City looking to restart talks on new Flames’ arena

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by surferguy

Well I’m convinced, it’s written in bold... BOLD!

[surferguy]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

What infrastructure has the city not gotten that it needs because of these projects?


The bridges: first of all, where's the form over function? They function great. Their uses are high, their uses are more functional than other pedestrian bridges (and non-pedestrian bridges) around the city. They have form accompanying their function, not in spite of it. A welcome change from the bridges that lack both form and function the penny-pinching mayors and councils of the past built. But what do you think they came at the expense of? The Peace Bridge was built with a provincial capital allocation for pedestrian infrastructure. It was conditional money that built infrastructure. The George C. King Bridge was built by the CMLC also using conditional money. What was it built at the expense of?



Art: the art is overpriced because it is tied to the infrastructure cost. Not at the expense of the project. The only reason you're seeing overpriced art is because infrastructure we need is being built.



Library: Came from the CRL and a fund that also has restricted uses. What wasn't built because of the library (more specifically, what could have been built instead using the same restricted funding sources)? Also how have we gone from 'not needing a library' to 'we could have built a bigger one?' Also what isn't efficient about the library (or similarly, what makes a library efficient)? Some of the things that made the project expensive (site location, fixed costs encapsulating the LRT) were also things that provide benefits elsewhere (taking a low value site and turning it into a useful one, freeing up other spaces for better returns). And at a lower cost, we're jut getting an uglier looking building, where's the value in that?







But to loop back around, given the funding and location restrictions these things were built with, what didn't get built that we needed?

Please don’t bring that type of sensible discussion into this thread. The use of facts and logic has no place here. This thread is about taking a topic rehashed multiple times and getting out your personal views and digs on some members of city council.

So please cast some shade on Nenshi or GTFO

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Calgary isn't really a conservative city anymore, hence people like Nenshi and Notley being in power. The shift in mindset has pissed off conservatives that like Calgary as a conservative enclave, and I don't think that's unreasonable or unexpected.

Side note, left, right, doesn't matter. Bronconnier was awful and should never be used as the bar for mayoral performance.

The thing is, Calgary has generally always elected liberal mayors. In fact, if you look through the list of former mayors who later sought election at the Provincial or Federal level, Klein is the only one (since the Second World War) who ran as a Conservative. From what I remember, even that was a surprise because he had been a card-carrying Liberal right up until he signed on as a PC candidate.

[TheScorpion]

Update:

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

https://twitter.com/user/status/1063159565426913282

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Update:

Were those leaked before as we have already seen those photos?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Were those leaked before as we have already seen those photos?

Yes, but there's a link in that tweet to an expanded plan. The photos aren't news.

[Toonage]

Also a downloadable PDF which includes a full presentation (admittedly unsure if that has been shared already or not)

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Were those leaked before as we have already seen those photos?

The photos may be old, but looks like a recent blog from the councillor.

[Senator Clay Davis]

With how badly the Olympic bid process went, I actually think they'll get something done quickly to remove the stink from that. A lot of people who voted against the bid wanted an arena, so this will be a good tonic.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

With how badly the Olympic bid process went, I actually think they'll get something done quickly to remove the stink from that. A lot of people who voted against the bid wanted an arena, so this will be a good tonic.

Honestly just a poorly put together plebesite.

should have been two questions:

1) Do you want calgary to submit a bid for the winter olympics in 2026? (Y/N)

2) do you support the current bid package as currently composed? (Y/N)


I bet the results would've been waaaay different.

So yeah I agree that an arena would likely get public approval if they do it right

[nik-]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

Honestly just a poorly put together plebesite.

should have been two questions:

1) Do you want calgary to submit a bid for the winter olympics in 2026? (Y/N)

2) do you support the current bid package as currently composed? (Y/N)


I bet the results would've been waaaay different.

So yeah I agree that an arena would likely get public approval if they do it right

Yeah, that's what we needed, more grey area.

Yes or no was fine.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by nik-

Yeah, that's what we needed, more grey area.

Yes or no was fine.

Not the place to debate it but i'm pretty sure the vote as it was set up meant that people who were on the fence were less liekly to vote because there was a lack of detail that could've swayed them to the yes side.

Either way I think many people on the no side voted No because of a lack of information or dislike for the current bid because it didn't have a stadium in it.

this way would've at least cleared that up.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Were those leaked before as we have already seen those photos?

It's all been seen before (or at least it's all been available before), just consolidated into one presentation after getting the engagement info back.



But it's also just more updated plans that we've known about since before the election as part of the EV/Vic Park plan. The issue regarding the arena is and remains funding. Which side has or will adjust their position to get a deal done? Until there's info on that, we're just going to keep seeing newer and newer graphics.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

The bridges: first of all, where's the form over function? They function great. The George C. King Bridge was built by the CMLC also using conditional money. What was it built at the expense of?

https://globalnews.ca/news/4403487/g...-crack-repair/

The Calgary Municipal Land Corporation (CMLC) closed the pedestrian bridge that spans the Bow River between the East Village and Bridgeland on Aug. 16 for public safety.

A four to six inch crack was spotted on one of the steel arches on the southwest corner of the bridge and a 311 call was phoned in.

[Cowboy89]

When you gold plate everything and pay everybody on staff $28/hour +(https://ca.indeed.com/jobs?q=city+of...=Calgary%2C+AB), it shouldn't be surprising that eventually you don't have enough left over to cover other capital projects. Our beautiful library, bridges etc. crowded out money that could have been used for additional things. It's a value judgement as to whether it's worth it or not, but if ultimately the arena deal can't get done because the city's broke, then it's another discussion point.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

With how badly the Olympic bid process went, I actually think they'll get something done quickly to remove the stink from that. A lot of people who voted against the bid wanted an arena, so this will be a good tonic.

Good luck with that. Chu’s Your Illusion & Fark.com will stamp their feet and throw a hissy fit in council because...

“TAXES!!”

& if Farrell can’t somehow elevate her own sense of self importance from a new arena... she’s out.


These three clowns are now emboldened by the Olympic debacle.

Beware the pandora’s box unlocked by the fear based campaign.

It’s not finished yet.

[transplant99]

Lol!

[Travis Munroe]

Are the arena/stadium's which have been 100% privately funded profitable? Between leasing out to NHL, NLL & WHL teams + concert event bookings and anything else you could fill it with, I wonder if it can be profitable. If it was privately owned, you would most likely see the venue booked up on a regular basis as people are active in trying to recruit where as I feel the saddledome is a situation of it just being there and if someone needs to use it, lets chat.

I guess the biggest concern is your anchor tenant in the flames being a variable as they could pack up and at that point you are losing huge money.

My guess is that larger cities can go private because they have enough events on a regular basis to keep it full where as smaller cities could present a challenge???

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

Are the arena/stadium's which have been 100% privately funded profitable? Between leasing out to NHL, NLL & WHL teams + concert event bookings and anything else you could fill it with, I wonder if it can be profitable. If it was privately owned, you would most likely see the venue booked up on a regular basis as people are active in trying to recruit where as I feel the saddledome is a situation of it just being there and if someone needs to use it, lets chat.

It being privately owned or not isn't really the issue. The Flames are the arena managers so empty dates is their opportunity cost. The city (Saddledome Foundation) doesn't really have anything to gain or lose with it at this point.



The reason teams don't like owning is because they can usually get sweetheart lease deals that give all the benefit of ownership but not the property taxes which are usually more. But having the city (county/port authority/whatever) own it means you can start negotiating when the lease deal is running out for big renovations or a new building altogether or whatever else because you don't have the ROI to worry about.



Even a publicly owned building will have the teams/management companies on the hook for operational losses so it's still in their best interest to fill it with as many events as possible to make as much money as possible.

[Snuffleupagus]

Primed with approximately $3B worth of private investment, the District, upon build-out could generate over $100 million in tax revenue each year

Does he say who these private investors are with 3 billion to spend?