1500 according to the slides. And that is more parking than the Montreal Canadiens offer.
Montrealers actually use their amazing transit system because you can get everywhere there on the train. Here, everyone is still married to their cars.
It will be interesting to read someday about how all this went down. Because it doesn't take 10 years frickin' years to come up with that proposal. There must have been some behind-the-scenes power struggles and stand-offs. Not to mention incompetence. It's safe to assume no private developer is going to be snapping up Ken King any time soon to bring in his mad project management skillz. I have to agree with the posts up-thread that the Flames should have partnered up with the Calgary MLC to plan this thing. People who actually have a clue about how to pull off a project of this scope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Four car trains, and a lot of people parking throughout downtown. They will be either shorthopping one or two stations, or just walking.
Finding parking at the Sentry Box is going to get a lot harder.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
I enjoyed reading your post, can I ask a question related to this and the CRL?
I wonder in this proposal who gets the benefit of developing the surrounding areas. For example, to use our friends to the north as an example, the cost of the team's investment was offset by the owner using the increased value in the surrounding lands and related development.
Is there anything like this going on in the CS&E proposal that you can comment on? Are there specific interests which stand to benefit?
I doubt it, and I say that because if that were the case, if the Flames Group was spending any kind of money on investing the area surrounding, they would have said it in their fluff piece.
The negativity in this thread is truly disappointing.
We have a group of local businessmen with a vision and $200 million of their own cash stepping up with something transformational for the city.
Boo fricken' hoo if their vision does not align perfectly with yours. It's still 1000x better than doing nothing, with is what happens if you spin your wheels trying to make everyone happy. The process has started, which is a huge step in the right direction. To think that there should be finalized plans when the Flames don't even know if they have a partner in this is crazy.
To me, all that needs to be bought into now is the concept of the facilities at the proposed locations. Everything else will evolve over due course.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ice_Weasel For This Useful Post:
Montrealers actually use their amazing transit system because you can get everywhere there on the train. Here, everyone is still married to their cars.
Montreal actually has a transit system, people in Calgary have to use their automobiles, even the LRT parking lots will be a nightmare if everyone try's to use the train.
The Following User Says Thank You to T@T For This Useful Post:
After listening yesterday and going through the website I am a bit disappointed with the Flames initial investment.
I was hoping for something closer to $350m. If the Canucks ownership group can come up with enough for the arena, then surely the flames could. Maybe this is the initial solvo and the 200m will increase as negotiations go on.
The Flames made concessions on the stadium for the Stampeders to get the minor sports vote with the field house (field house funding could come from all 3 different levels of government, not just 200m from the city).
Before I really decide on whether this is a good deal or bad I would have to have a few questions answered:
1: What are the CRL boundries? In order to pay for the East Village the city included all land east of Centre street to 9th ave which just happened to include the largest office tower in the city at the time. Will it include all land east of Crowchild to 14th St and southern border of 17th Ave?
2: What are the lease terms the Flames/Stampeders are willing to sign off on? 35 years would be the minimum I would require for this much public investment from the City.
Montrealers actually use their amazing transit system because you can get everywhere there on the train. Here, everyone is still married to their cars.
With the current greenline funding aren't we supposed to have an amazing transit system in 10 years as well. That is pretty close to the same time this arena project would be finished.
The Following User Says Thank You to fundmark19 For This Useful Post:
This arena complex will not take up the entire space of the West Village. CSE's plan calls for additional residential, shopping (which would include bars), commercial, etc. The arena project is meant to be the catalyst for getting clean-up and the build out of the area started.
The unanswered question here is whether CalgaryNEXT's vision of the hotel, convention centre, residentail areas, shops, etc. is part of their own plan that would be built later, or if they are assuming someone else will come along after they build.
With no mention of any commitment yesterday, I assume there is no commitment by them as of yet. That can be negotiated sure, but why not add that instead of wowing us with "it makes the citizens healthy!"
West Village isnt really all that big either. The stadia would take up a large chunk and without the bow realignment you are losing its main draw, the riverfront.
1. I think with Stamps to be playing all indoors, it is going to hurt ticket sales long term. The CFL is a summer/fall sport, and now people are going to have to spend nice summer days indoors if they want to go (likely for higher ticket prices than currently). For as nice as it'll be to avoid -20 in early November, it will also suck to be inside when it's 25 outside. The Als would be dead if not for moving outside, and the Argos should be dead playing in that cavern but the league would never allow it. Moving indoors feels like a mistake for the Stamps.
2. If the city picks up the ticket tax up front, that's amazing by the Flames. Essentially taxpayers loan them the money (interest free of course), for the right to then pay the Flames a fee so that the Flames can pay back....the taxpayers. "Hey, loan me money, then I'll charge you a fee so that I can pay you back!". Brilliant (horrible for taxpayers of course).
3. If the Flames don't get the public money they want, will they sell the Stamps to focus on the arena and let a new stadium for the Stamps become someone else's problem?
4. If people are fine with the ticket tax at $250 million, will they be fine if it becomes $500 million if the Flames can't get the money they want?
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
I think this sort of project is in line with other recent developments in the city and, in general, makes sense. I'm quite excited about it, not just for the team I cheer for but also for the city I live in.
On CBC radio this morning someone mentioned an interesting point. The city has earmarked $200M towards a fieldhouse. The Flames are touting that they are saving millions in construction costs by building the fieldhouse, arena, stadium, etc at the same time. Why shouldn't those savings go towards the public financing portion and reduce the city commitment from $200M to say $100M?
Also, I am very concerned that the infrastructure, traffic and transit issues were just glossed over in the presentation and plans. I can't see how a large scale development can work in that area when it's primary access points are through one of the worst intersections in the city.
__________________
The of and to a in is I that it for you was with on as have but be they
I don't think it will be an area were you go and then leave. They mentioned 20 restaurants and a number of shops in the area. If you assume the stadium will be were the greyhound station is now then within 600m they would have those said restaurants and shops. 600m is about the distance from the saddledome to the Vic C-train station. Who knows maybe a schanks downtown or new flames central goes down there as the go to sports watching venue close to the arena.
In regards to the parking, why not park downtown in any of the city lots for $2 and take the train a couple stops (or walk 15 mins). I don't know why people want a ton of parking around the actual arena when there is a ton of parking spots 15 minutes away. Currently people who park on the grounds have to either leave early or wait 15 -30 minutes to get out anyways. Ideally, for events, they would expand the free fare zone that one stop and people would probably be more then willing to park in heated parking lots in the core.
They are speculating. Making it sound great but really they pulled that out of their whatsit
Really surprised Eric Francis didn't make anything of King's non-answer to his revenue splitting question.
That's arguably the most central component of the entire arrangement being proposed by the Flames.
I suspect that will be part of the negotiation with the City, along with who fronts the money for the ticket tax, who pays for the remediation, etc. Still lots of questions that will need to be resolved, but at least this gets the discussion started.
Also, I think people need to relax about the design of the arena and of the fieldhouse -- King stated the exterior images were "placeholders" and that there would be no renderings (i.e. of the interior design) released at this time. He also spent a grand total of zero minutes talking about the arena (other than the capacity and apparent sightlines), and was extremely high level in talking about the fieldhouse. Lets wait until we actually see the drawings before calling the project a failure.
The Following User Says Thank You to tvp2003 For This Useful Post:
1. I think with Stamps to be playing all indoors, it is going to hurt ticket sales long term. The CFL is a summer/fall sport, and now people are going to have to spend nice summer days indoors if they want to go (likely for higher ticket prices than currently). For as nice as it'll be to avoid -20 in early November, it will also suck to be inside when it's 25 outside. The Als would be dead if not for moving outside, and the Argos should be dead playing in that cavern but the league would never allow it. Moving indoors feels like a mistake for the Stamps.
2. If the city picks up the ticket tax up front, that's amazing by the Flames. Essentially taxpayers loan them the money (interest free of course), for the right to then pay the Flames a fee so that the Flames can pay back....the taxpayers. "Hey, loan me money, then I'll charge you a fee so that I can pay you back!". Brilliant (horrible for taxpayers of course).
3. If the Flames don't get the public money they want, will they sell the Stamps to focus on the arena and let a new stadium for the Stamps become someone else's problem?
4. If people are fine with the ticket tax at $250 million, will they be fine if it becomes $500 million if the Flames can't get the money they want?
Excellent question. User pay, in theory, is ideal.
Does this type of ticket tax exist in any form for the arts?
Would be excellent if it did as well.
I suspect that will be part of the negotiation with the City, along with who fronts the money for the ticket tax, who pays for the remediation, etc. Still lots of questions that will need to be resolved, but at least this gets the discussion started.
Also, I think people need to relax about the design of the arena and of the fieldhouse -- King stated the exterior images were "placeholders" and that there would be no renderings (i.e. of the interior design) released at this time. He also spent a grand total of zero minutes talking about the arena (other than the capacity and apparent sightlines), and was extremely high level in talking about the fieldhouse. Lets wait until we actually see the drawings before calling the project a failure.
I agree. But what most people gleaned in terms of detail is the new McMahon will have a closed, if translucent, roof.
With the dough that's being thrown at this project, most people, including myself, would like the pitch section of the roof to be retractable. Glendale-esque.
But would you be willing to spend $330mm more for separate facilities? How is it unsuitable for soccer? While compromise will be necessary in combining a fieldhouse/CFL stadium, I think that compromise is essential. I don't see how a stand-alone fieldhouse is sustainable, nor a separate CFL facility. Combined, at least there is a chance. Combine that with an arena, hotel, conference centre, restaurants and bars, and then you might really have something.
Honestly, yes I would be willing to spend more to do it right the first time, rather than end up with something that kind of fits for a few years and then is an embarrassment. I guess I am in the minority on this one. Or maybe I just assume that for $890 million you could build a fantastic new arena AND a 25000 seat football/soccer stadium AND a $200 million indoor amateur fieldhouse?
In terms of how this is not suitable for soccer, if you can get 30000 people in there, it could make the atmosphere work. But soccer in a multisport indoor facility when the stands are not 100% full is terrible. The atmosphere at Olympic Stadium during the CCL Final was fantastic, but that type of crowd is the exception, not the norm in Montreal.
Did you watch the Women's World Cup games this year when they were in Montreal with 10000 fans? If not, here is a video:
This is how I envision soccer played in this stadium proposal turning out. Looks like a fun place to be, hey? Perhaps I am getting caught up in the rendering they showed, but even as one of the most active soccer supporters in this city I just cannot get excited about soccer being played in this potential stadium.
King talked about the field house at length because that is his way of selling taxpayers money for this project. With the Flames owners only paying $200M that doesn't even cover the new events centre which the city has said they have no interest whatsoever in paying for. Now the ticket tax and the ownership contribution funds the events center of Flames ownership puts up the $250M up front to recoup later then it is a different scenario.
Look, there's still a long way to go, but everything the Flames have shown so far is a sign that they are not very experienced/competent at this development business. They've already wasted half a decade to be at a point where they should've been 2-3 years ago. Talk to anyone in the industry and engaged with development/architecture, and they'll tell you what the Flames have showed is under-developed and thin on details, compared to the time they've had to work on this. You don't have to have a final rendering to see where the massive holes are.
It's not about inferiority complexes. It's about expecting better.
As Ken said, they have and are working with architects, and have details, but are not ready to share them, my guess is for fear of this not being approved, and/or someone else snaking the design on them.
If this is going to be as neat and groundbreaking as Ken suggests, then the slow play on the details makes sense in my opinion. Also, and especially, if this is not approved by the City, and they have to look to a Plan B, and it is not as amazeballs as this is suggested to be, then it would be a let down.
Short answer: This is a 40,000 foot view and they have a lot more done that they are not sharing for sensible reasons. I know we all want more made public, but I understand why we don't have more at this time.
