CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Zarley

It's tough to answer this poll, as I support the concept of a combined arena/stadium and think the West Village location is good, but the execution of the current proposal has been poor.

I think the poll we have is pretty telling.

There is a lot of talk about a plebiscite (although, if my remembrance of under grad Poli Sci is correct, a plebiscite is not binding) with respect to the proposal.

We are all most likely Flames fans, if not hockey in general, and attend games at the Dome. We all see the benefit in having a new arena. However, over 60% of the people on this forum are opposed to the current proposal.

That should telol us something about its reception outside the "Ivory Tower" () of Calgary Puck

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

poll question is too simplistic - this is a big complicated issue, discussions will continue, and things will evolve

that poll guarantees a one-sided reply

I think Enoch had it right. Of course it is one sided. I am conceptually ok with the location and the combined facility, but not enough to actually vote for the proposal without more information and a better funded model.

[KevanGuy]

So what you're saying is that you don't support the current version of CalgaryNEXT?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by KevanGuy

So what you're saying is that you don't support the current version of CalgaryNEXT?

I am saying that no one can logically support the current version of CalgaryNEXT and therefore the poll question isn't very relevant

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I am saying that no one can logically support the current version of CalgaryNEXT and therefore the poll question isn't very relevant

Apparently 22% do...

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Apparently 22% do...

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Apparently 22% do...

They must really love it. Good on 'em.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

They must really love it. Good on 'em.

I think we are just trying to say that there are obviously people who support this proposal. I don't think the poll is irrelevant because its the only proposal we have and some people support it.

If the facts change, the poll can change.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I am saying that no one can logically support the current version of CalgaryNEXT and therefore the poll question isn't very relevant

So what you're saying is that many don't support the current version of CalgaryNEXT?

[Dion]

It's a shame we can't see the posters behind the new polling figures. Even better would be to compare them against the original poll.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Dion

It's a shame we can't see the posters behind the new polling figures. Even better would be to compare them against the original poll.

How could you compare to the last poll? It had like ten options.

[Vinny01]

I support CalgaryNEXT. It is unfortunate the west village remains undeveloped due to the creosote and this solves that problem. That is valuable land that helps increase the downtown core west. I also support it for selfish reasons because I live west of downtown so it is pretty close

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I support CalgaryNEXT. It is unfortunate the west village remains undeveloped due to the creosote and this solves that problem. That is valuable land that helps increase the downtown core west. I also support it for selfish reasons because I live west of downtown so it is pretty close

How does this proposal do that? I think that's precisely the problem, it requires big money for the facility with no solution for the contamination and other infrastructure requirements to execute the large scale brownfield redevelopment where the proposed facility is situated.

In fact, you could argue the public money required for CalgaryNEXT diverts money needed for cleanup and infrastructure and also displaces tax producing land needed to finance such debt.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Its so early in the process who knows where all this leads. But I'd probably support it. And had to vote yes just to wind up all the weenies.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I am saying that no one can logically support the current version of CalgaryNEXT and therefore the poll question isn't very relevant

Good thing the flames spent 10 years and so much time and effort presenting a plan that no one can logically support.

[browna]

Upon further reflection over the past month or so, Flames should've really stuck to an arena-only project, like I first heard, first hand, in 2006. A lot changed then with the Stamps purchase, the economy, up, then down, then up, now back down.

I think they hoped that the identified need for a field house, and a McMahon replacement would be the driving force behind the project, with the arena, though the main money maker, as not the focal point when it comes to the Mayor/public.

The arena concept was average, and the field house was certainly very underwhelming as a result of trying to shove both those complexes into one spot.

Don't get me wrong, very pro- new arena, and if the Flames pony up for the majority of it, which they plan on, it would certainly be a nice addition to the city, as the Saddledome was 33 years ago. But watering it down by trying to also push a tepid concept of a field house, in an already confined space, was a error in judgment, as they aren't getting the goodwill they thought out of providing the required field house option.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by jayswin

How could you compare to the last poll? It had like ten options.

We had one question "Get digging, I love it all!" which indicated that those who voted were on board with what the Flames were trying to do.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Bunk

How does this proposal do that? I think that's precisely the problem, it requires big money for the facility with no solution for the contamination and other infrastructure requirements to execute the large scale brownfield redevelopment where the proposed facility is situated.

In fact, you could argue the public money required for CalgaryNEXT diverts money needed for cleanup and infrastructure and also displaces tax producing land needed to finance such debt.

Well I don't see this land being more than a spot for a couple car dealerships and a bus station for the fords rabble future where this project of it moves forward develops the land. I know more hurdles but I like the end result

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Good thing the flames spent 10 years and so much time and effort presenting a plan that no one can logically support.

Perhaps "logically" was a poor choice of words on my part. My problem with the poll is that it doesn't tell you much because it is a more nuanced issue. If I thought this was anywhere close to a final proposal, then I would happily vote "no". However, as is probably obvious, I like a lot about the project and the location and it isn't a final product, so that "no" probably isn't the same as, I presume, Cappy's.

As with any poll, the structure of the question matters. I think the suggestion of breaking out the critical factors (location, joint facility, funding, etc.) would be more illuminating than what was presented.

[Stay Golden]

If the location wasn't contaminated to build on i wouldn't be so pessimistic. But as it is i can't give any serious thought that this will even get started.
No i don't support the Flames new arena plan until this wishy washy location changes to somewhere practical.