Oilslick941611
Registered User
Nenshi re-elected. Good bye New Arena for the Flames.
Yikes, some ugly stuff going down in Calgary. How long do mayor's hold seats up there before the next election? 4 years?
It's on the Flames and their entitled owners as well.Four years. Same as Edmonton now.
At this rate the Oilers might replace Rogers before the Flames replace the Saddledome.
It's really tough to beat an incumbent. Hopefully Nenshi takes this as a wake up call and runs city hall down there a little more congenially.
It's on the Flames and their entitled owners as well.
Are you confused, the public statements from the Flames that are tantamount to them being owed this from the CityWhat "is on the Flames and their entitled owners"?
Nenshi was pretty dishonest in how he handled the rink. That whole infographic of the city contributing 1/3rd was a joke.
Nenshi doesn't want a new rink built. Maybe he listened to the voters, but probably not.
Calgary won't get a new deal to start building a rink until 2021 or later.
As someone living in Calgary, the right choice was made. It was beyond clear who had a better vision for Calgary's future.
Well I mean there is more to a city than a rink and that almost seemed to be the only thing Bill Smith had going for him. It'll get built, they were just playing rough before the election.A vision of a city without a new rink for decades to come?
Another one from earlier in the day:
What "is on the Flames and their entitled owners"?
Nenshi was pretty dishonest in how he handled the rink. That whole infographic of the city contributing 1/3rd was a joke.
Nenshi doesn't want a new rink built. Maybe he listened to the voters, but probably not.
Calgary won't get a new deal to start building a rink until 2021 or later.
They obviously wanted almost everything paid for by the city and even their subsequent proposals never felt like a partnership between the city and the organization. I dont think Nenshi doesn't want a rink built; just not at the terms the Flames want where the city covers almost everything and gets nothing in return.
Yes but they are completely different scenarios.What the Flames want is essentially what Katz got with the Ice District.
The part in bold is just dishonest.
Yes but they are completely different scenarios.
The city needed a catalyst to bring developers and people downtown. Building Rogers helped the city by creating a crap ton of property tax revenue and bringing other construction downtown and bringing people down here too.
They want to build the new Calgary arena pretty much beside the old one. There is no benefit there for the city.
Edmonton's deal is an outlier and it turning out well is not the norm.
The West Village needs to go with what 200mill+ just to make the site usable?What is this ton of property tax in Edmonton? The biggest new building, beside the rink, is Edmonton Tower. Biggest tenant in the tower is the City of Edmonton. The City basically abandoned two buildings that pretty much sit empty now to move into Edmonton Tower.
Edmonton deal only worked because the city was willing to put in a ton of money.
It's the City of Calgary who wants to build the new arena basically beside the Saddledome. CalgaryNext would clean up some good land in the West Village. Huge ton of money, but much more economic value to the city than building close to the Stampede grounds.
The West Village needs to go with what 200mill+ just to make the site usable?
Do you not see all the buildings being built in the ice district? Stantec, condos, new retail the actual district itself? None of that would be under construction without the arena deal because there wouldn't be any draw downtown. It sparked downtown growth.
That wouldn't happen in either Calgary spot. Victoria Park would be the cheapest and make the most sense but the funding model doesn't work.
I've explained it tons of time.Are you going with a spark for growth or the cheapest model?
West Village makes sense to spark growth, but not the cheapest. Cleaning up the West Village is something the city of Calgary needs to do eventually.
Calgary doesn't need new office towers. Edmonton didn't really either.
I don't see how government money for Rogers was good, but not for a rink in Calgary.
If you can't see it I don't know what else to tell you.
Why is government money good for a rink in Edmonton but not in Calgary?
The money for the rink in Edmonton sparked development in an important part of Edmonton that needed revitalization.
It's all about return on investment and the deal in Calgary would see little to no return on investment in anyway.
Dude you are literally looking at a slice of the picture that's it.Don't insult me jerk.
The money that the city of Edmonton will pour into the Rogers deal is many times more than what Calgary proposed with their third/third/third infographic.
You are dead wrong with the ROI argument. The City of Edmonton is paying out of market rental prices for the Edmonton tower lease, plus the CRL concessions and the demolition of Northlands.
The City of Calgary literally tried to count demolition of the Saddledome as part of their third of the new rink costs. Edmonton will pay to demolish Rexall and that wasn't even calculated in part of the demolition.
I wasn't trying to be a jerk, I just have explained this like 3 times already and you seem to be ignoring 90% of the development and shrugging your shoulders.