[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I'm a little stumped by the enthusiasm for "the city owns it" angle.

Like, umm, why wouldn't they? The city owns the land and going by today's announcement they/we'll be paying for something like 80% of this, if not more.

Who else would own it?

In Edmonton Katz owned all the land. He bought it piece by piece a long time ago.

The funding model was the same, except some of Katz' contribution went into downtown development, not the arena itself. Otherwise the Levy and ticket tax were also included. I believe Katz funded 200 million himself, while the ticket tax, levy, and city contributed the remaining 400 million.

Calgarians are actually getting the better deal from what I can tell.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I'm a little stumped by the enthusiasm for "the city owns it" angle.

Like, umm, why wouldn't they? The city owns the land and going by today's announcement they/we'll be paying for something like 80% of this, if not more.

Who else would own it?

The evil capitalists? At least people might have been concerned about that before the details of the presentation came out today.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Count me in as someone who was really looking forward to this announcement but came away unimpressed. Trying not to be overly negative at this point but that is a terribly uninspired design. I know, I know, this isn't the final design but I honestly think they could have put together better drawings (they certainly had the time) as often with drawings there are fewer limitations in the conceptual stage. My fear is that KK and the owners already think that this is pretty transformational and all it needs are some final touches. Generally, I'm a pretty optimistic person so I will put these thoughts aside for now and hope that we will be blown away when the final design comes out. I've been pretty happy with the way architecture is advancing in Calgary (for eg. new Public Library and NMC) and am hoping that this new facility will follow along; especially for such a prominent site.

I was disappointed that there is no re-alignment of westbound Bow Trail. It will take a lot of imagination in the design to prevent that stretch North of the facility from becoming a barren wasteland. Would have liked that the facility open up to the river to encourage more activity there.

I also don't like how the facility creates a large barrier between the new live/work area and the rest of downtown. As an earlier poster said, commercial (office) development brings more to the city's coffers than residential but I doubt rents will be that high for an area so far out of the core. As well, there is still a lot of developable land in the core and the beltline that developers would likely choose for the projects than for something relatively far away from the core.

On the residential side, I sure wouldn't mind living near the facility but I would think twice about living next to it. A large, concrete facility like this with limited interaction with the street isn't as attractive for a neighbour as some might like to think.

Left out of the presentation is whether the $250M for the CRL included upgrades to the surrounding infrastructure (roads, utilities) to accommodate the future commercial and residential development. This is where the $'s went for the development of the East Village - I'm assuming this would also be the case in the West Village. How much more money is required?

When it comes to the stadium/fieldhouse, I'm okay with enclosed roof, especially if it is translucent. A retractable roof would be ideal but I think we have to realize that a new open air football/soccer stadium isn't economically feasible with the limited number of events that would be held there. Haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet but with the E-W alignment of the stadium, a translucent roof is going to cause some difficulty with the Sun - hope the architects are thinking about that one.

Finally, during KK's presentation, I couldn't help from thinking that I would have preferred Treliving giving this presentation instead; so much more thoughtful and polished in his delivery than King. It wasn't the only thing I didn't like about his presentation style but I, too, wasn't impressed with his response to Francis' question.

Very well put, David.

[GGG]

Regina is building a CFL stadium for 280 million.

100 million ticket tax -- interest free loan from province to city
25 million riders - through naming rights
73 million city of regina
80 million from province
http://www.reginarevitalization.ca/s...-project/cost/

They also plan to raise 200 million for the maintenance of the facility for the 31 years of the stadium, they are also borrowing the 73 million and paying it off over 30 years.

The cost of this is a 1/2% on property taxes.

A CFL stadium is not profitable so some combination of this type of funding is required to do that part.

Based on the above numbers though you ditch the field house component and the flames can pay for this with a ticket tax loan and their money. And the city / province remediate and then sell the land to The flames at market value. The remediation dollars could come from the CRI.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

The evil capitalists? At least people might have been concerned about that before the details of the presentation came out today.

Having a team owned arena increases the franchise value.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

There's that thin skin again.

Thin skin usually refers to people not being able to take criticism. Me not buying what Ken King is selling with regards to being a world class city because of this project doesn't really fit that.

Stick to security you're better at that.

[MarkGio]

What's happening with the Saddledown and McMahon Stadium, assuming the new arena goes through?

Ie, will the new arena complex be in direct competition with the previous facilities?

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Remediation will be a provincial/municipal cost as KK noted. He didnt say anything about paying that cost, nor did he about infrastructure - it can be assumed their plan is to have the city front that.

The Flames current lease with the saddledome doesnt have any revenue sharing and the majority of arena's in all leagues do not off this deal. City owned but costs and revenue go to the team.

Again, I, and several others have already commented on the city ownership of the stadium. It offers no benefit. They receive no revenue from it and it is a depreciating asset with one tenant that pays no rent.

Lastly, and again, it has been mentioned already, the land has been earmarked for development once east village is done. The city doesnt want to dilute both areas by opening them both up. The results have been great in the east village and once the area is sustainable they plan on working on getting west village going. It is a prime area of city owned land and they want to get their money's worth. This issue was raised in the leaked emails that Markusoff wrote on in the Herald. They feel the Flames are pushing the city into developing an area that doesnt have the funding to sustain success.

As noted, there are benefits, but I think the people on here are either looking past the issues or speculating too much on the potential to justify the fact that they really want the new arena. I do to, but I feel like there are numerous ways the city can help without paying for half to 2/3 of the cost (even 1/4 as you claim). Every arena in Canada, except Edmonton, was private money. The NY Jets and Giants 1.6 billion stadium was private money. We dont have to pay for the majority to get a quality project and the arguments used by KK and Co. are utter BS.

+1,000,000 points

Beyond site remediation and free land, there is no justification for governments to offer subsidies to get this arena built. When the saddledome is past its useful life, the Flames will build a new arena with their own funds. It is still 10 years away from that time.

1) The CLR is a subsidy because it simply diverts taxes that would have otherwise gone into the general municipal tax pool.

2) The ticket tax is a subsidy of $6 million per year at an interest rate of 3%.

Is the dome past its prime? Yes

But does it justify spending $700mm so I can pee and get a beer faster between periods? it does not.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

What's happening with the Saddledown and McMahon Stadium, assuming the new arena goes through?

I would assume McMahon would be torn down since I'm sure the University could use the land to expand. The Saddledome could be used for something if the city wanted to.

[D as in David]

Should have included that the presentation didn't include the cost of the land that the city owns. This is a cost to the taxpayer of this project, as well. I, too was under the impression that it held negative value up until the point where KK mentioned that their analysis indicates that the remediation costs won't be that high.

Don't get me wrong, I want to see this project come to fruition in the best possible way. I'm just hoping for (a lot) more than what we saw today.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Cappy

That hasn't really been a huge issue. In the article last week they talked about the city paying 200 for the field house but also said the Flames would foot the bill for the rest. That was ok with most people (although many rightly raised the concern of the fact that it isnt funded and wants vs needs etc.)

The issue now is the city is contributing alot more for the project than the original project.

So take the 200M for the field house out of the equation because the city is getting more for their 200M if they built it as a stand alone project.

So for me it boils down to 200M from Flames group, 240M for the CRL, and 250M ticket tax.

Like I said the wild card is the remediation because as it stands the remaining parts are something I can get behind.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Thin skin usually refers to people not being able to take criticism. Me not buying what Ken King is selling with regards to being a world class city because of this project doesn't really fit that.

Stick to security you're better at that.

Or when they're easily insulted.

[DFO]

Why trot this out now if this was all they had? The concept is fine and all but the plan is so incomplete. The elephant in the room now is the remediation and infrastructure costs. How on earth can you present without broaching that? Is the expectation that the city or provincial gov steps up no matter what? It doesn't sound like either level of government has been engaged.

This is going to turn into a bigger dog & pony show than Katz vs Edmonton.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by stone hands

Im a STH and you can count me out on wanting my tax dollars to go this

As much as i hate spending 35+ nights a year in a crammed concourse because theres an f150 sitting between the bathrooms, ATMs and major concessions, nothing will sway that opinion

But they're not...

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Conceptually, the presentation makes a fair bit of sense (and to be fair KK was clear that this was a high level overview of a very complicated project). Combining the facilities save a tonne of money in capital and operating expenses. A catalyst is required to address the creosote problem, as evidenced by 50 years of doing nothing by the city and the province. The area is currently a dump without this catalyst. Having an urban sports facility is the only way to go (KK called the suburban facilities a death sentence or something similar). With all of that, WV and an ambitious project is what is needed. I am at a loss to understand what the naysayers would do otherwise which would be better. Do tell.
Finally, thanks to JayRandom for his posts. He encapsulated my thoughts (and I suspect many other's) on this.

[Erick Estrada]

I really wish this announcement was held two years ago as I didn't hear anything today that justifies all the delays but it's good that it's finally been revealed and it should be exciting over the coming years to see more polished designs. People are entitled to their opinions and being opposed is fine but this project will happen and I hope it doesn't get drawn out too long because the longer it gets drawn out the more it's going to cost.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Weird translucent roofs make the buildings look like fast food take out containers

Otherwise, looks interesting.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

1) The CLR is a subsidy because it simply diverts taxes that would have otherwise gone into the general municipal tax pool.

At present, those taxes are nonexistent. They aren't going into the general tax pool because there is no development in the area to tax. Given that the land has been sitting there undeveloped for close to 50 years, it's difficult to see that changing on its own.

It would be easy to exaggerate the surplus revenues that will be generated by West Village development – i.e., after paying for municipal services to the area. That's why I consider the CRL rather hinky, and hope the city will negotiate that $240m figure downwards as much as possible short of cancelling the project. But those revenues will certainly be greater than zero, and with the present usage of the land, those revenues are zero for the foreseeable future.

2) The ticket tax is a subsidy of $6 million per year at an interest rate of 3%.

You are assuming that the city pays the interest and CSEC only repays the principal. Now, maybe I'm a chump, but if I were costing a project like this, I would include interest costs and other carrying charges in the total price. That would mean that the ticket tax generates enough revenue to completely amortize the initial loan, including interest.

Is the dome past its prime? Yes

But does it justify spending $700mm so I can pee and get a beer faster between periods? it does not.

Is the money being spent solely so you can pee and get a beer faster? No, it is not. Hint: Let us know the first time there's a football or soccer game at the Saddledome.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Finally, during KK's presentation, I couldn't help from thinking that I would have preferred Treliving giving this presentation instead; so much more thoughtful and polished in his delivery than King. It wasn't the only thing I didn't like about his presentation style but I, too, wasn't impressed with his response to Francis' question.

Meh we're lucky it wasn't Burke.

But yeah his response to Francis' question was like Darryl Sutter took over for a second there.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I really wish this announcement was held two years ago as I didn't hear anything today that justifies all the delays but it's good that it's finally been revealed and it should be exciting over the coming years to see more polished designs. People are entitled to their opinions and being opposed is fine but this project will happen and I hope it doesn't get drawn out too long because the longer it gets drawn out the more it's going to cost.

Wonder how much the acquisition of the Stampeders set back/changed plans in 2012. Could have just been looking at a hockey rink at the time then totally shifted gears.