News Article: RendezVous LeBreton plan dead, but there are still places Melnyk could build an arena

Status
Not open for further replies.

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,086
9,663
It might not be the literal absolute worst thing to spend money in, but it's close.

It produces the wrong kind of jobs that a city wants (mostly part-time and low wage jobs), it doesn't boost the construction industry at all (studies have shown that it doesn't create new construction jobs or projects, it just diverts resources from other projects that either get delayed or cancelled), and the limited beneficial effects have shown to be very up-front and not sustainable over the long haul (large benefits for the first 2-3 years after constructuion, dwindling every year thereafter).

There was a poll where something like 86% of economists were either "against" or "strongly against" civic subsidization of professional sport stadiums. Only about 5% of economists were in favour. And this was back in 2006, before construction costs balooned wildly out of control over the past 5 years or so.

We've had the discussion on these boards over the past few months. Lots of good studies out there that definiteively suggest that it's one of the worst civic expenditures from a purely economic perspective you could embark on.

Whether or not it makes sense, it may be the only way this market get's a new facility
 

Mr Hat

Registered User
Oct 24, 2017
555
556
Kelowna
Whether or not it makes sense, it may be the only way this market get's a new facility

This market was in a great position to have a new downtown facility. Everyone including Bettman wanted it to happen and stressed it's importance to sustainable market growth. The pieces were in place for it to happen but Yuge single handedly imploded the project. Maybe it's not until 2030 that we get a new arena under a new owner but it will happen eventually.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RyCam

Registered User
Nov 3, 2016
382
363
As long as Melnyk is the owner of the Sens, there's not going to be a downtown arena. And honestly, that's for the better because any arena outside of Lebreton is not acceptable IMO.

There's no location, other than Lebreton, where they can build an arena that is a walk or a train stop away from downtown. You might as well just keep the arena in Kanata in that case because any other location will be mired with similar issues as the Kanata location(no LRT access, only served by buses, and it will be a traffic nightmare pre and post game).
 

Larionov

Registered User
Feb 9, 2005
4,420
2,131
Ottawa, ON
Well, re: Gibbon's suggestion of the DND building on Colonel By - I can, with a HIGH degree of confidence, assure everyone that this is completely off the table. Not going to happen for at least 20 years.

And... Lincoln Fields? Come on. Try harder, Gibbons.

The list of locations he gave ranged from unlikely to comical. Now, if an owner truly had money and wanted to build downtown, there are options. For instance, L'Esplanade Laurier is a dump of a complex in need of a very expensive overhaul, and most of the government departments have now moved out of there. I'm betting that the feds could be talked in to selling that block. All of this, though, isn't worth speculation because buying that land and building the arena would cost money that Euge doesn't have. He's looking for a free building because his only meaningful asset is the team and the building he's in currently. He's has lost or sold off all of his other assets, and is borrowing constantly against the value of the team. Therefore, the whole notion that the Sens could somehow go it alone for a new building is a joke.

Katz at least had some money to put into the Oilers project. (A project model that, it should be pointed out, the city of Calgary refuses to replicate.) Euge has none - he would be asking government to build him a building for free. It's not happening - not for him, anyway. His goodwill bank is not only empty, bad badly overdrawn. A new owner might get some government cooperation. Conversely, any government that is seen to be giving Euge a handout will be eaten alive by the public.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,086
9,663
The list of locations he gave ranged from unlikely to comical. Now, if an owner truly had money and wanted to build downtown, there are options. For instance, L'Esplanade Laurier is a dump of a complex in need of a very expensive overhaul, and most of the government departments have now moved out of there. I'm betting that the feds could be talked in to selling that block. All of this, though, isn't worth speculation because buying that land and building the arena would cost money that Euge doesn't have. He's looking for a free building because his only meaningful asset is the team and the building he's in currently. He's has lost or sold off all of his other assets, and is borrowing constantly against the value of the team. Therefore, the whole notion that the Sens could somehow go it alone for a new building is a joke.

Katz at least had some money to put into the Oilers project. (A project model that, it should be pointed out, the city of Calgary refuses to replicate.) Euge has none - he would be asking government to build him a building for free. It's not happening - not for him, anyway. His goodwill bank is not only empty, bad badly overdrawn. A new owner might get some government cooperation. Conversely, any government that is seen to be giving Euge a handout will be eaten alive by the public.

you think the block is big enough? it's long enough, I don't know if it is wide enough
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlyingJ

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
Whether or not it makes sense, it may be the only way this market get's a new facility

[MOD]

I'd say it might be the opposite, at least in the short term, if only because there seems to be a significant rift between the city (Watson) and Melnyk. I think municipal funding might be off the table at least until someone defeats Watson as mayor... but even then, this city is INCREDIBLY conservative as far as municipal politics is concerned, and combined with the extreme rural-urban split we have in Ottawa where there is growing resentment in the rural ridings to be taxed for urban infrastructure, I'm not super confident it would pass. We cleaned up Lansdowne, but that site a) had historical significance, and b) was spearheaded by people the city trusted (rightly or wrongly). I'm not saying that a vote wouldn't go the same way for a new Melnyk arena that the Lansdowne one did (it was pretty significant, I think like 20-4 or something like that), but there are personality politics at play - I doubt that Melnyk has ingratiated himself to the current city officials to the point where they're willing to do them any favours. There's a critical amount of broken trust right now.

Regardless of how any of us feel about the economics of municipal funding for a professional-grade arena, the fact is that card is probably off the table for at least a half-decade, perhaps longer depending on how much the current ward council remembers the toxic negotiations that transpired in the Lebreton case, and how much influence those councillors have in negotiations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Knave

Registered User
Mar 6, 2007
21,632
2,226
Ottawa
I guess I'm not a big fan of listening to John Oliver for 10 minutes and thinking you understand the complexity of a multi-billion dollar build-up, its impact and what role municipal government should play.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,086
9,663
[MOD]

I'd say it might be the opposite, at least in the short term, if only because there seems to be a significant rift between the city (Watson) and Melnyk. I think municipal funding might be off the table at least until someone defeats Watson as mayor... but even then, this city is INCREDIBLY conservative as far as municipal politics is concerned, and combined with the extreme rural-urban split we have in Ottawa where there is growing resentment in the rural ridings to be taxed for urban infrastructure, I'm not super confident it would pass. We cleaned up Lansdowne, but that site a) had historical significance, and b) was spearheaded by people the city trusted (rightly or wrongly). I'm not saying that a vote wouldn't go the same way for a new Melnyk arena that the Lansdowne one did (it was pretty significant, I think like 20-4 or something like that), but there are personality politics at play - I doubt that Melnyk has ingratiated himself to the current city officials to the point where they're willing to do them any favours. There's a critical amount of broken trust right now.

Regardless of how any of us feel about the economics of municipal funding for a professional-grade arena, the fact is that card is probably off the table for at least a half-decade, perhaps longer depending on how much the current ward council remembers the toxic negotiations that transpired in the Lebreton case, and how much influence those councillors have in negotiations.

you think it's the opposite....so we'll get a new facility without public investment?
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
you think it's the opposite....so we'll get a new facility without public investment?

I think there's a chance we get SOME civic infrastructure spending, but only within the programs that are already established and available to anyone who successfully applies for them and are accepted (brownfields remediation funding, etc...) - I don't think this city is going to invoke some special property tax or other Arena-specific tax venture to help fund anything that Melnyk is proposing.

If there is public money available, I'm more liable to believe it would come from the NCC, and probably as a reduction of land cost to reflect expenditures to build the arena (ie: they wouldn't get actual money, they'd just get a discount on the land to reflect certain agreements).

It certainly won't be coming from the province if Ford's austerity talk on provincial funding of literally anything is for real - you can't talk about cutting health expenditures on the one hand and then give a millionaire arena money with the other... though with Ford, I'm liable to believe anything is possible. But I doubt it.

The reason this original Lebreton proposal got as far as it did was that it was based on a funding model that asked for zero public money (outside of land remediation, etc...).
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,086
9,663
We were going to until Melnyk decided he wanted a free arena and only wanted to pay for the operating costs.
well it would seem here was never an agreement that Melnyk was good with.

I'll stick to the belief I've held for a long time that the numbers behind the deal don't add well enough to move forward
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,086
9,663
I think there's a chance we get SOME civic infrastructure spending, but only within the programs that are already established and available to anyone who successfully applies for them and are accepted (brownfields remediation funding, etc...) - I don't think this city is going to invoke some special property tax or other Arena-specific tax venture to help fund anything that Melnyk is proposing.

If there is public money available, I'm more liable to believe it would come from the NCC, and probably as a reduction of land cost to reflect expenditures to build the arena (ie: they wouldn't get actual money, they'd just get a discount on the land to reflect certain agreements).

It certainly won't be coming from the province if Ford's austerity talk on provincial funding of literally anything is for real - you can't talk about cutting health expenditures on the one hand and then give a millionaire arena money with the other... though with Ford, I'm liable to believe anything is possible. But I doubt it.

The reason this original Lebreton proposal got as far as it did was that it was based on a funding model that asked for zero public money (outside of land remediation, etc...).

I don't think it'll ever happen with Melnyk and Watson at the helm. too much dislike there.
 

Nac Mac Feegle

wee & free
Jun 10, 2011
34,869
9,289
It find it astonishing that there are still people who think that spending public funds on luxury items like sports arena makes any sense.

Roads, hospitals, schools and public transportation please.

Yes and no.

I would be strongly opposed to putting a lot of money into a sports arena...but I do think there is room for some public money into sports. Sports and recreation are a part of a healthy community. I would expect some form of public access to any sports facility in exchange for some public funds. Perhaps a certain amount of dates set asides for things like school events (graduations, theatre productions, etc), local theatre and sporting groups, city events, etc.

For Lebreton specifically, it does make sense to put some money into soil/ground cleanup and the mass transit infrastructure in the area. Basically because it benefits both the facility and the public. Public health especially (and that soils cleanup should happened a long, long time ago).
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeTigre

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,086
9,663
Yes and no.

I would be strongly opposed to putting a lot of money into a sports arena...but I do think there is room for some public money into sports. Sports and recreation are a part of a healthy community. I would expect some form of public access to any sports facility in exchange for some public funds. Perhaps a certain amount of dates set asides for things like school events (graduations, theatre productions, etc), local theatre and sporting groups, city events, etc.

For Lebreton specifically, it does make sense to put some money into soil/ground cleanup and the mass transit infrastructure in the area. Basically because it benefits both the facility and the public. Public health especially (and that soils cleanup should happened a long, long time ago).

I don't think that putting money into soil clean up is public money being invested. The "public" currently owns that lahd but it is currently useless in its contaminated state. THe NCC isn't investing in the clean up costs, they are in effect paying a vendor to clean it up. They could pay anyone to do that.

And the LRT i wouldn't argue is public investment either. That train is going right by the site. It's going right by that site regardless of what happens to LeBreton.
 

The Lewler

GOAT BUDGET AINEC
Jul 2, 2013
4,675
2,815
Eastern Ontario Badlands
The only location mentioned that is actually viable is the DND HQ area. I'm not sure if there is enough space there for an arena.. but it's the only one that is truly downtown, directly on transit, and steps from an existing entertainment district.

That said, that will never happen. (or at least in near to mid future)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silencio

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
The only location mentioned that is actually viable is the DND HQ area. I'm not sure if there is enough space there for an arena.. but it's the only one that is truly downtown, directly on transit, and steps from an existing entertainment district.

That said, that will never happen. (or at least in near to mid future)
Yeah thought the same,it would be a very tight fit
 

SENATOR

Registered User
Feb 6, 2004
1,979
812
Ottawa
47188863632_e45dd5f080_b.jpg
 

SENATOR

Registered User
Feb 6, 2004
1,979
812
Ottawa
I personally love the overbrook location. It is really the only workable viable option for the new arena. And I scouted all the places in Ottawa.
For those of you who would say that the baseball stadium doesn't have enough land for parking- the plans for LeBreton flats didn't involve much of surface parking really. There is always an option for underground 5 levels parking(2000 cars) under the stadium. I counted, you can add 2000 more on a surface around the stadium. Utilize stores parking lots. You can park across the highway at the rail station and around, you can use both mall parking. That's another 2000 spots or even more. Also the parking is available on the streets in overbrook area of Vanier and beyond.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad