[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I think it depends on how big the scope is. If the City wanted to bring the Bow/Crowchild fix into this project (which may make sense if they are doing a realignment of Bow Trail already) that part alone was estimate to cost $1B. With creosote being up to $300 million, and you add riverfront/pathway upgrades, any 14th street work, infrastructure upgrades, pedestrian bridge over the river.... and finally, the stadium/arena...$2B is not unreasonable by any means.

The Flames $1B solution is the cheap option that sacrifices quite a bit. Getting closer to $2B is probably more realistic in what that area needs to be a well designed and properly functioning community.

The area is slated for redevelopment with or without a new arena complex as is the Crowchild corridor. The Crowchild plan, pedestrian bridge, and land remediation are costs that should not be included in the project's price tag as they will happen independent of the project.

[PostandIn]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Creosoaked...C'mon bro.

I can't hear the word creosote and not think of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx0M...xWoVle1LFUJLOW

[Jbo]

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

The fact of the matter is that using public funds to build arenas for billionaires is almost ALWAYS a poor use of money.

Pretty funny to watch the double-think of some "conservatives" on here though. Hopefully this project fall flat on its face not only for this reason, but for the fact that there is very little transparency given.

I bet a Canuck fan would want this project to fail. I would say stick to the "underlying stats" threads but youve been pretty much wrong on those too.

Hey Quincy Egg, have a snickers, you're not yourself when your hungry.

[bax]

Originally Posted by RM14

This picture is a great view of Bow Trail. I really wish money wan't an issue and this thing could be tunneled right under the complex. Then a massive plaza connected to an extended Riverwalk pathway system.

Spoiler!

Could the design incorporate something like an elevated platform/pedestrian over pass that leads from the river pathway to a second level entrance?

[TX_Flame]

Originally Posted by RM14

The area is slated for redevelopment with or without a new arena complex as is the Crowchild corridor. The Crowchild plan, pedestrian bridge, and land remediation are costs that should not be included in the project's price tag as they will happen independent of the project.

This, although I'm beginning to think the price tag is kind of steep. Videtron Centre is supposed to cost $400M and the recent CFL stadiums are all in the $200M range, and that's without the supposed savings from combining the buildings. If you build 2 buildings like that + a $200M fieldhouse you only get to $800M.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TX_Flame

These are almost all baseball/football combos, which is apples and oranges. A baseball diamond is very different from a football field, which made these combo stadiums nearly impossible to pull off in a way that works well for both sports. A soccer pitch, on the other hand, is quite similar in configuration to a football field, so it's not so hard to pull off. I live in Houston, TX and NRG Stadium (home of the Texans) is regularly used for international soccer matches.

A note of caution to MLS hopefuls, though. MLS frowns on multiple use facilities. They made Houston build a dedicated soccer only stadium (TDECU) for the Dynamo.

All of these stadium examples are missing the point. NRG is not used at all as an amateur sports facility, unlike the proposed fieldhouse. Personally I think the combined use is a good idea for Calgary.

As for MLS, what they didn't want was teams playing in cavernous, empty football stadiums. That would not be a problem here but you are right they prefer dedicated stadiums. Calgary is a long ways down their list anyway. And the MLS ownership structure is different than other sports leagues. The league owns the teams, and investor/operators own an interest in the league. Who knows what the Flames would think of that.

[saillias]

Anyone hear the KKing interview the Fan aired this morning? It was with some Toronto guys, Friedman and Bob Mckeown(?). They grilled him with hard, pointed questions. He dodged them all.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by saillias

Anyone hear the KKing interview the Fan aired this morning? It was with some Toronto guys, Friedman and Bob Mckeown(?). They grilled him with hard, pointed questions. He dodged them all.

I'd like to listen to this.

The more I think about all of this, and now that I've had some time to reflect, the more I feel like the Flames just don't seem prepared to answer the tough questions. Which seems bizarre given how much time they've had - you'd think they'd at least have proposed answers to ALL the tough questions, even if the designs and plans aren't fully finished.

[curves2000]

For those who are looking for the video clip and interview from Sportsnet 590 in Toronto here is the link.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/k...f-calgarynext/


I am actually surprised how poorly of a selling job Ken King is doing here with this overall project. I personally have some doubts about some aspects of certain things but what everyone agree's is the shocking lack of details and wow factor for something that has been in making for years!

In any event I found Elliot Freidman's reaction to some of the answers interesting on a few levels. The thing with these sports reporters and personalities is they have all heard a lot of this BS before. I particularly loved Ken King's comment about the new Detriot Red Wings project and how it is essentially bringing Detriot back to life. Quality comedy all around.

[420since1974]

The Field House money has already been approved by City Council, they just haven't decided where to put it.

The cost of remediation/decontamination of the former Domtar (out of business) creosote plant will eventually have to be borne by the city and the province.
They simply cannot continue to allow it to flow across the Bow River into the Hillhurst community indefinitely.

The above two items are approximately 1/2 the cost of the proposed project.
IMHO, it's only the other 1/2 of the money that's truly up for debate.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Wow. Ken king is ridiculous. Love the comment Bob made about come down to Toronto and I will show you what you can build with your own money. Brilliant

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by RM14

The area is slated for redevelopment with or without a new arena complex as is the Crowchild corridor. The Crowchild plan, pedestrian bridge, and land remediation are costs that should not be included in the project's price tag as they will happen independent of the project.

That may be the case, but while you can proceed with the big picture West Village vision without the stadium in there, you can't really do the stadium without thinking about the rest of the West Village issues.

The Flames don't have to look at this from a big-picture standpoint, but the City does. And if it doesn't make long-term sense, I doubt you'll get much approval/funding on the stadium front. For the City, the Flames stadium has to be one piece of a master puzzle in West Village, not the one piece you do now and figure out the rest later. It would be silly to build the stadium as the Flames want it, and then 5 years later try to re-align Bow Trail.

West Village and the valley corridor was always going to be a hairy, expensive, mess. Which is why I think the whole dollar picture needs to be considered. If the Flames don't want to be part of the long-term fix of that mess, they need to build on a more traditional piece of land.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by curves2000

For those who are looking for the video clip and interview from Sportsnet 590 in Toronto here is the link.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/k...f-calgarynext/


I am actually surprised how poorly of a selling job Ken King is doing here with this overall project. I personally have some doubts about some aspects of certain things but what everyone agree's is the shocking lack of details and wow factor for something that has been in making for years!

In any event I found Elliot Freidman's reaction to some of the answers interesting on a few levels. The thing with these sports reporters and personalities is they have all heard a lot of this BS before. I particularly loved Ken King's comment about the new Detriot Red Wings project and how it is essentially bringing Detriot back to life. Quality comedy all around.

I think you hear what you want to hear, because that is not what he said.

King's comment about Detroit was in direct response to a question about a project started when the city is in a down time, or recession. His answer was perfectly sensible based upon beginning the project and how the financing will be required. Look back in Alberta and see when all of the big projects were built, i.e. Olympics/Commonwealth etc. They were all started in down times and coincided with upturns in the economy at completion, when the communities started the main repayment for the construction. The difference today is the public/private partnerships that build most of these things in Alberta and the majority of US States (difference is we call part of the financing CRL's and the US issues City Bonds)

[Southside]

Originally Posted by Table 5

That may be the case, but while you can proceed with the big picture West Village vision without the stadium in there, you can't really do the stadium without thinking about the rest of the West Village issues.

The Flames don't have to look at this from a big-picture standpoint, but the City does. And if it doesn't make long-term sense, I doubt you'll get much approval/funding on the stadium front. For the City, the Flames stadium has to be one piece of a master puzzle in West Village, not the one piece you do now and figure out the rest later. It would be silly to build the stadium as the Flames want it, and then 5 years later try to re-align Bow Trail.

West Village and the valley corridor was always going to be a hairy, expensive, mess. Which is why I think the whole dollar picture needs to be considered. If the Flames don't want to be part of the long-term fix of that mess, they need to build on a more traditional piece of land.

I don't think the Flames need to contribute to an environmental clean-up they have no relation to. You can argue other costs, but not that one. Where is that more traditional piece of land? Spruce Meadows? Balzac?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by 420since1974

The Field House money has already been approved by City Council, they just haven't decided where to put it.

The cost of remediation/decontamination of the former Domtar (out of business) creosote plant will eventually have to be borne by the city and the province.
They simply cannot continue to allow it to flow across the Bow River into the Hillhurst community indefinitely.

The above two items are approximately 1/2 the cost of the proposed project.
IMHO, it's only the other 1/2 of the money that's truly up for debate.

The field house has been identified as a priority project, but it does not yet have a source of funding to actually make it happen (Foothills was the identified site, but this proposal would have it moved to co-locate with the stadium).

The creosote contamination - its remediation or risk management will depend on what's ultimately done with the land and the cost-benefit. If hypothetically it costed $400 million to clean up for purposes of development, the City could decide nothing but a park on top with containment and risk management could ever be financially feasible.

CRL is a City cost in the form of foregone general revenue (at some increment) for a period of say 20 years.

[The Ditch]

Listened to that interview, King tries to spin it like they're doing the city a huge favour by building this arena with public funds, I don't think my eyes could roll any further back into my head.

[MacDaddy77]

I just dont understand the issue here so Flames are kicking in 200 million that leaves 750 million shortfall

Calgary has lets call it 1 million people, each tax payer contributes $750 to the project TOTAL

take that over 10 years and its $75/year!! why is this such a bad thing to contribute to the growth of the city


I understand that's an oversimplification of the math and population doesn't mean tax paying population but even multiply it by 5 and take it over 30 years means its $125/yr roughly

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

I just dont understand the issue here so Flames are kicking in 200 million that leaves 750 million shortfall

Calgary has lets call it 1 million people, each tax payer contributes $750 to the project TOTAL

take that over 10 years and its $75/year!! why is this such a bad thing to contribute to the growth of the city

What ruffles most people's feathers is that the Leafs, Habs, Canucks and I believe the Sens all built their own arenas. Folks think Murray Edwards and Co should pony up their own dough for an arena.

While those folks have a point, and there is precedent, teams like the Oilers and CFL clubs have received public funds to build their venues.

So it's a muddy situation.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Southside

I don't think the Flames need to contribute to an environmental clean-up they have no relation to. You can argue other costs, but not that one. Where is that more traditional piece of land? Spruce Meadows? Balzac?

If they don't want to pay, that's fine. But somebody does, so it will have to be a consideration. The Stadium is simply not going forward without remediation. You can't just pretend it doesn't exist.

As for location, there are several of plots of land around the city where they can build...they'd just have to buy the piece of land (you know, like every other developer who wants to build something). Stampede Park or the Remington Lands close by are still good options for a stadium, and would be much easier to work with.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

I just dont understand the issue here so Flames are kicking in 200 million that leaves 750 million shortfall

Calgary has lets call it 1 million people, each tax payer contributes $750 to the project TOTAL

take that over 10 years and its $75/year!! why is this such a bad thing to contribute to the growth of the city


I understand that's an oversimplification of the math and population doesn't mean tax paying population but even multiply it by 5 and take it over 30 years means its $125/yr roughly

A lot of people aren't ok with shelling out money so that a billionaire can make millions more is this really a hard concept to understand? You're saying, let me give you this money of mine, so that you can charge me more money to see your thing so that you can make millions of dollars.