|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 1, 2019 23:17:53 GMT -6
New thread since Philly Mike started the old one and I can't change the title Calgary city council approves new arena dealCalgary is going to build a new arena for its NHL team. Council voted 11-4 on Tuesday approving a financial agreement to build an event centre, which will be the new home of the Calgary Flames and replace the 36-year-old Saddledome. The city and Flames owner Calgary Sports and Entertainment announced last week a tentative agreement that would equally split the cost of a $550-million sports and entertainment centre. Talks broke off two years ago when the arena became a fractious civic election issue. Mayor Naheed Nenshi voted in favour of the deal Tuesday. “I think the public is split,” the mayor said just prior to the vote. “In times when the public is split… and in times when the public is split, elected officials have to look at everything, in which public input is one aspect, and make the decision they think is right for the community and we do that every day.” The agreement is for 35 years, which keeps the Flames in Calgary for that term, with options to extend it.Coun. Jeff Davison, who headed an events centre committee, has said the earliest shovels would go in the ground if the deal was approved is 2021. The city vows municipal property taxes will not increase to pay for the event centre. In the agreement unveiled last week, the city says the projected return to Calgarians is $400.3 million over the course of the 35-year agreement with the Flames. That figure incorporates revenues from ticket sales, a portion of naming rights, retail property taxes in the building, CSEC donations to amateur sports programming and tax generation in the district where it will be built. But a net loss of $47 million over the 35 years on the project is also projected. “ The critical question we have to ask ourselves, are the thing we can’t count, the intangible benefits _ and every economist agrees there are intangible benefits to this kind of thing — are those intangible benefits worth $47 million in today’s money for over a 35-year period? I am satisfied that they are,” the mayor said.“Think about this spring. I was a very early convert to (Toronto) Raptors fever. You think about the economic activity in the bars and restaurants … you think about the community spirit, you think about what it means for people getting together. “These things actually do have a value. It’s just not a value you can quantify. Economists agree that is a value that means something to the city.” The arena is part of a revitalization plan for the east side of downtown near the Stampede grounds. CSEC is putting up the same amount of up-front caCrap was prepared to give two years ago — $275 million. One major difference in the current deal is the Flames will not pay property tax as the city proposed two years ago. The city would own the building. CSEC, which also owns the WHL’s Hitmen, CFL’s Stampeders and NLL’s Roughnecks, initially didn’t want to give the city any ticket revenue. The corporation has agreed to hand over 2 per cent from every ticket sold to the city as a facility fee, capped at $3 million annually for the first five years and estimated to bring in $155.1 million over 35 years. All revenues generated by the event centre go to CSEC, minus its commitment to the city and the sharing of parking revenues with the Calgary Stampede board which is a third party in the agreement. The Flames would be responsible for the operation, maintenance and day-to-day repairs of the event centre. CSEC has committed to upping its contribution to local sport groups, which the city states amounts to $75 million over the course of the 35-year term. Calgary follows other large prairie cities investing in sports infrastructure over the last 15 years. Winnipeg’s new football stadium opened in 2013 and the downtown arena completed in 2004 is the home of the NHL’s Jets who returned in 2011. The Edmonton Oilers moved into Rogers Place in 2016. Another edition of Mosaic Stadium opened in Regina a 2017 for the CFL’s Roughriders. globalnews.ca/news/5698551/decision-time-for-new-calgary-arena/
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 1, 2019 23:18:42 GMT -6
Pic of what the skyline will look like without the Saddledome ![](https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/no-dome-for-web_1-1.jpg?quality=70&strip=all&w=1200)
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 1, 2019 23:20:17 GMT -6
Saddledome days numbered with announcement of new Calgary arena dealJordan Kanygin CTV News Calgary Published July 31, 2019 7:27 p.m. ET City council has signed off on a deal to build a $550 million event centre in Calgary and the decision means the Saddledome's days as an NHL arena are numbered. Construction on Calgary’s Saddledome, or the Olympic Coliseum, as it was called back then, started on July 29th, 1981. Almost 38 years later to the day, on July 30th of this year, council officially agreed to build the arena’s replacement. In an 11-4 vote on Tuesday afternoon, city council decided in favour of the deal to build the facility in east Victoria Park. The new home for the Calgary Flames won’t be completed until 2024, but it means the Saddledome’s days are numbered. It’s slated to be demolished when the new rink opens its doors. “It will be very much like a member of the family is gone,” said Josh Traptow of the Calgary Heritage Authority. “It’s been on the skyline for the vast majority of Calgarians’ lives and it will be the first major building that we’ll lose from the skyline.” It may be hard to envision Calgary without the Saddledome in Victoria Park now, but that location almost wasn’t approved for the arena. “When it was being built in the 80s, there was actually a great deal of controversy in Victoria Park about whether that was the right place to build the coliseum,” Traptow explained. Due to the controversy and threat to derail the project, then-mayor Ralph Klein requested the province intervene and waive the planning regulations of the project. The provincial government voted in favour of Calgary’s request and construction started the next day. “Had the community gone ahead with their appeal to the development appeal board, they were confident the authority would overturn the development permit for the Saddledome,” he said. “They were very upset about the traffic and the development pressures the Saddledome would cause in the area.” Demolition of the Saddledome will cost the city an estimated $12.4 million and the Flames will cover $1.4 million. It’ll leave a giant saddle-shaped hole in Calgary’s skyline but, despite discussions of possible alternative uses for the arena, the mayor says tearing it down is the right call. “I’m going to be super sad,” Mayor Naheed Nenshi said Tuesday following council’s vote. “We don’t really need that second arena. But listen, if somebody out there has a brilliant plan for how to repurpose that building, send them in now,” Nenshi said.
Design and public consultation for Calgary’s new arena will take up to 18 months and construction is anticipated to start in 2021. beta.ctvnews.ca/local/calgary/features/saddledome-days-numbered-with-announcement-of-new-calgary-arena-0.html
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 1, 2019 23:22:37 GMT -6
New arena could be ready for Flames' 2024-2025 seasonThe timeline for building a new $550-million event centre could see the Calgary Flames kicking off the 2024-2025 season in their new Victoria Park digs. Following a year of finalizing design details and acquiring the requisite permits, construction will commence in 2021 and be completed in 30 months, or 2-1/2 years, said Clare LePan, spokeswoman for Calgary Municipal Land Corp. (CMLC), which will quarterback the project.Less than a day after city council ratified a cost-sharing deal to build the facility, LePan couldn’t say exactly when in 2021 construction would begin. But that timeline could put its completion in sync for the October 2024 Flames’ season opener.“We don’t have definitive dates. . . We’d like the facility to be completed in advance of the NHL season starting,” said LePan. After years of wrangling and verbal sparring over the need for a replacement for the 36-year-old Scotiabank Saddledome, a new chapter now lies ahead, she said. “A huge amount has been done to get here but it’s now turned into a living, breathing project that has to be realized,” said LePan. It’s possible the Flames could take their first face-off in the new building in the fall of 2024, said Coun. Jeff Davison, who spearheaded efforts in pursuing the deal for the city. File photo: Interior Image of the Scotiabank Saddledome in Calgary on Friday, September 15, 2017. AL CHAREST / POSTMEDIA By then, the Scotiabank Saddledome will be 41 years old. B ut for now, the next step is determining how the new building will look and function, a process expected to kick off after Sept. 5 when a CMLC report — on how public engagement will proceed — goes to the city’s Event Centre Assessment Committee, said Davison.
That’s largely to ensure, he said, that a multitude of expectations can be met by that feedback, which will be added to those of conceptual designers. “Calgarians have said loud and clear this is not just going to be a hockey facility, it’s something that can used for more than one purpose,” said Davison. A virtual pre-requisite is that the 19,000-seat facility be capable of hosting major concerts, something the Saddledome’s unique but finicky roof was often unable to accommodate, he said. “Calgarians are tired of going to Edmonton for those,” he said. And the beauty of the recently-opened central public library, just a few blocks away, will be expected to set a standard for the Flames’ new home, added Davison. “We’d expect nothing less,” he said. That consultation will also include how the surrounding Rivers District is developed for public use, said an CMLC official. The new facility will occupy a three-hectare site at 12 Avenue and 4 Street S.E. on Calgary Stampede-owned land now occupied by parking lots. Its construction will occur almost in tandem with the expansion of the BMO Centre, which is also expected to be finished in 2024 and whose proximity will benefit the event centre and overall cohesiveness of the Rivers District, said the CMLC’s LePan. “It’ll be just across the street. . . It’s quite rare for a city to be able to co-ordinate that,” she said. The demolition of the Saddledome won’t happen until after its replacement is completed, added LePan. One of four city councillors to vote against the new arena deal said he remains concerned about how any cost overruns will be shared in the pact, that sees the city and Flames’ parent company Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corp. putting up $275 million each for construction costs. Jeromy Farkas also said he’s also concerned about a possible repeat of the kind of flood damage that ravaged the Saddledome in 2013. The Scotiabank Saddledome in downtown Calgary, Alta. on June 21, 2013. STUART DRYDEN / STUART DRYDEN/CALGARY SUN/QMI AG “It’s building on a flood plain and we’re going to be on the hook for flood insurance but we don’t know what the cost of that premium will be,” said Farkas. “And if the budget does go over for the ($15 million) demolition of the Saddledome, council hasn’t set aside anything.” He said residents of Victoria Park who live mostly in newer condo developments west and northwest of the proposed site haven’t been consulted about how the project will proceed. “As this proceeds, it’s only going to heat up,” he said. Farkas also opposed the agreement because it comes at a time when the city is slashing emergency service funding. But he said as area councillor, he’ll now “roll up his sleeves to make sure it’s a success.” calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/new-arena-could-be-ready-for-flames-2024-2025-season
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 1, 2019 23:24:04 GMT -6
Pics ![](https://postmediacalgaryherald2.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/67114338-cmlcarenarendering002-s.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=840&h=630&crop=1) ![](https://images.thestar.com/qbhavpUb6MvmJGCE8JNjCCF59uQ=/1086x612/smart/filters:cb(1564401729097)/https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/calgary/2019/07/28/calgary-flames-step-into-real-estate-development-as-part-of-new-arena-deal/stampede_trail.jpg)
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 1, 2019 23:29:33 GMT -6
The cost breakdown That’s a little hard to put a final number on, but if we take the city’s $275 million construction cost plus $12.4 million demolition cost, then subtract out the $72.5 million from ticket tax revenues and $2 million from naming rights (property taxes are just what any development of the land would normally pay to help fund all the city services that new development requires, so they’re not really a net plus), we get: $212.9 million in public costs, plus any potential public share of cost overruns or land cost breaks. Or, to put it another way, the city and the Flames owners would be splitting construction costs down the middle, and the team would be collecting all revenues on the place except a thin trickle of ticket taxes and a sliver of naming rights money. Compared to the last Flames arena proposal, which was projected to cost taxpayers at least $1.2 billion, this one does seem to involve lighting less public money on fire. That’s about as much positive as we can say about it, though, and $212.9 million–plus toward a $550 million arena is still an awful lot of money — pretty close in percentage terms, in fact, to the $311 million in public money toward a $676 million arena that Edmonton spent on the Oilers, to much popular consternation. “ www.fieldofschemes.com/2019/07/23/15094/calgary-reveals-complex-flames-arena-plan-involving-212-9m-in-subsidies-gives-public-a-whole-week-to-understand-it-before-final-vote/#comments
|
|
|
Post by ekjet72 on Aug 3, 2019 20:51:54 GMT -6
Ironically I am writing this from SW Manitoba in Killarney about an article on Calgary's new arena. That the old building had deficiencies was apparent. The most glaring to Calgarians was the lack of flexibility for non-sporting events, particularly concerts. The acoustics sucked. The building's design doesn't allow for suspension of speakers and other devices that are required in today's presentations. Apparently sight lines are bad. But after that it's mainly about the Flames ability to generate more revenue. The actual seat numbers are the same. Wider concourses allow for bigger suites and restaurants and high priced seats. It is older but to my eye met the need. It sits in a flood plain but so will the new one. Much was made by the media, and rightfully so, of short roll out of the agreement to a vote of acceptance by city council. City council members for the agreement argued that this was known about for the last 3 years. But those three years were like the crowds "yelling less filling and tastes great," at each other. Nothing of substance was yelled or discussed and certainly no one knew the actual costs. Now we have a part owner of the Predators, Brett Wilson (a Calgarian), saying this is a great deal because at the end of the agreement, the city will full and complete control and ownership of the facility. Guess what the current age of the wholly inadequate Saddledome is now...right, 35 years! We still don't know, after a weeks civic consultation, who splits the cost overruns and needed renovations which seem to happen every 10 years. Benefits of the deal, which are given in 2019 dollars, even though they are earned in 2030s. Dollars earned in the future are worthless than the current dollar. So the promised return will be less than stated. BUT the worst is the premise that building will rejuvenate that part of the city without affecting other parts. Entertainment and food dollars are relatively fixed and if you own a bar or restaurant in the other entertainment parts of the city, you will be losing dollars. Lastly it couldn't have come at a worse time. The city just had to cut 60M from its budget. Making for the appearance of the city favouring owners and players over police, fire and garbage services. The city's unemployment rate is seemingly intractable at 7%. The high rollers are gone with the oil industry and downtown is 30% vacant leaving a 300M hole in tax revenues. House valuations have fallen 10%. Nothing feels positive economically now. The whole thing stinks. Shovels will hit the ground in 2021. We will see what transpires by then. Civic elections will be in Oct in 2021!
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 4, 2019 13:59:45 GMT -6
Ironically I am writing this from SW Manitoba in Killarney about an article on Calgary's new arena. That the old building had deficiencies was apparent. The most glaring to Calgarians was the lack of flexibility for non-sporting events, particularly concerts. The acoustics sucked. The building's design doesn't allow for suspension of speakers and other devices that are required in today's presentations. Apparently sight lines are bad. But after that it's mainly about the Flames ability to generate more revenue. The actual seat numbers are the same. Wider concourses allow for bigger suites and restaurants and high priced seats. It is older but to my eye met the need. It sits in a flood plain but so will the new one. Much was made by the media, and rightfully so, of short roll out of the agreement to a vote of acceptance by city council. City council members for the agreement argued that this was known about for the last 3 years. But those three years were like the crowds "yelling less filling and tastes great," at each other. Nothing of substance was yelled or discussed and certainly no one knew the actual costs. Now we have a part owner of the Predators, Brett Wilson (a Calgarian), saying this is a great deal because at the end of the agreement, the city will full and complete control and ownership of the facility. Guess what the current age of the wholly inadequate Saddledome is now...right, 35 years! We still don't know, after a weeks civic consultation, who splits the cost overruns and needed renovations which seem to happen every 10 years. Benefits of the deal, which are given in 2019 dollars, even though they are earned in 2030s. Dollars earned in the future are worthless than the current dollar. So the promised return will be less than stated. BUT the worst is the premise that building will rejuvenate that part of the city without affecting other parts. Entertainment and food dollars are relatively fixed and if you own a bar or restaurant in the other entertainment parts of the city, you will be losing dollars. Lastly it couldn't have come at a worse time. The city just had to cut 60M from its budget. Making for the appearance of the city favouring owners and players over police, fire and garbage services. The city's unemployment rate is seemingly intractable at 7%. The high rollers are gone with the oil industry and downtown is 30% vacant leaving a 300M hole in tax revenues. House valuations have fallen 10%. Nothing feels positive economically now. The whole thing stinks. Shovels will hit the ground in 2021. We will see what transpires by then. Civic elections will be in Oct in 2021! It's been 100% standard lately that the team covers the cost overruns with arena deals. If Calgary didn't get the team to cover it all shame on them! What also helped kill the Saddledome besides what you mentioned is too many seats in the lower deck/too many in the upper deck. That was the biggest thing that killed our last arena here in Wisconsin.
|
|
|
Post by wolfmannick on Aug 4, 2019 17:02:34 GMT -6
^ i also heard the acoustics sucked for concerts. They needed a new arena 10 years ago
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 4, 2019 22:27:09 GMT -6
Poll shows Calgarians evenly split on new arena dealCalgarians are evenly split on a tentative pact for a new NHL arena, though naysayers appear more determined in their opposition, a new poll shows. In the poll of 645 people conducted last week by ThinkHQ Public Affairs Inc., 47 per cent of respondents voiced support for the 35-year deal, with the same number in opposition. But among those against the agreement that would see the city and Calgary Flames owners evenly splitting the $550 million construction cost, 26 per cent were strongly opposed, while 14 per cent of proponents were strongly in favour.Most of those surveyed — 58 per cent — said they supported replacing the early 1980s-vintage Saddledome, with 35 per cent opposed to the idea.Council could approve the agreement on Tuesday after one week of public consultation, but 60 per cent of the poll respondents said that wasn’t a long enough public consultation period. Meanwhile, city officials had extended the deadline for public submissions on the issue from noon on Sunday to 4:30 p.m. Monday. The city would also pay $12.4 million, or 90 per cent of the cost to demolish the Saddledome, a detail opposed by 65 per cent of those polled. Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corporation (which owns the Flames) would receive an option to acquire valuable land near the site of the proposed event centre in Victoria Park and would increase the amount it funds local amateur sports to $75 million. That latter detail earned high marks among those polled, as did the notion of keeping the Flames in Calgary, noted ThinkHQ president Marc Henry. “There is a lot of goodwill in Calgary toward the Flames. People are proud of the team, they recognize their contribution to the city both in terms of economic impact and community good, and there is support for replacing the Saddledome,” Henry said in commentary included with the poll results. But he said the timing of the deal just as city council is cutting emergency service and transit budgets have soured many on it. “Wow, talk about bad timing,” said Henry. “Public confidence in council is staggeringly low right now, and if a quick approval leaves voters feeling unheard by their elected officials on a big project like this, watch out.” With the next civic election 812 days away, city councillors should feel nervous about the decision, he added. The survey also polled public perception of city council, which showed approval at just 23 per cent compared to a disapproval rating of 69 per cent while eight per cent were unsure. That’s a 50 per-cent-drop in approval since June 2017, states the survey. Mayor Naheed Nenshi’s approval rating came in at 35 per cent versus disapproval of 59 per cent. In a tweet Monday morning, Coun. Druh Farrell said council is playing with fire on the arena issue by pursuing budget cuts while also seemingly favouring spending on a new arena. “Regardless of our opinions on the proposed deal, council agreed unanimously to do one thing and are instead doing another,” she stated. “Our word/policies/approved direction have lost meaning. We’re losing public trust, the most valuable thing in a democracy, as a result.” A newly-formed small business group raising the alarm over massive business tax hikes has begun a petition to back a notice of motion it hopes city council will consider before it makes any changes to its budget this fall. It wants the city to clarify how $1.5 billion in spending on a host of major projects, including the event centre and BMO Centre expansion, will impact tax rates. “We want to know how small business owners and Calgary citizens can expect to pay for all of this; how is it going to affect our taxes when it’s gone up by 300 per cent,” said Kelly Doody of the Calgary Small Business Alliance. The ThinkHQ poll’s margin of error is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points 19 times out of 20 calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/poll-shows-calgarians-evenly-split-on-new-arena-dealA new pic of the proposed arena ![](https://postmediacalgaryherald2.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/new-arena.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=840&h=630&crop=1)
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Dec 4, 2019 16:41:28 GMT -6
Motion to Reallocate Calgary Flames Arena Funds Failsby Zach Spedden on December 2, 2019 in Hockey, NHL An effort in the Calgary City Council to reallocate funds committed to a new Calgary Flames arena was defeated last week, assuring that the money is not diverted elsewhere. Over the summer, the Calgary City Council approved plans for a new C$550 arena in Victoria Park that will be funded as part of a partnership with Flames ownership. Last week, those plans became the subject of a debate as the city council weighed potential adjustments to its 2020 budget. Councillor Evan Woolley pushed a motion that would have taken the C$290 million that is committed toward the arena project and reallocated it to cover three other initiatives, including an LRT project, new downtown police station, and upgrades to affordable housing stock. The motion was considered Friday and defeated by an 11-4 margin, well short of the 10-vote supermajority it needed to obtain in order to move forward. More from the Calgary Herald: “While I respect the attempt to make a bad situation less bad . . . I cannot accept the premise on which it’s built,” said Coun. Gian-Carlo Carra, who voted against the motion. Coun. Jyoti Gondek told her colleagues it’s wrong to equate funds allocated to the arena deal with ongoing budget debates taking place this week at city council. “What we’re doing is public drama,” she said, referring to Friday’s debate. Woolley responded that he failed to understand the reluctance to reopen the arena deal debate “when everything else is supposed to be on the table.” Under the terms of the deal, the city will own the arena, while receiving proceeds from a ticket tax and a share of naming-rights revenue. In addition, the Flames will assume operations and maintenance costs over the course of a 35-year lease with the city and receive an option to buy two nearby city-owned land parcels. Construction has been expected to begin in 2021, with the arena completed in time for the 2024-25 NHL season. The Flames had sought for years to replace the Scotiabank Saddledome, which originally opened in 1983 and is currently the second-oldest venue among full-time NHL arenas. arenadigest.com/2019/12/02/motion-to-reallocate-calgary-flames-arena-funds-fails/
|
|
|
Post by ekjet72 on Dec 4, 2019 19:55:38 GMT -6
Ironically I am writing this from SW Manitoba in Killarney about an article on Calgary's new arena. That the old building had deficiencies was apparent. The most glaring to Calgarians was the lack of flexibility for non-sporting events, particularly concerts. The acoustics sucked. The building's design doesn't allow for suspension of speakers and other devices that are required in today's presentations. Apparently sight lines are bad. But after that it's mainly about the Flames ability to generate more revenue. The actual seat numbers are the same. Wider concourses allow for bigger suites and restaurants and high priced seats. It is older but to my eye met the need. It sits in a flood plain but so will the new one. Much was made by the media, and rightfully so, of short roll out of the agreement to a vote of acceptance by city council. City council members for the agreement argued that this was known about for the last 3 years. But those three years were like the crowds "yelling less filling and tastes great," at each other. Nothing of substance was yelled or discussed and certainly no one knew the actual costs. Now we have a part owner of the Predators, Brett Wilson (a Calgarian), saying this is a great deal because at the end of the agreement, the city will full and complete control and ownership of the facility. Guess what the current age of the wholly inadequate Saddledome is now...right, 35 years! We still don't know, after a weeks civic consultation, who splits the cost overruns and needed renovations which seem to happen every 10 years. Benefits of the deal, which are given in 2019 dollars, even though they are earned in 2030s. Dollars earned in the future are worthless than the current dollar. So the promised return will be less than stated. BUT the worst is the premise that building will rejuvenate that part of the city without affecting other parts. Entertainment and food dollars are relatively fixed and if you own a bar or restaurant in the other entertainment parts of the city, you will be losing dollars. Lastly it couldn't have come at a worse time. The city just had to cut 60M from its budget. Making for the appearance of the city favouring owners and players over police, fire and garbage services. The city's unemployment rate is seemingly intractable at 7%. The high rollers are gone with the oil industry and downtown is 30% vacant leaving a 300M hole in tax revenues. House valuations have fallen 10%. Nothing feels positive economically now. The whole thing stinks. Shovels will hit the ground in 2021. We will see what transpires by then. Civic elections will be in Oct in 2021! All that I wrote above is still true but worse. Provincial revenues are falling due to loss of the Carbon tax and the breaks in corporate taxes. Costs are rising to all levels of government. Meanwhile the government has put through an austerity budget. More job cuts are on their way in the public services. My home value is down 12% now from its high water mark. The city likely will raise taxes 7-8% all told. But were gonna spend $250M on a rink for millionaires is how this looks to many people! Myself included. Political heads will roll over this...in 3 years! Call me in 3 and see if this has gone as expected or sideways because AB and Calgary can't successfully wean itself from the oil and gas teat.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Dec 6, 2019 0:09:15 GMT -6
Calgary, Flames, Stampede sign deal for new arenaWard 6 Councillor Jeff Davison announced the City of Calgary signed a “definitive agreement” with Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corp. (CSEC) and the Calgary Stampede to build a new arena/event centre in the Victoria Park, establishing a culture and entertainment district. “As we heard at committee this morning, everybody is very comfortable that we are well within the term sheets that we proposed back in July and concluded the deal on the basis of that,” Davison told Danielle Smith on Global News Radio 770 CHQR Thursday. Davison said the plan is to start construction in the third quarter of 2021, with completion in spring of 2024.The Calgary Flames have agreed to be the primary tenant of the new event centre for 35 years. Jeff Davison @jeffdavisonyyc BREAKING: I am pleased to announce that definitive agreements are signed between the @cityofcalgary, the @nhlflames and the @calgarystampede for Calgary’s new #EventCentre and Culture and Entertainment District. Onward to the next chapter of our City’s story! #yyc #yyccc 687 10:43 AM - Dec 5, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy 214 people are talking about this CSEC, who owns the Calgary Flames, will be responsible for $275 million of the arena’s projected $550-million cost. The city will put the same amount toward building the new event centre. Calgary will also be responsible for the demolition costs of the Scotiabank Saddledome, estimated at $12.4 million, and land and transactional costs at $3 million. “Our intent here is to take the new event centre and bring it out into the community,” Davison said. “A land swap needed to be effected in order to do that. That’s where the Stampede comes in as a partner.” The plan is to swap the land under the Saddledome that it owns with a parcel along Olympic Way and 12 Avenue S.E. owned by the Stampede. The city will own the new arena and receive a quarter of an eight per cent ticket surcharge. The city also receives $250,000 per year for 10 years in naming rights revenue. In July, the City of Calgary projected $400.3 million in revenues for the city over the 35-year term. The Calgary Flames Foundation has also committed $1.5 million per year to community sports organizations. While many at the city celebrated Thursday’s development, others weren’t so keen on officials signing the high-priced deal at a time when residents are facing higher taxes and service cuts. “It’s ridiculous to me that we’re talking about cutting social services at the same time that we’re talking about putting a whole lot of money towards an arena,” Anna Greenwood-Lee with Keep Calgary Strong said. “And the message of the campaign Keep Calgary Strong is to keep the needs of the most vulnerable in our city top of mind. And if we need to make cuts, we shouldn’t be making them at their expense.” Franco Terrazano, Alberta director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, also said the city’s priorities aren’t straight. “The most frustrating part here is that city councillors think that it’s better to prioritize getting a ton of money to a professional hockey team than putting that money back into the pockets of Calgary families,” he said. globalnews.ca/news/6259404/calgary-flames-stampede-arena-deal/
|
|
|
Post by ekjet72 on Dec 6, 2019 11:22:31 GMT -6
Yup that pretty well summarizes both POV. Let's talk in 5 years and see what has transpired.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Dec 6, 2019 15:44:12 GMT -6
Yup that pretty well summarizes both POV. Let's talk in 5 years and see what has transpired. I understand both points of view. The optics of this are TERRIBLE given what currently is going on in Calgary. The other ways to look at it are this. The Saddledome is the last outdated arena in the NHL. Every arena has been built from 1993 on other than Key Arena in Seattle and MSG in York. MSG underwent a $1B renovation and was build ahead of it's time anyway. Seattle is essentially building a new arena under the old roof for $900M to $930M. Most of the 90s arenas in the NBA and NHL have been renovated or are undergoing a renovation other than Buffalo and that is coming soon. Last Forbes the Flames were only 21st in franchise value and only $35M from being 28th. The were only tied for 22nd in revenue with Nashville which is undergoing an arena renovation only $3M ahead of Buffalo which will probably get an arena renovation soon. If the Flames did leave you aren't getting another team unless an Atlanta happens which is unlikely. The NHL is NOT a sport that seeks to maximize profits unlike NFL, MLB and NBA. In the NHL there is a north/south civil war. So if the Flames left and Calgary did get a new arena in time it's not like the NHL is going to race back(see Quebec City). It would be a last resort type deal. Also compare to most recent deals this isn't a bad deal. By my count and mostly using data from Field of Schemes which is anti-arena subsidy Calgary's contribution is $215.9M out of $565.4M(counting land/Saddledome demolition). Calgary gets back a ticket tax/naming rights revenue which reduces the $275M they are paying to $212.9M according to Field of schemes. They forgot to add the extra $3M for land and transactional costs. The only elephant in the room is the city is responsible for cost overruns. In Milwaukee, Edmonton, Detroit, Sacramento the team was responsible for cost overruns. Other recent arena breakdowns were like this Las Vegas- The public paid 0 out of $375M. Vegas can do this even though it's just 2.2M population because of shows etc... for out of town visitors. Edmonton- The public paid $323.2M out of $613.7M (52.43%) Detroit- The public paid $324M out of $862.9M(37.55%) They also got the NBA Pistons to move downtown from Auburn Hills Quebec City- The public paid $370M out of $370M(100%) and didn't get a team and likely never will unless the NHL civil war ended which is probably the most unlikely thing to happen in any sport since the bad blood is too deep on both side Calgary- $215.9M out of $565.4M (38.19%) NBA only Sacramento paid $255.1M out of $558.2M(45.7%) Milwaukee paid $250M out of $524M(47.71%) The original cost of the arena was $500M but cost overruns were $24M which the bucks paid. San Francisco paid 0 out of $1.4B. The Bay Area is gigantic and the richest area in either the US or Canada.
|
|