[News Roundup] CSEC/City arena deal UPDATED: Third Party Facilitator

[getbak]

Here's my understanding of how things progressed...

2019: The City and CSEC come to an agreement to split costs 50/50 with an estimated final price of $550 million and some land swapping between the City and the Stampede and the City agreeing to pick up the cost of demolishing the Saddledome once the new building is open.

April 2021: The arena project was put on "pause" to figure out the new financing arrangement.

July 2021: The new agreement was made with both sides agreeing to increase their contributions, CMLC removed as the project manager, and CSEC agreeing to pay for any additional cost increases.

August 2021: Initial designs are submitted to Planning & Development and opened for public feedback.

October 2021: Based on feedback and in consultation with Planning & Development, revised designs are submitted.

November 2021: Proposal is presented to the Planning Commission and approved.

These changes were made between the August submission and the final October designs (as noted in this document: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....umentId=186207):

Following Administration’s review of the application, a number improvements were made to the proposed building and site design, including:

• the inclusion of solar photovoltaic equipment;
• increased publicly accessible bicycle parking, both on-site and off-site;
• the inclusion of e-scooter parking, on-site;
• refinements to the building’s street interface and landscaping;
• increased active use frontage;
• increased glazing and permeability along the north and east facades;
• measures to reduce the visual impact of the mass, including refinement of the ‘ribbon’ feature;
• improved parkade screening; and
• measures to add interest to large wall areas.

These changes were agreed to by all parties and were based on the feedback received from the public and various groups such as the area community associations.

This document shows the comments from the Urban Design Review Panel and the responses from the project team: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....umentId=186212

These are the changes that seem to be the issue. As I understand it, both sides agree that these changes add about $19 million to the budget and the City has agreed to pay approximately $9 million of that cost, which would leave the other $10 million for CSEC.

Now, CSEC is trying to claim that these changes were forced on them and the City wants them to pay the added costs, which have already ballooned since even July because of the supply-chain issues.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I don't blame either side for not wanting a rising cost building to get away on them.

Don't blame the city for wanting out of the 50/50 share, and don't blame the Flames for hitting their limit now either.

But as far as I've read it was 50/50 and the city wanted out of that. I think the "cold feet" discussion in that is semantics isn't it?

Weren't the extra costs originally capped at like $25M each?

Then it became clear that buffer was insufficient, CSEC absorbed that risk in exchange for booting CMLC (and a few other concessions?)



If both sides are somehow getting a 'raw deal'...then maybe it just doesn't make a lot of sense. The decade of inaction/poor action from CSEC kinda contradicts the notion that this is anywhere near an existential crisis.

[curves2000]

I have always said that the city should pay for the climate mitigation expenses and the sidewalk and other improvements, that's fine and that may be their costs. Whatever is in the agreement or not appears to be in dispute. The ownership group though did make a deal to get rid of CMLC and then take upon the full risk of the job, that happened only a few months ago so you can't really put your hand up now and say you didn't know.

[fulham]

Given the amount of concessions the city is willing to give CSEC, at what point is it viable for the city to just buy the Flames. I mean if your splitting costs without any ownership why not.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by fulham

Given the amount of concessions the city is willing to give CSEC, at what point is it viable for the city to just buy the Flames. I mean if your splitting costs without any ownership why not.

Yup. Buy them then IPO them on the TSX. Full public quarterly disclosure of the books, what a dream...

It's sad people think that it's a crazy idea for the city to do that, and instead they have to fund part of an arena for the public good or the team will move while we're a cap maxed team with a full building (less covid) and less than mediocre record over 30yrs.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

Yup. Buy them then IPO them on the TSX. Full public quarterly disclosure of the books, what a dream...

It's sad people think that it's a crazy idea for the city to do that, and instead they have to fund part of an arena for the public good or the team will move while we're a cap maxed team with a full building (less covid) and less than mediocre record over 30yrs.

This assumes that the Flames would be up for sale over an arena deal, when Murray Edwards is in the inner-circle of NHL owners. I imagine they would be relocated well before going up for sale. The city can't buy what isn't for sale.

[Rutuu]

[QUOTE=ComixZone;8115675]This assumes that the Flames would be up for sale over an arena deal, when Murray Edwards is in the inner-circle of NHL owners. I imagine they would be relocated well before going up for sale. The city can't buy what isn't for sale.[/QUOTE

Agreed...and it's unlikely the NHL would ever allow a sale that resulted in public listing. One can dream though.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

This assumes that the Flames would be up for sale over an arena deal, when Murray Edwards is in the inner-circle of NHL owners. I imagine they would be relocated well before going up for sale. The city can't buy what isn't for sale.

You really think the league and other owners would let that happen because he's a buddy? Would they waive the relo fee, too?

Where would he go? Houston would be a second fiddle tenant situation. QC has their own ownership group. Portland's building is 27 years old and they'd be second fiddle.

Kansas City or bust, I guess? Or maybe he's a good enough buddy that they'd let him move into Toronto?

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

You really think the league and other owners would let that happen because he's a buddy? Would they waive the relo fee, too?

Where would he go? Houston would be a second fiddle tenant situation. QC has their own ownership group. Portland's building is 27 years old and they'd be second fiddle.

Kansas City or bust, I guess? Or maybe he's a good enough buddy that they'd let him move into Toronto?

I'm of the opinion that Salt Lake City would be a viable option. The metro area of Provo and Ogden provide a pretty sizeable market and it is a winter climate that should be supportive of winter sports. They would only have to compete with the Jazz and the arena is pretty decent. Plus for former Flames fans it is a quick flight or relatively easy drive to go see a game.

[getbak]

Salt Lake would need a new arena. The Delta Center (or whatever it's called now) is one of those built-for-basketball arenas that doesn't really fit a hockey rink.

I remember during the Olympics, they held the figure skating there and because they had to pull back so many seats to fit the ice, one of the skaters was quoted as saying it felt like performing in a canyon.


The Grizzlies play in the former Olympic hockey venue, but it only holds 10,000 people.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

You really think the league and other owners would let that happen because he's a buddy? Would they waive the relo fee, too?

You may be quite sure that they would let the Flames relocate before they would accept a municipal government as an owner. Frankly, politicians are the wrong kind of crooked.

[MoneyGuy]

Delta is an unfortunate name for an arena, also for an airline.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

Delta is an unfortunate name for an arena, also for an airline.

Corona says please hold my beer. Please, please we're struggling here.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by getbak

Salt Lake would need a new arena. The Delta Center (or whatever it's called now) is one of those built-for-basketball arenas that doesn't really fit a hockey rink.

I remember during the Olympics, they held the figure skating there and because they had to pull back so many seats to fit the ice, one of the skaters was quoted as saying it felt like performing in a canyon.


The Grizzlies play in the former Olympic hockey venue, but it only holds 10,000 people.

I didn't realize that the Vivint Center in Salt Lake wasn't really suitable for a rink. I also just looked and apparently the building is 30 years old now so it is getting to the end of it's life so that is a good position in terms of expansion. Package a new Jazz/NHL arena with an expansion/relocation team and a sweet government deal and things can work out really well for an owner.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I'm of the opinion that Salt Lake City would be a viable option. The metro area of Provo and Ogden provide a pretty sizeable market and it is a winter climate that should be supportive of winter sports. They would only have to compete with the Jazz and the arena is pretty decent. Plus for former Flames fans it is a quick flight or relatively easy drive to go see a game.

SLC could definitely be interesting. Not sure there is a business case for the Flames to go there given relo fee. Vivint Centre opened 1991, though they just finished a $125M renovation in 2017.

The Utah Grizzlies play out of of a 12k seat arena that is almost dead centre in the metro area. They were drawing 5k+ for a few years before the pandemic, which is only slightly above avg for that league.

IMO KC, QC, or even Hartford/Cincinnati/Austin would have better luck as the only winter show in those towns. It's hard to see a superior business case in any of them compared to just staying in the Dome, before even contemplating the relocation fee.

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You may be quite sure that they would let the Flames relocate before they would accept a municipal government as an owner. Frankly, politicians are the wrong kind of crooked.

His premise was that they would move before any kind of sale attempts at all, which is ludicrous.

It would be one thing if the city had held a firm line on $0 public money, but it's quite another when a fairly generous deal fell apart in unprecedented times.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I'm of the opinion that Salt Lake City would be a viable option. The metro area of Provo and Ogden provide a pretty sizeable market and it is a winter climate that should be supportive of winter sports. They would only have to compete with the Jazz and the arena is pretty decent. Plus for former Flames fans it is a quick flight or relatively easy drive to go see a game.

Lol, but I don’t consider about 1400 km an easy drive.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JBR]

So.. still no official word on killing the deal? Isn’t tomorrow the deadline for both sides?

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I didn't realize that the Vivint Center in Salt Lake wasn't really suitable for a rink. I also just looked and apparently the building is 30 years old now so it is getting to the end of it's life so that is a good position in terms of expansion. Package a new Jazz/NHL arena with an expansion/relocation team and a sweet government deal and things can work out really well for an owner.

Has SLC ever been considered a spot for an NHL team. Why speculate when there is no smoke?

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Has SLC ever been considered a spot for an NHL team. Why speculate when there is no smoke?

Well there is this happening so I'm assuming it is part of some sort of market testing. Why else would they be hosting games?

https://www.nhl.com/kings/news/la-ki...ty/c-325331344

[powderjunkie]

They could schedule teams' road trips to have SLC come right after vegas so players have a chance to dry out.