New Downtown Calgary Arena - Page 199

artvandelay · #**3961** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 4:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Why is that? Flood protection? West Village was going to be hugely expensive for reclamation and road alignment, I can't see how a site could be worse than that.

Unfortunately I can't go into detail.

Fuzz · #**3962** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 4:33 PM**

We promise to keep it super secret on this publicly accessible forum

I can only assume it must be a large facility to cost taxpayers more. I wonder if there will be an appetite for that, or if it will be rejected by the public like NEXT was. I know I have very little interested in blowing a lot of money on this thing.

GreenSPACE · #**3963** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 5:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

The Saskatchewan Roughriders imposed a $12 a ticket facility surcharge to help pay off the team's share of New Mosaic Stadium. I think Calgary can easily handle that much.

Rogers Place ticket surcharge amounted to $125m. Not sure how much that is per ticket. I think it's around $5.

artvandelay · #**3964** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 5:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzz

We promise to keep it super secret on this publicly accessible forum

I can only assume it must be a large facility to cost taxpayers more. I wonder if there will be an appetite for that, or if it will be rejected by the public like NEXT was. I know I have very little interested in blowing a lot of money on this thing.

The costs associated with WV cleanup and infrastructure are sunk, in that they will need to be borne eventually. I'd put what's being discussed in Vic Park in the category of "nice to have" rather than essential to the city. It will result in a better project if everything comes to fruition, but likely greater expense to taxpayers.

Apologies for being so cryptic, but I really can't reveal much other than that things are in motion behind the scenes.

Fuzz · #**3965** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 5:17 PM**

No worries, I understand the need to keep it under wraps. Thanks for the tidbits, appreciate it!

patm · #**3966** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 5:19 PM**

I'm assuming some sort of underground connection to the core?

What could it possibly be on that foot print, above ground, that would make it more expensive?

Unless we're talking that strip of bars they want to build. Really not sold on that unless it's enclosed (like what you see in some of the mega malls these days)

Big Sky · #**3967** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 5:20 PM**

Agreed. It could even be percentage based whereas Flames tickets and concert tickets which are higher to start with, pay a bit more. Hitmen and Roughnecks would be a bit lower.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Calgary Flames: 767,829
Calgary Hitmen: 273,564
Calgary Roughnecks: 104,598
Concerts: 120,000-250,000

Total:
1,265,991 (at the low side)

Amount needed to carry a $200 million loan per year, 30 year time frame: $10,201,813.38

$8 a ticket.

Probably can go to $10 without totally causing a downward spiral of events not being held.

craner · #**3968** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:09 PM**

^Agreed, percentage based is the way to go.

$10 on a Flames ticket is less than 10% but would be a third of a Hitmen or Roughneck ticket - not really fair.

craner · #**3969** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cage

The problem with the ticket tax is that the city is calculating the tax portion as civic public money contribution rather than user pay contribution.

The major problem, IMHO, is the player collective bargain agreement that puts all ticket receipts to the club into the cap room and pay calculations. If there was a mechanism to segregate a portion of the ticket revenue to the building fund and not go into player salary calcs, then CSEC could manage the ticket tax themselves.

How have they dealt with this in Edmonton and/or other cities that have a ticket tax ?

Fuzz · #**3970** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by craner

How have they dealt with this in Edmonton and/or other cities that have a ticket tax ?

In Edmonton the ticket checker has a shopvac, so when you open your wallet to take out your ticket they just suck up whatever they can get. Concessions, too.

Cage · #**3971** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Thanks Cage. Are those issues scheduled to be delt with, or is Bret correct that the city is dragging? I kind of thought the next step would be for CSEC to come up with a Victoria Park proposal similar to Calgary NEXT. Then Council would be in a position to say 'yes this is an idea we can fund or work with' or go pound sand.

Your welcome.

From what I have read and seen, none of the above issues are being worked on or mentioned in the public domain.

The city first identified that Vic Park was their preferred location. Therefore the city has to bring the Vic Park plan up to concept design stage. In this regard, CSEC lists put their requirements for an arena only proposal and the city fills in the blanks for city costs (e.g. Infrastructure upgrades) and funding proposals.

My guesstimate looking at what Art Vandalay posted above, the city will come out with a Vic Park proposal that will serve as a ballot box question for October.

Cage · #**3972** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by craner

How have they dealt with this in Edmonton and/or other cities that have a ticket tax ?

The city fronts money to the arena for construction and then collects 100% of the ticket tax receipts to pay off the loan over a 15-30 year period. That is how it's done in a Edmonton.

In other cities, the hotel/tourist tax pays for the sports arena. The tax is smaller because it is spread out over more funding sources.

craner · #**3973** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:23 PM**

Thanks Cage.
(& Art V. For the insider info).

Cage · #**3974** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by patm

What could it possibly be on that foot print, above ground, that would make it more expensive?

Unless we're talking that strip of bars they want to build. Really not sold on that unless it's enclosed (like what you see in some of the mega malls these days)

Don't think in terms of the arena footprint, think in terms of everything the city is doing in the East Village and Vic Park. If Vic park portion of the green line and new arena was transferred into an enhanced East Village CRL, that would expand the civic portion well above WV Calgary Next proposal.

artvandelay · #**3975** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 8:42 PM**

Cage is a smart fella.

suburbia · #**3976** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 8:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzz

What is the next step here? Brett Wilson said the city is dragging its heels. What does the city need to do right now? Or are we waiting for a new proposal from CSEC?

Brett Wilson is not involved.

suburbia · #**3977** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 8:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cage

The major problem, IMHO, is the player collective bargain agreement that puts all ticket receipts to the club into the cap room and pay calculations.

That's an interesting point. I wonder why the Calgary Flames "truth tellers" are not pointing this out?

Fuzz · #**3978** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 8:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

Brett Wilson is not involved.

Thanks, Poirot.

suburbia · #**3979** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by artvandelay

I heard a very interesting confidential tidbit that leads me to believe there is significant traction with the Victoria Park location.

It also suggests that the decision to utilize the Victoria Park site will be significantly more expensive to taxpayers than the WV alternative when all is said and done.

The only way I can see that happening is if the project integrates the BMO centre plans, and presents the arena with this together as one bigger project. Even then it is hard to fathom, but is conceivable.

The BMO project includes hall F, removal of the Corral, development of an integrated convention centre, and a hotel.

In such a scenario, it could be foreseeable that the City provides a pinch more, but then they also get another building / convention centre out of it (which on its own as a separate facility would have been $800M-$900M itself).

outoftheice · #**3980** Posted **Jun 14, 2017, 11:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

The only way I can see that happening is if the project integrates the BMO centre plans, and presents the arena with this together as one bigger project. Even then it is hard to fathom, but is conceivable.

The BMO project includes hall F, removal of the Corral, development of an integrated convention centre, and a hotel.

In such a scenario, it could be foreseeable that the City provides a pinch more, but then they also get another building / convention centre out of it (which on its own as a separate facility would have been $800M-$900M itself).

I think you're probably close to what we'll see. Instead of a CalgaryNext proposal that incorporated an arena/stadium/field-house my money is on a 'VicParkNext' proposal that will incorporate a new arena that is tied into a BMO expansion that would allow the arena to be used as over-flow convention space and will also tie into a revised Stampede Trail entertainment district proposal.