The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

[The_People1]

So the press conference is over.  I missed the part about the province voting on the $300mil.  It needs to go to vote after the election is over?  And voted by Albertans or by council or by who?

[travel_dude]

9 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

So the press conference is over.  I missed the part about the province voting on the $300mil.  It needs to go to vote after the election is over?  And voted by Albertans or by council or by who?

 

Voted by MLA's, or so Smith suggested.

I believe it has to wait, since there is not enough time for the current legislature to do it.

If Notley makes it a campaign issue, then it's up to all.

 

This stage is a bit confusing as they don't have a signed agreement.

I believe this is an agreement in principal.

I think the province vote is due to being an expenditure item not previously agreed to in the budget.

[cross16]

So the provinces component (which is 100% a play to garner votes) rests on them winning the election. 
 

ya I’ll be waiting this one out before I get excited. This is just the first step of many

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

So the provinces component (which is 100% a play to garner votes) rests on them winning the election. 
 

ya I’ll be waiting this one out before I get excited. This is just the first step of many

 

The city positioned it that whoever wins the election should honor the deal.  Easy to say.

TBH, I don't see Notley making this a campaign issue.

It's loaded potato.

Notley base is urban EDM and CGY.

 

[jjgallow]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

The city positioned it that whoever wins the election should honor the deal.  Easy to say.

TBH, I don't see Notley making this a campaign issue.

It's loaded potato.

Notley base is urban EDM and CGY.

 

 

Well I can't imagine a deal being struck and then someone new being elected wrecking it.

 

that would never happen.

[cross16]

38 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

The city positioned it that whoever wins the election should honor the deal.  Easy to say.

TBH, I don't see Notley making this a campaign issue.

It's loaded potato.

Notley base is urban EDM and CGY.

 

Well Smith has already made this an election issue today.  I’m sure the NDP will comment before the election once they have a chance to review and decide. So it’s possible we will know pre election. 
 

Just possible that end falls apart is all 
 

 

[tmac70]

Well, it's good news for Alberta and Calgary for now. I can see the NDP not being in favor of this though. 

[Mike_Oxlong]

59 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Well I can't imagine a deal being struck and then someone new being elected wrecking it.

 

that would never happen.

If you still think that the Mayor killed the first deal, please send me a dm. 

[The_People1]

5 minutes ago, Mike_Oxlong said:

If you still think that the Mayor killed the first deal, please send me a dm. 

 

Ox with the insider info comes through about news on Tuesday.

 

It's a good first step.  Establishes a lot in terms of the players involved all wanting this done based on this framework.  Only thing is the province's $300mil.  It's not a sure thing yet.  

[travel_dude]

10 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Well I can't imagine a deal being struck and then someone new being elected wrecking it.

 

that would never happen.

 

10 hours ago, cross16 said:

Well Smith has already made this an election issue today.  I’m sure the NDP will comment before the election once they have a chance to review and decide. So it’s possible we will know pre election. 
 

Just possible that end falls apart is all 
 

 

 

The timing was perfect to make it an election thing.

But I can't imagine the NDP saying it's worng or should be an issue they attack.

Calgary residents may not be entirely supportive of spending money on a district, but the cities are the only places the NDP has support.  The vision is too well developed and the spend is targeted to an area that needs work.

 

$330M is a drop in the bucket for infrastructure spending.  Toronto is spending more than that on electric buses.

[jjgallow]

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

The timing was perfect to make it an election thing.

But I can't imagine the NDP saying it's worng or should be an issue they attack.

Calgary residents may not be entirely supportive of spending money on a district, but the cities are the only places the NDP has support.  The vision is too well developed and the spend is targeted to an area that needs work.

 

$330M is a drop in the bucket for infrastructure spending.  Toronto is spending more than that on electric buses.

 

Yeah I do believe in City building actually.   Just never fully bought into the proposals here.   I'll look further into this one.

 

$330m IS  a drop in the bucket, if the project is truly value-add.

 

But don't worry, it's not going to be $330m when they're done 😅

[cross16]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

The timing was perfect to make it an election thing.

But I can't imagine the NDP saying it's worng or should be an issue they attack.

Calgary residents may not be entirely supportive of spending money on a district, but the cities are the only places the NDP has support.  The vision is too well developed and the spend is targeted to an area that needs work.

 

$330M is a drop in the bucket for infrastructure spending.  Toronto is spending more than that on electric buses.

 

If the NDP were to say No to this I think it would be for 1 of, or maybe both, 2 reasons. 

 

1. no public money for private infrastructure. I think they'd get a lot of support on that message

2. Pressure from Edmonton. Edmonton got exactly $0 for their arena project from the province. It's not a good look for Smith (who publicly said in the past that no money should go to projects like this) to give them money and none to Edmonton. I think as a result of this your going to have municipalities around the province start asking "where is mine" ? Gives the NDP some ammo. 

 

Not trying to turn this political as really the decision for the NDP to support or not really comes down to politics only. I'm just saying that I think there are actually a few good reasons why the NDP should not support this. 

 

it also happens to be a pretty poor deal for everyone but the Flames IMO. 

[cross16]

Still want to see/understand the finer print to this but after sitting on this overnight, i'm frustrated. 

 

The clear winner in all of this is Murray Edwards and the Flames. IMO they have been poor negotiators through all of this but in the end they got what they want. They get a bigger project, they get a practice rink and they do it for less money than they were supposed to give a few years ago. not only that they only are required to put $40million upfront and the rest of it is in payments. 

 

So once again Edwards and CSEC act like jerks but they end up getting what they want. I get it's the way business gets done, especially if you are Murray Edwards, but it's pretty frustrating as a tax payer and as a fan that it keeps coming to this. 

 

I'll support the project and i'm sure the vision will be great once done but for now I've found this really frustrating and disappointing. 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Still want to see/understand the finer print to this but after sitting on this overnight, i'm frustrated. 

 

The clear winner in all of this is Murray Edwards and the Flames. IMO they have been poor negotiators through all of this but in the end they got what they want. They get a bigger project, they get a practice rink and they do it for less money than they were supposed to give a few years ago. not only that they only are required to put $40million upfront and the rest of it is in payments. 

 

So once again Edwards and CSEC act like jerks but they end up getting what they want. I get it's the way business gets done, especially if you are Murray Edwards, but it's pretty frustrating as a tax payer and as a fan that it keeps coming to this. 

 

I'll support the project and i'm sure the vision will be great once done but for now I've found this really frustrating and disappointing. 

 

Don't worry.

 

It may sound bad now, but when we look back, after the NDP cancels this and turns it into a $3B Solar and wind-powered hockey tent with massive delays, the original proposal will have actually looked pretty good.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

If the NDP were to say No to this I think it would be for 1 of, or maybe both, 2 reasons. 

 

1. no public money for private infrastructure. I think they'd get a lot of support on that message

2. Pressure from Edmonton. Edmonton got exactly $0 for their arena project from the province. It's not a good look for Smith (who publicly said in the past that no money should go to projects like this) to give them money and none to Edmonton. I think as a result of this your going to have municipalities around the province start asking "where is mine" ? Gives the NDP some ammo. 

 

Not trying to turn this political as really the decision for the NDP to support or not really comes down to politics only. I'm just saying that I think there are actually a few good reasons why the NDP should not support this. 

 

it also happens to be a pretty poor deal for everyone but the Flames IMO. 

 

Take away the arena for a moment.  Is there infrastructure that needs to be revitalized in that part of the city?  Like expansion to LRT or road improvement.  Will the future building of condos and such require that kind of upgrade?  That's the type of spending Smith is talking about.

 

So the argument comes down to who should pay for this.  The city or the province.  This probably doesn't fall into the category that can get federal funding like the Toronto buses, and probably doesn't since they didn't let the Feds speak.  

 

The deal for the city looks worse in the amount paid, but how much is actually arena.  It's a grand plan, so details will be interesting.  I think if you look at the EDM deal, the Oilers came out way further ahead.  The province didn't need to touch it because the city paid for it.

 

Smith tipped her hand a bit when she suggested that dollars spent on the two cities were not quite equal.  This evens it out, but then she also mentioned some further EDM stuff around the arena area that might have money coming.  

 

From the NDP side, this is a waste of money that does not improve the social safety net.  The jobs created (construction) are hard to criticize, even though they are still far off.  So it comes down to whether they think there is enough people dead set against it.  If that's in the urban areas where they already are winning the seats, it doesn't help them get a minority or majority.  Currently, they have very little electoral support outside the urban areas.  From a political standpoint, there is little to be gained in coming out against it.  At least that is how I see it.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Take away the arena for a moment.  Is there infrastructure that needs to be revitalized in that part of the city?  Like expansion to LRT or road improvement.  Will the future building of condos and such require that kind of upgrade?  That's the type of spending Smith is talking about.

 

So the argument comes down to who should pay for this.  The city or the province.  This probably doesn't fall into the category that can get federal funding like the Toronto buses, and probably doesn't since they didn't let the Feds speak.  

 

The deal for the city looks worse in the amount paid, but how much is actually arena.  It's a grand plan, so details will be interesting.  I think if you look at the EDM deal, the Oilers came out way further ahead.  The province didn't need to touch it because the city paid for it.

 

Smith tipped her hand a bit when she suggested that dollars spent on the two cities were not quite equal.  This evens it out, but then she also mentioned some further EDM stuff around the arena area that might have money coming.  

 

From the NDP side, this is a waste of money that does not improve the social safety net.  The jobs created (construction) are hard to criticize, even though they are still far off.  So it comes down to whether they think there is enough people dead set against it.  If that's in the urban areas where they already are winning the seats, it doesn't help them get a minority or majority.  Currently, they have very little electoral support outside the urban areas.  From a political standpoint, there is little to be gained in coming out against it.  At least that is how I see it.

 

Can you?   For me you can't, this is just the way politicians frame this now. If you are providing money for infrastructure that needs to be done to in order for an arena project to be successful then IMO you are providing funding for the arena. 

 

I also think the idea that an arena ends up being a catalyst for developments like condos is false. Why do people want to live next to arenas, especially when you consider that they are spinning this as a "community" project with outdoor gathering areas. Could see it attracting bars/restaurants but those aren't big money makers for the cities. 

 

It's a political issue I expect people to have different opinions but IMO the UCP has clearly spent money that they should not have in an effort to buy votes.  I'm not suggesting that the NDP should reject this, just simply pointing out I think there is the potential they could and I could see why. I don't pretend to know how the NDP operates. 

 

All in all, the Flames should have paid more for this. The province swooped in to rescue it to get votes and that looks poor IMO. I'll get behind the project but it's just disappointing as a fan and a taxpayer that the sides all wound up here. 

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

If the NDP were to say No to this I think it would be for 1 of, or maybe both, 2 reasons. 

 

1. no public money for private infrastructure. I think they'd get a lot of support on that message

2. Pressure from Edmonton. Edmonton got exactly $0 for their arena project from the province. It's not a good look for Smith (who publicly said in the past that no money should go to projects like this) to give them money and none to Edmonton. I think as a result of this your going to have municipalities around the province start asking "where is mine" ? Gives the NDP some ammo. 

 

Not trying to turn this political as really the decision for the NDP to support or not really comes down to politics only. I'm just saying that I think there are actually a few good reasons why the NDP should not support this. 

 

it also happens to be a pretty poor deal for everyone but the Flames IMO. 

 

My first thought was exactly that.  Why would people in Edmonton, Red Deer, Fort McMurray, etc be happy about provincial tax dollars spent on a Calgary Arena?

 

But looking at this a bit closer, Smith is spinning this as an Arena "project" meaning there is peripheral work that needs to be done. Money for infrastructure... So, roads?  Demolition?  Clean-up?  And the result is a "park".  An area for Albertans to go enjoy.

 

But the notion Smith is using tax dollars to buy Calgary votes cannot be lost in the equation.  Calgarians should be okay with it but it's not a great look outside of the Calgary area.  Smith betting on conservative strongholds in the rural areas to stay with her.

[travel_dude]

48 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Can you?   For me you can't, this is just the way politicians frame this now. If you are providing money for infrastructure that needs to be done to in order for an arena project to be successful then IMO you are providing funding for the arena. 

 

I also think the idea that an arena ends up being a catalyst for developments like condos is false. Why do people want to live next to arenas, especially when you consider that they are spinning this as a "community" project with outdoor gathering areas. Could see it attracting bars/restaurants but those aren't big money makers for the cities. 

 

It's a political issue I expect people to have different opinions but IMO the UCP has clearly spent money that they should not have in an effort to buy votes.  I'm not suggesting that the NDP should reject this, just simply pointing out I think there is the potential they could and I could see why. I don't pretend to know how the NDP operates. 

 

All in all, the Flames should have paid more for this. The province swooped in to rescue it to get votes and that looks poor IMO. I'll get behind the project but it's just disappointing as a fan and a taxpayer that the sides all wound up here. 

 

 

West village had the creosote issue that nobody wanted to touch.  Costs varied depending on who you talk to.  It should have been cleaned up regardless.

 

The last deal died when costs started climbing and the city decided it was politically a good time to add in Green costs.  Perhaps the city would have been better off just sucking it up and finishing the deal.  I think it ended up copsting more to cancel it, let alone the new increased amount.  The city would argue that they are getting more out of this deal for more money.  Who knows.  

 

Regarding condos.  Probably should have used mixed-use, since it really depends on the what developers step up and want a piece of the area.  I wouldn't want to live near an arena, but that's me.  Riverfront space is likely high demand, so I would let the people living downtown decide if that area would be a good one.  The area near the arena is closer to being like Stampede area, so it's not really condos for that specific area.  

 

I don't agree with vote buying.  I do agree that money needs to be spent on revitalizing cities.  Or improving transportation.  Devil in the details, so I don't know if the Flames get the same for less cost?  Is the city getting more for more?

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

But the notion Smith is using tax dollars to buy Calgary votes cannot be lost in the equation.  Calgarians should be okay with it but it's not a great look outside of the Calgary area.  Smith betting on conservative strongholds in the rural areas to stay with her.

 

I think she realized that when she brought up the differences in spending between EDM and CGY.  She gave numbers and mentioned she wanted to do more in EDM with relation to downtown (ICE District).  Perhaps I misheard that, but I keyed into it.

 

Red Deer is something like 50/50 in support.  Not quite sure the split but it seemed a bit equal.

 

I think she is also betting on voter apathy.  Do you hate the use of public funds enough to vote against her.  Or do the fans of Flames get out there when they otherwise would not.  It might become a campaign issue, but I think it's a hill neiother wants to die on.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I also think the idea that an arena ends up being a catalyst for developments like condos is false. Why do people want to live next to arenas, especially when you consider that they are spinning this as a "community" project with outdoor gathering areas. Could see it attracting bars/restaurants but those aren't big money makers for the cities. 

 

I could be an out of touch GenX'er but I would guess that young people would love to live where the action is.  Arenas attract bars/restaurants, nightlife, and the whole scene.  The area also has the Stampede among other major attractions in downtown Calgary.  There is potential for the area to become very popular for the younger crowd.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I could be an out of touch GenX'er but I would guess that young people would love to live where the action is.  Arenas attract bars/restaurants, nightlife, and the whole scene.  The area also has the Stampede among other major attractions in downtown Calgary.  There is potential for the area to become very popular for the younger crowd.

If its like any other major urban center, condos near a new event/attraction site would most likely air bnb type residences. Unless Calgary has put up stricter bylaws in that regard.

[cross16]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

West village had the creosote issue that nobody wanted to touch.  Costs varied depending on who you talk to.  It should have been cleaned up regardless.

 

The last deal died when costs started climbing and the city decided it was politically a good time to add in Green costs.  Perhaps the city would have been better off just sucking it up and finishing the deal.  I think it ended up copsting more to cancel it, let alone the new increased amount.  The city would argue that they are getting more out of this deal for more money.  Who knows.  

 

Regarding condos.  Probably should have used mixed-use, since it really depends on the what developers step up and want a piece of the area.  I wouldn't want to live near an arena, but that's me.  Riverfront space is likely high demand, so I would let the people living downtown decide if that area would be a good one.  The area near the arena is closer to being like Stampede area, so it's not really condos for that specific area.  

 

I don't agree with vote buying.  I do agree that money needs to be spent on revitalizing cities.  Or improving transportation.  Devil in the details, so I don't know if the Flames get the same for less cost?  Is the city getting more for more?

 

 

I really wish this narrative would stop. If you talk to or listen to anyone close to the situation this is not what happened. The Flames are as much responsible for the deal falling apart as the City is. 

 

I actually don't think the City did poorly here. They are paying more but they are getting more. They are getting more of a community space area and they are getting the province to kick in more so at the end of the day this project, at least at first glance, looks to be more efficient than the previous deal. They also get the Flames to pay what appears to be a pretty decent amount of money over a longer period of time. That money should aid in keeping this up building/area up to date and if they are correct that they have already funded the account to pay for this then I would say all in all the City is in a decent spot. Enough that i'm not suer, again at first glance only, I would suggest they should have just sucked it up and taken the previous deal. 

 

The province is really the loser in all of this and IMO the Flames are making out extremely well. The only way to change that narrative though would have been to do this deal 10 years ago. 

[cross16]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I could be an out of touch GenX'er but I would guess that young people would love to live where the action is.  Arenas attract bars/restaurants, nightlife, and the whole scene.  The area also has the Stampede among other major attractions in downtown Calgary.  There is potential for the area to become very popular for the younger crowd.

 

it's like Gaudreau and Columbus with his family. You want to be close but not too close right?

 

I know a few people who bought in the Guardian and don't like it. Plan to leave if this goes through. Of course to each their own there are some that would like it, but in what i've ready and what I've seen people mention about the subject is that arena's don't tend to do a good job attracting condos. 

 

 

[robrob74]

If they want to build some housing around it and an entertainment hub, I can see how the costs can be recouped by the housing taxes the city earns in the long run. But is there a need for that kind of housing?

 

In Vancouver land is a premium so there are a lot of high rises being built and therefore building condos around an arena could be really good. Opens up a need for transit in the area too.
 

Construction jobs would be a premium and add income into the community.

[tmac70]

The whole thing is a win for the city and province. Housing around any form of water will be a premium return.