PDA

View Full Version : New Downtown Calgary Arena


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

suburbia
Jan 4, 2013, 3:17 AM
Wildrose is suggesting a new lottery funding model for new arenas in Calgary and Edmonton:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Wildrose+proposes+lottery+game+fund+arenas+Calgary+Edmonton/7771857/story.html

Sounds interesting, though I hope it wouldn't dent existing lottery/charity revenue.

This is a slippery slope. Can't be directing gambling revenue to for-profit businesses / causes. Perhaps there should be a lottery for some of the more urgent needs relating to the social fabric of the province, but I'd doubt the Wild Rose would go for that.

Ramsayfarian
Jan 4, 2013, 4:14 AM
Wildrose is suggesting a new lottery funding model for new arenas in Calgary and Edmonton:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Wildrose+proposes+lottery+game+fund+arenas+Calgary+Edmonton/7771857/story.html

Sounds interesting, though I hope it wouldn't dent existing lottery/charity revenue.

I've long thought a government is morally bankrupt to use gambling to raise revenue and I'm a hypocrite because I've belonged to groups that have directly benefited from casinos.

I know a perfect way to raise money for both arenas in less than 5 years. Not only that, but also greatly reduce crime, whilst simultaneously reduce police costs. Added bonus, create a new tourist attraction.

Make pot legal for recreational use and tax the fuck out of it.

RicoLance21
Jan 4, 2013, 6:38 AM
I've long thought a government is morally bankrupt to use gambling to raise revenue and I'm a hypocrite because I've belonged to groups that have directly benefited from casinos.

I know a perfect way to raise money for both arenas in less than 5 years. Not only that, but also greatly reduce crime, whilst simultaneously reduce police costs. Added bonus, create a new tourist attraction.

Make pot legal for recreational use and tax the fuck out of it.

Cigarettes too.

MichaelS
Jan 4, 2013, 3:45 PM
Wildrose is suggesting a new lottery funding model for new arenas in Calgary and Edmonton:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Wildrose+proposes+lottery+game+fund+arenas+Calgary+Edmonton/7771857/story.html

Sounds interesting, though I hope it wouldn't dent existing lottery/charity revenue.

I would rather any new keno revenue go towards a new LRT line than a new NHL arena. But that is just me.

If they want to provide an option for people who support the oilers/flames to pay for it voluntarily (like in this lottery), why not just put a large ticket surcharge on for games? Or set up a fund that will allow fans to donate their money to Darryl Katz so he can build his arena?

freeweed
Jan 4, 2013, 6:20 PM
I would rather any new keno revenue go towards a new LRT line than a new NHL arena. But that is just me.

And I'd rather see LRT funding than a library system that no one I know has used in 15 years. :shrug:

The real issue is that these arenas are MUNICIPAL infrastructure and should be treated as such. However the teams insist on acting like (and in many cases it's reality) they own the places, earning all revenue from them. The money shouldn't be "going towards an NHL arena", it should be going towards "Calgary's new multi-purpose arena which the NHL occupies for 1/9th of the year".

Unfortunately the NHL has done this to itself. The public used to be all for funding arenas, even if multi-millionaires play there. Because the arena was seen to benefit the community at large (just like a library). However today all anyone can see is the NHL and its greed. And it's their own fault.

93JC
Jan 4, 2013, 10:43 PM
You should go get a library card!

Coldrsx
Jan 23, 2013, 5:52 PM
FYI

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture1-83.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture2-51.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture3-47.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture4-38.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture5-32.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture6-26.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture7-18.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture8-15.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture9-9.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture10-6.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture11-4.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture12-3.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture13-3.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture14-2.png
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/misc%20photos/Picture15-1.png

all from edmonton.ca

Coldrsx
Jan 23, 2013, 5:53 PM
New photos up!

Option A
http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-R4RG6pp/0/L/SW%20aerial%20of%20arena%20A-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-R4RG6pp/0/L/SW%20aerial%20of%20arena%20A-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-mCctqX5/0/L/View%20of%20plaza%20A-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-mCctqX5/0/L/View%20of%20plaza%20A-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-SMhTbtn/0/L/Looking%20down%20104%20avenue%20to%20east%20A-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-SMhTbtn/0/L/Looking%20down%20104%20avenue%20to%20east%20A-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-CCfmf6j/0/L/View%20of%20SE%20corner%20A-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-CCfmf6j/0/L/View%20of%20SE%20corner%20A-L.jpg)

Option B
http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-3QMDWWs/0/L/SW%20aerial%20of%20arena%20B-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-3QMDWWs/0/L/SW%20aerial%20of%20arena%20B-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-mLBzjbH/0/L/View%20of%20plaza%20B-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-mLBzjbH/0/L/View%20of%20plaza%20B-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-GKjWnSB/0/L/Looking%20down%20104%20Avenue%20to%20east%20B-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-GKjWnSB/0/L/Looking%20down%20104%20Avenue%20to%20east%20B-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-7km55b9/0/L/View%20of%20SE%20corner%20B-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-7km55b9/0/L/View%20of%20SE%20corner%20B-L.jpg)

Option C
http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-rJmzvn7/0/L/SW%20aerial%20of%20arena%20C-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-rJmzvn7/0/L/SW%20aerial%20of%20arena%20C-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-bHbSh9x/0/L/View%20of%20plaza%20C-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-bHbSh9x/0/L/View%20of%20plaza%20C-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-trMrPw9/0/L/Looking%20down%20104%20to%20east%20C-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-trMrPw9/0/L/Looking%20down%20104%20to%20east%20C-L.jpg)

http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-mMwCCNh/0/L/View%20of%20SE%20corner%20C-L.jpg
(http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/i-mMwCCNh/0/L/View%20of%20SE%20corner%20C-L.jpg)

all from
http://photos.edmonton.ca/CityGovernment/Projects/Design-Options-Presented/27687412_X47Dtd#!i=2332773323&k=mMwCCNh&lb=1&s=L

RicoLance21
Jan 23, 2013, 9:48 PM
Awesome! Mandel, you are amazing! The arena deal is approved! Git'er done, Edmonton. Oh god, the downtown will be barely recognizable in a decade.

So, Calgary's new 20000-seat arena will be approved a year later?

You Need A Thneed
Jan 23, 2013, 10:11 PM
Awesome! Mandel, you are amazing! The arena deal is approved! Git'er done, Edmonton. Oh god, the downtown will be barely recognizable in a decade.

So, Calgary's new 20000-seat arena will be approved a year later?

it's all approved, except they are now asking for MORE money from other levels of government. Which they won't get.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. My two predictions re: the new Edmonton arena - it won't get built until Katz sells the team, and Calgary's new arena will be completed first.

RicoLance21
Jan 23, 2013, 10:17 PM
it's all approved, except they are now asking for MORE money from other levels of government. Which they won't get.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. My two predictions re: the new Edmonton arena - it won't get built until Katz sells the team, and Calgary's new arena will be completed first.

MSI funding for adjacent community rink--that would take a huge chunk off the shortfall.

Calgarian
Jan 23, 2013, 10:24 PM
Even if they go the cheapest option, this looks like it will be a great building, hopefully we don't end up with this.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090920124541/icehockey/images/4/48/American_Airlines_Center_outside.jpg

MalcolmTucker
Jan 23, 2013, 10:24 PM
MSI funding for adjacent community rink--that would take a huge chunk off the shortfall.
MSI can go to the main building. The community rink may be eligible for other grants just like normal community recreation facilities.

You Need A Thneed
Jan 23, 2013, 10:31 PM
MSI funding for adjacent community rink--that would take a huge chunk off the shortfall.

MSI funding - though originally from the province, is essentially city money. It taking money away from the city that they could use for other projects.

I think the city is completely crazy for putting the $219 million out of MSI, never mind essentially paying for the portion that is "Katz's share". And you talk casually about using even more MSI money?

RicoLance21
Jan 23, 2013, 10:36 PM
MSI funding - though originally from the province, is essentially city money. It taking money away from the city that they could use for other projects.

I think the city is completely crazy for putting the $219 million out of MSI, never mind essentially paying for the portion that is "Katz's share". And you talk casually about using even more MSI money?

I thought some of the $219M would come from revenue generated by surrounding development through CRL (Community Revitalization Levy).

The only real shortfall left now is the $114M. That can come from various sources like MSI and grants like MalcolmTucker mentioned.

Coldrsx
Jan 23, 2013, 10:38 PM
Community Rink would likely be a 1/3.1/3.1/3

Wooster
Jan 23, 2013, 10:42 PM
If the Flames come looking for a similar deal - it will be tough. Calgary, for instance, has already spent every penny of MSI - so that's not even an option to throw into the mix like in Edmonton.

You Need A Thneed
Jan 23, 2013, 10:43 PM
I thought some of the $219M would come from revenue generated by surrounding development through CRL (Community Revitalization Levy).

The only real shortfall left now is the $114M. That can come from various sources like MSI and grants like MalcolmTucker mentioned.

CRL is really just a shell game. It doesn't really create new money.

Coldrsx
Jan 23, 2013, 10:58 PM
CRL is really just a shell game. It doesn't really create new money.

...and also a lever that can accelerate A LOT of projects that theoretically in turn will then accelerate development in the area.

MalcolmTucker
Jan 23, 2013, 11:17 PM
In a uni city CRLs are just an accounting method, when you have competing jurisdictions like Edmonton, you can actually change revenue outcomes.

The Chemist
Jan 23, 2013, 11:22 PM
Even if they go the cheapest option, this looks like it will be a great building, hopefully we don't end up with this.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090920124541/icehockey/images/4/48/American_Airlines_Center_outside.jpg

Personally I liked the look of the American Airlines Center when I visited Dallas, so I wouldn't be opposed to Calgary getting something similar.

Full Mountain
Jan 23, 2013, 11:24 PM
So who gets the revenue under the new agreement? Previously the Katz group got it and was responsible for the maintenance, capital, etc. but it doesn't seem defined now. Seems like the EAC will get it but how is the EAC owned? Is it a city corp, a partnership, or a private enterprise?

93JC
Jan 23, 2013, 11:42 PM
In a uni city CRLs are just an accounting method, when you have competing jurisdictions like Edmonton, you can actually change revenue outcomes.

:sly:

What other jurisdictions is Edmonton competing against for... downtown Edmonton development?

Spring2008
Jan 24, 2013, 12:55 AM
So who gets the revenue under the new agreement? Previously the Katz group got it and was responsible for the maintenance, capital, etc. but it doesn't seem defined now. Seems like the EAC will get it but how is the EAC owned? Is it a city corp, a partnership, or a private enterprise?

Katz gets all the revenue from the arena for the 35 year period.

He has had the city by the balls the whole time. Nice looking project and good to see some of those downtown parking lots finally getting developed, but listening to this fiasco for 7 years, this project appears to be a desperate ploy to generate private investment in the downtown area, and Katz has played it completely to his advantage.


Besides the over $300million in public contributions, Katz also wanted the nearby Bacarat Casino to close and for him to earn revenue on a new casino as part of the project. He also wanted to build an office tower and force the city to lease the whole building for him, and also that the city pay ~6million per year for 35 years to cover operating costs on the building because "he's not going to be earning enough to pay his utilities":haha:

I don't know if those side stipulations still stand, but this project has been ridiculous.

RicoLance21
Jan 24, 2013, 1:06 AM
Katz gets all the revenue from the arena for the 35 year period.

He has had the city by the balls the whole time. Nice looking project and good to see some of those downtown parking lots finally getting developed, but listening to this fiasco for 7 years, this project appears to be a desperate ploy to generate private investment in the downtown area, and Katz has played it completely to his advantage.


Besides the over $300million in public contributions, Katz also wanted the nearby Bacarat Casino to close and for him to earn revenue on a new casino as part of the project. He also wanted to build an office tower and force the city to lease the whole building for him, and also that the city pay ~6million per year for 35 years to cover operating costs on the building because "he's not going to be earning enough to pay his utilities":haha:

I don't know if those side stipulations still stand, but this project has been ridiculous.

Katz abandoned both of these conditions. The new 50/50 deal may have been a factor as NHL owners like Katz gets a larger share of the revenue?

Spring2008
Jan 24, 2013, 1:06 AM
Calgary is in a different boat-the downtown has already and continues to see heavy private investment from various sources.

The Saddledome is only a bit more than 20 years old and already in the core. If King wants a new arena, I would imagine Calgary taxpayers are not going to budge at all.

The Core is getting really packed during rush hours. Trains, buses, sidewalks, streets are all mostly jammed packed at times. I like the busy feeling, but efficiency is key. The trains are getting really, really tight for space. If the city has extra cash or really any cash lying around at all, and wants to continue to attract heavy investment in the core, their primary focus should be mobility(Transit-Walking-Biking)

4 car trains(already being worked on), SE-NC lrt expansion as soon as possible, Streetscape improvements across the inner-city(ex.10th ave, under the train underpasses), separated bike lanes, increased bus frequencies. This would impact the quality of life of a much broader group of users than an arena, no?

93JC
Jan 24, 2013, 2:15 AM
The Saddledome is only a bit more than 20 years old and already in the core.

30. The Saddledome is 30 years old.

Full Mountain
Jan 24, 2013, 3:30 PM
Calgary is in a different boat-the downtown has already and continues to see heavy private investment from various sources.

The Saddledome is only a bit more than 20 years old and already in the core. If King wants a new arena, I would imagine Calgary taxpayers are not going to budge at all.

The Core is getting really packed during rush hours. Trains, buses, sidewalks, streets are all mostly jammed packed at times. I like the busy feeling, but efficiency is key. The trains are getting really, really tight for space. If the city has extra cash or really any cash lying around at all, and wants to continue to attract heavy investment in the core, their primary focus should be mobility(Transit-Walking-Biking)

4 car trains(already being worked on), SE-NC lrt expansion as soon as possible, Streetscape improvements across the inner-city(ex.10th ave, under the train underpasses), separated bike lanes, increased bus frequencies. This would impact the quality of life of a much broader group of users than an arena, no?

Yes, and fortunately we have a council and a mayor that see the value in this over that of a new arena who someone else profits off of (corporate hand out anyone?)

MalcolmTucker
Jan 24, 2013, 4:05 PM
The thing is arena's are classic market failures. They cost too much and the activities they host aren't profitable in proportion to the cost.

I just hope personal seat licenses and advance box sales are able to fill in a big portion of the capital for Calgary.

freeweed
Jan 24, 2013, 4:22 PM
The thing is arena's are classic market failures. They cost too much and the activities they host aren't profitable in proportion to the cost.

Virtually no cultural institutions ever are. They're not built to turn a profit. The great lie was when sports teams tried to claim otherwise.

freeweed
Jan 24, 2013, 4:23 PM
So, Calgary's new 20000-seat arena will be approved a year later?

It will be around 18,000, 18,500 tops. And I'd be very surprised if we see it completed within the next decade.

Then again, the Stampede re-development has a 2015 date on their signs now, so who knows. Maybe things aren't completely stalled in that area like they have been for years now (it's been so weird considering how the rest of the city hardly skipped a beat).

O-tacular
Jan 24, 2013, 4:24 PM
Even if they go the cheapest option, this looks like it will be a great building, hopefully we don't end up with this.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090920124541/icehockey/images/4/48/American_Airlines_Center_outside.jpg

Sadly this is exactly what I envision us getting. Though they won't actually spend the money to clad it completely in brick. Instead it will transition to mismatched stucco 1/3 of the way up like Montana.

Full Mountain
Jan 24, 2013, 5:02 PM
Sadly this is exactly what I envision us getting. Though they won't actually spend the money to clad it completely in brick. Instead it will transition to mismatched stucco 1/3 of the way up like Montana.

This :previous: and it will only get worse with age, I'm waiting for the wonderful orange to come out on Montana

Doug
Jan 24, 2013, 10:30 PM
As much as the design of the Edmonton arena is great and will enhance a bleak part of downtown, I hope the Province doesn't provide a cent of funding, MSI or otherwise. Pro sports is called pro sports for a reason, it intends to make money. This is a case of a brilliant business mind (Katz) pulling a fast one on government.

I wonder if Katz' $400K donation to the PC party will make the Premier think twice about handing over any money, especially in the face of a looming $6B deficit.

The City's contribution should come with an equity stake in the Oilers.

Doug
Jan 24, 2013, 10:31 PM
If the Flames come looking for a similar deal - it will be tough. Calgary, for instance, has already spent every penny of MSI - so that's not even an option to throw into the mix like in Edmonton.

Calgary will just borrow the money. It is already headed down the path to 1970's style Montreal fiscal oblivion.

Full Mountain
Jan 24, 2013, 11:06 PM
As much as the design of the Edmonton arena is great and will enhance a bleak part of downtown, I hope the Province doesn't provide a cent of funding, MSI or otherwise. Pro sports is called pro sports for a reason, it intends to make money. This is a case of a brilliant business mind (Katz) pulling a fast one on government.

I wonder if Katz' $400K donation to the PC party will make the Premier think twice about handing over any money, especially in the face of a looming $6B deficit.

The City's contribution should come with an equity stake in the Oilers.

This is the only way a deal like this should be considered by any government, with a pay back on the original investment over a specified period of time, with a way to recover the investment if the other party defaults

libtard
Jan 25, 2013, 6:28 PM
Calgary WISHES it could get a stadium of the same caliber as the AA Center

O-tacular
Jan 25, 2013, 6:32 PM
As much as the design of the Edmonton arena is great and will enhance a bleak part of downtown, I hope the Province doesn't provide a cent of funding, MSI or otherwise. Pro sports is called pro sports for a reason, it intends to make money. This is a case of a brilliant business mind (Katz) pulling a fast one on government.

I wonder if Katz' $400K donation to the PC party will make the Premier think twice about handing over any money, especially in the face of a looming $6B deficit.

The City's contribution should come with an equity stake in the Oilers.

I completely agree. Glad the Flames aren't trying this here. As much as I like the arena design I think the city of Edmonton and provincial taxpayers are being robbed by Katz.

Wooster
Jan 25, 2013, 6:35 PM
Calgary will just borrow the money. It is already headed down the path to 1970's style Montreal fiscal oblivion.

Borrow the money to help pay for a stadium? Very unlikely.

Coldrsx
Jan 25, 2013, 6:35 PM
^elaborate please.

suburbia
Jan 25, 2013, 6:58 PM
Calgary will just borrow the money. It is already headed down the path to 1970's style Montreal fiscal oblivion.

If you don't like the city, leave.

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/523493/dont-expect-an-edmonton-style-arena-deal-in-calgary-says-nenshi/
“I’m open to conversation but I don’t believe in public money subsidizing private profit in general,” Mayor Naheed Nenshi tweeted in response to a question about how the Edmonton arena deal would affect Calgary.

The mayor added, “it will be hard to convince me it’s a good use of public money.”

artvandelay
Jan 25, 2013, 7:06 PM
I bet the province kicks in some cash for the new Edmonton arena at some point, considering Katz financed the PCs election campaign.

You Need A Thneed
Jan 25, 2013, 7:10 PM
I bet the province kicks in some cash for the new Edmonton arena at some point, considering Katz financed the PCs election campaign.

The province has already given cities money to do with mostly as they please (MSI). I still don't understand why they would give an additional amount for arenas.

MichaelS
Jan 25, 2013, 8:32 PM
^elaborate please.

The City of Calgary is very near its borrowing limits already, and barring some large change in policy likely can't borrow much more. And, with the limited amount of room left in the cap, there are many other projects that the current mayor and council consider to be a much higher priority than a new NHL arena in Calgary, so that is why it is not very likely.

Wooster
Jan 25, 2013, 11:11 PM
The City of Calgary is very near its borrowing limits already, and barring some large change in policy likely can't borrow much more. And, with the limited amount of room left in the cap, there are many other projects that the current mayor and council consider to be a much higher priority than a new NHL arena in Calgary, so that is why it is not very likely.

The vast, vast majority of the City's debt is related to short term WLRT borrowing because Provincial money from MSI has flowed slower than originally proposed as well as (and in particular) water/sewer infrastructure.

Previously, the City did not (foolishly) include water/sewer infrastructure in the development levy. A couple mega projects (that went over budget) later and we landed ourselves in massive debt. This Council has put a plan in place to pay this debt off - which unfortunately has to come on the backs of the rate-payers.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2011/06/29/water-fee-hike-a-long-time-coming

As the Mayor said “it is time to atone for the sins of the past.”

In the next two years, we get very close to our debt-ceiling, then it starts to drop off sharply after that as a result of the water/sewer repayment strategy and completion of WLRT payment. City's in fine financial shape.

MichaelS
Jan 25, 2013, 11:21 PM
The vast, vast majority of the City's debt is related to short term WLRT borrowing because Provincial money from MSI has flowed slower than originally proposed as well as (and in particular) water/sewer infrastructure.

Previously, the City did not (foolishly) include water/sewer infrastructure in the development levy. A couple mega projects (that went over budget) later and we landed ourselves in massive debt. This Council has put a plan in place to pay this debt off - which unfortunately has to come on the backs of the rate-payers.
.

Good to know that a good chunk of the $3 billion in debt is related to short term WLRT and will be cleared soon.

As to the bolded part, I don't know if it was foolish. The original agreement with UDI was to drop the water and sewer levy in favour of a higher transportation levy. Water and sewer were dropped because everyone agreed it could be funded through rate payers like every other utility (where as Transportation had no such revenue option). The agreement gets into place and we start collecting higher transportation levies. UEP puts together their proposed rates that are now needed to fund all the infrastructure and council (foolishly) decided they couldn't put those rates to their voters, and didn't implement what was necessary. And like you said, a couple of mega projects later....

frinkprof
Jan 27, 2013, 3:09 AM
For what it's worth, on Hockey Night in Canada tonight it was mentioned by Ron MacLean that the Flames plan to announce new arena plans in 3-4 months.

Calgarian
Jan 27, 2013, 3:53 AM
Yeah I heard that too, very exciting news!

craner
Jan 27, 2013, 8:39 PM
^ Exciting indeed.
I really hope the Flames intend to do something with McMahon as well now that they own the Stamps.

ZeDgE
Jan 28, 2013, 1:22 AM
Demolish it and start over hopefully, anything else is lipstick on a pig.

KONYS
Jan 28, 2013, 10:54 PM
For those interested, there is a fairly lively discussion about the new arena/debate over the merits of stampitecture ongoing over at Calgary Puck. It looks like the Flames are considering lands on the West End of downtown or just north of the Stampede lands (as previously mentioned in this thread).

suburbia
Jan 28, 2013, 11:40 PM
For those interested, there is a fairly lively discussion about the new arena/debate over the merits of stampitecture ongoing over at Calgary Puck. It looks like the Flames are considering lands on the West End of downtown or just north of the Stampede lands (as previously mentioned in this thread).

If it is the west end of downtown, it might be part of a larger master plan including the convention centre proposal that is currently being worked out. This might be a smart move, as not only would it consolidate the arena in an area that would need to become a hospitality / service hub, it could also open up discussions about revenue streams, as a convention centre may command a broader appetite, and allow for some efficiencies.

While I'm not wanting major tax subsidies, am interested in how the broader proposal will look, and what the potential views from the WLRT will be :)

DizzyEdge
Jan 29, 2013, 2:02 AM
Imagine a convention centre/arena where the bus depot is, with an enclosed skywalk crossing 9th ave into Sunalta station.

People complain about putting such a structure in the middle of nowhere, where there's no other amenities, but a redeveloping 10th ave could provide amenities

RyLucky
Jan 29, 2013, 2:19 AM
Imagine a convention centre/arena where the bus depot is, with an enclosed skywalk crossing 9th ave into Sunalta station.

People complain about putting such a structure in the middle of nowhere, where there's no other amenities, but a redeveloping 10th ave could provide amenities

I've heard a rumour of exactly this. The Flames will have a hard time getting funding for a new arena from any level of government (at least in the near future), but they might be able to get help with a concept that kick started the west village. By help, I don't necessarily mean money directly for the stadium, but I think the city would seriously consider pitching in for redeveloping the area as well as cut them every break possible. I'm still sceptical...

fusili
Jan 29, 2013, 2:55 PM
I am skeptical that the West Village area is any more than 15 years away. There is still a massive amount of land to be redeveloped in the East Village, let alone the Beltline. The East Village is struggling already because of competition from the Beltline in terms of the condo market. Such comprehensive redevelopment plans make sense when the City is running out of room for this type of development, and more land needs to be made available. There is currently no shortage of places for condo towers, and I can list about 50 more sites in the Beltline alone where we could put towers .

suburbia
Jan 29, 2013, 4:18 PM
I am skeptical that the West Village area is any more than 15 years away. There is still a massive amount of land to be redeveloped in the East Village, let alone the Beltline. The East Village is struggling already because of competition from the Beltline in terms of the condo market. Such comprehensive redevelopment plans make sense when the City is running out of room for this type of development, and more land needs to be made available. There is currently no shortage of places for condo towers, and I can list about 50 more sites in the Beltline alone where we could put towers .

The East Village proper does not have appropriate spaces for a combo convention centre / arena project, and nor are the available spots connected well to an existing LRT station. The only option there was over the tracks for the convention centre, but even then, an arena on the bus-depot location, as an example, would be quite out of the way.

There is no reason West Village should not be considered, perhaps also in conjunction with road realignments and re-work of the pretzel road configuration at crowchild / bow trail and memorial. The more things you can do in one comprehensive plan, the better the outcome.

MalcolmTucker
Jan 29, 2013, 4:22 PM
West Village would be rejected out of mobility concerns IMO. Not enough parking or LRT capacity considering there isn't enough parking. For all its faults the Stampede is a pretty good spot for the arena.

artvandelay
Jan 29, 2013, 4:50 PM
I still think the Big Four site is the perfect spot for a new arena. Right next to the CTrain; a new building could easily include a buried Vic park station. Very close to bars and restaurants on 17th and plenty of parking at the Stampede. Unfortunately the recent indications are that the Stampede grounds are no longer in consideration.

Wooster
Jan 29, 2013, 5:12 PM
West Village would be rejected out of mobility concerns IMO. Not enough parking or LRT capacity considering there isn't enough parking. For all its faults the Stampede is a pretty good spot for the arena.

That's why Big Four is the ideal site. Stampede Park by its nature has a lot of parking. The building could tie directly into the LRT station as well. From a redevelopment standpoint it could be a catalyst for the revitalization of the East end of 17th Avenue and area.

Bigtime
Jan 29, 2013, 5:24 PM
I was under the impression the Stampede nixed the Big 4 site because of contractual obligations of space for the bi-yearly Petroleum show.

I still think it would be the best location, just the ability to have an LRT station right in the building is the biggest reason in my mind.

Calgarian
Jan 29, 2013, 5:28 PM
That's why Big Four is the ideal site. Stampede Park by its nature has a lot of parking. The building could tie directly into the LRT station as well. From a redevelopment standpoint it could be a catalyst for the revitalization of the East end of 17th Avenue and area.

I thought the Stampede and Flames had a "falling out" of sorts in recent years.

Also, once a new building is built and people rally to save the saddledome, what will happen to the Corral?

Barnes
Jan 30, 2013, 3:39 PM
I thought the Stampede and Flames had a "falling out" of sorts in recent years.

Also, once a new building is built and people rally to save the saddledome, what will happen to the Corral?

A falling out? Probably not, but the Flames would rather stop giving the Stampede the parking revenue so just outside the grounds makes the most sense for the Flames.

Also, the Stampede board is rather terrible at development. Recently, they added terrible exposition space to their existing terrible exposition space and built a casino and failed at running it. A CASINO! How do you suck at that?

They release major plans to improve the grounds that hinges on tearing down the Big Four and then signs a 100 year deal with the GPS that makes ripping down the Big Four impossible.

Flames can't wait for the Stampede to figure things out.

The Corral is in the Municipal Heritage inventory and I don't think much can be done with it. I would like all the crap built around it torn down when the Dome comes down and the Corral become a featured building on the grounds.

Calgarian
Jan 30, 2013, 4:20 PM
Was just something I thought I heard.

Doug
Feb 20, 2013, 5:42 PM
Stampede Park is such a waste of desirable inner city land. 355 days per year, it is a wasteland of parking. At the very least, the grandstand and entire riverfront should be redeveloped. Maybe it would make sense to move the midway and rodeo events somewhere like Fire Park and redevelop the entire parking area. The Big 4 site would be ideal for an arena with an extension of 17th Ave linking up to Olympic way/4 St.

nick.flood
Feb 20, 2013, 5:52 PM
delete

mrcccondor
Feb 20, 2013, 5:58 PM
Stampede Park is such a waste of desirable inner city land. 355 days per year, it is a wasteland of parking. At the very least, the grandstand and entire riverfront should be redeveloped. Maybe it would make sense to move the midway and rodeo events somewhere like Fire Park and redevelop the entire parking area. The Big 4 site would be ideal for an arena with an extension of 17th Ave linking up to Olympic way/4 St.

When Victoria Park has no more surface parking, you can call Stampede Park a waste of desirable inner city land. There is way too much supply in the area to even consider changing Calgary's #1 tourist attraction.

Doug
Feb 20, 2013, 6:21 PM
When Victoria Park has no more surface parking, you can call Stampede Park a waste of desirable inner city land. There is way too much supply in the area to even consider changing Calgary's #1 tourist attraction.

Only in the short term.

Wigs
Mar 9, 2013, 12:12 AM
Thought you guys might be interested in seeing what the Buffalo Sabres are building adjacent to the First Niagara Center.
http://video.sabres.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=1373&id=215750
Harbor Center (http://harborcenter.tumblr.com/)
$172M hockey themed mixed-use project
-twin rink ice arena (one with seating for 1,800)
-~200 room hotel
-parking garage
-New Era flagship store (New Era (http://www.neweracap.com/en_US/Default.aspx) cap is HQ'd in Buffalo)
-Tim Hortons and possibly other restaurant and retail options

This project (along with a handful of new hotels coming down the pipeline in downtown Buffalo) should help Buffalo land World Juniors, NCAA Div I, maybe even NHL All Star game or World Hockey championship and many other hockey tournaments.
Thank you Billionaire Sabres owner, Terry Pegula!

Surrealplaces
Mar 26, 2013, 7:36 PM
I was under the impression the Stampede nixed the Big 4 site because of contractual obligations of space for the bi-yearly Petroleum show.

I still think it would be the best location, just the ability to have an LRT station right in the building is the biggest reason in my mind.

I agree. The Big Four bldg location is IMHO the best location for a new arena. I can't remember the details, but I recall that the idea was nixed for some reason?

lubicon
Mar 26, 2013, 8:07 PM
Likely due to the Stampede not wanting to give up all that space right in the middle of the grounds. In particular, having a gigantic construction site with all the associated mess right smack in the middle of their showcase event.

suburbia
Apr 1, 2013, 8:20 PM
This is an April Fools joke, but a good one I think ...

Syncrude filling funding gap for Edmonton arena for naming rights:
Alberta Venture (http://ht.ly/jDC1O)

Joborule
May 10, 2013, 5:57 AM
Update stolen from CP. (http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpost.php?p=4241400&postcount=771) Whole lotta nothing still on actual proposal/construction start, but bit more details on what the concept is.
the project has become very, very large - beyond anything this town has yet seen (I know, I know... don't shoot the messenger)

it will be a multi-purpose facility - but that does not mean a multi-purpose building. As he continued and clarified, the impression that I got (as others did as well) was that he meant it would be multiple different facilities in one location - much like Phoenix, I presume.

He was specifically asked about a football field and pretty much said yes, that would be included. And it was at this point that he said it would NOT be a multi-plex type facility - football fields and hockey rinks do not fit into the same building (paraphrasing of course)
So it seems like a whole complex-consisting of two sporting venues, along with dining, entertainment, hotel and office building in the area as well-is what Flames ownership is intending to build. Since it's been confirmed by Ken King for most part that it'll stay in city centre, that leaves only two possible spots for this. East Village/Victoria Park (by future SE LRT station) and West Village (LRT access via Sunalta).

MalcolmTucker
May 10, 2013, 6:05 AM
football fields and hockey rinks do not fit into the same building
I guess they`ve never heard of Edmonton`s old OMNIPLEX proposal! ;)
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_jZrUb2_0WQc/TLumakxD8yI/AAAAAAAAAF8/YBdmQKgL_Ls/s1600/omniplex+cutaway.jpg
source:http://thesummitproject.blogspot.ca/2010/10/it-is-election-day-in-edmonton.html

Colin
May 10, 2013, 6:37 AM
Wow that sounds amazing. I'm imagining a plan similar to Vancouver where BC Place and Rogers Arena are next door to one another.

The more I hear about it, the more I'm leaning towards the west village site. This would be a major catalyst for the area and get rid of the terrible car dealers along such prime real estate. It also has great LRT access with the new Sunalta station across bow trail and may spur a second entertainment district along the former Electric Avenue. Also, this could result in the preservation of the Saddledome, which is simply an icon in the city. The view while entering downtown would be ridiculous!

The only thing I'm worried about is the development of the west village may cannibalize the development of the east village. However, I'm not sure about the timeline of the new arena, so maybe the east village will be far along enough that the city can handle the redevelopment of two different districts.

P.S. Moving away from the Stampede grounds virtually eliminates any possibility of Stampitecture!

Bigtime
May 10, 2013, 12:57 PM
Just how much space would something like this take up in the west village though? Would there be any space left afterward for any level of development to not leave the place a ghost town on night where there are no events?

speedog
May 10, 2013, 1:07 PM
Just how much space would something like this take up in the west village though? Would there be any space left afterward for any level of development to not leave the place a ghost town on night where there are no events?

Isn't most of the west end kind of dead right now after hours?

Anyhow, one could probably squeeze a football stadium on the north side of Bow Trail just east of the Pumphouse Theatre and a hockey arena would easily fit between Bow Trail where Jack Carter current sits. LRT access, fairly good road access and within easy walking distance of downtown plus this would most likely kick start the re-vitalization of the west end of downtown east of Mewata Stadium.

Bigtime
May 10, 2013, 1:11 PM
Isn't most of the west end kind of dead right now after hours?

Anyhow, one could probably squeeze a football stadium on the north side of Bow Trail just east of the Pumphouse Theatre and a hockey arena would easily fit between Bow Trail where Jack Carter current sits. LRT access, fairly good road access and within easy walking distance of downtown plus this would most likely kick start the re-vitalization of the west end of downtown east of Mewata Stadium.

Your answer illustrates my point exactly. If something like this was to go in the west village there would be little to no room for residential and other uses to build on the site, so you'd end up with the same dead zone on non-event nights.

I just don't see that as a real gain over what is there right now in that case.

MichaelS
May 10, 2013, 2:54 PM
Your answer illustrates my point exactly. If something like this was to go in the west village there would be little to no room for residential and other uses to build on the site, so you'd end up with the same dead zone on non-event nights.

I just don't see that as a real gain over what is there right now in that case.

Where else would you have room to fit this complex, AND residential? Maybe Firepark?

Bigtime
May 10, 2013, 3:00 PM
My point is I am not crazy on a arena and new field together if it costs us valuable space in the core that could be put to a much better use if we are only talking about fitting an arena in the space.

fusili
May 10, 2013, 3:01 PM
Where else would you have room to fit this complex, AND residential? Maybe Firepark?

Firestone Park would involve a massive amount of infrastructure costs (sanitary sewer) to have anything built there.

MalcolmTucker
May 10, 2013, 3:08 PM
My point is I am not crazy on a arena and new field together if it costs us valuable space in the core that could be put to a much better use if we are only talking about fitting an arena in the space.
Condo towers on each corner of the field to support the lights! Also, it might be a suitable use of space for 30 years as development catches up to the amount of needed land.

kw5150
May 10, 2013, 3:22 PM
Well, we do need somewhere for the homeless people to go after hours.

Your answer illustrates my point exactly. If something like this was to go in the west village there would be little to no room for residential and other uses to build on the site, so you'd end up with the same dead zone on non-event nights.

I just don't see that as a real gain over what is there right now in that case.

s211
May 10, 2013, 4:00 PM
I guess they`ve never heard of Edmonton`s old OMNIPLEX proposal! ;)
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_jZrUb2_0WQc/TLumakxD8yI/AAAAAAAAAF8/YBdmQKgL_Ls/s1600/omniplex+cutaway.jpg
source:http://thesummitproject.blogspot.ca/2010/10/it-is-election-day-in-edmonton.html

Dang, but Edmonton dreamed large in the 60s and 70s.

Spring2008
May 10, 2013, 4:05 PM
If they're going to build a new stadium, better have a retractable roof. I'd like to see a MLS team here among other possibilities the roof would create.

Calgarian
May 10, 2013, 4:53 PM
So if they do build a new football stadium, what would happen to McMahon?

I think the West Village is a perfect place for an entertainment district. If they put something there for amenities that are open on non event nights, there will be enough people in the surrounding areas to keep the tumbleweeds away.

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 5:11 PM
My point is I am not crazy on a arena and new field together if it costs us valuable space in the core that could be put to a much better use if we are only talking about fitting an arena in the space.

I think that an arena + stadium (retractable roof) would be much more than two sporting facilities, as they would allow for certain types of conferences to occur, and then between those events and the sporting events, would allow for enough critical mass for other service industry developments in and around the site. Whether East Village or West Village, the key for it to be a conference facility would be to not only closely integrate with an LRT location, but also have that LRT station be part of the central free-fare zone. If not, it could still work, as long as the city has the mechanism for extending such privileges to conference attendees. The latter solution is much less preferable though.

nick.flood
May 10, 2013, 5:21 PM
delete

Black Star
May 10, 2013, 5:38 PM
Dang, but Edmonton dreamed large in the 60s and 70s.



We still dream large.....but at a snail's pace.

I think this will change in the comming years.

Barnes
May 10, 2013, 5:59 PM
I think that an arena + stadium (retractable roof) would be much more than two sporting facilities, as they would allow for certain types of conferences to occur, and then between those events and the sporting events, would allow for enough critical mass for other service industry developments in and around the site. Whether East Village or West Village, the key for it to be a conference facility would be to not only closely integrate with an LRT location, but also have that LRT station be part of the central free-fare zone. If not, it could still work, as long as the city has the mechanism for extending such privileges to conference attendees. The latter solution is much less preferable though.

I have attended a number if conferences at the BMO Centre that allowed you to travel on transit for free with your badge.

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 6:04 PM
I have attended a number if conferences at the BMO Centre that allowed you to travel on transit for free with your badge.

I've been involved with several larger events that skip the BMO centre / Calgary completely because of the site and facility's limitations. The 'free with your badge' thing is a much lower interest solution, as I stated in my prior note. Firstly, you don't get a badge till you get to the event. Second, it isn't actually free, the conference has to pay for it. That's okay, but the proof is in the pudding with the largest events don't make a stop. You might ask why would we need to provide this anyway? Because there are not enough hotel room within two blocks of the facility. Plus, BMO centre capacity is a real issue, given lack of exit doors from the larger hall and minuscule foyer space that can't even manage registration requirements for an event with, say 10K people. The comic show doesn't qualify for the types of events I'm talking about.

kora
May 10, 2013, 6:08 PM
I think the West Village is a perfect place for an entertainment district. If they put something there for amenities that are open on non event nights, there will be enough people in the surrounding areas to keep the tumbleweeds away.

I think one problem with West Village is that they didn't build the Sunalta station platforms wide enough to handle such major traffic coming on and off the trains. The platforms are narrow. It's built more as a community station, rather than a metropolitan one. Compare with Westbrook station which has wider platforms. Would they need to upgrade Sunalta station?

Riise
May 10, 2013, 6:08 PM
Just how much space would something like this take up in the west village though? Would there be any space left afterward for any level of development to not leave the place a ghost town on night where there are no events?

I'm with Bigtime. It takes a lot of quality design work to ensure that large scale developments like a single arena/stadium fit seamlessly into urban areas. Trying to fit two would be a major endevaour and while were growing in our design capabilities as a city, it might be biting off more than we can chew.

Riise
May 10, 2013, 6:13 PM
I think one problem with West Village is that they didn't build the Sunalta station platforms wide enough to handle such major traffic coming on and off the trains. The platforms are narrow. It's built more as a community station, rather than a metropolitan one. Compare with Westbrook station which has wider platforms. Would they need to upgrade Sunalta station?

With the size of station in general you could most likely set up a queuing system to manage the crowds and ensure platform safety.

Calgarian
May 10, 2013, 6:35 PM
I think one problem with West Village is that they didn't build the Sunalta station platforms wide enough to handle such major traffic coming on and off the trains. The platforms are narrow. It's built more as a community station, rather than a metropolitan one. Compare with Westbrook station which has wider platforms. Would they need to upgrade Sunalta station?

I never considered that, might have to wander over to Sunalta station this weekend and take a look.

Barnes
May 10, 2013, 6:47 PM
I've been involved with several larger events that skip the BMO centre / Calgary completely because of the site and facility's limitations. The 'free with your badge' thing is a much lower interest solution, as I stated in my prior note. Firstly, you don't get a badge till you get to the event. Second, it isn't actually free, the conference has to pay for it. That's okay, but the proof is in the pudding with the largest events don't make a stop. You might ask why would we need to provide this anyway? Because there are not enough hotel room within two blocks of the facility. Plus, BMO centre capacity is a real issue, given lack of exit doors from the larger hall and minuscule foyer space that can't even manage registration requirements for an event with, say 10K peopel. The comic show doesn't qualify for the types of events I'm talking about.

I don't think I was insisting that the BMO Centre was a good convention centre simply, that event organizers can and have in the past offered attendees transit for the duration of the conference with a badge. Expanding the free fare zone for everyone also represents an opportunity cost for Calgary Transit. Do they expand the free fare zone for that small number of people? When I am away at a conference, it's cabs, rental cars and shuttles anyways.

If new conference space is being planned, I am sure that whether or not these apparently destitute attendees are able to save 3 bucks is pretty low on the project plan.

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 7:17 PM
I don't think I was insisting that the BMO Centre was a good convention centre simply, that event organizers can and have in the past offered attendees transit for the duration of the conference with a badge. Expanding the free fare zone for everyone also represents an opportunity cost for Calgary Transit. Do they expand the free fare zone for that small number of people? When I am away at a conference, it's cabs, rental cars and shuttles anyways.

Most large conferences, and I'm talking 4K and up, require a lot of hotel event space in addition to the primary conference facility. I've spoken about the Canadian Cardiovascular Conference in the past, which dropped Calgary from the circuit years ago for lack of appropriate facilities / support facilities. Even when it is hosted at the huge Metro Toronto Convention Centre, it still requires the near-by hotels for symposia / satellite symposia / meetings of affiliated entities, etc. It is not just getting there in the morning and leaving at night.

I get your point about costs of adding another station to the free-fare zone, especially if it is seen as a subsidy to for-profit sporting outfits (the other / primary half of the equation). Need to mull it more ...

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 7:19 PM
I never considered that, might have to wander over to Sunalta station this weekend and take a look.

If something major like this were to be added off of Sunalta, could it be possible to have a platform on both sides of the tracks? I haven't poked around there enough / didn't pay attention, but that would be a huge plus and could more than mitigate the issue.

Barnes
May 10, 2013, 7:55 PM
Most large conferences, and I'm talking 4K and up, require a lot of hotel event space in addition to the primary conference facility. I've spoken about the Canadian Cardiovascular Conference in the past, which dropped Calgary from the circuit years ago for lack of appropriate facilities / support facilities. Even when it is hosted at the huge Metro Toronto Convention Centre, it still requires the near-by hotels for symposia / satellite symposia / meetings of affiliated entities, etc. It is not just getting there in the morning and leaving at night.

I get your point about costs of adding another station to the free-fare zone, especially if it is seen as a subsidy to for-profit sporting outfits (the other / primary half of the equation). Need to mull it more ...

I agree, Calgary severely lacks space for these types of conferences where smaller rooms are required for talks/presentations. In terms of exhibition space, Stampede is just ok. The GO Expo in June has 20,000 attendees and the Global petroleum Show is 63,000 but the conference side of both shows is really small in comparison.

Aside from what has been posted here in terms of hotel development, there are plenty of plans for even more.

suburbia
May 10, 2013, 8:20 PM
I agree, Calgary severely lacks space for these types of conferences where smaller rooms are required for talks/presentations. In terms of exhibition space, Stampede is just ok. The GO Expo in June has 20,000 attendees and the Global petroleum Show is 63,000 but the conference side of both shows is really small in comparison.

Aside from what has been posted here in terms of hotel development, there are plenty of plans for even more.

Just to clarify the Go Expo, Global petroleum Show and Comic show type numbers. Those are entries cumulatively totaled over the length of the event. It does not mean 63,000 people would be in the BMO centre for the global Petroleum Show. The space cannot hold those type of numbers - not even close.

I've been to an event, for example, with 35,000 attendees, but over the course of about 5 days, they would have been counted as ~300,000. Big difference between how the numbers are presented and the real number of people.

Anyway, next time I see Ken I'll asking him about the full breadth of what is being contemplated.

Barnes
May 10, 2013, 8:36 PM
Just to clarify the Go Expo, Global petroleum Show and Comic show type numbers. Those are entries cumulatively totaled over the length of the event. It does not mean 63,000 people would be in the BMO centre for the global Petroleum Show. The space cannot hold those type of numbers - not even close.

I've been to an event, for example, with 35,000 attendees, but over the course of about 5 days, they would have been counted as ~300,000. Big difference between how the numbers are presented and the real number of people.

Anyway, next time I see Ken I'll asking him about the full breadth of what is being contemplated.

LOL, ok. :worship: