[News Roundup] CSEC/City arena deal UPDATED: Third Party Facilitator

[rohara66]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Yep. Attached as a condition of the development permit approval.

Pretty slimy if you ask me.

Every developer in the city knows that the city pulls this stunt all the time. City asks for stupid #### and forces developers to pay for it. Except in this case there is a deal in place and the city has to pay for it and wants help.

[shotinthebacklund]

Im very disappointed, the city needed this and I was excited to have a new building. I dont use a fancy downtown parking lot or a high end library but pay anyways. I would have used this for multiple events from music to flames. Another blow to another ####ty day

[chummer]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

He’ll move the team to Houston. I think Gondek just cost us the Flames, unfortunately.

What a terrible day to be from Calgary.

Haha, long way to go.

Part of the game.

[monkeyman]

Giving the flames an excuse to walk away from the deal, given the likelihood of cost overruns, is really really stupid considering the Flames were on the hook for those costs.

[dieHARDflameZ]

This doesn’t surprise me in the least. City of Calgary is one of the most crooked organizations... in the city.

[rohara66]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

What? Municipalities routinely give provisional DP approval that hinges on action items.
How do you know what is in the building spec? Have you read it?

What gives the city of Calgary the right to ask a developer to include solar panels as a condition of DP approval. That’s a total joke. There is zero industry standard, land use bylaw or building code requirement for solar panels to be included in any construction project. If the city of Calgary wants solar panels then they should pay for them.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

I think this is the important tweet (best to read the whole thread though):

https://twitter.com/user/status/1473467788576497664

Suggests it’s CSEC looking for $$$ here, not the other way around.

That’s her take though; I’m sure CSEC sees it differently.

Exactly. Original deal that Ryan Pike shared the City was on the hook for these types of cost overruns.

The Flames came back and said "we want CMLC removed as the developer", the City said "okay, but you're responsible for cost overruns" and they all agreed.

Now their are cost overruns and the city has offered to pay a portion but is holding the Flames to the majority.

They both *agreed* that the Flames would be on the hook for cost overruns but the Flames are now threatening to take their ball and go home.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Torture

Exactly. Original deal that Ryan Pike shared the City was on the hook for these types of cost overruns.

The Flames came back and said "we want CMLC removed as the developer", the City said "okay, but you're responsible for cost overruns" and they all agreed.

Now their are cost overruns and the city has offered to pay a portion but is holding the Flames to the majority.

They both *agreed* that the Flames would be on the hook for cost overruns but the Flames are now threatening to take their ball and go home.

Are those cost over runs in the scope of work? Road ROW and climate mitigation?

[Krovikan]

Originally Posted by Torture

Exactly. Original deal that Ryan Pike shared the City was on the hook for these types of cost overruns.



The Flames came back and said "we want CMLC removed as the developer", the City said "okay, but you're responsible for cost overruns" and they all agreed.



Now their are cost overruns and the city has offered to pay a portion but is holding the Flames to the majority.



They both *agreed* that the Flames would be on the hook for cost overruns.

Exactly, Ryan Pike is being very miss-leading, Flames wanted their own project manager and made the concession to have their own project manager.

This is a very Edwards thing to do, guy is a tool.


Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Climate Change for 4.5 million?

Drop in the bucket. How much do you think the cost of insurance went up on the dome after the flood?

[soreshins]

There’s a difference between cost overruns and scope creep. The city are absolute masters at scope creep

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Torture

Exactly. Original deal that Ryan Pike shared the City was on the hook for these types of cost overruns.

The Flames came back and said "we want CMLC removed as the developer", the City said "okay, but you're responsible for cost overruns" and they all agreed.

Now their are cost overruns and the city has offered to pay a portion but is holding the Flames to the majority.

They both *agreed* that the Flames would be on the hook for cost overruns.

Are these additional cost overruns, part of the Event Centre construction envelope though? Maybe that's the contentious point. CSEC, sees traffic infrastructure upgrades as outside of, and irrelevant to the the scope of the Event Centre construction budget.

Perhaps, this is more a debate into the language into what is actually part of the project and what is simply the City's, irrespective of any private venture project.

[Roughneck]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1473470942177562627


Its not a big word, but definitely means a lot when it comes to posturing.

[zamler]

What is worse, the new Matrix movie or this news.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Are these additional cost overruns, part of the Event Centre construction envelope though? Maybe that's the contentious point. CSEC, sees traffic infrastructure upgrades as outside of, and irrelevant to the the scope of the Event Centre construction budget.

Perhaps, this is more a debate into the language into what is actually part of the project and what is simply the City's, irrespective of any private venture project.

Based on the deal that Pike posted it would seem *yes* capacity to enter and exit the arena is part of the original agreement (which was later amended so that CSEC was on the hook for overruns)

Devil is in the details and what's in the contract but by my read and what has been agreed to it doesn't seem like CSEC is living up to their end of the bargain.

And let's be honest, Pike is not an unbiased source, (just like Gondek isn't) Sportsnet 960 regularly carries water for the Flames.

[Gemnoble]

So are the Flames more likely to end up in Quebec or Houston? Houston would keep the conference's even. But Quebec would mitigate the Canadian rage.

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Drop in the bucket. How much do you think the cost of insurance went up on the dome after the flood?

It's an insult. It is a drop in the bucket but sends some kind of message. The new building with it's measures and building envelope and decent mass transportation, will be far more climate efficient.

[rohara66]

Originally Posted by soreshins

There’s a difference between cost overruns and scope creep. The city are absolute masters at scope creep

Exactly. It’s not cost overruns. It’s 100% new scope being added by the city put in DP conditions.

And frankly sneaking the solar panels into a condition of approval is sneaky AF. Applicant should have appealed. Gotta go read the full conditions to see just how sneaky the city was.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

It's an insult. It is a drop in the bucket but sends some kind of message. The new building with it's measures and building envelope and decent mass transportation, will be far more climate efficient.

How do you expect people to get to the arena from mass transportation without sidewalks?

[dieHARDflameZ]

Originally Posted by Gemnoble

So are the Flames more likely to end up in Quebec or Houston? Houston would keep the conference's even. But Quebec would mitigate the Canadian rage.

Curious join date. Must be a quiet night for the Oilers.