Calgary city council approves arena deal (UPD: new deal upcoming?)

Status
Not open for further replies.

KingLB

Registered User
Oct 29, 2008
9,034
1,160
City, Flames to each put extra $12.5M toward arena, CMLC off project | Calgary Herald

Flames to cover anything above the 25 million overrun that the 2 parties are splitting. Apparently this split was part of the 2019 agreement so it won't need a vote to approve.

More details to come out this week, looks like city will pay more for Saddledome demolition. CMLC will be removed as project manager in lieu of partners the Flames choose in exchange of covering the rest of the overruns.

Project now scheduled to break ground December or early 2022

As someone that works in building materials. They are going to be so far over budget if this budget is more than 2 months old. Hot rolled steel has almost tripled in price this year, and no end in sight. With other building supplies seeing similar jumps.

This could get real painful?
 

oknazevad

Registered User
Dec 12, 2018
467
328
In terms of age? The Rangers. Sure they completely rebuilt the interior bowl, but the arena is still an awful 1960s design at its core, and that real estate needs to be used for something far more important. Penn Station is far too busy and important to be a basement craphole.

Ok, maybe that's just the rail fan in me still mad about the demolition of the original Penn Station.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Devonator

patnyrnyg

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
10,838
869
In terms of age? The Rangers. Sure they completely rebuilt the interior bowl, but the arena is still an awful 1960s design at its core, and that real estate needs to be used for something far more important. Penn Station is far too busy and important to be a basement craphole.

Ok, maybe that's just the rail fan in me still mad about the demolition of the original Penn Station.
Dolan offered to move to the Farley building across the street. City Council dragged their feet, so he renovated instead. This idea that the city will take back MSG is a pipe dream. If the city wants to take it through eminent domain, good luck. Dolan's lawyers will tie that up in court for years. Last thing they need to do is to make Penn Station "nice" or a tourist destination and have more people hanging out there.
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,427
5,042
Brooklyn
In terms of age? The Rangers. Sure they completely rebuilt the interior bowl, but the arena is still an awful 1960s design at its core, and that real estate needs to be used for something far more important. Penn Station is far too busy and important to be a basement craphole.

Ok, maybe that's just the rail fan in me still mad about the demolition of the original Penn Station.
I agree.

Evict Knicks and Rangers and make them play in newark.
 

oknazevad

Registered User
Dec 12, 2018
467
328
To the latter, hell no. That would kill the Devils.

To the former, the idea that Penn Station should remain a crappy hole instead of being an actual functional and attractive Station is plain stupid and laughable when all one has to do is point at Grand Central to show that a train station being a tourist destination in itself is not a crazy or unsuccessful idea. Moynihan Hall helps in both space and attractiveness, but it's only a part of the whole Penn complex.

Fact is, the city screwed up by not arranging to have a new MSG built on the area between 31st and 33rd on the west side of 9th that used to be open down to the tracks leading to Penn. Instead it's now got generic overpriced condo towers. Like there aren't enough of those in Manhattan.
 

Hoser

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
1,846
403
Bump! The Flames are pulling out of the arena deal because the City won't pour more money into it.



Colour me unsurprised. The City never should have agreed to a deal with the Flames in the first place. Give Murray Edwards an inch and he'll take a mile. "Privatize the profits and socialize the losses."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike Jones

Mightygoose

Registered User
Nov 5, 2012
5,586
1,382
Ajax, ON
And they were supposed to break ground in the coming months.

What a gong show..All this over less than 10 million? Edit: I re read it and she says Edwards intends to pull out, so perhaps hasn't yet

Still a gong show
 
Last edited:

hockeyguy0022

Registered User
Feb 20, 2016
346
175
Really... they're bickering over 10 million bucks... split down the middle and tell each other off and get over it.

Shouldn't even be a public thing for this amount of money.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,390
2,737
Really... they're bickering over 10 million bucks... split down the middle and tell each other off and get over it.

Shouldn't even be a public thing for this amount of money.

That's how things go with city politicians now and then these sort of thing always go public when there's a disagreement or something they don't like Wasn't the first time that happened between the team and the city. Probably just posturing.

I mean look a the glendale and coyotes mess.
 

jonathan613

Registered User
Aug 6, 2018
133
53
I am shocked that an agreement was approved between 2 parties without clearly addressing cost overruns. I would never think it is the cities responsibility to pay those unless maybe we are talking about infrastructure. But if a city will be liable for infrastructure costs there should be a cap on that amount. The major financial risks should be assumed by the private entity.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,390
2,737
I am shocked that an agreement was approved between 2 parties without clearly addressing cost overruns. I would never think it is the cities responsibility to pay those unless maybe we are talking about infrastructure. But if a city will be liable for infrastructure costs there should be a cap on that amount. The major financial risks should be assumed by the private entity.

It has nothing to do with cost over runs. The mayor is asking for more money that was never approved in the first place.
 

Ciao

Registered User
Jul 15, 2010
9,905
5,720
Toronto
It's ridiculous for the City to pay anything for the arena, whether that's Calgary, Glendale, Tempe or anywhere else.

I would much rather see public money spent for better purposes.

Let the sports teams build their own facilities
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,390
2,737
It's ridiculous for the City to pay anything for the arena, whether that's Calgary, Glendale, Tempe or anywhere else.

I would much rather see public money spent for better purposes.

Let the sports teams build their own facilities

Here's the issue the deal was already approved by the city council the current mayor is trying to change it and ask for more money.
 

jonathan613

Registered User
Aug 6, 2018
133
53
It has nothing to do with cost over runs. The mayor is asking for more money that was never approved in the first place.
I do not understand the difference between money not approved in the first place and a cost overrun, but that likely is my issue. Regardless, the parties either have or do not have a binding contract. If they do, then it should address the contingencies where more money is needed to fund the development. If there is no binding contract , then I would hope that future requests for "money not approved in the first place" is addressed in any MOU. By the way, 600 million seems really light to me. I know it was a bigger market, but Seattle had to pay about double that. With supply chain issues, possible inflation around the corner, as well as accommodating covid issues, costs may be significantly higher than the amount they are bickering over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clinton Comets EHL

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,390
2,737
I do not understand the difference between money not approved in the first place and a cost overrun, but that likely is my issue. Regardless, the parties either have or do not have a binding contract. If they do, then it should address the contingencies where more money is needed to fund the development. If there is no binding contract , then I would hope that future requests for "money not approved in the first place" is addressed in any MOU. By the way, 600 million seems really light to me. I know it was a bigger market, but Seattle had to pay about double that. With supply chain issues, possible inflation around the corner, as well as accommodating covid issues, costs may be significantly higher than the amount they are bickering over.

The new mayor wants the team to put money into her "climate change" thing. That was never in the original deal that was approved by the city.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->