No, it's the same covered tee box area as top golf with an open range. Essentially a Top Golf but the range area and ball tracking are different.johnnyblaze36 said:
So is it essentially an indoor Top Golf? I'd much rather have an outdoor Top Golf but with this being a Club Corp property it should make a nice addition to the city.
Captn_Ag05 said:
BCS residents: There is nothing to do here. It is so boring!
Also BCS residents: Don't do anything to incentivize business to come here.
The company will pay 6% of its gross revenue to the city beginning in year 5 so it isn't exactly free property. The 6% of annual gross revenue will be payment for the land lease.agnerd said:
Will Bryan residents get to use the facility for free since it's being built on their park land? If not, can I get a similar deal to build a house on free city property if I promise to pay property tax? I wouldn't mind getting a few free acres too.
I understand that, and realize how a venture like this can , if successful, benefit the city through revenues. But I think the fly in the ointment for most who have been posting anti sentiments is that public park land is now going to be used for a commercial interest, especially when many citizens expressed a desire for the land to remain in a natural state.jja79 said:
It's amazing some people don't understand how communities compete for businesses to choose them and the long term economic impact of sales taxes, jobs and likely higher property values.
Wasn't it's natural state a golf course? Also it looks like they are building an amphitheater, are you opposed to that? Also from the story it's going into the corner by the railroad overpass. Not sure that's prime real estateturfman80 said:I understand that, and realize how a venture like this can , if successful, benefit the city through revenues. But I think the fly in the ointment for most who have been posting anti sentiments is that public park land is now going to be used for a commercial interest, especially when many citizens expressed a desire for the land to remain in a natural state.jja79 said:
It's amazing some people don't understand how communities compete for businesses to choose them and the long term economic impact of sales taxes, jobs and likely higher property values.
So the only way people who have reservations is to run for office? What happened to citizens input to make their voices heard through the media or their representatives, if in any case their representatives shared their point of view? So if they are not in a position to run they are SOL?halibut sinclair said:
So many little whiny *****es that think they know better than anyone else. Run for office and make a change - if you even live in Bryan.
So you are saying that a multi story / restaurant/ amphitheater/ party gathering/ golf driving game area qualifies as a nature area? And I simply stated that is the reason many citizens are upset with the entire situation. Why are you ramping up the discussion?BQ_90 said:Wasn't it's natural state a golf course? Also it looks like they are building an amphitheater, are you opposed to that? Also from the story it's going into the corner by the railroad overpass. Not sure that's prime real estateturfman80 said:I understand that, and realize how a venture like this can , if successful, benefit the city through revenues. But I think the fly in the ointment for most who have been posting anti sentiments is that public park land is now going to be used for a commercial interest, especially when many citizens expressed a desire for the land to remain in a natural state.jja79 said:
It's amazing some people don't understand how communities compete for businesses to choose them and the long term economic impact of sales taxes, jobs and likely higher property values.
I never said the development was a nature area. It's an old golf course. The proposed development doesn't change that. They are putting this in the worst part of the park. And there still is large park area left.turfman80 said:So you are saying that a multi story / restaurant/ amphitheater/ party gathering/ golf driving game area qualifies as a nature area? And I simply stated that is the reason many citizens are upset with the entire situation. Why are you ramping up the discussion?BQ_90 said:Wasn't it's natural state a golf course? Also it looks like they are building an amphitheater, are you opposed to that? Also from the story it's going into the corner by the railroad overpass. Not sure that's prime real estateturfman80 said:I understand that, and realize how a venture like this can , if successful, benefit the city through revenues. But I think the fly in the ointment for most who have been posting anti sentiments is that public park land is now going to be used for a commercial interest, especially when many citizens expressed a desire for the land to remain in a natural state.jja79 said:
It's amazing some people don't understand how communities compete for businesses to choose them and the long term economic impact of sales taxes, jobs and likely higher property values.
Quote:
Was a private enterprise such as this ever presented to the citizens as a proper use of former park property? As presented, it appears the city was supposed to build and operate an indoor facility to host mega volleyball/basketball tournaments
Quote:
with profits showing up a few years after operation.
Not so sure about that. There's a lot of university groups (frats/sororities/professional organizations) that I'm sure will keep them afloat. You may be right but I hope you're dead wrong.harrierdoc said:
I'd lay odds that it will be out of business by year 5.
Evidently you have never had experience with how these deals work. That is pretty much a standard deal especially in the retail world. Not goofy at all. This about the same percentage that malls get from the stores along with the rent.Brian Alg said:
They are scheduled to get hit with a 6% cut from their gross in year 5. I would not be surprised if BigShots will have a strong case to make when they go to renegotiate and say that the new fee will put them under.
https://www.theeagle.com/news/local/bryan-city-council-approves-plans-for-golf-complex-at-regional/article_eb473f82-4d5e-11ea-9d52-33828fd44f31.html
This seems like a very goofy deal, but I would have to see the lease to be sure.
From what I have seen so far: give Big Shots free use of the land for five years. After that, BigShots gets the option to continue using the space (for the price of 6% of their gross) if that works in BigShot's favor. Of course, BigShots will probably renegotiate if they are not making a ton of money at that point because the city's only leverage would be to take over a single purpose white elephant of a building. And the city pays BigShots $100k.
Hopefully there are details in the lease (e.g., guaranteed money after year 5 in case BigShots is not successful). Does anyone have a link to the full lease