Do you support the proposal for the new arena?

  • Yes

    Votes: 102 67.5%

  • No

    Votes: 39 25.8%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 10 6.6%
  • Total voters
    151
Colinfill said:
I thought that most conservative candidates for mayor and council during the last election were in favour of the arena seeing it benefits the business elite of the city
Click to expand...
Gondek and especially Farkas are not approving of spending taxpayers money on a new arena
 
FFS!

first off, sell the fckng team if you cant afford to replace a 40yr old building.

as for the city you had 15 fckng years of gravy to get this done.

everyone who has had a hand in this for the last 15yrs is utterly useless.

youre all complete see you next tuesdays!!!

now what?
 
Last edited:
Well that's VERY disappointing. I agree that this will basically kill the project or at best give us a cheap tin shed. I am of the belief that if it can't be built properly and as originally conceived than it's best to pull the plug. This is what happens when politicians and business leaders drag their feet on an issue for well over a decade. The idea of a new arena first popped up in the early 2000's ( I remember them talking about a new arena during the Flames Stanley Cup run). 17 years later and we are no further ahead. There were so many opportunities to build over the years that would have ensured this project remain or come under budget. Costs will continue to escalate and I doubt there will ever be a good time to build. Very disappointed that Calgary will continue to be the black-hole of sporting facilities in this country. This will surly kill the field house and revamp to Foothills park as well. My only hope is that they were able to lock in their material costs for the BMO expansion months ago. They are supposed to break ground this month so hopefully that project is still a go.
 
MichaelS said:
Why are they referring to it as "early stage"?... Weren't we supposed to see groundbreaking in August? Seems like a pretty late stage design issue to me.
Click to expand...
Because they realized that they couldn't get all of the scope for their budget, and they don't have a good mechanism to solve the scope issues, and they don't have a good mechanism to solve the cost escalation either, (which normally would be reducing scope), which the Flames is trying to get the city to pay 100% for, and the city is trying to get the flames to pay 100% for and neither want to remove scope for.
 
darwink said:
Because they realized that they couldn't get all of the scope for their budget, and they don't have a good mechanism to solve the scope issues, and they don't have a good mechanism to solve the cost escalation either, (which normally would be reducing scope), which the Flames is trying to get the city to pay 100% for, and the city is trying to get the flames to pay 100% for and neither want to remove scope for.
Click to expand...
While that is all true, none of it changes the timing of this revelation as being quite late in the design stage for the project.
 
MichaelS said:
While that is all true, none of it changes the timing of this revelation as being quite late in the design stage for the project.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Both parties must have known about the budget issues for a while now.

Best to wait until material price volatility settles down, and to see how live events fare post COVID.

I wouldn't be surprised to see inflation finally kill the Green Line, as well as Arts Common improvements. Welcome back to the 1970's.
 
Inflation will most certainly increase the construction budget. I think it was always a pipedream that this project would
1. Be an iconic design that everyone would talk about
2. Come in on budget and on time.
3. Satisfy all parties .. the Flames, the city, the province and the public

To get this far, it took years of discussions and compromise. With our devastated economy and additional COVID spending, there is just no more money to go around. It would not surprise me that the project gets re-engineered, the design changes and the timeline pushed back a year or more. Listen for the collective sigh of disappointment 😞
 
Project clearly needs some value engineering and they need to see if the cost of materials will come down any time soon, so hitting pause isn't a bad thing. All parties seem adamant that they aren't stopping so we will see if they remain amicable moving forward. How dire is the need for repairs on the Dome? that is what should determines the timeline.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top