CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I've never seen an arena project announcement or plan that included interest on the loans and infrastructure upgrades included in the totals, the city making it sound like the Flames were hiding things is as ridiculous as most of the outrage in this thread. But anyone who has paid any attention knew that Nenshi and his lackeys would spin it this way.

When did the City say they were hiding things?

We as a group made that assumption.

At the end of the day, why wouldn't you include it? Do you not include interest payments when purchasing a mortgage?

[Bingo]

yeah this is a little sketchy in my opinion.

I think the only way you can really add up total cost for the project is to look at what the infrastructure and remediation costs are for two or three other development plans for the West Village and then just total the increase or decrease from going with the sports model.

The city bought poopy land. They need to clean it up. You can't just have a blight next to downtown.

If this is a poor way to develop it then fine, but to just add up all the infrastructure and then suggest the Flames underestimated the project by 100% is a little unfair.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by dino7c

that area will never be cleaned up...everyone loves the environment until it costs them money

It is kind of strange how this city has spent countless hours and millions on the whole fluoride in drinking water fiasco but since creosote isn't killing fish in the Bow river it's not a priority. There is no doubt the Flames have piggybacked on this to their advantage but I don't think accelerating the removal or treatment of the soil this is a bad thing.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I've never seen an arena project announcement or plan that included interest on the loans and infrastructure upgrades included in the totals, the city making it sound like the Flames were hiding things is as ridiculous as most of the outrage in this thread. But anyone who has paid any attention knew that Nenshi and his lackeys would spin it this way.

Right on the nose. The city has inflated their numbers in obvious ways. Both sides have now made their public appeals, so now the games can really begin. Both sides need to put on their big boy pants and start hammering out the middle ground details.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Cappy

When did the City say they were hiding things?

We as a group made that assumption.

At the end of the day, why wouldn't you include it? Do you not include interest payments when purchasing a mortgage?

Same reason you list a house at $250k when in the end you know the person will pay north of 350k. Same reason you list a car at 20k and don't advertise any more than an interest rate.

[HotHotHeat]

Just for the sake of sharing. If we're considering the real value of $1.8 billion in terms of building costs...

From Wikipedia:

AT&T Stadium, formerly known as Cowboys Stadium, is a city-owned 101,000-seat capacity[1] stadium with a retractable roof in Arlington, Texas, United States. It serves as the home of the Dallas Cowboys of the National Football League (NFL).

Originally estimated to cost $650 million, the stadium's current construction cost was $1.15 billion,[23] making it one of the most expensive sports venues ever built.

Not a comparison, because the starting points are different, but still, $1.1B USD is an outrageous sum of money for a sports stadium. Makes $1.8B difficult to grasp.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Same reason The Flames list a projectat $250k when in the end you know the city will pay north of 350k. Same reason the Flames list a arena at 20k and don't advertise any more than an interest rate.

Sounds the same.

I understand what you are trying to say, and I don't disagree, but I think youre being a little harsh on the city for including the amounts in the proposal (especially considering the proposal states clearly the amount and what it was for).

In the end, there is nothing wrong with the City's response. The City said, nope it isn't feasible (we are focusing on the amount, but this is the real conclusion), they offered alternatives that would fit with the City's strategic plan, and are now allowing the Flames to respond? what is wrong with that?

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Sounds the same.

Your point? I am simply saying these figures are never included when trying to sell the vision. A secondary (and lesser reason) that these figures are not included is because interest rates fluctuate, it makes it very hard to sell a vision when you can't put an accurate cost on it.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Just for the sake of sharing. If we're considering the real value of $1.8 billion in terms of building costs...

From Wikipedia:





Not a comparison, because the starting points are different, but still, $1.1B USD is an outrageous sum of money for a sports stadium. Makes $1.8B difficult to grasp.

I think it's important to note that Cowboys Stadium is probably the best or one of the best stadiums in the world.

Also, those costs were USD, and the costs associated with Calgary next are expressed in CAD. And calgary next incorporates a lot more than just 1 stadium.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Sounds the same.

That's because it is. It makes perfect sense for the Flames to downplay by omission the full end cost of the proposed project... just as it makes perfect sense for the city to include it when deliberating on said proposed project.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Your point? I am simply saying these figures are never included when trying to sell the vision. A secondary (and lesser reason) that these figures are not included is because interest rates fluctuate, it makes it very hard to sell a vision when you can't put an accurate cost on it.

That is my point. I'm agreeing with you. It's hard to sell a house or a car or a "vision" when you include various externalities. Home repairs, costs of renovations, estimated costs of furniture.

I'm not blaming the Flames for not including these numbers. But I certainly am not faulting the City for including them in their proposal.

I think most people on here (or in general) were of the mind that the City's contribution in the original proposal was too much, so anything over and above that is tough to deny - whether 1.8 billion or 1.1

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

It is kind of strange how this city has spent countless hours and millions on the whole fluoride in drinking water fiasco but since creosote isn't killing fish in the Bow river it's not a priority. There is no doubt the Flames have piggybacked on this to their advantage but I don't think accelerating the removal or treatment of the soil this is a bad thing.

It's not just about the soil though, you have to tear down and replace 2 dealerships and a big ass bus station as well, even the amount of work and cost digging and disposing up all the asphalt and concrete is staggering.

This isn't Edmonton with dead land in a dead downtown,West village can and will likely be beautiful in time but it should be cleaned up and developed slowly over time and it should be for housing not arena's to cause more traffic problems to an area with enough already.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Cappy

That is my point. I'm agreeing with you. It's hard to sell a house or a car or a "vision" when you include various externalities. Home repairs, costs of renovations, estimated costs of furniture.

I'm not blaming the Flames for not including these numbers. But I certainly am not faulting the City for including them in their proposal.

I think most people on here (or in general) were of the mind that the City's contribution in the original proposal was too much, so anything over and above that is tough to deny - whether 1.8 billion or 1.1

But the difference is the fact that there would be infrastructure costs in a west village development anyway.

You have to clean it up, run utilities, make roads, move roads, alter roads, look at the crowchild overpass.

Building a sports district there changes things and may add infrastructure costs to the original plan, but to just say all of those costs are for this project is a little disingenuous.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Bingo

but to just say all of those costs are for this project is a little disingenuous.

No, it's not, it's accurate. Those are actual costs that will actually happen if they go ahead with this project. That they are also actual costs that will actually happen if they go ahead with any other hypothetical project is immaterial because it's this project they're discussing.

[johnnybegaudreau]

Just some thoughts after the news of last night/this morning
1. On the notion that this was all a ruse to get both the city and the stampede to play nice on a plan B, which was really plan A all along.
-- Great thought, however, gives far too much credit to the Flames owners, and KK. You're talking about the same organization that "Forever a Flames" it's most notable retiree's. Simply, they're not that smart.

2. to the poster(s) who think the dome is fine and not anymore crowded than prudential and xCel.
-- It is because the concorse at the dome is a single floor concourse. xCel and Prudential both have multi-concourse concepts. Meaning your 200 level seats are separated from your 100 from your 300. You can be sitting in press level and go get a beer and pee without having to walk 2 flights of stairs and navigate an over crowded single concourse where -everyone else- has to go. This separation saves time and crowding.

3. Something that has always bothered me about this city is that it seems to have astronomical costs to provide world class quality that you see in other cities. It's like, we want to be world class, but we always compromise because the costs in this city is too great. The result being we comrpomise on costs and end up with a product that always isn't as good as it seems it should be for the price we paid.
Just look at Regina, they're getting an amazing new stadium for $278m and it looks and feels world class. We all know what's happening up north and the costs there.
Why is it that to do such a thing here in Calgary would cost almost 10% more? Is it because this city is massively over priced when it comes to building? I'd like to know. Let's say you take the 480m for an arena (from edmonton) and 278m for a stadium (regina) = $758m why the hell can't we build something that combines hockey and football into a world class facility for roughly that much? Even if you build them separately side by side on the same property with a shared basement this should be feasable to do at a decent cost and still be world class.

4. On McMahon and the possibility of building on that site.
-- part of the problem with hosting concerts and events at McMahon in the past was the noise. University Heights, Rosedale, and the surrounding areas have a very strong community association and they are already up in arms all the time about traffic/parking issues due to the hospital and university. Back during the 70s/80s when McMahon hosted summer concert series they complained about the noise. Having such a venue that hosts such events would be problematic with the communities. One of the reasons i believe the Flames want to move the Stamps is the ability to use the stadium for other events besides just football.. it would have to be somehwere where these complaints wouldn't be a problem making redeveloping/building etc on university land there a nonstarter, imo.

5. Ken King should clearly be fired.

[Frequitude]

There is a very big difference between scope uncertainty and estimate uncertainty. Scope is what your going to build. The estimate is how much it will cost to build that thing.

Estimate uncertainty is the +/- cost & schedule estimate range on a fixed scope. i.e. you know what you're building but you haven't spent tons of detailed engineering on it so you're probably wrong on the cost estimate.

Scope uncertainty is not even having a complete grasp on what you're building.

Estimate uncertainty is completely acceptable and expected at this stage. Scope uncertainty is a big sin in the early stage of a project because it creates a compounding effect on the estimate uncertainty (you might have to build more, and that increased scope might cost more than estimated).

The Calgary Flames thought they only had to look at a portion of the scope. Basically, their facility which can be considered a black box. They did not consider how to plug that black box in. That was naïve and a poor way to develop an asset. It is critical to understand, study and outline the entire scope required for the success of your asset. Even the pieces you may not be responsible for.

The Flames failed to do that. They should be scolded for that. The city picked up the slack. They should be commended for that.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Parallex

No, it's not, it's accurate. Those are actual costs that will actually happen if they go ahead with this project. That they are also actual costs that will actually happen if they go ahead with any other hypothetical project is immaterial because it's this project they're discussing.

You are 100% correct if the decision is to do Calgary Next or just leave everything the way it is.

However this little puppy that came out in 2010 suggests they are going to do something or at least are looking at it seriously.

http://www.realestateforums.com/ref/...thias_tita.pdf

And given the fact they mention moving Bow Trail, creating another 8th Avenue and a promenade they probably will need to move some creosote, add some utilities and build in some infrastructure.

This has zip to do with the Flames and their plan.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by Bingo

But the difference is the fact that there would be infrastructure costs in a west village development anyway.

You have to clean it up, run utilities, make roads, move roads, alter roads, look at the crowchild overpass.

Building a sports district there changes things and may add infrastructure costs to the original plan, but to just say all of those costs are for this project is a little disingenuous.

There are better ways to use the land than letting the Flames increase their profits and valuation of the team, if you subscribe to the theory that it has to be cleaned up, put something there that's beneficial to the city, and more beneficial to the citizens of Calgary, it's ridiculous to go, welp ya gotta clean it up anyways better spend all this money for a private company

[RM14]

Also, the add back the value of the current land both stadiums are situated. Both are opened up space that add value to their current operators/owners.

Anyone guess what the land value of McMahon is to the University? Stampede Park is hard, but the Stampede could certainly utilize that space for their own good.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

There are better ways to use the land than letting the Flames increase their profits and valuation of the team, if you subscribe to the theory that it has to be cleaned up, put something there that's beneficial to the city, and more beneficial to the citizens of Calgary, it's ridiculous to go, welp ya gotta clean it up anyways better spend all this money for a private company

And I don't have a problem with that. Just leave the spin out of it, it's not helping.