Rogers Place | ?m | ?s | Katz Group | HOK

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    28
Gronk! said:
edmonton.ctvnews.ca

10 years after construction started, Edmonton's Ice District 'a model in pro sports'

Ten years ago, heavy equipment was brought in to a plot of vacant downtown land to start construction of the catalyst for one of the most transformative projects in Edmonton history: Ice District. Today, it's the epicentre for many major city events, including NHL playoff hockey, something...
edmonton.ctvnews.ca edmonton.ctvnews.ca
Click to expand...
I took a class in uni that beat the "sports stadiums do not provide enough economic benefit to outweigh subsidized costs" drum pretty hard, albeit it was more focused on the US where the norm is fully funding stadiums with public purse. Not sure there is much of an argument left that ICE District hasn't been an economic success for not only downtown but Edmonton as whole, aside from perhaps the immediate area surrounding Rexall.

Now imagine if the province had contributed $300m for infrastructure upgrades around Rogers (incl. further covered Metro Line costs) and demo of Rexall--would have been a major win for YEG
 
Honestly, I'm of the same opinion on that front. Stadiums (especially in a US context) are extremely subsidized and aren't justifiable a lot of the time. I'd argue Edmonton is an exception to this rule.

Plus it helps that Rogers Place wasn't built surrounded by a massive sea of parking in the middle of nowhere.
 
Rogers Place still has a lot of parking north of the facility and lot of underground parking at the Ice District. There are still a lot of people who insist on parking in a parking lot, even though Northlands parking was up to six blocks away and the wait was 20 minutes.
 
Last edited:
Anyone read the Power Play book? Free at the library or on the Libby app.

Left me with a good mix of feelings. Probably the intention. It’s a complex question of what ifs and how things could have been done differently.

Hard to say it’s backfired. Also hard to say taxpayers didn’t get fleeced. It’s likely a net win for the city. And also a significantly bigger net profit for katz.
 
thommyjo said:
Anyone read the Power Play book? Free at the library or on the Libby app.

Left me with a good mix of feelings. Probably the intention. It’s a complex question of what ifs and how things could have been done differently.

Hard to say it’s backfired. Also hard to say taxpayers didn’t get fleeced. It’s likely a net win for the city. And also a significantly bigger net profit for katz.
Click to expand...
I actually bought that book and I highly recommend it for anyone who hasn't read it!
 
Mosaic Stadium in Regina cost like $350m and is used only 15-20 days of the year. A hockey arena like Rogers Place is different and use a whole lot more.

I haven't read the hockey book, but to me the math is pretty clear. The City spent x dollars and got x dollars back in taxes. That's what allowed us to have a new arena downtown, Katz build out ICE District, and a whole lot of other amenities Downtown like new parks, community arena and so on. There was no other way that was politically possible.
 
thommyjo said:
Anyone read the Power Play book? Free at the library or on the Libby app.

Left me with a good mix of feelings. Probably the intention. It’s a complex question of what ifs and how things could have been done differently.

Hard to say it’s backfired. Also hard to say taxpayers didn’t get fleeced. It’s likely a net win for the city. And also a significantly bigger net profit for katz.
Click to expand...
Haven't read it, so maybe I'm about to spew a ton of nonsense, but ICE District is a great example to be used in the discussion of at what point does de-risking private sector projects via gov't subsidy make sense when considering the resulting externalities.

The City spent future increases in property tax gains to allow a private corp the confidence to redevelop a substantial amount of brownfield land in the core, and financially it's being indicated this is a net positive ROI to taxpayers even before considering other overarching benefits. For a different case analysis of another private corp subsidy: the City building an interchange on 23rd ave to reduce accidents after it was consistently one of the most dangerous intersections in the city, but way overbuilt the design until the cost ballooned to $253m, largely so drivers could have easier access to SEC (I bet the 102 st flyover probably added $40m to the project cost alone).

Ironically, in retrospect I actually think the worst aspects of the arena deal were not even the direct financial subsidy. It was the clause(s) that rendered Rexall useless for virtually any purposes that it was designed for, and then the lack of any real planning for what the City would end up doing with Rexall, despite knowing it'd cost tens of millions to demo. That's the real embarrassing legacy component of all of this and where taxpayers got fleeced.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top