Yes, if they are going to operate the meeting space and arena when Key
Arena is rebuilt.
No.
In either case the city is not going to promote a facility to be placed at Seattle Center ( or anywhere else in the city) while it is actively seeking part of the same revenue stream that the Washington State Convention & Trade Center currently enjoys. It is not going to promote convention space to be added while it is trying to fill its own space. The more likely spot is the "air space" above the King County bus ranch.
The fact is that the Washington State Convention & Trade Center people do not have an actionable plan. They have a want to grow in 3 possible spots with no scope of size (200 to 300 hundred square feet). They do not want to give up the revenue stream when their project is paid off. They have not proposed a cost, which might be hard to do without a real scope of work.
David Brewster has taken another swing at throwing this idea out there. I think that when he says that the "state" is interested he is also talking about Frank Choop.
He also gives Ron Sims' point of view. He did give the reaction from the spokesperson from the Seattle Center, that the city would not support a Seattle Center solution for the WSCTC. The story was sadly lacking in fully explaining the city's point of view.
This is a sandbag, David Brewster is the bagman.
The answer at the end will be that the city plan for Key Arena is defined, does not consume much of the revenue source, and enough revenue from that source would be there if the WSCTC ever got its plan together.
Brewster does mention that the hotel folks were unhappy that several million dollars from this source were dumped into the state's general fund, and that they do not want that to happen again. I think Senate Bill 6638 closed that loophole.
There are 30 million reasons the city is not ready to "finally let Key Arena go".
BTW, Ron Sims, mind your own backyard. You have been no help to me.
www.GoForItLarry.com
Have a great day,
Mr Baker
Sent from my iPhone
Posts
5 comments:
Your response to David Brewster's column made "Editor's pick" on Crosscut. Congrats
You know I didn't give your "yes" answer much consideration before but why wouldn't these two entities try and hash something out in regard to the Key? It's probably too much to ask for though. Too many big egos, conflicted priorites, and general ineptitude to come up with something tangible.
This is one of the reasons I think the renovated plan of KeyArena is flawed. If they decide to go along with the remodel- cool hopefully the NBA comes back. But eventually another venue is needed. Tacoma Dome is too far south and obsolete to host big conventions. A new arena in Renton, Bellevue, South Seattle, or so would be best. Have it allow NHL hockey, Arena Football, Conventions and major touring acts and performances. I created a blog for this plan- nhlinseattle.blogspot.com
If they could all get along we could get a new building with bigtime convention features, as well as the convention center folks to schedule non sports and festival times.
The city tried to sell the responsibility for the arena to Schultz, now they are contracting with somebody else.
Why bother, WSCTC is in that business.
If they were involved in a bigger arena project then the state's 25% requirement could grow to meet the costs of a new arena that really could host the NCAA semi's, or DNC/RNC national convention, if Denver and Minni can then why not us? NHL, why not us?
WSCTC wants to grow a site that is 200 to 300 thousand square feet. A much larger arena project would make that possible.
Key Arena, flatten and reload.
Well I believe you said it before, "It makes too much sense, that's why they'll (Chopp, Sims, et al) would be against it. The city and the WSCTC should join forces for this endeavor.
Post a Comment