YYCguy
Active Member
Oh i never said I never used the arena! In fact, I really would love to see the new arena/event centre built! I hope the difficulties are overcome!
Calgary Event Centre | 36.85m | 11s | CSEC | HOK
- Thread starter Meikkhaell
- Start date
1875
Senior Member
ha, sorry, didnt mean you you
CplKlinger
Senior Member
Braid: Without the death certificate, event centre project is still breathing
As the lights began to go out at city hall Thursday afternoon, Mayor Jyoti Gondek’s new crew was waiting for a letter.
calgaryherald.com
Joborule
Active Member
I would hope that if anything, the city will just agree to pick up the costs in relation to the sidewalk and climate features if that'll be good enough for CSEC to proceed forward. The costs are not that significant, CSEC is still covering the majority of the costs and overruns, and the facility is to be owned by the city. So technically, it's something the city should be covering anyway as the owner. They may be able to get funding from other levels of government to help offset the costs.Braid: Without the death certificate, event centre project is still breathing
As the lights began to go out at city hall Thursday afternoon, Mayor Jyoti Gondek’s new crew was waiting for a letter.
Last edited:
konradiical
Active Member
This will definetly get rivived as soon as costs go down that are related to supply chain issues and COVID. If they started building now, it would be just a super high cost. I think both a comfortable to wait it out a couple months to a year, to lower the price. I would be shocked if they actually never build it.
doughflow
New Member
Give CSEC an inch and they're gonna take a mile. Especially when this thing eventually balloons to $1B.
darwink
Senior Member
But the climate features will lower operational costs. Will pay for itself over time.
There is a reason climate was not where it fell apart in - it was sidewalks. But getting more climate funding for the climate parts help offset the real costs of the pedestrian realm. Since money is money.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
Even though I've opposed this project from the very beginning, I think the City should just call CSEC's bluff by offering to cover the climate and infrastructure costs. It seems clear to me that CSEC is mostly afraid of the inflation issue, but they're using the climate and infrastructure issue to to create political cover: "We tried! But the City keeps nickle and diming us with all of these last minute extra costs driven by their lefty-liberal agenda!!!" It's complete BS, but Calgary's columnist class is happily amplifying the lie.
Patrick.1980
Active Member
I kinda agree. I'm ticked off at CSEC for dragging this out, but I'm at the point of, we've gotten this far, let's just finish it.
MichaelS
Senior Member
We already gave them an additional $12.5 million of city money just 5 months ago. What makes you think that another $10-14 more will finally get them to shut up about it and just start building?
Patrick.1980
Active Member
It might not, but right now it's the sticking point. If we give in and they request more money for something else, then it's a different decision. Because it's been approved and construction is imminent I'm okay with it. I realize they are trying to squeeze extra money out of us at the last minute, but I'm good with it, if this is it.
YYCguy
Active Member
Isn’t that what kidnappers and blackmailers do? Keep coming back for more?
Joborule
Active Member
CSEC acquiring the Stampeders really fucked everything up with the arena timeline. They got the whole CalgaryNEXT debacle vision in mind due to that, and set the arena back at least a whole decade. Getting the Stamps wasn't the bad call at the time, but should've just focused on still making the arena it's own thing, rather than trying to get a new home for the Stamps as well.
Thing should've been built in the early 2010's; costs are much more expensive now. Both CSEC and the city are paying for it now.
FCC1982
Active Member
If you ask me McMahon should have been replaced or renovated long before the Saddledome.
darwink
Senior Member
The concept would have worked if they had pitched it on the Stampede Grounds/Victoria Park tbh. When the field house with 7500-10,000 seats is finished, we will all be able to see first hand how with 10 way better renderings, some explatory video, and a bit of dreaming the project would have worked.
Now, the pitch has to be set up all backwards from what we got. Four parallel tracks ...
1. What is included in a field house, how much will it actually cost for the scope, and what are the potential benefits (tourism) [we eventually got somewhat close to this in 2019-2020]
2. What would it cost to renovate McMahon to be functional for another 50 years [we eventually got this in 2018]
3. What would it cost to keep the Saddledome going until 2040 or 50 [we never got a detailed thing]
a. What would it cost to retrofit a roof that could hold loads necessary for it to accommodate all current arena shows [I think we only got speculation]
4. What would a facility that meets all of the above needs cost, what costs would it help avoid, and what benefits would it have over and above the base cases above (like a covered Football stadium!) [ we got one page of a power point with some of this info]
Instead of the above, we got a pitch that assumed every member of the public and City Council knew inherrently like the Flames did that this was a good idea! We weren't told a story of where we've been, where we want to go, and how this will get us there in an innovative and economical package.