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
JonnyCanuck said:
It is going to take significant will power from all sides to breath life into this again. It does not help that most of the parties involved in the first negotiation and agreement are no longer around (i.e. Ken King with CSEC, a new city council). CMLC was pushed out of the picture late in the process.
If there is a new design and a new agreement then most certainly it is going to be at a higher cost and completion timeline that will be pushed out further this decade.
Click to expand...
I agree. Short of something shocking happening relatively soon, I don't see this arena deal resurrecting. The exhaustion of all parties and the apathy in the public don't suggest they are coming back for a while.

I get the sense CSEC and their backers over-estimated their influence and power, wasted a ton of time and energy and helped to create their own opponents by assuming they could always get/deserve a better deal. These guys have tried to influence elections 2 (3?) times in a row to try to get an arena-friendly Council in place, to marginal success. They threw all the spaghetti at the wall - all the classic "we will move the team" threats, the half-assed CalgaryNext proposal, a sloppy Olympics bid to generate public support and nostalgist feelings. All CSEC's schemes and trying to get one-up on public dragged things by years and ended up meaning they couldn't get it done before a global black-swan event from a global pandemic crisis and unpredictable construction inflation killed the project.

Of course, some will say that the delay can be blamed on democracy and the inefficiency inherent in our local public engagement process - to which I would say what remains true a decade ago when this saga began: CSEC is welcome to pay for the whole thing themselves, skip all the public drama and plebiscites, and control your construction schedule. The City would be happy to give them the land for free in Victoria Park.

If CSEC just did it themselves 10 years ago, imagine how much time and money everyone (the public, but also CSEC) might have saved?
 
Last edited:
Joborule said:
With the money that's already been put in for the design, and the work up to November on getting the DP approved, I figure there's not much of an incentive to try to do a new design at this point? The costs of what it will take to actually build is now more solidified, and that's where the current stalemate lies.

I imagine the DP is still active correct? So if CSEC and the city agree on a new deal to cover the finances, they can pretty much head straight into groundbreaking at the point right? If that's the case, then it seems it'll just come down to when material costs hopefully drops down enough that CSEC is comfortable that the cost certainty of the project won't continue to escalate in a manner that the overruns could be more than they imagine.
Click to expand...
CSEC also needs to gather all First Nations and decide what and where in the building their favourite design elements will go. That was one of the added conditions. Just after turning the ice plant into a carbon neutral facility.
 
Sambo said:
CSEC also needs to gather all First Nations and decide what and where in the building their favourite design elements will go. That was one of the added conditions. Just after turning the ice plant into a carbon neutral facility.
Click to expand...
That would never happen for a plethora of reasons. Also the design would be a monstrosity.
 
My prediction: in six months we will be through the Omicron wave and there will be much more certainty around the supply chain and inflationary pressures that I believe are the real reasons the Flames got cold feet. With the Flames less afraid of monster cost over-runs that they will 100% be on the hook for, a new deal will be struck where the City pays for the public realm/climate change stuff and the CMLC gets put back as project manager. The Flames get a face saving reason to revive the deal and Mayor Gondek gets the CMLC back which is one of the main reasons she has publicly stated the deal lost her support.

I could be totally wrong and completely over-optimsitic but I think this project was too close to being done and achieving two big goals for both CSEC and the City of Calgary to be considered completely dead. That being said I could also see the rumour of a deal with a First Nation group being true too and the Flames building something resembling Calgary Next out by the Grey Eagle casino because of the access by the ring road and Glenmore Trail and I doubt anyone in the Flames ownership believes in the good of public transit access to their arena.
 
A new project to move forward I think has to start with one of two things:
  • the acceptance by all parties of the reduced capacity of an inverted bowl (we still don't know who put the knife in on this one - the Flames were a big proponent for years, so I suspect the City)
  • the acceptance by the City that more land is needed for what was scoped in
plus one more thing:
  • that more iteration with flexibility when cost drivers are identified to stop and identify what is the driver - a true requirement or an artificial requirement (mostly to solve the problem: are we paying for things that we would never pay for as a separate line item? and is there a different way to solve for less)
What I have learned from this entire process (and the Green Line) is that admin is too quick to treat Council musings as law, instead of pushing back on Council when they are stepping beyond their strategic oversight role.
 
outoftheice said:
My prediction: in six months we will be through the Omicron wave and there will be much more certainty around the supply chain and inflationary pressures that I believe are the real reasons the Flames got cold feet. With the Flames less afraid of monster cost over-runs that they will 100% be on the hook for, a new deal will be struck where the City pays for the public realm/climate change stuff and the CMLC gets put back as project manager. The Flames get a face saving reason to revive the deal and Mayor Gondek gets the CMLC back which is one of the main reasons she has publicly stated the deal lost her support.

I could be totally wrong and completely over-optimsitic but I think this project was too close to being done and achieving two big goals for both CSEC and the City of Calgary to be considered completely dead. That being said I could also see the rumour of a deal with a First Nation group being true too and the Flames building something resembling Calgary Next out by the Grey Eagle casino because of the access by the ring road and Glenmore Trail and I doubt anyone in the Flames ownership believes in the good of public transit access to their arena.
Click to expand...
I’m of similar mind to outoftheice that current cost escalation uncertainty is the reason CESC pulled the plug and in about 6 months things will be resurrected. I don’t believe CMLC will be back though.
 
FCC1982 said:
I’m of similar mind to outoftheice that current cost escalation uncertainty is the reason CESC pulled the plug and in about 6 months things will be resurrected. I don’t believe CMLC will be back though.
Click to expand...
Inflation is only starting, so 6 months will only bring more uncertainty. Inflation will not fall until central banks shrink their balance sheets and raise interest rates, and governments start down the path towards balanced budgets. This could take a decade or more.

What value did or could CMLC involvement provide?
 
DougB said:
What value did or could CMLC involvement provide?
Click to expand...
Experience in delivering projects -- the central library came in on time and under budget on the other hand, CSEC signed Zadorov for $3.75 million to play third pair -- and having someone in the room looking for public benefit from the public's $300 million. I think I remember someone on here saying that the CMLC was fighting against the millionaire's parkade, for instance, which provided no public benefit at substantial cost.
 
Is the role you believe was played by CMLC not played by the city? We frankly do not know what the results of the role the CMLC was playing were, but we do know that their role was not as the city’s representative.

As for inflation…it seems, as a gross generalization, that people who were old enough to remember the 70s and early 80s and remember inflation cannot imagine that inflation could be caused by something other than government spending.
 
darwink said:
What I have learned from this entire process (and the Green Line) is that admin is too quick to treat Council musings as law, instead of pushing back on Council when they are stepping beyond their strategic oversight role.
Click to expand...
This! For so, so many things, beyond just the arena and green line. Oh to have the days when a board of commissioners was the administrative org structure.......
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top