New Downtown Calgary Arena

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by milomilo

• Video Link

This video? Why was it seen as offensive?

He associated the Flames with a proposal they had already rejected in a campaign video, he tried negotiating in public to get the Flames back to the table but the Flames lashed out instead.

[milomilo]

Sounds like a Flames problem, not a Nenshi problem

[sammyd]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Calgary is missing out on a lot of big concerts because the Saddledome roof can't handle the weights of modern stage setups. It's one of the big reasons why we need a new arena. As for the other sports teams, don't forget that CSEC owns them as well. If the Flames leave I could see them taking the Roughnecks with them and possibly the Hitmen as well depending on where they went. Nenshi's the biggest roadblock to a new arena and has been since Day 1.

Nah, the biggest roadblock is the owners. No available public money currently for handouts to billionaires. They must understand that.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by sammyd

Nah, the biggest roadblock is the owners. No available public money currently for handouts to billionaires. They must understand that.

Nah, probably not. The way they speak , they literally do not understand what entitled pricks they sound like. For good measure, this is always a good video to post of what awful humans CSEC management are:

• Video Link

Greasy twat. If not having a new arena is the price to show guys like him where to shove it, it's worth it.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Sounds like a Flames problem, not a Nenshi problem

I suspect you wouldn't be impressed if I invoked your name publicly in my long standing proposal to build helicopter-oriented moated urban estate homes.

Nenshi is the proponent of a Victoria Park arena, not the Flames. I think he forgot that somewhere along the way.

I don't like the idea in the first place, an arena that will be locked shut more often than not isn't going to do anything for the neighbourhood but take up space.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I suspect you wouldn't be impressed if I invoked your name publicly in my long standing proposal to build helicopter-oriented moated urban estate homes.

Nenshi is the proponent of a Victoria Park arena, not the Flames. I think he forgot that somewhere along the way.

I don't like the idea in the first place, an arena that will be locked shut more often than not isn't going to do anything for the neighbourhood but take up space.

To be clear, are you talking about this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=302&v=gS5HCP1vjZg

Because I can't see what Nenshi said that equates to what you are saying. Nenshi stated that he thought that Victoria park was the better option and doesn't think the public should pay to build the Flames' arena in the West Village. Doesn't sound controversial to me, unless you're a douchebag entitled sports team corporation owner. Not that it matters now anyway as we hold the cards and should act like it - we have nothing to lose, except the Flames, which isn't a loss if you are a rational person.

I agree that an arena is a waste of space - whether it's in the West Village or the East Village. Build it in Balzac. It'll be cheaper to build, it's got two freeways servicing and we don't waste land on a church. Everyone's a winner.

[MalcolmTucker]

But the city doesn't hold all the cards if it wants an arena to exist. It is either a pay now, or pay in the future scenario.

[milomilo]

We still have the Saddledome though. Call the Flames' bluff, see if they leave. And if they do (great), then we can decide what to do with it. It's not like there is going to permanently be a vacuum of investor interest - it cannot be the case that the only possible way for an arena to get built is to subsidise a sports team. There's decent music venues in medium sized cities all across the UK and they didn't need to be corruptly financed the way they are here.

On this matter, why are arenas here so expensive anyway? In the Tyne and Wear Metro area (1.1M people), there are two football stadiums and arena built for less than the cost of one arena here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadium_of_Light
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_James%27_Park
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Radio_Arena

The Metro Radio Arena was £10.6m in 1995. It's not super fancy and half the capacity of an arena here, but how can we justify an arena here being about 20x the price?

[MalcolmTucker]

Based on my rudimentary understanding of engineering, a span gets twice as long, it needs to support 4 times the load. When your expanding in two dimensions and you want to have no sightlines blocked, your span is expanding, and the area is expanding, so your strength and area compound into an annoying problem. Now I know that it is unlikely that a beam with 4 times the performance costs 4 times as much, but this example is illustrative of what scale does to cost.

So lets look at the Enmax Centrium in Red Deer. Nothing fancy. The roof is 100m by 66m. Rogers in Edmonton is 140m by 110m. So 6600 square meters vs 15400 square meters (the Saddledome is around 14,000sqm). To instantly you have 2.5 times the space, and that space is nearly 4 times as much to construct, to around 10 times more for the roof - not even looking into higher weight requirements, or the cost of taller roof supports.

So we can see construction cost would not be a linear curve - 4 5,000 seat stadiums does not cost the same as 1 20,000 seat stadiums. (except for soccer/football where until a tipping point you can just replicate a simple stadium down the sidelines).

Also, Enmax cost $23 million (with CPI, $40 million today, or $49 million using the construction price index (18-10-0050-01).

Using the same construction price index, the Saddledome's original $98 million cost in 82 ish would be $251.2 million today plus $78.4 million for the 1994 renovations, which would probably get you close to the actual construction cost if built today, given Edmonton's core arena and amenities were constrained to $450 million but that core includes more stuff, and a much stronger and taller roof.

[MalcolmTucker]

it cannot be the case that the only possible way for an arena to get built is to subsidise a sports team

But the numbers and experience show that it is. The sports team is actually subsidizing a community amenity that would otherwise be built without a major tenant.



We can be mad at the world that this is the case, that an arena large enough to attract concerts that the community is used to cannot sustain itself in a market as small as ours, but that doesn't get us any closer to an arena.



Right now the arena receives an annual subsidy for maintenance (maybe - was the case years ago) and pays no property tax. Why wouldn't we extend at least that level of support to a new facility?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Right now the arena receives an annual subsidy for maintenance (maybe - was the case years ago) and pays no property tax. Why wouldn't we extend at least that level of support to a new facility?

Well, providing a reasonable subsidy is one thing, but the 'level of support' the Flames Management seems to want, especially with their West Village proposal is another. I'd rather subsidize the Saddledome for another decade while we wait for a better solution than bend over for the Flames now.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Well, providing a reasonable subsidy is one thing, but the 'level of support' the Flames Management seems to want, especially with their West Village proposal is another. I'd rather subsidize the Saddledome for another decade while we wait for a better solution than bend over for the Flames now.

You can always negotiate a better deal. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise... as though it's inevitable that Calgary has to get hosed on a new arena, that it is somehow an immutable law of nature.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by esquire

You can always negotiate a better deal. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise... as though it's inevitable that Calgary has to get hosed on a new arena, that it is somehow an immutable law of nature.

The city offered a very reasonable deal, and the Flames told them to get stuffed. And somehow managed to get away with the story that it was the city being uncooperative.

[MalcolmTucker]

A contribution valued at less than $0 was reasonable?

[DoubleK]

Neither side brought forward a proposal that was reasonable or realistic.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

A contribution valued at less than $0 was reasonable?

$185 million + infrastructure is nothing? Is it just assumed that sports corporations don't have to pay taxes like everyone else?

[MalcolmTucker]

The $185 million was not a grant, it was a repayable contribution at best (interest free loan) or at worst, a loan (the difference isn't that large in a low interest rate environment).



The corporation doesn't pay city taxes now.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by milomilo

$185 million + infrastructure is nothing? Is it just assumed that sports corporations don't have to pay taxes like everyone else?

That seems to be the assumption. That you can't build an arena without a significant public contribution AND a property tax holiday that gets swept under the carpet.

[Socguy]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Calgary is missing out on a lot of big concerts because the Saddledome roof can't handle the weights of modern stage setups. It's one of the big reasons why we need a new arena. As for the other sports teams, don't forget that CSEC owns them as well. If the Flames leave I could see them taking the Roughnecks with them and possibly the Hitmen as well depending on where they went. Nenshi's the biggest roadblock to a new arena and has been since Day 1.

How many concerts is Calgary missing out on exactly? King himself admitted that the handful of concerts that don't come to Calgary is NOT a sufficient reason to build a new arena.

[ZeDgE]

Originally Posted by Socguy

How many concerts is Calgary missing out on exactly? King himself admitted that the handful of concerts that don't come to Calgary is NOT a sufficient reason to build a new arena.

I dont have the link, but someone posted some attendance numbers here before, the arena in Saskatoon *is pretty damn close* to the Saddledome. The bigger arenas in Toronto and Edmonton etc get double or triple what the saddledome does.

*edit found it

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

A company, Pollstar, tracks this (found a more current list just now to link to, I think my numbers for events were 2013 numbers). The big difference is on the event side.

http://canadianmusician.com/blog/2015/01...f-top-200-busiest-arena-venues-globally/

2014 numbers:
11- Air Canada Centre – Toronto, ON (584,729 tickets)

31- Bell Centre – Montreal, QC (442,710 tickets)

33- Rexall Place – Edmonton, AB (405,408 ticket)

64- MTS Centre – Winnipeg, MB (241,045 tickets)

65- Canadian Tire Centre – Ottawa, ON (237,055 tickets)

66- Rogers Centre – Vancouver, BC (224,400 tickets)

68- Scotiabank Saddledome – Calgary, AB (210,727 tickets)

83- Budweiser Gardens – London, ON (160,160 tickets)

85- SaskTel Centre – Saskatoon, SK (155,655 tickets)