Very disappointed that the Olympics weren't mentioned in this article. BMO was originally an Olympics project, as was the event centre and the field house as then conceived.Great article. One counterpoint - if the City timed this project very will. If they tried to build this today, it would cost ~30-40% more.
Interesting article. Certainly I dont think it makes any sense to compare an Event Centre or BMO, to community rec facilities or the green line. The first 2, while having local benefit, are economic drivers in that they bring the outside to Calgary. Those short term lifts that fill hotels, restaurants, ect... Community rec facilities, parks, affordable housing public transit ect are all annual operational losses that you take on to provide ease and quality of life to your citizens...but they dont directly help you economically, it's more of a wholistic vision that hopefully drives people to move here . If all we ever did was invest in those, the city would be "boring", but operate well. If it was the inverse, we'd be a tourist mecca but a horseshit place to live. You need to do both.The real costs of Calgary’s new BMO Centre | The Sprawl
City hall went big—and is feeling the pinch.www.sprawlcalgary.com
A good overview of the financing of this, as well as the other big 3 capital projects (Arena, Arts Common, Field House).
True. I'll go to the grave that the Olympics were a huge missed opportunity for the city, given what we already have in play to use, the external investment that we'll never see now. Just a calamity in how it was rolled outVery disappointed that the Olympics weren't mentioned in this article. BMO was originally an Olympics project, as was the event centre and the field house as then conceived.
The reasons for why these projects are a good idea always shift with the political discussion on the time - the important thing is that the project is always the solution!Very disappointed that the Olympics weren't mentioned in this article. BMO was originally an Olympics project, as was the event centre.
It only makes sense to compare in that at any given time we can only afford to build so much stuff of this scale - by choosing to prioritize one type of thing, you are choosing to not invest in another (or at least to delay investment).Interesting article. Certainly I dont think it makes any sense to compare an Event Centre or BMO, to community rec facilities or the green line. The first 2, while having local benefit, are economic drivers in that they bring the outside to Calgary. Those short term lifts that fill hotels, restaurants, ect... Community rec facilities, parks, affordable housing public transit ect are all annual operational losses that you take on to provide ease and quality of life to your citizens...but they dont directly help you economically, it's more of a wholistic vision that hopefully drives people to move here . If all we ever did was invest in those, the city would be "boring", but operate well. If it was the inverse, we'd be a tourist mecca but a horseshit place to live. You need to do both.
The important part re:Olympics would be accessing extra special money which is very rare. Alas! The sales effort around that was a dogs breakfast.The reasons for why these projects are a good idea always shift with the political discussion on the time - the important thing is that the project is always the solution!