News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.2K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     5 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 5.3K     0 

Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

Monster jam would be maybe 1or 2 weekends of the year. What I'm getting at is that the dirt would be used a minority of the time, so maybe they just make the Stamps do a road trip during Stampede, then keep the track dirt free the rest of the time. That would leave more flexibility for events that use the grandstand.
 
Not sure if this warrants its own thread, but there is a new medical building being proposed at the Foothills Medical Campus. The Radio-Pharmaceutical Facility.
1731971127616.png

1731971154843.png

1731971184121.png

1731971205980.png
 
I don't understand why this facility is so small. Is it on a separate power grid, or are the services offered there more educational in nature?
 
I don't understand why this facility is so small. Is it on a separate power grid, or are the services offered there more educational in nature?
It’s a manufacturing facility that makes radioactive material for nuclear medicine and imaging, no patients will actually go there. I was surprised it wasn’t built into the cancer centre, since the increased cancer treatment capacity would’ve required this type of facility. It’s pretty common for large hospitals to have a facility nearby, since these materials break down relatively quickly.
 
Why bother having them play away during Monster Jam? They aren't much of a football team. They may preform better on the track
 
Their time to occupancy could be so incredibly short, plus with many costs avoided or defrayed with shared infrastructure and efficiency upgrades from the 80s to now, that the pro-forma could be amazing. So much savings on construction financing. The about section of their website is illustrative, their 'proud' projects, their not every day regular returns projects come from finding assets that have potential others don't see and then they execute.

Will be very interesting to see what they come up with. They can likely take on a much larger (above ground) project than a greenfield site.

I think it is VERY interesting that they noted how tall the original approval for FCC was. It means they believe the project has very little government risk if proposed that tall. TALL!
 
Last edited:
Their time to occupancy could be so incredibly short, plus with many costs avoided or defrayed with shared infrastructure and efficiency upgrades from the 80s to now, that the pro-forma could be amazing. The about section of their website is illustrative, their 'proud' projects, their not every day regular returns projects come from finding assets that have potential others don't see and then they execute.
Have they heard of the perfectly good lot south of the Bow building?
 

Back
Top