extra tax that they pay on top of whatever day the CRL starts goes back to the City/Partnership (the red triangle in the picture) until it hits 240M.

Assuming the City is the one fronting the 240M for CRL, that means that again it'll be the City that is basically borrowing from itself to pay itself.

As that graph shows, though perhaps not that dramatically, any increase in actual infrastructure spending due to the CRL area must be paid for from other revenues.

Here's a quote from the CRL bylaw



Also, the City is probably fronting the 250M for ticket tax as well - and of course collecting it over a long period of time. That's the structure of the edmonton deal.

Basically, the City fronts 200M for the fieldhouse, and 490M in additional loans given to the developer for free.

For some reason there are no thanks, but thanks.

This post should be quoted everytime someone raises the CRL as a non-public money source.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by polak

Yup. The city seems to be under the illusion that some miracle angel investor will come in and clean everything up and build some awesome condos or something.

If it didn't happen in the last boom, it'll never happen.

You have to realize theres 2 factors at play there though. 1, theres nothing out there right now that will draw anyone to live in a condo over there, its not exactly a hotbed nor very aesthetically pleasing of an area, and 2, its still contaminated so somebody has to take that first step, and once that is complete the palatability for development is much higher (and likely a bit more affordable). The whole thing needs to come together at the same time (or at least make the area vibrant, and viable first) in order to draw more development there

[TopChed]

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but having the track surround the field at the fieldhouse is a huge negative for me. Having the track makes the fan experience worse for every non track and field event.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by TopChed

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but having the track surround the field at the fieldhouse is a huge negative for me. Having the track makes the fan experience worse for every non track and field event.

Everyone else has mentioned it, including Ken King. Hence the retractable seats.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by TopChed

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but having the track surround the field at the fieldhouse is a huge negative for me. Having the track makes the fan experience worse for every non track and field event.

There will be retractable seating that will cover the track when not in use. I agree, the track is an eyesore for other events, but it won't be an issue here.

[PostandIn]

I agree that the project is ambitious and transformative for Calgary but doesn't strike me as the truly top shelf project that its been characterized as. The 30K capacity for the football stadium is disappointing and seems like a compromise for the sake of the field house. If 28K is the average Stamps game attendance currently, wouldn't making the game day experience exponentially better, as King claims they are doing, mean that a lot more than 2 thousand additional people would show up at football games? Missed opportunity here if the stadium stays at 30K IMO.

[hockey.modern]

Was their any mentions of who the architects will be for this?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by TopChed

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but having the track surround the field at the fieldhouse is a huge negative for me. Having the track makes the fan experience worse for every non track and field event.

But for none-track events it looks like the stand will extend onto the track to close the distance between the field and the seats.

Seems to be a non-issue if that is the plan.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by TopChed

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but having the track surround the field at the fieldhouse is a huge negative for me. Having the track makes the fan experience worse for every non track and field event.

But non-track events will have the stands, which are retractable and will be over the track.

It's actually a decent solution to the problem.


I'm a fan of the whole project, I think that it's a great idea and looks to be coming together.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Benched

from atbs' post on the NEWS thread, Nenshi's statement echo some of my concerns.

http://calgarymayor.ca/stories/mayor...house-proposal

Not enough of you are reading this part.

• The proposal includes incorporating The City’s proposed (and much-needed) fieldhouse into the facility. However, that project, while a very high priority for the City, remains unfunded.

The 200 million is not there. It is not budgeted. It is not earmarked. It does not exist.

And if it did, I'd rather it go to something else like the green line.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

No kidding. Maybe if we put a lost cat rescue or a hipster bar he will be all over it. Saying "no money" doesn't cut it when this has been in development for years going back to Bronco.

One thing to keep in mind with Nenshi's statement is that he notes the city has already budgeted for the next couple years. Those budgets include not just spending, but planning for revenue - especially the tax rates. So Nenshi is probably quite correct in saying there is little to no ability to pull this funding right now.

Given the Flames' timelines though, their major asks will probably be coming just about the same time frame as the city's next budget planning cycles are in progress. We'll see how many councilors they can convince in that time.