Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Incogneto

I sent this email to a friend in Edmonton who was laughing at us Flames fans. This is what the bid says, people:
-------------------------------------------------------
Holy, even YOU are not looking at the bid? Just hearing what HAS to be said, and not what IS being said? Did you think the bid was going to just come out and say 'WE ARE GOING TO BUILD A NEW ARENA' and blow away leverage with the City and the Flames?

Look at the bid. Look hard. Here are the facts: 25M Dedicated to 'Saddledome Upgrades', and $150M dedicated to a new 5000 seat arena to replace the Corral. Nenshi even said 'There is no need for a small arena in this city. This will be replaced with a new event center.'. PLUUUUUUS, the curling was marked as TBA. Do you think a bid like this isn't going to have all details nailed down?

Here is what the bid says to me:
- 'SaddleDome Upgrades' + 'New Arena' = $175M. Which happens to be ALMOST 1/3 of the cost of a new events center.
- Bid 1/3, City 1/3, Flames 1/3, Arena gets built.
- Curling is at the Corral.

- If you ask the Flames brass, they would 100% be for this bid.
- The Arena 100% gets built if this bid wins. If it doesnt, then who knows.

- This is exactly what I have been saying for 3 years. Everything right now is feet dragging between the city and the Flames for this bid. Its all about getting some Federal money in for the arena. Free money for both sides.

I wish people could understand the WHAT in what is being said, and read deeper than just the ink on the paper. This bid means 100% an arena is built. WITHOUT the bid, its gonna be a struggle.

All of this is your interpretation. There is nothing concrete in the proposal speaking directly to this. In fact, the proposal says just the opposite. You are deducing that this is what is going on without anything definitive to support your claims. What you're suggesting is a possibility, but it would be clearly stupid on the part of the Calgary organizing committee to risk the games bid on such a sheltered proposal for a major cog of the games themselves.



When putting a bid together you have to be very clear what you are going to do and what facilities are going to be available for the games. Not having a state of the art arena for such a major event is just a massive hole in the proposal. I'll say this again. There is no way the bid committee would go forward without some level of certainty of what facilities the games would rely upon. They are not going to submit a bid for the 2026 Olympic Games without a clear schedule of where and how each sport is going to be presented. The IOC would be expecting that, and would not be happy to hear that there is a - nudge nudge, wink wink - "deal" being made for another major venue. They want to know how and where you are doing things, and don't give a rip about the backroom deals going on between CSEC and City of Calgary.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ You may be right but ‘ar3 dumb’ because of engineering / foundation constraints is obviously more simple of a dismissal than I was hoping for.

Working within constraints is what architects and engineers do.

If reno’ing is infeasible then why is it on the table for the Olympics?

Or is a significant portion that a new arena is a vanity project?

Trust me, renovating the Dome from a structural perspective would cost just less than building an arena. There's other issues that need to be solved including larger concessions and washrooms, multi-level access, improved transportation routes.

These are not simple solutions that architects and engineers can do; while not impossible, the cost would likely justify just building a new facility from the ground up.

I would peg a new arena at $300M - $400M, and a renovated Dome addressing some of the issues above, at probably about $300M.

The other thing is, when you renovate the Dome, where do the Flames play in the meantime with 18,000 seats? That project would take 18-24 months, minimum.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Muta

Trust me, renovating the Dome from a structural perspective would cost just less than building an arena. There's other issues that need to be solved including larger concessions and washrooms, multi-level access, improved transportation routes.

These are not simple solutions that architects and engineers can do; while not impossible, the cost would likely justify just building a new facility from the ground up.

I would peg a new arena at $300M - $400M, and a renovated Dome addressing some of the issues above, at probably about $300M.

The other thing is, when you renovate the Dome, where do the Flames play in the meantime with 18,000 seats? That project would take 18-24 months, minimum.

There hasn't been an NHL arena constructed for less than $375 million US in 15 years.

[BigFlameDog]

They are not going to put curling in the friggin' Corral at a Canadian hosted Olympics. I am not a huge curling fan and even I can tell you that event will be a huge draw in this country and will be held in a top shelf facility somewhere nearby.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by New Era

When putting a bid together you have to be very clear what you are going to do and what facilities are going to be available for the games. Not having a state of the art arena for such a major event is just a massive hole in the proposal. I'll say this again. There is no way the bid committee would go forward without some level of certainty of what facilities the games would rely upon. They are not going to submit a bid for the 2026 Olympic Games without a clear schedule of where and how each sport is going to be presented. The IOC would be expecting that, and would not be happy to hear that there is a - nudge nudge, wink wink - "deal" being made for another major venue. They want to know how and where you are doing things, and don't give a rip about the backroom deals going on between CSEC and City of Calgary.

The IOC are Macromanagers, they certainly could not care less about what is done with that money as long as they get their money and the games look good. Its important that the bid "looks good", if Calgary wins the bid, everything is off the table and things could change 100 percent, buildings/locations will change(already has happened for Tokyo 2020) and sports could even be removed.

The bid committee is certainly not going to lay all their cards on the table at this time.

I would expect three separate views of this project:

1. A lowball looking model that looks good from a taxpayer perspective, this is what we will see before the November 13th plebiscite.

2. A Really nice fancy presentation for the IOC, this will be designed to win the bid and will spare no expense, the cost will probably go up by 2-3 billion.

3. If the bid is won everything can change, but the money will roll in and expect one of two things before we see the final view in the lead up to 2026

• Corruption will settle in and all the goodies will be distributed among bad actors: (eg, Rio, Montreal, Sochi, and others)
  
• The money will be applied in such a way as to leave a maximum legacy for the host city: (eg Calgary 1988, Vancouver, Barcelona...)

Its not until phase 3 that we will know what is cooking on the arena front, but i do not see any reason why Calgary(like 1988) would not do the right thing at this stage. If the new arena is the proper way to go given the extra funding, then it will certainly be built.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by nik-

There hasn't been an NHL arena constructed for less than $375 million US in 15 years.

Yeah, but this new arena can take advantage of the cheap construction costs and favourable weather southern Alberta has to offer.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

They are not going to put curling in the friggin' Corral at a Canadian hosted Olympics. I am not a huge curling fan and even I can tell you that event will be a huge draw in this country and will be held in a top shelf facility somewhere nearby.

They should just Curl on the Bow and if the rocks break the ice and go down and take the odd curler with them then we just made curling exciting! And they should thank us for that!

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

1. A lowball looking model that looks good from a taxpayer perspective, this is what we will see before the November 13th plebiscite.

Except for most people this still looks terrible (this lowball model is still nearly $1 billion more than expected), and comes with literally none of the things people want. Given that polling suggested the plebiscite vote was gonna be tight, they likely have cost themselves the chance to pass by presenting the lowball offer. There were many who really truly didn't want the Olympics, but would accept it if it came with goodies. So those voters are now gone. Just like CalgaryNEXT, extremely poor PR roll out by the bid committee.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Yeah, but this new arena can take advantage of the cheap construction costs and favourable weather southern Alberta has to offer.

oh ####, my b

[Muta]

Originally Posted by nik-

There hasn't been an NHL arena constructed for less than $375 million US in 15 years.

So, in the range of my estimate. T-Mobile Arena was constructed for $375M. Doesn't mean Calgary can't target $375M, maybe lower, maybe a bit higher.

[nik-]

USD my man

[Manhattanboy]

As I mentioned in the other thread, how and why are people supposed to "read between the lines"?

It would be nice if CSEC publicly announce their support for the bid.

That would get my vote.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

As I mentioned in the other thread, how and why are people supposed to "read between the lines"?

It would be nice if CSEC publicly announce their support for the bid.

That would get my vote.

I'm not as sure as other people that the Olympics is je necessarily a positive for flames ownership as it pertains to an arena, in fact quite the opposite.

Imo, the last thing they want is competition for infrastructure dollars, valueable real estate and federal/provincial input/interference in regards to zoning and development.

The flames want a big parcel of land in the middle of the city that they can then develop. Things like an athletes village similar to what Vancouver did in 210 or what Calgary did in 88 really hurt that plan.

The Olympics is hugely disruptive to a Katz type deal which is explicitly what the flames are after.

[RM14]

KK breaks his media silence... I am not surprised the ongoing negotiation was omitted from the bid package considering how much of a poop show it's been to this date.


https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...eemed-adequate

Calgary Flames CEO Ken King said that while the city has created a specific committee to continue arena talks with the NHL team, he was surprised it was not co-ordinated with Calgary 2026.

“Everyone is aware there has been a committee struck to talk to us about a new arena,” King told Postmedia on Tuesday.

“What is surprising is that it hasn’t been co-ordinated with the Olympic bid.”

But King added he is pleased the committee has at least been struck and there seems to be continued interest to get a new arena built.

“The impetus is there to do some work, and that’s a good thing.”

The Flames and the city have been debating funding models for a new arena for years, with the most recent talks focused around a location in Victoria Park near the Stampede grounds. Both the city and the team’s ownership were accused of playing politics in the run-up to the municipal election last October when talks broke down.

But a charge to reboot negotiations has begun with the new committee, while King has asked for “media silence” around negotiations until a deal is reached.

During the Calgary 2026 presentation to council, Mayor Naheed Nenshi criticized the idea for a mid-size arena, which he argued may be unnecessary, particularly if a new NHL rink gets built.

“If there’s a new big arena built, that obviates a plan for the mid-sized one,” said Nenshi, adding that facilities such as Max Bell and Father David Bauer already seat good-sized capacity crowds.

“I have a lot of trouble seeing a new 5,000-seat arena as part of a legacy. I just don’t see what the future need of that will be.”

[Bunk]

Cllr Davison musing about combining mid-and full sized arenas in one building

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...emains-unclear

Makes some sense. Would need to probably shuffle the location of the Stampede headquarters south of 14ave too. It would be a substantial building.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Cllr Davison musing about combining mid-and full sized arenas in one building

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...emains-unclear

Makes some sense. Would need to probably shuffle the location of the Stampede headquarters south of 14ave too. It would be a substantial building.

Good. That's what I've been in favour of for a while.

We know the Flames will want an on-site practice rink as part of the new building like we've seen with most of the newer buildings in the League (among the post-lockout new arenas, only Pittsburgh and Vegas have their practice rinks off-site). Rather than just building a small rink with very little seating, like most of those other arenas, why not give the secondary rink some capacity and it can serve as a replacement for the Corral?

I think there are a lot of good reasons to build something that size in that area. As suggested, the Hitmen and/or Roughnecks could play some of their games in the smaller building, which would free up the bigger building for other events, or just to let the ice rest. Building the two arenas into one space would create some of those operational efficiencies that the Flames talked about with CalgaryNext. Also, because the Flames would be operating both arenas, they wouldn't be losing revenue when they put an event into the smaller arena. It also lets them sell naming rights to two different venues.



If you look at New Jersey, the plot of land where the Prudential Center sits is almost exactly the same size as the land in Victoria Park that is being discussed for the new arena. On that land, the Devils have not only their arena, they also have their practice rink.

Here's a photo of it. The practice rink is the smaller building in the foreground (it has virtually no seating inside and is just big enough for the rink itself). Adding in some seating around the smaller rink would likely only add about 30-40m to the size of the building.




With some clever design work, you probably could find a way to fit both the large and mid-sized arenas into that 2-block space.

There would also be the possibility of putting the mid-sized arena south of 14th Ave, where Parking Lot A currently is and having a tunnel connecting the two buildings under the road. Or, the better option would likely be to shift 14th Ave about 40m to the south. That would give them enough room to build the two arenas together, and the road would align better with the bridge across the river.



If you take the money budgeted in the Olympic bid plan for the mid-sized arena by Foothills and shift it to a downtown arena, you basically close the funding gap between the City and the Flames.

[getbak]

I did a mock-up of what it could look like to have two shared arenas together.




I used the Prudential Center because it's the perfect size for the spot in question. For the smaller arena, I used the Thunderbird Arena at UBC, which was the small hockey venue in 2010. It holds about 7,500 people for hockey games.

To make this specific design work, 14th Ave would need to be shifted south by about 30 metres. The only existing structure that would be affected is the Stampede HQ building, but I don't think it will survive the redevelopment plan anyway.


My big concern with linking arena funding to Olympic funding is that it has the potential to completely stop the discussions between the city and CSEC until the IOC makes a decision next year.

[Freeway]

Why not just use Prudential Center and the smaller rink that's already attached to that facility?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Freeway

Why not just use Prudential Center and the smaller rink that's already attached to that facility?

Because it doesn't have seating for 5000+ people. It's barely larger than the size of the ice itself.



I put the UBC arena directly over the Devils practice rink and it's more than twice as wide as the practice rink. The practice rink is about 35m wide. The UBC arena is about 75m.

[InglewoodFan]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Cllr Davison musing about combining mid-and full sized arenas in one building

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...emains-unclear

Makes some sense. Would need to probably shuffle the location of the Stampede headquarters south of 14ave too. It would be a substantial building.

One moronic thing from Davison is the comment that the the Roughnecks and Hitmen could play in the 5000 seater. Apparently unaware of the Necks drawing 9-11000 on average. And I am sure the Hitmen do better than 5000 on a regular basis.