159 replies to this topic

[jcrc]

Hartfordfan, on Jan 26 2008, 11:00 PM, said:

if you go to hartford.gov you can see the feasibility study of the xl center.

That is after they didn't like the recommendation the other group of experts who were against a new arena from a few months back.

[jcrc]

Can someone explain why Civic Center with AHL = $42 million direct spending and new Arena with AHL = $75 million direct spending? Page 6 of the study. Why would a new arena increase attendance by 78%?

Also, the example given in the study, Verizon Center in DC cost sports team owner Abe Pollin nearly $220 million. The District provided financial assistance in the amount of $70 million for land and site preparation costs. Does that mean Northland should cough up 75% of the cost and public funding should be 25% of the new arena?

[beerbeer]

Pollin owns the building an is making out like a bandit.

But even if the DC had covered the entire cost of the MCI/Verison Center, it still would have come out ahead. The stadium has led to a building boom and the area is now an economic powerhouse. It turned a dormant part of the city into one of the liveliest neighborhoods in Washington.

In fact, the only reasonable conclusion that could come from studying the Verison Center is that building an arena is a must. No matter how you get it done, it enhances the life of the city and more than pays for itself.

Edited by beerbeer, 28 January 2008 - 12:14 PM.

[jcrc]

beerbeer, on Jan 28 2008, 01:10 PM, said:

Pollin owns the building an is making out like a bandit.

But even if the DC had covered the entire cost of the MCI/Verison Center, it still would have come out ahead. The stadium has led to a building boom and the area is now an economic powerhouse. It turned a dormant part of the city into one of the liveliest neighborhoods in Washington.

In fact, the only reasonable conclusion that could come from studying the Verison Center is that building an arena is a must. No matter how you get it done, it enhances the life of the city and more than pays for itself.

He has every right to make out like a bandit, he took bulk of the risk. If Northland also take on bulk of the risk, then they too should have to chance to make out like a bandit. However, if the public sector is to take 75% of the risk, then public sector should take in 75% of the loots. Just trying to be fair instead of the typical connection driven corporate welfare in Hartford.

[The Voice of Reason]

After looking through that rediculously long report, I have a few conclusions.

We are pretty clever on these boards as our ideas are quite simular to the conclusions that HOK made.  They mention a connector between Allyn and Pratt to unify downtowns two entertainment and retail districts.  They are also most focused on spuring development around the arena location.  They highlight all of the parking lots west of the arena site down to the train station as targeted growth areas.

I for one think the best way for this arena to have the affect desired would be to tie several properties into the development and set minimum density requirements.

If The City/State/Arena group required the development of certain parcels to be in place before they released funds for the arena project itself, the result will be greater than the sum of its parts.  For Northland/AEG this would be a no brainer.  They would have to commit to developing the metrocenter II parking lot with ground floor retail and some minimum amount of housing as well as a minimum parking requirement.  The city should also place a minimum height of 5 floors on this site as well as the other prospective development lots. Think of it as a replica of Trumbull on the park but to a slightly larger scale for the housing and a much larger scale for the parking.

I am not sure what the city could require, but it seems to me that the city could include these parking lots in a development zone or district to change tax lawa and set up bond funding.  The city could easily make it less profitable for the owners to keep the lots as parking Than to develop them into 5 story mixed use buildings fronting the street.  The city could also make it attractive for certain larger parcels to include residential (or office) towers to maximize density.  I think if this semi forced private involvement would get the public more behind such a large public project.

[The Voice of Reason]

jcrc, on Jan 28 2008, 01:34 PM, said:

He has every right to make out like a bandit, he took bulk of the risk. If Northland also take on bulk of the risk, then they too should have to chance to make out like a bandit. However, if the public sector is to take 75% of the risk, then public sector should take in 75% of the loots. Just trying to be fair instead of the typical connection driven corporate welfare in Hartford.

I do not think that there is any evidence as yet to any portion of costs being picked up by any given party.  lets remember how early on this whole thing is.

But if I were to guess, AEG would be putting up a good amount of the cost and expect a great deal of profit.  AEG is interested in this market and has chosen Hartford as its foothold.  AEG is an arena development/management company.  Northlands primary role is to get a professional sports team and to increase the value of its holdings around the arena.

The city and state wants both of the above and would be thrilled if they got some new construction to tax out of the deal.  
If the corporate residents of Hartford want the same, then this is just might happen.  

I would be disapointed if the city/state paid for the whole thing and no other lots were developed with private $

[beerbeer]

I think this configuration would make sense for Allyn/Pratt Street. The new street (as shown by the red line) would allow a continuous flow from Main Street to the Train Station.



It also allows enough room (green space) to put a world class arena north of Allyn/Pratt.

Edited by beerbeer, 28 January 2008 - 03:21 PM.

[MadVlad]

How about making Church St a tunnel under the arena?  Also, I love the idea of tying in development of some of the open lots for an entertainment/residential district.  The question is, why stop at 5 stories?  Make it a minimum 10, that way the density would be guaranteed.

Edited by MadVlad, 28 January 2008 - 05:06 PM.

[mikel]

MadVlad, on Jan 28 2008, 06:03 PM, said:

How about making Church St a tunnel under the arena?  Also, I love the idea of tying in development of some of the open lots for an entertainment/residential district.  The question is, why stop at 5 stories?  Make it a minimum 10, that way the density would be guaranteed.

Yes that would guarantee those lots would remain empty forever.    Great idea.    Hartford's age of skyscapers is over thankfully.    I would say implement a MAXIMUM of 5 stories.     Also, the tunnel idea....    

[jcrc]

The Voice of Reason, on Jan 28 2008, 03:12 PM, said:

I do not think that there is any evidence as yet to any portion of costs being picked up by any given party.  lets remember how early on this whole thing is.

But if I were to guess, AEG would be putting up a good amount of the cost and expect a great deal of profit.  AEG is interested in this market and has chosen Hartford as its foothold.  AEG is an arena development/management company.  Northlands primary role is to get a professional sports team and to increase the value of its holdings around the arena.

The city and state wants both of the above and would be thrilled if they got some new construction to tax out of the deal.  
If the corporate residents of Hartford want the same, then this is just might happen.  

I would be disapointed if the city/state paid for the whole thing and no other lots were developed with private $

When Northland first mentioned a new arena, they suggested total cost is about $400 million, and they were seeking about 75% public financing. While they did say it was their starting position, it suggested heavy public financing.

[MichaelQReilly]

beerbeer, on Jan 28 2008, 05:16 PM, said:

I think this configuration would make sense for Allyn/Pratt Street. The new street (as shown by the red line) would allow a continuous flow from Main Street to the Train Station.



It also allows enough room (green space) to put a world class arena north of Allyn/Pratt.

I'm not sure any proposal to link Pratt and Allyn is really feasible because it would involve going through part of the retail space that Northland just redid when it built Hartford 21.

[Bill Mocarsky]

The Voice of Reason, on Jan 28 2008, 02:47 PM, said:

After looking through that rediculously long report, I have a few conclusions.

We are pretty clever on these boards as our ideas are quite simular to the conclusions that HOK made.  They mention a connector between Allyn and Pratt to unify downtowns two entertainment and retail districts.  They are also most focused on spuring development around the arena location.  They highlight all of the parking lots west of the arena site down to the train station as targeted growth areas.

beerbeer, on Jan 28 2008, 04:16 PM, said:

I think this configuration would make sense for Allyn/Pratt Street. The new street (as shown by the red line) would allow a continuous flow from Main Street to the Train Station.



It also allows enough room (green space) to put a world class arena north of Allyn/Pratt.

MichaelQReilly, on Jan 28 2008, 08:51 PM, said:

I'm not sure any proposal to link Pratt and Allyn is really feasible because it would involve going through part of the retail space that Northland just redid when it built Hartford 21.

I think an Allyn/Pratt corridor would be essential if this was to be the site of the new arena. There should also be a secondary corridor leading to Asylum and Haynes Street, in between CityPlace and the Goodwin.

Reconfiguring the retail space that Northland just redid seems to be minor in the grand scope of the project.

The original Civic Center Mall should have been built around such a connector. I believe its cul de sac feel contributed to its downfall.

[MichaelQReilly]

Bill Mocarsky, on Jan 29 2008, 09:53 AM, said:

I think an Allyn/Pratt corridor would be essential if this was to be the site of the new arena. There should also be a secondary corridor leading to Asylum and Haynes Street, in between CityPlace and the Goodwin.

Reconfiguring the retail space that Northland just redid seems to be minor in the grand scope of the project.

The original Civic Center Mall should have been built around such a connector. I believe its cul de sac feel contributed to its downfall.

Well, I think that you're right that if the arena stayed on this side of 84 the roads would have to be reconnected.  Which is part of the reason why I think that it is more sensible to put it on the other side of the highway.

[The Voice of Reason]

MichaelQReilly, on Jan 29 2008, 09:56 AM, said:

Well, I think that you're right that if the arena stayed on this side of 84 the roads would have to be reconnected. Which is part of the reason why I think that it is more sensible to put it on the other side of the highway.

The city has decided on the current location so I think it's a mute point.  To further illustrate, the city has its land North of I-84 out to bid for development proposals.

As far as a connector between Goodwin and City place, I think the parking garage for H-21 makes this nearly impossible.  I could be wrong since I do not know the specifics of the configuration, but parking garages are very difficult to change.  There may however be a way to make it work at least for pedestrian traffic.
Another mark against the connector would be the financial interests of the developers.  The goal is clearly to connect Pratt and Allyn, and to add value to retail properties on this axis.  It would most benefit the developers to "force" arena goers through a pedestrian mall type environment terminating at the beginning of Pratt or Allyn depending on the direction taken.  Think of this like a Vegas casino.  You always have to walk through a shopping mall to get to the gaming area, and through the gaming area to get to the lobby.  A large number of the 17000 visitors to the arena would be "forced" to walk past many shops and restaurants increasing their visibility and the developers return.

http://www.hartford....ility_Study.pdf   its right on page 73

[whalerscomehome]

Yes, the city has chosen the site, so no sense debating alternative sites.

This is also going to require a lot of public money.  But that should be expected.  All new arenas in similar size cities require a great deal of public financing.

As for attendance going up for AHL, they are anticipating a jump in interest because of the new arena.  Studies show that attendance increases in a new building, even when the product remains the same.

However, let's hope there is more talk about bringing an NHL or NBA team here!!!

[MichaelQReilly]

The Voice of Reason, on Jan 29 2008, 01:05 PM, said:

The city has decided on the current location so I think it's a mute point.  To further illustrate, the city has its land North of I-84 out to bid for development proposals.

As far as a connector between Goodwin and City place, I think the parking garage for H-21 makes this nearly impossible.  I could be wrong since I do not know the specifics of the configuration, but parking garages are very difficult to change.  There may however be a way to make it work at least for pedestrian traffic.
Another mark against the connector would be the financial interests of the developers.  The goal is clearly to connect Pratt and Allyn, and to add value to retail properties on this axis.  It would most benefit the developers to "force" arena goers through a pedestrian mall type environment terminating at the beginning of Pratt or Allyn depending on the direction taken.  Think of this like a Vegas casino.  You always have to walk through a shopping mall to get to the gaming area, and through the gaming area to get to the lobby.  A large number of the 17000 visitors to the arena would be "forced" to walk past many shops and restaurants increasing their visibility and the developers return.

http://www.hartford....ility_Study.pdf   its right on page 73

After having read the report, you are right that will be the site.

[beerbeer]

I read most of the report.

It's a pleasure to see a a professional done document filled with new ideas that addresses multiple contingencies.  After reading most of the dull documents prepared by Ken Greenberg (my favorite whipping boy) this is absolutely a step up.  The case for a new arena is self-evident after reading this document and the appendix (on the existing XLC).

[The Voice of Reason]

To those of you who have read the report, what are your thoughts on the HOK plan?

do you agree with their assessment of the area and the anscilliary development that SHOULD happen?  or are you like me and hope for higher density developments on those parking lots.

[MichaelQReilly]

The Voice of Reason, on Feb 1 2008, 02:47 PM, said:

To those of you who have read the report, what are your thoughts on the HOK plan?

do you agree with their assessment of the area and the anscilliary development that SHOULD happen?  or are you like me and hope for higher density developments on those parking lots.

My impression was that it was quite well done.  I was impressed with the focus on siting the new arena in the place that was most likely to spur surrounding development.  The only thing I didn't like was the idea of covering the plaza/pedestrian walkway that would connect Pratt and Allyn, I would prefer it to be open air.

[The Voice of Reason]

MichaelQReilly, on Feb 1 2008, 04:31 PM, said:

My impression was that it was quite well done. I was impressed with the focus on siting the new arena in the place that was most likely to spur surrounding development. The only thing I didn't like was the idea of covering the plaza/pedestrian walkway that would connect Pratt and Allyn, I would prefer it to be open air.

That was my primary gripe as well.  It seems that it would best serve the area to create a connector that appears as though it has been there for years.  It would make the entertainment districts merge much better.  Doors are a barrier plain and simple.  It would be like the prudential center in Boston but smaller.  That area is NOT pedestrian friendly.