[Rumour] CMLC Revealing Masterplan in Jan?

[powderjunkie]

Everyone talking about the public good - the question has to be how much MORE public good can be found from a new building than the current one?

In 15+ years we could maybe talk more about new arena vs. no arena at all.

Improved Public Good:

1. 200 metres north is a [slightly] better location; potential to map out new/better surrounding development?
2. A few more concerts each year thanks to stronger roof
3. Improved ability to host major events (e.g. Olympics)
4. ???? Honestly interested in other suggestions specific to 'public good'...struggling to think of much else that isn't specifically a CSEC benefit or a user benefit

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

A few things jump out at me from that news release:

3) I have been amazed at how little the Stampede board has been discussed in these threads. Specifically, a new arena, in the Stampede grounds, would be very beneficial to them. And yet there is no talk about how they might contribute to the costs. To me, this release demonstrates once again, that there is a benefit to them as well (and therefore they should be involved in the financing solution)

Again, how much more benefit would a new arena be for Stampede? Land swap is of debatable benefit. Parking revenue implications unknown. Where is the ROI for them to put up real money?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Everyone talking about the public good - the question has to be how much MORE public good can be found from a new building than the current one?

In 15+ years we could maybe talk more about new arena vs. no arena at all.

Improved Public Good:

1. 200 metres north is a [slightly] better location; potential to map out new/better surrounding development?
2. A few more concerts each year thanks to stronger roof
3. Improved ability to host major events (e.g. Olympics)
4. ???? Honestly interested in other suggestions specific to 'public good'...struggling to think of much else that isn't specifically a CSEC benefit or a user benefit






Again, how much more benefit would a new arena be for Stampede? Land swap is of debatable benefit. Parking revenue implications unknown. Where is the ROI for them to put up real money?

I don't know what the quantifiable benefit is to the Stampede board. But there appears to be a pretty strong appetite to get a new arena on the Stampede grounds. So make of that what you will.

[Robbob]

It wouldn't surprise me if the stampede makes upward of 5 million a year off parking. That isn't exactly chump change for a non profit.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

A few things jump out at me from that news release:

1) As I argued earlier, one of the primary sticking points, if not THE sticking point of the contention between the city and CSEC is location, and the ability to develop around it. The city has a vision for what they would like to build around an arena, and CSEC has their own vision for surrounding development. I think the bottom line here is that an arena, in and of itself, is not a great investment (in a city this size), but the surrounding development tips the scales and defines the value.

2) Anyone that has argued that an arena doesn't benefit the city needs to re-evaluate. The city is flat out stating that they value having a new arena with that news release.

3) I have been amazed at how little the Stampede board has been discussed in these threads. Specifically, a new arena, in the Stampede grounds, would be very beneficial to them. And yet there is no talk about how they might contribute to the costs. To me, this release demonstrates once again, that there is a benefit to them as well (and therefore they should be involved in the financing solution)

In point 3, it’s smart from the Stampede perspective to keep their head down in public. They are no good at this type of development which is why the CMLC was engaged to handle Stampede redevelopment. The City’s interest’s align with the Stampede so why get into it?

[stamps]

Originally Posted by Robbob

It wouldn't surprise me if the stampede makes upward of 5 million a year off parking. That isn't exactly chump change for a non profit.

I guess the Stampede profits from the Flames and they want that to continue ... I remember hearing in the past that the Stampede is subsidized by the provincial government to a certain extent , I remember reading that it was something like 25 million , maybe it was just a one year gift ... maybe its the Stampede that is really the fly in the ointment here .... for a non profit business they do a pretty good job of extracting money from different sources ... If you call the Stampede a public benefit then that public benefit benefits nicely from the Flames and their endeavors ....

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

A few things jump out at me from that news release:

1) As I argued earlier, one of the primary sticking points, if not THE sticking point of the contention between the city and CSEC is location, and the ability to develop around it. The city has a vision for what they would like to build around an arena, and CSEC has their own vision for surrounding development. I think the bottom line here is that an arena, in and of itself, is not a great investment (in a city this size), but the surrounding development tips the scales and defines the value.

The key being that CSEC doesn't actually own the land they want to develop, they just want to fill the Katz role, which down here is a role already filled by CMLC.

Until CSEC starts buying stuff, their stake is limited to that of arena owner/operator, for whatever deal they are willing to work out.

3) I have been amazed at how little the Stampede board has been discussed in these threads. Specifically, a new arena, in the Stampede grounds, would be very beneficial to them. And yet there is no talk about how they might contribute to the costs. To me, this release demonstrates once again, that there is a benefit to them as well (and therefore they should be involved in the financing solution)

The Stampede's stake in this is the land around the arena, which CMLC has now been put in charge of developing. Effectively the Stampede Board has been replaced in the negotiations, which is a good thing, because they're significantly worse than CSEC when it comes to out of touch dinosaurs who keep pushing back plans. Still a stakeholder, but in the backseat.

[Reneeee]

Any update here?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Beninho]

nm

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Reneeee

Any update here?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Just the January update from CMLC

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...cmlc-1.4504422


I don’t think we will see anything change until there’s something final regarding the Olympics and the arena. The Master Plan basically revolves around it, so there isn’t much to bring to the table until then.