"I don't think there's such a thing as a perfect proposal, by any stretch," Brian Surratt told Seattle city councilmembers. That could perfectly sum up the KeyArena renovation proposal by the Oak View Group made available to the public on Monday.
Surratt, director of the city's Office of Economic Development and lead on the KeyArena RFP process, made the comment during the April 17th meeting of the council's Select Committee on Civic Arenas. It was the first opportunity for councilmembers to get acquainted with OVG's proposal and a competing bid from Seattle Partners, the joint venture between AEG and Hudson Pacific Properties. The comment was in response to a question from council president Bruce Harrell if the city had the ability to request an amalgam of aspects from both proposals they like in a final agreement when a bid is chosen.
Further negotiation might be necessary (and likely).
What stands out about OVG's 108-page proposal, in comparison to a mammoth document supplied by Seattle Partners, is that it's lean and focused. A more modest recommendation section features mayors of Inglewood, CA, Toronto, and Kansas City (former and present), as well as the director of Toronto's Exhibition Place, a mixed-use district in the Canadian city that's home to some of the country's largest entertainment venues. Some of the partners working on OVG's proposal (and project) offer support, including hospitality provider Delaware North. Local endorsement comes from the Pacific Science Center, Ivar's, Friends of Waterfront Seattle, and the Seattle Monorail Services company, as well as the YouthCare organization working to help homeless youth.
Two of the standout recommendation letters hold national and local implication. One from State Architectural Historian Michael Houser finds that the KeyArena building and roof are eligible to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Part of OVG's pitch on retaining the exterior look and feel of the former Washington State Pavilion and Seattle Center Coliseum is securing not only local landmark status but national historic recognition.
In July 2016, brothers Ted and Chris Ackerley, sons of former longtime Seattle SuperSonics owner Barry Ackerley, made waves by writing a letter to the city in support of the Sonics return and offering to help in some fashion, which was unclear at the time. Their letter endorsing OVG's plan answers that question.
The other seemingly clear difference between the two KeyArena proposals is that OVG's is privately funded. SP requests to partner with the city with a $250 million public financing contribution. But is OVG’s proposal fully private?
Financial proposal
For entitlement, design, construction, and operation of the new arena, OVG offers a mix of equity and private financing to cover the full cost. The project is estimated at $564 million, though the financial information section of the proposal was redacted from public consumption. The breakdown of the project number has been identified in a few different publications, though the numbers of the split between equity and financing seem to flip flop.
Quoting Venues Today, the arena & stadium industry magazine owned by Oak View Group, would appear to be the most reliable source. OVG is expected to contribute $150 million in equity (or "cash"), backed by the Madison Square Garden Company. The group will also be borrowing at least $350 million and up to $400 million in financing from Goldman Sachs. OVG is partnering with concert promoting giant Live Nation Entertainment, who will contribute an unknown amount to the project.
The proposed lease term is 35 years with five (5) optional 10-year extensions that OVG would have the sole right to enact as long as they are solvent. Rent payment would be $1 million per year for each year of the lease. They also offer performance-based additional rent of $1 million for a year if the arena exceeds a defined revenue threshold in the previous operating year.
A capital reserve fund for maintenance and capital improvements to the building would be created and maintained. Upon completion of the arena, they will contribute $1 million to the fund, and will add $1 million each year on the anniversary of the date the arena is completed up to a total balance of $5 million. The fund would never have less than $1 million and never more than $5 million.
OVG seeks to negotiate a deal with the city to repurpose some of the tax revenue collected each year on admissions, retail sales, parking, and the leasehold excise taxes they would pay in lieu of property taxes for use of a private building on public lands. The plan calls for these revenues to provide credit towards the base rent they would pay the city each year. Any excess would be used to create a "City Arena Fund" that would help to offset OVG's costs for maintenance on the arena.
Though OVG will handle all construction costs and overruns, the city would be responsible for the effort and cost to remove any hazardous waste or materials found on the defined redevelopment site during construction.
Parking garages
The group proposes building an 850-space parking garage on the south end of the arena site, butting against Thomas Street. This would be a separate project and additional cost above and beyond the $564 million arena cost. The project would be contingent upon securing a financial contribution from a public entity other than the city. Geoff Baker with The Seattle Times reports that the Port of Seattle would likely be the contributor, though no specific money value is mentioned.
In addition, OVG also seeks to have the right to take over management and operation of the three (3) existing parking garages at Seattle Center, as well as negotiate a sharing agreement with the city for the revenues generated by these other parking garages.
Naming rights and sponsorships
Like Seattle Partners' proposal, OVG would like exclusive rights to naming rights for the arena and any direct or indirect revenues generated by selling those rights. They would also seek control over sponsorships at the arena or any building in the redevelopment zone. While they would leave general control of sponsorships at Seattle Center to the city, they look to consolidate and manage selling sponsorships for the Space Needle, the Seattle Monorail, the Museum of Pop Culture (MoPOP; formerly EMP), and the Chihuly Glass Studio.
Concessions
Unlike other entities at Seattle Center, OVG would look to manage concessions for food, beverage, and merchandise on their own, completely independent of the Center. All revenues, of course, would stay with the group. As mentioned earlier, Delaware North has signed on to be their concessionaire.
Two-venue solution?
SP's proposal is noted for stating, in no uncertain terms, that they want "exclusive" rights to the arena market in Seattle for 30 years. This would prevent another arena project (with 10,000 to 25,000 seats) from being built in the city and possibly competing with their proposed arena. OVG does not have such a request in their proposal.
Arena designs and plans
The proposal includes a fair amount of specifics on OVG's intended arena design, including new images to whet your appetite. As stated previously, OVG will be digging down 15 feet (roughly 1.5 stories) below the current floor to expand the footprint and increase the size of the arena to 660,000 sq. ft. They will close the existing subterranean east and west entrances to KeyArena and build an atrium with entrances at the southern end of the arena.
With the deeper bowl, the NBA configuration is planned to have 9,900 seats in the lower bowl alone with 18,350 total seats. The NHL (and arena football) configuration will have 8,650 seats in the lower bowl with 17,100 total seats. For end stage concerts, they plan on 16,940 seats, and 19, 125 seats for a center stage concert. There are 16 event level suites, 40 sideline suites, and 18 twelve-seat opera boxes on the shoot-twice end of the hockey ice. A cutaway image shows bunker suites below the bowl stands but the proposal doesn't specifically mention them.
The traffic question
There is not a lot offered in the proposal in the way of mitigating traffic and parking issues and challenges. The bulk of their coverage of transportation centers on identifying what already exists, what's anticipated by 2035 or 2040, and explaining how what's already there can be leveraged better. Details on that leverage are scarce.
Currently, KeyArena hosts about 20 events with attendance higher than 10,000 per year. OVG anticipates that this number will increase to at least 100 events per year. (82 dates would be for both basketball and hockey with an average of 18,000 per date.) They do not anticipate a growing demand for parking for each event rather than growing frequency of days parking would be used. They expect to see parking demand drop by 2035 as alternative transit methods grow, including the addition of light rail to Seattle Center.
Available parking in the Uptown neighborhood would be increased to 8,150 spaces with the inclusion of the new 850-space parking garage. OVG plans to leverage other off-street parking in a 3/4-mile radius of Seattle Center, totaling 11,350 spaces within 15 minutes walking distance. They also point to 2,400 spaces near Westlake Center, where attendees can catch the monorail, walk, or use a rideshare service or shuttle to get to Seattle Center. 6,100 spaces is the identified amount of parking required for 18,000-person crowd.
They look to road and travel time improvements with the additions of Harrison, Thomas, and John Streets once the Highway 99 tunnel opens. The new connection between Alaskan Way and Elliott Avenue along the waterfront is also identified to help. They believe existing roadway capacity has not been reached and will handily support additional traffic traveling to the arena.
OVG is considering using shuttles from parking in South Lake Union to bring to and from the arena. They also plan to bring real-time traffic information to patrons through technology and marketing to disburse traffic routing on a number of streets rather than congesting Mercer, Denny, Aurora, and Elliott/15th Avenue. A parking app concept, currently employed in the Rose Quarter in Portland to aid with Moda Center and Veterans' Memorial Coliseum traffic, is proposed to allow attendees to pre-purchase their parking.
Incorporating the monorail and building a new monorail platform at Westlake Center to more easily move people from parking and the light rail stop to the monorail are primary suggestions. They propose possbily incorporating the ORCA Card system into the monorail functions to allow seamless transition between different modes of transportation. They also want to work with King County Metro to offer premium bus service. Purchasing transit fares in blocks to discount to attendees or include in season ticket packages is another idea floated.
Like Seattle Partners, OVG plans to encourage use of pedestrian and bike trails throughout the neighborhood, as well as the planned Lake2Bay concept. There are no mentions of how they would contribute to these efforts.
Timeline
OVG expects their selection, due diligence period, and negotiated Development and Operation & Lease Agreements to be completed by July 10. They expect their entitlement period, which would include SEPA review, the Landmarks process, the design process, and issuance of their master use permit, to last from July 10, 2025 to November 23, 2018.
Schematic designs are expected to be completed and approved by September 22, 2017. Design development is planned to be completed and approved by April 24, 2018. Final construction documents have a goal date of December 21, 2018.
Any demolition is planned to finish by the end of 2018. Construction is expected to start on January 3, 2026 with the new arena opening on October 1, 2020.
Teams
The proposal mentions both the Sonics and the Seattle Metropolitans, the first American hockey club to win the Stanley Cup a century ago in 1917.
If ever one were to doubt the ties OVG has with both the NBA and the NHL, they need only look to the executive staff. CEO and co-founder Tim Leiweke spent years as an exec with four different NBA teams, as well as president of the NHL’s Toronto Maple Leafs through Maple Leafs Sports & Entertainment, the corporation owning and running the Leafs and the Toronto Raptors.
OVG’s co-chairman of their Arena Alliance subsidiary, Peter Luuko, has been executive chairman of the NHL’s Florida Panthers since 2015. For over 25 years, he was president and COO of Comcast-Spectacor, owners of the Philadelphia 76ers and Philadelphia Flyers.
OVG’s financial backer, MSG, owns the New York Knicks and the New York Rangers.
Extraordinary contribution
To integrate itself within the community, over 20 years OVG pledges to contribute over $20 million to aid nonprofit ventures, causes, and enterprises that share and demonstrate OVG's core values and beliefs. To that end, they have already committed $10 million to the YouthCare organization to combat teen homelessness.
Conclusions
Of the two KeyArena renovation proposals, Oak View Group's initially seems the more impressive. The community financial commitment is not only welcome and admirable, but it's a great incentive in Seattle's political environment.
The inclusion of designs and plans in the proposal helps to identify to the public exactly what we would be getting. It encourages excitement and discussion of possibility, and it provides a tangible reality that helps to sell OVG's vision.
At first blush, the project's private funding makes a big statement. Not asking the city to contribute to the construction of the facility separates it from SP's proposal. The prospect also presented a challenge to the SoDo arena project proposal that resulted in them offering to go private as well. When talking about reduced or no risk to the city, it's a winning strategy.
When you dig further, though, there appears to be more of a financial contribution from the city's end than we were led to believe. The public contribution won't be upfront, but the mix of tax revenues to help offset their comparatively lower annual rent payments, as well as sharing parking revenues and laying claim to sponsorship money for the biggest attractions at the Center, makes for a significant chunk of change. It's the kind of creative math that makes citizens leery of these kinds of deals.
This in addition to potentially turning over a substantial piece of public land for up to 85 years.
It was a point of pride and exception for OVG to note that their proposal included additional parking while SP’s did not. Yet, it turns out that the parking garage is not a “gimme.” Conditioning it on the participation of a public entity is a curious approach. More than likely the Port will offer funds and the condition will be a moot point. It shouldn't be lost on citizens, though, that the Port's funding is from the public. In essence, we would still be contributing to this garage; it's just shifting the signature on the check.
While Tim Leiweke and Lance Lopes have done a fairly strong job of presenting and selling the public on OVG's proposal, one thing that has been lacking has been anything of true substance regarding traffic and parking solutions, aside from betting the house on the monorail. I'm shocked, though not necessarily surprised, to find that there are still just vague concepts presented in the proposal. We don't need definitive answers right now, but a wireframe of specific actions being considered is better than a Wikipedia entry on Seattle traffic. Saying things already exist and not offering guidance on how you are going to take advantage of them is not going to get it done.
None of this is dealbreaking, and the process of negotiating hasn't even started. The proposal, though, seems less promising than it did two weeks ago.
Article updated to include link to OED’s KeyArena RFP page, featuring links to download the full proposals, not included when originally published.
Comments
If its down to OVG and AEG I would be angered if AEG were to win. Not saying OVG isnt without faults or questions but seems to be better for the city than AEG by some distance
Now against Sodo, that is a different story but I really dont think that matters much.
By Trolltossin on 05.03.17 3:11pm
I feel like it's too early to definitively say that.
The obvious advantage OVG’s proposal has over SP’s is that the fact that they are covering all construction costs, while SP wants to use city bonds for roughly half of their costs. they, like Hansen, would use revenue (a fee added to ticket prices) generated from the arena to pay off the bonds. Just as I thought that Hansen’s financing structure was a great deal for the city, I see this as acceptable too, though I don’t really like the amount SP is asking for. My grief would be with rejecting Hansen, then turning around and doing it with someone else.
OVG Is offering to pay significantly less rent than SP. they also want that discounted rate,as Matt pointed out in the article, for up to 85 years. That’s insane! Then, on top of that, they want to take city revenue from various taxes and use it to pay their rent. So, essentially the city is paying itself on behalf OVG.
I think the non compete from SP is what scares fans the most, but that doesn’t make it a bad deal for the City. If the City is trying to maximize their revenue potential from Key Arena, OVG’s proposal really doesn’t seem that great…
OVG’s proposal is so void of detail that it’s hard to say whether it is truly a good deal or not. You can certainly see the potential for a good deal, but I can also see it being a very bad one.
By itsanospreybich on 05.03.17 3:48pm
Then hopefully someone from Hansen's group
Can crunch the financial numbers and let his PR arm educate the SCC and the voting public the issues with both plans
By Jeff - j1012 on 05.04.17 4:59am
The responsible next step for the SCC is to issue an RFP for renovations that focus on a performing arts option
Capacity in the 13k-15k range, with no impact on the local/national historic status, and taking the NBA/NHL out of the question. The Seattle Center could still host the WNBA, SPU, Rat City, etc. Special care taken in the load-in, A/V, and backstage facilities to make it a premium venue for performers.
And then grant Sodo the unconditional street vacation.
Does anybody really want Arena football?
By cortone on 05.03.17 3:25pm
Does anybody really want Arena football?
I do.
By Taylor Bartle on 05.03.17 3:48pm
Excellent, I've never heard it mentioned in this context before
and I don’t know anybody personally who is interested.
Just like the Mariners, I have zero interest in it, but I happily supported Safeco when it came around because I know lots of people who love the Mariners. Same for Arena football. Do they draw to that degree that they make more sense for a Seattle venue versus Kent or Everett?
By cortone on 05.03.17 4:47pm
Full disclosure
I haven’t watched it in a while and I know the AFL was having financial issues and contracted a bunch of teams. I doubt it’s a feasible option for a downtown arena, Everett or Kent would probably be a better option.
By Taylor Bartle on 05.04.17 11:01am
Everett had an AFL team at least according to this wiki
Everett Hawks I can’t say I remember them at all though and I don’t know anyone that went to any of their games
By Gene Hunt on 05.04.17 12:48pm
Huh, owned by former Seahawk Sam Adams
They weren’t in the "major league" though, which would be AFL. Of course, now AFL is only 5 teams.
By Taylor Bartle on 05.04.17 12:50pm
I thought this part
"The Everett Hawks are a now-defunct professional (2002–05)…." meant they were in the AFL for 3 years and then later came back as a minor league team. I could be wrong, it was just the impression I got.
By Gene Hunt on 05.04.17 12:53pm
af2 was AFL’s (completely unnecessary) minor league.
By Taylor Bartle on 05.04.17 1:08pm
Oh ok that makes sense then
By Gene Hunt on 05.04.17 2:50pm
I agree.
So far SP is requesting a public contribution and OVG offering a minimal revenue stream for the City. It seems that there is potential for a scaled back renovation to join the best qualities of each proposal and offer the best deal possible deal for the City.
By itsanospreybich on 05.03.17 4:48pm
From a public perspective, that's the best scenario
SODO for sports and big concerts, Seattle Center for concerts and smaller scale sporting events. They can coexist, and everyone will make money. Just need someone to bring the two sides together and tell them this is how it’s gonna go down. Rob Johnson?
By flyingchickensinthebarnyard on 05.04.17 9:10am
OT but I thought this was pretty interesting
NBC Sports Radio’s Seth Everett Thoughts On The Thunder-"I Think The Owner Is Borderline Criminal"
By Gene Hunt on 05.03.17 4:04pm
Borderline?
UNDERSTATEMENT
By cortone on 05.03.17 4:57pm
I really wish we had more details from SODO
Then we could make real side by side comparison of the benefits each plan offers. We know SP wants 250 million in Public Bonds but is also paying 5 times the anual rent that OVG is offering and seems to let city keep more the tax revenue from the venture (please correct me if this is oncorrect) I also worry about the exclusive arena clause but there transportation plan is way more fleshed out than OVG. SODO says they are going 100% private and the property tax would generate but has not shown how they plan to fund this option. We also do not if he is wanting addtl benefits outside the B&O taxes that i am sure all 3 proposals want waived. But he definitely brings more to the table in regards to transportation and infastructure than either OVG or SP. But i also worry the legal challenges and the fact that the leagues seem to prefer actual construction rather than shovel ready. Looking back at the OVG proposal it seems more line the promise of "private financing" was just a smokescreen to get the council and public behind them but in reality they bring much less to the city than it seemed initially. Gonna be very interesting to say the least
By Malve on 05.03.17 5:34pm
Ask and receive
http://www.sonicsarena.com/2017/05/sodo-arena-project-updates/
By Taylor Bartle on 05.04.17 11:02am
Is there anything that could stop them from building office buildings?
Could the City or Port do anything to prevent that from happeneing?
By itsanospreybich on 05.04.17 11:37am
Not that I can see
It’s already zoned for it, he already owns the land, he’s already done an EIS.
By Taylor Bartle on 05.04.17 11:45am
If occidental didn't need a street vacation...
Hansen would not need council approval to construct the arena. Just the normal permitting required for any project that fits the areas zoning. Putting office buildings in this location would not require special permitting beyond the normal city permit process. So, it would be easy without much of any recourse for any dissenting parties.
By ksmith1984 on 05.04.17 8:16pm
Public Funding
I think the city has created a terrible situation. AEG asks for the bonding but sounds like a better return for the city. OVG is not but you see it’s not a true partnership (sound familiar). They are offering a better building but they’re going to make sure the city pays in some way.Now they don’t get the land on the SODO proposal and has spit on developing that area of the city. For a guy who claims to bring people together he sure has been divisive on this issue
By DJDawg77 on 05.03.17 5:50pm
At the end of the day, the City has 3 separate developers willing to inves hundreds of millions of dollars in to building a world class arena, so it's not all bad.
I think the most important takeaway is that both proposers are asking for a public contribution in some way. It’s crazy to think that anyone would come in and spend this much to develop on public land without recouping a significant portion of it in some way.
Our argument against Key Arena wasn’t just about who was going to step up and renovate Key Arena (that has been answered), it was also about who was going to pay for it, because the City has made it clear that they don’t want to give handouts to billionaire developers for arenas. The fact that Key Arena is a city asset obviously moves the needle on how hard their stance against that would be, but it will be interesting to see how much.
One thing that was pointed out in the article above is that negotiations haven’t even begun, so for all we know both groups came in high on their asks anticipating that they will need to concede on them some during negotiations.
From my view, SoDo supporters got exactly what we wanted. There is one truly private offer on the table and the City has made it clear that that’s what they wanted out of this. The more details that come out about these proposals the harder it is going to be for them to kill SoDo. Short of the developers coming back and saying it can’t be done, this is the best we could have hoped for, IMO.
By itsanospreybich on 05.03.17 6:21pm
AEG's poison pill offer is unacceptable
Because if they can’t recruit teams on their terms, their building, without competition from any other arena project, becomes a white elephant shrine to Sally Bashaw for the foreseeable generation.
By NWEastcoaster on 05.03.17 6:26pm
Agreed.
If the City signs any type of Non-Compete that isn’t stipulated on bringing the NBA/NHL, they screwing over the fans.
By itsanospreybich on 05.03.17 6:33pm