I have a bunch of rambling thoughts...
1. How well/how much does the stadium and arena area have to be remediated if no one is living on it? Does it seriously require as much cleaning up as some have suggested just to be paved over? If they the built a containment system at the river which has essentially stopped this creosote from leeching under it to the north then why spend millions cleaning it up?
2. If the stadium was built separate from a field house no one would support it. A lot of people are saying that the area won't bring in people, but the field house will be a much bigger draw than we think right now. I lived in Edmonton for too many years and the Kinsmen parking lot was two-thirds full all the time (and I drove by once a day). It would actually be a bigger tourist draw than we think as well (weekends, tournaments, track meets, etc.).
3. If anyone here is going today to the presentation, ask KK about the clear roof on the arena and if that's needed or just a want. If they want to attract concerts I assume the roof will need to support their equipment. Also, where in the complex is this community rink that was mentioned?
4. The city is going on a building spree with recreation centres (Quarry Park, Seton, Royal Oak) - surely they can think of supporting one downtown.
5. Out of all the city-owned facilities that are used currently, wouldn't the Saddledome and Stadium be the most popular? Yeah the sports teams are the primary tenants, and everyone is against supporting private companies, but it's not for their exclusive use. Why wouldn't anyone want to see the Flames or Hitmen, but also Neil Diamond, U2, or Barney in a new, safe, and comfortable environment.
6. I don't use city facilities a lot, but I probably would go to the arena or stadium the most. If I could direct 5% of the property taxes I pay to something I want to support, this project would most likely be my selection.
|