Comment 58825

By improvethehammer (registered) | Posted January 30, 2011 at 22:48:26 in reply to Comment 58790

The plan all along was to build a city-owned stadium with a 20,000+ capacity -- at West Harbour, at East Mountain, at Confederation Park, at MIP, wherever. If the Ticats 5 years from now (or even tomorrow), then we'd have a city owned stadium without a major tenant.

With respect to point (a), the costs. The good news is even if the costs are inflated (and I think almost everyone agrees that they are) that the total costs are covered. And, it is a cheaper site than any of the other sites looked at (unless you count building a scaled down stadium). So from a cost perspective, this is a definite win.

With respect to point (b), the risk of the Ticats folding -- the stadium is suitable for soccer, football, lacrosse, etc. So if the Ticats fold -- we can look for another anchor tenant. The point is we have a facility built to replace aging Ivor Wynne, WITH NO MORTGAGE. And as long as the Ticats are a tenant, they are paying the bulk of the ongoing costs.

So IWS2 minimizes cost (it is the cheapest site we've looked at) and it minimizes risk (the Ticats have agreed to a lease, and it means $600,000- $1 million dollars a year to the city for upkeep of the facility).

The velodrome funding is an interesting one. Because the budget given for the velodrome by HostCo is just as out of whack as the stadium budget. There will be a shortfall. Probably a comparable shortfall as the stadium (percentage-wise). Let's see what clever things the council can do there.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds