The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

[conundrumed]

On 4/2/2017 at 7:14 PM, TheBurn said:

The creosole cleanup is not posing any threat unless development happens on the land as you will have to dig four stories down to build the foundation and this changes the drainage in the area. This exposes the contaminants to enter the water table. To add to this, the city must make available the land in question when it already has the stampede grounds used for entertainment infrastructure. I guess some us flames fans are not about fiscal responsibility. Explains the deficit.

But the contaminant would be contained during excavation, and the contaminated soil hauled off to Tervita. Being right beside a major watercourse, I'd guess the depth of Creosote contamination wouldn't be much, a few meters maybe, and it has already leached into the river.

Again, if I owned an entity responsible for this, it would be my scrotum through a meat grinder. It would be cleaned up within a month at my cost and I'd pay a hefty fine.

Why is it okay for the govt to say, "yeah it's historical, maybe someday, but not now".

Heck, with that logic, let's start fracking the Bow, the govt doesn't care. Golf courses have run off of their chemical 'cides into the Elbow and Bow constantly, that seems to be okay.

Double standard is one thing, but on the water courses that your entire region relies on?

 

[robrob74]

22 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

But the contaminant would be contained during excavation, and the contaminated soil hauled off to Tervita. Being right beside a major watercourse, I'd guess the depth of Creosote contamination wouldn't be much, a few meters maybe, and it has already leached into the river.

Again, if I owned an entity responsible for this, it would be my scrotum through a meat grinder. It would be cleaned up within a month at my cost and I'd pay a hefty fine.

Why is it okay for the govt to say, "yeah it's historical, maybe someday, but not now".

Heck, with that logic, let's start fracking the Bow, the govt doesn't care. Golf courses have run off of their chemical 'cides into the Elbow and Bow constantly, that seems to be okay.

Double standard is one thing, but on the water courses that your entire region relies on?

 

 

Thats not how it works though. How many spills go on the province and not the company? Here in BC they had a huge mine run off into a well to contain it. That well broke and they just let it run into the fresh water lake, no repercussions to the company. 

 

Just before it happened, BC lowered their regulations on such matters as well. Drinking water and animlal life does not matter to big business or government...

 

i definitely do not like this and believe government has to hold them accountable. But when the government gets kickbacks and donations from these companies, they're going to be lenient. 

 

The system isnt isn't a true democracy when corporations run the government.

[conundrumed]

57 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Thats not how it works though. How many spills go on the province and not the company? Here in BC they had a huge mine run off into a well to contain it. That well broke and they just let it run into the fresh water lake, no repercussions to the company. 

 

Just before it happened, BC lowered their regulations on such matters as well. Drinking water and animlal life does not matter to big business or government...

 

i definitely do not like this and believe government has to hold them accountable. But when the government gets kickbacks and donations from these companies, they're going to be lenient. 

 

The system isnt isn't a true democracy when corporations run the government.

Maybe they should talk to Murray Edwards?

Oh wait, they do.

That's quite a tradeoff for the BC liberals.

[cross16]

On 4/15/2017 at 2:02 AM, The_People1 said:

 

Not sure if posted already but somewhat related is City of Calgary's study into Crowchild Tr which includes expansion of the Bow Tr and Crowchild overpass. 

 

All badly needed but IMO a major blow to CalgaryNext. Cit of Calgary right now just has too many ambitious plans they aren't sure how they will pay for but will value over CalgaryNext. Between things like this expansion, SW Ring Road, Green Line, Airport LRT etc etc I don't think CalgaryNext is ever going to be a viable option in their mind. 

 

Sounds like King is already here anyway, but sounds like Plan B will become Plan A pretty soon and CalgaryNext will die. 

[CheersMan]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

All badly needed but IMO a major blow to CalgaryNext. Cit of Calgary right now just has too many ambitious plans they aren't sure how they will pay for but will value over CalgaryNext. Between things like this expansion, SW Ring Road, Green Line, Airport LRT etc etc I don't think CalgaryNext is ever going to be a viable option in their mind. 

 

Sounds like King is already here anyway, but sounds like Plan B will become Plan A pretty soon and CalgaryNext will die. 

 

That’s a bit presumptuous. 

For those of you who want to be educated on the debate and read the facts, I invite you to visit CalgaryNext web site.  After you read the information, and if you like the idea, enter your name as a supporter of the project on the front page.

 

http://calgarynext.com/index.php

 

[cross16]

17 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

 

That’s a bit presumptuous. 

For those of you who want to be educated on the debate and read the facts, I invite you to visit CalgaryNext web site.  After you read the information, and if you like the idea, enter your name as a supporter of the project on the front page.

 

http://calgarynext.com/index.php

 

 

Maybe, but key word though is "in their mind". I already don't think CalgaryNext is a viable project and it sure sounds like council is leaning that way too. Just to much debate in the last few weeks that they may have to put the Green LIne on holding due to cost and the Green LIne is one that almost all of council thinks is a huge priority for Calgary. Just not a good sign if they don't have the money for that they will be willing to shell out hundreds of millions for CalgaryNext. 

 

also would be equally as presumptuous to learn the "facts" based on CalgaryNext's website. Some are fine, but its obviously very slanted to what CalgaryNext wants you to know and is not a very objective view of the debate. Think people should read all evidence before deciding whether or not they want to support a project.  

Also just because I, or anyone else, doesn't support CalgaryNext doesn't mean you don't support a new arena for the Flames. Hopefully when we start debating this again, City and Flames I mean, the debate can just be around an arena for the Flames and what is best and not just CalgaryNext or no CalgaryNext. Debate seems to have moved that direction, mostly Nenshi's fault IMO, and that's too bad. 

[CheersMan]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Maybe, but key word though is "in their mind". I already don't think CalgaryNext is a viable project and it sure sounds like council is leaning that way too. Just to much debate in the last few weeks that they may have to put the Green LIne on holding due to cost and the Green LIne is one that almost all of council thinks is a huge priority for Calgary. Just not a good sign if they don't have the money for that they will be willing to shell out hundreds of millions for CalgaryNext. 

 

also would be equally as presumptuous to learn the "facts" based on CalgaryNext's website. Some are fine, but its obviously very slanted to what CalgaryNext wants you to know and is not a very objective view of the debate. Think people should read all evidence before deciding whether or not they want to support a project.  

Also just because I, or anyone else, doesn't support CalgaryNext doesn't mean you don't support a new arena for the Flames. Hopefully when we start debating this again, City and Flames I mean, the debate can just be around an arena for the Flames and what is best and not just CalgaryNext or no CalgaryNext. Debate seems to have moved that direction, mostly Nenshi's fault IMO, and that's too bad. 

Calgary needs more than just a hockey arena.  Throwing your supporting behind just a stand-alone arena ($700-800M) does not solve three other major dilemmas that have immediate costs as well.   A new stadium WITHOUT roof ($280M Regina), new field house ($200M -C of C estimate) WITHOUT roof.  Contamination clean-up ($200M est). 

Plan A provides a solution for all our sport and entertainment infrastructure needs saving the tax payer $330M in todays dollars………….and our WV land gets cleaned up ready for additional immediate development. 

Doing these one at a time is going to take another 10, 20, 30 years, add in inflation and we’ll be paying double, triple for scattered facilities that will be inferior to what todays Plan A provides.

[cross16]

I'm going to assume you work for CalgaryNext? Considering most of what you are saying is not accurate or grossly inflates the project estimates and cost 

 

But to each his own. Think we can agree for sure that Calgary needs new facilities. Hopefully soon the debate can open up and we can see all the options we have. 

[CheersMan]

17 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I'm going to assume you work for CalgaryNext? Considering most of what you are saying is not accurate or grossly inflates the project estimates and cost 

 

But to each his own. Think we can agree for sure that Calgary needs new facilities. Hopefully soon the debate can open up and we can see all the options we have. 

I’m not KK’s brother or family member and no I don’t work for CalgaryNext.  I look at the numbers and make my own conclusions…...as a tax payer, fan and resident of Calgary.  Which part of my post do you consider inaccurate?    

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

I’m not KK’s brother or family member and no I don’t work for CalgaryNext.  I look at the numbers and make my own conclusions…...as a tax payer, fan and resident of Calgary.  Which part of my post do you consider inaccurate?    

 

I don't see how you think it will take 700-800 million to build a new arena. Edmonton was 600 million and that included land cost, LRT extension, development around it and an additional area. The actual arena cost was under 500 million (including parking). Why is it going to be 200-300 mill to build one here?

A new Stadium in Regina did cost that much. however, there was a report also done that said McMahon can be renovated for around 200 Million. Not sure to what degree however and I'd want to see it for sure as McMahon is in bad shape. That being Its not for sure that a new stadium is needed. Not to mention Hamilton built theirs for under $200 million and Winnipeg was estimated at under $250 million. Few years apart, so not automatic that a new stadium costs the same as it did in Regina. 

A roof is not necessary for McMahon either so i'm not sure why we need to factor that into the cost. 

The City of Calgary has plans for a fieldhouse that would have a roof http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Recreation/Pages/Research-and-development/Redevelopment-of-Foothills-Athletic-Park.aspx. This is included in the 200 million they've allocated. 

A report pegged the contamination cleanup of West Village between 85-140 million, so not sure where 200 Million comes from. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgarynext-city-report-torpedoes-project-1.3545509

I also don't see how you figure it's going to take another 10,20, or 30 years more to do it separately. i would actually argue the opposite consider the estimates on the land cleanup in West village will be a MINIMUM of 6 years before land is ready. Rogers Arena was up faster than that and because the City already owns the land in Victoria Park you could literally have a new building for the Flames before the West Village is even ready to be developed. 

 

I also don't agree with the logic of "saving" tax payers 300 million with a combine project. You ignore that the fact that if Plan B goes ahead the City can then develop West Village on their own and make more revenue off of the land than building CalgaryNext on it. So I don't agree that the costs are going to be higher with separate projects and in fact I think the net benefit to Calgary is great with building an Arena in Victoria Park, Renovations to McMahon, their own fieldhouse at the U of C and then developing the WV on their own. 

 

 

[CheersMan]

46 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't see how you think it will take 700-800 million to build a new arena. Edmonton was 600 million and that included land cost, LRT extension, development around it and an additional area. The actual arena cost was under 500 million (including parking). Why is it going to be 200-300 mill to build one here?

A new Stadium in Regina did cost that much. however, there was a report also done that said McMahon can be renovated for around 200 Million. Not sure to what degree however and I'd want to see it for sure as McMahon is in bad shape. That being Its not for sure that a new stadium is needed. Not to mention Hamilton built theirs for under $200 million and Winnipeg was estimated at under $250 million. Few years apart, so not automatic that a new stadium costs the same as it did in Regina. 

A roof is not necessary for McMahon either so i'm not sure why we need to factor that into the cost. 

The City of Calgary has plans for a fieldhouse that would have a roof http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Recreation/Pages/Research-and-development/Redevelopment-of-Foothills-Athletic-Park.aspx. This is included in the 200 million they've allocated. 

A report pegged the contamination cleanup of West Village between 85-140 million, so not sure where 200 Million comes from. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgarynext-city-report-torpedoes-project-1.3545509

I also don't see how you figure it's going to take another 10,20, or 30 years more to do it separately. i would actually argue the opposite consider the estimates on the land cleanup in West village will be a MINIMUM of 6 years before land is ready. Rogers Arena was up faster than that and because the City already owns the land in Victoria Park you could literally have a new building for the Flames before the West Village is even ready to be developed. 

 

I also don't agree with the logic of "saving" tax payers 300 million with a combine project. You ignore that the fact that if Plan B goes ahead the City can then develop West Village on their own and make more revenue off of the land than building CalgaryNext on it. So I don't agree that the costs are going to be higher with separate projects and in fact I think the net benefit to Calgary is great with building an Arena in Victoria Park, Renovations to McMahon, their own fieldhouse at the U of C and then developing the WV on their own. 

 

 

The last two arenas built in the NHL were EDM $614M and DET $733M.  Do you see the trend? 

A FB stadium with a roof would seem appropriate considering the most important part of the season is in Oct-Nov when temps could dip to -25C.  Scraping the ice and snow off your seat seams so 70’s, 80’s, 90’s.  Maybe families would go and support the Stamps more often if they didn’t have to sit in the rain or a blizzard. Think of the Grey Cups we could host.

A field house just happens to fit inside a FB stadium, why build two roofs, two structures when one will do?  Why dig two holes (arena VP and contamination WV) when you can dig one?  You can’t see where saving can be had because your agenda is blocking your vision.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

The last two arenas built in the NHL were EDM $614M and DET $733M.  Do you see the trend? 

 

 

Ok, but they didn't cost that so again your are ignoring the facts. You keep quoting the total costs of the entire project and assuming Calgary would face the same costs. both of the actual areas are costing around 500 million. The extra 100-200 million are in additional costs. Rogers Arena, including parking, cost just under 500 million as did the new Detroit. In Detroit 200 mill of the 733milion is included in retail and office space. Why is that guaranteed to be part of a new arena that isn't part of Calgary Next? 

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

A FB stadium with a roof would seem appropriate considering the most important part of the season is in Oct-Nov when temps could dip to -25C.  Scraping the ice and snow off your seat seams so 70’s, 80’s, 90’s.  Maybe families would go and support the Stamps more often if they didn’t have to sit in the rain or a blizzard. Think of the Grey Cups we could host.

 

 

There is 1 indoor stadium now in the CFL that is it, 2 if you include that when Montreal hosts the Grey Cup they move inside to Olympic Stadium (for now). so 7 or the 9 teams in the CFL are outdoor stadiums. Having an indoor Football stadium is not going to impact their abilty to host Grey Cups. Not to mention there is no evidence that would suggest more people would go to Stamps game in an indoor stadium. If that were true then why isn't the Stamps attendance significantly higher in the summer than the fall?

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

A field house just happens to fit inside a FB stadium, why build two roofs, two structures when one will do?  Why dig two holes (arena VP and contamination WV) when you can dig one?  You can’t see where saving can be had because your agenda is blocking your vision.

I don't have an agenda at all, other than what is best for Calgary.

 

I think the difference here is you are thinking short term and i'm thinking long term. I agree, and have said elsewhere, that I understand it may be somewhat "cheaper" in the short term to build CalgaryNext, probably to the tune of around 150Million. King said by putting all the structures in 1 footing that is what they would save and I don't buy the CalgaryNext estimate of 300 million in savings. Even if you did. I think the City of Calgary would make more than 300 million in revenue if the develop WV on their own and still put money for the separate projects, plus I think the locations make sense separately versus CalgaryNext. 

So no agenda at all. I just thing long term an arena in Victoria Park, a renovated McMahon, a field house at the U of C, and the City developing WV on their own is a much better plan for Calgary. If it "costs" the city an extra 200 mill or so in the short term that's fine by me for the increased benefits in the long term. They'll make it back, I don't think they will with CalgaryNext. 

[cross16]

Report heading to council Monday to discuss a Plan B in Victoria Park. 

 

Edit: the report itself http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sirepub/cache/2/5axlxevhr2wjb0nmiodnbucg/5419230421201703372538.PDF

 

Nothing too fancy in there. Couple quick highlights;
 - Located where the 2 north parking lots are now (see picture below)

- Arena only. No mention of a stadium, just mentions potentially some "auxiliary" features.

- Interesting in that them mention this is in a zone that has already been approved for a CRL so there is a funding source for the infastructure to put it in.

- Land is owned by Stampede but they are agreeable to the land swap

 

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, cross16 said:

Report heading to council Monday to discuss a Plan B in Victoria Park. 

 

Edit: the report itself http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sirepub/cache/2/5axlxevhr2wjb0nmiodnbucg/5419230421201703372538.PDF

 

Nothing too fancy in there. Couple quick highlights;
 - Located where the 2 north parking lots are now (see picture below)

- Arena only. No mention of a stadium, just mentions potentially some "auxiliary" features.

- Interesting in that them mention this is in a zone that has already been approved for a CRL so there is a funding source for the infastructure to put it in.

- Land is owned by Stampede but they are agreeable to the land swap

 

I have always thought this would be the location for a new Arena only. They could really enhance this area with a pedestrian village surrounding the activities.

[cross16]

Council now receiving initial details on the CLMC report of an arena at Victoria Park

 

Worth noting on the last tweet that the majority of council did agree that CalgaryNext was not feasible. Didn't agree it was time to completely "kill" it however. 

[cross16]

Ken Kings response 

 

 

[The_People1]

On 4/22/2017 at 9:47 AM, MAC331 said:

I have always thought this would be the location for a new Arena only. They could really enhance this area with a pedestrian village surrounding the activities.

 

Same.  I've always thought this is where it should go.  Sensible though boring.

[The_People1]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-creosote-monitoring-west-hillhurst-province-calgarynext-west-village-bow-river-1.4086136

 

Nenshi now says the time has come to clean-up the creosote.

[DirtyDeeds]

4 hours ago, The_People1 said:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-creosote-monitoring-west-hillhurst-province-calgarynext-west-village-bow-river-1.4086136

 

Nenshi now says the time has come to clean-up the creosote.

not quite.. they are starting a 5 year study to see if it is moving again or contained...  This is sweeping it under the carpet for 5 years and guaranteeing that Calgary Next does not get consideration for that period.

[conundrumed]

17 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

not quite.. they are starting a 5 year study to see if it is moving again or contained...  This is sweeping it under the carpet for 5 years and guaranteeing that Calgary Next does not get consideration for that period.

Typical. Drop $100mil on an engineering company to "study" it and call yourself proactive.

This stuff drills me, you see it time and again with municipalities.

Pat yourselves on the back and do nothing of any consequence but pour good money over bad on "study".

Sometimes being reactive is the better course of action over proactive, especially when bureaucracy is involved.

If it is contained, excavate it out. We have machines that are excellent at it these days, lol. Alluvium/Fluvial/Morainal flood plain or not.

But they won't, they'll come up with bs that disturbing it is bad.

This stuff makes me so angry I shouldn't even post...

Lynnview Ridge anyone? Let's build a subdivision where a refinery operated for 50 years. What benzenes? We use that to shine our shoes...

Pathetically, most larger communities across Canada struggle to clean up their past, and do nothing but shrug and say, "I didn't do it"...

And they all approach it the same way...Nenshi...WAKE UP. People rave that you're progressive...stop being the same.

Apologies for the rant, I kinda kept my seethe in check though...

[CheersMan]

1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:

not quite.. they are starting a 5 year study to see if it is moving again or contained...  This is sweeping it under the carpet for 5 years and guaranteeing that Calgary Next does not get consideration for that period.

Absolutely retarded.  Let’s do another 5-year study on contaminated land that has been dormant and studied for the past 55 years.  The contamination has migrated under the river and it’s rearing its ugly head a mile away in Hilhurst.  Hate to guess how much has/is going down the river.  Maybe in 5 years’ time we can evacuate Hillhurst then perform another 5 yr study on where it will migrate next.  It should get good publicity by then when it comes time to evacuate the CBC building along Memorial Dr.  This is asinine.

[Cowtownguy]

17 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Typical. Drop $100mil on an engineering company to "study" it and call yourself proactive.

This stuff drills me, you see it time and again with municipalities.

Pat yourselves on the back and do nothing of any consequence but pour good money over bad on "study".

Sometimes being reactive is the better course of action over proactive, especially when bureaucracy is involved.

If it is contained, excavate it out. We have machines that are excellent at it these days, lol. Alluvium/Fluvial/Morainal flood plain or not.

But they won't, they'll come up with bs that disturbing it is bad.

This stuff makes me so angry I shouldn't even post...

Lynnview Ridge anyone? Let's build a subdivision where a refinery operated for 50 years. What benzenes? We use that to shine our shoes...

Pathetically, most larger communities across Canada struggle to clean up their past, and do nothing but shrug and say, "I didn't do it"...

And they all approach it the same way...Nenshi...WAKE UP. People rave that you're progressive...stop being the same.

Apologies for the rant, I kinda kept my seethe in check though...

I agree with your argument, although they are only spending $1.3 million to study it. I don't understand why municipalities struggle to find the money for this kind of work. Rather than redistributing the carbon tax to less wealthy folks, why not use it to clean up the environment? It took decades to clean up the Sydney tar ponds, but they eventually got federal cash for it. Maybe Justin can give us some of that marijuana tax money to get this project started.

[Carty]

3 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Maybe Justin can give us some of that marijuana tax money to get this project started.

 

That would make too much sense for the Liberal government to even consider it...   It's a pipe dream...   

[Cowtownguy]

Just now, Carty said:

 

That would make too much sense...   It's a pipe dream...   

Yeah, I doubt Justin would want anything to do with CalgaryNext, including cleanup. I think that project is up in smoke.

[DirtyDeeds]

On a side note Domtar bought out the company that did all the original creosote damage. The mayor in his defense hinted that they should pony up some of the cleanup costs however there seems to be something preventing the governments from using legislation from forcing them to help out. (*was there some backroom deal in the past??)  Every province has environment legislation with enough clout that they can force companies to clean up sites like this.