Quote:
Originally Posted by Muta
Cool - maybe they explored the idea of football / soccer / other sports inside. Point still stands.
|
No, your point is vague and stupid.
That study very likely occurred several years ago (care to share the timing Mr. Insider?) when they were figuring out their next steps in evolving towards a tier 1 conference facility, which is where the indoor parameters came from. They landed on Corral renovation. This may/may not have been concurrent with CalgaryNext - I'd bet a cocktail napkin conversation happened between Warren/Vern from CS and KK/etc. with CSEC - the Flames position was likely that arena is priority #1, though they're exploring their own hair-brained scheme of dealing with the stadium at the same time. Which doesn't mean the Stampede wouldn't have opted for a big-ass covered grandstand facility if the business case made more sense than renovating the Corral.
What's changed since then? Arena deal sorted, Hall F and Corral re-vamp proceeding, 17th ave extension/Vic Park station re-design, Green Line 3 steps forward and 1 step back, Enmax Park completed, youth campus [completed?], and perhaps most interestingly the Saddledome lands being traded to Stampede (not to mention everything in East Village).
Also, 6 horses died in the chucks this year, which seems to have blown over without much ado, but I'm sure it re-sparked the question of if/when the Calgary Stampede might move on from chuckwagons (I assure you it has been contemplated at many levels of the organization - support for the idea varies widely). I expect various levels of government have also considered their financial relationship with the Stampede in light of horse deaths...it's a political hot potato either way, so status quo is the path of least resistance, for now. My point in all of this is that there would be many influential people enticed by a project that could serve as an 'excuse' to move on from the chucks (also many steadfastly against the idea).
Of course a two-sided stadium could be designed to incorporate the track...it could just as easily be designed such that locker rooms, rodeo gates, and/or endzone seating make the track 'infeasible'.
I haven't been to university campus lately, but I'm sure their position regarding McMahon Stadium site continues to evolve as time passes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muta
Yes, really. Use your head here; why would a private organization release their strategic plans for everyone to see? This isn't the City of Calgary or some other public institution.
As for your idea being unfeasible, it hasn't been bothered to be studied, whereas an indoor option was. Any way you try and spin it, that's the reality of the situation. Complain and conspire all you want, it doesn't change what's already been prioritized and done.
|
They're not a private organization, they're a not-for-profit organization (they make plenty of profit, but it's all reinvested directly) with tons of funding directly from all levels of government. While it's not likely that they'd release draft plans/feasibility studies, it's also not totally out of the question (especially in the context of a larger project, like the Olympics).
I've explained why indoor was the priority in the past. The present and future are very different.