If the “bit of infrastructure”, is designed to accommodate a capacity of a second downtown, well, that’s my point. They may not need it.
You know the beauty of master planning? Is it's just that, a plan.
If time pans out that the vision created isn't feasible down the road, then it won't get developed, and an alternative vision can be produced when the time comes.
When trying to plan for something that pans out over decades, you have to think big, and anticipate what could pan out under ideal conditions. Just because things are rough now, doesn't mean it's forever. It's not like Calgary hasn't been through this before, and never recovered.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Joborule For This Useful Post:
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
4 Iconic Men! Former voice of the Calgary Flames, Peter Maher and Flames Alumni Colin Patterson and Perry Berezan sit down with Lanny McDonald to discuss the ongoing controversial topic; building a new sports arena in Calgary. Very insightful.
__________________
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dion For This Useful Post:
4 Iconic Men! Former voice of the Calgary Flames, Peter Maher and Flames Alumni Colin Patterson and Perry Berezan sit down with Lanny McDonald to discuss the ongoing controversial topic; building a new sports arena in Calgary. Very insightful.
You'll have to point out the insightful part of the sit down to me. They trotted out every CSEC talking point but managed to avoid mentioning who should fund and how much.
Charities!
Concerts!
Civic pride!
Restaurants!
Bars!
But the library!
Everyone else is getting a new building!
Well actually, they did mention that City Council needs to wake up! No mention of Flames ownership kicking in the appropriate funding from their side.
Very much a CSEC propaganda piece. And not a very subtle one.
CSEC is preparing the full court press to leverage the great Flames season in the same way Koskinen's agent leveraged a new contract out of the Oilers.
If we get caught up in the hype, taxpayers could end up signing off on an overpriced funding agreement.
The Following 23 Users Say Thank You to longsuffering For This Useful Post:
I know. I just wish they could hammer out the details behind closed doors and come to a resolution. But I understand the complexities and optics of the project, so I know it is immensely difficult.
You'll have to point out the insightful part of the sit down to me. They trotted out every CSEC talking point but managed to avoid mentioning who should fund and how much.
Charities!
Concerts!
Civic pride!
Restaurants!
Bars!
But the library!
Everyone else is getting a new building!
Well actually, they did mention that City Council needs to wake up! No mention of Flames ownership kicking in the appropriate funding from their side.
Very much a CSEC propaganda piece. And not a very subtle one.
CSEC is preparing the full court press to leverage the great Flames season in the same way Koskinen's agent leveraged a new contract out of the Oilers.
If we get caught up in the hype, taxpayers could end up signing off on an overpriced funding agreement.
Is it surprising that a group of former players and their former PBP guy are supportive of the arena. I don't see this as something CSEC would even have to ask to have done. These guys are going to be very pro arena because of their experience and backgrounds.
Just because they are supportive doesn't mean it is a propaganda piece.
The Following 20 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Is it surprising that a group of former players and their former PBP guy are supportive of the arena. I don't see this as something CSEC would even have to ask to have done. These guys are going to be very pro arena because of their experience and backgrounds.
Just because they are supportive doesn't mean it is a propaganda piece.
IMO, stating that City Council needs to WAKE UP and get an arena deal done is where their impromptu(?) get together crossed the line from opinion piece to propaganda piece.
They easily could have left it as "a new building needs to be built and the 2 sides need to sit down and work this out".
But they didn't. Rather, they UNANIMOUSLY agreed that any lack of progress on a deal is the fault of the City's representatives. Seems pretty clear to me they've taken sides.
YMMV of course.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to longsuffering For This Useful Post:
Yeah I don't see this as a Flames led initiative, it's four guys stating their personal opinions that surprise no one. Tbh I'm outside of Calgary now but I think the Flames and the city need to find a way to get a deal done here soon - I was strongly against the flames initial proposal but I think arguments solely focusing on economics are flawed here... Peter made comments to the extent of the flames having cultural/social significance to the city and I agree, I don't think you can put a price tag on what the flames mean to the city and say that's it.
I hope something gets done soon, it's been depressing frankly watching a bunch of nimby killjoys and blowhard oil guys and their delegates hammering on each other with our hockey team as collateral.
IMO, stating that City Council needs to WAKE UP and get an arena deal done is where their impromptu(?) get together crossed the line from opinion piece to propaganda piece.
They easily could have left it as "a new building needs to be built and the 2 sides need to sit down and work this out".
But they didn't. Rather, they UNANIMOUSLY agreed that any lack of progress on a deal is the fault of the City's representatives. Seems pretty clear to me they've taken sides.
YMMV of course.
Yes they've taken a side. That is clear.
That doesn't make it a propaganda piece.
It means they have an opinion. One that doesn't surprise me in the least given their backgrounds.
They could have easily said what you outline above - but that's not how they feel. Again - that doesn't mean this is some grand propaganda piece.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Francis says on Monday the Event Centre committee will present on whether the new arena should be included in the city's $300 million mega project budget.
I've been hearing the Arena will not be in the CRL funds, but from normal City capital funds. Of course, $150m in stuff right around the arena to make the district work is in the CRL, already approved.
So excited that we are nearly in the next phase of this. Still plenty of time for the "still miles apart", "the city isn't contributing enough", "two very different ideas of what is fair" and add in a Ken King sighting in Houston and a Bettman sighting in Calgary. Wait for it.
Francis says on Monday the Event Centre committee will present on whether the new arena should be included in the city's $300 million mega project budget.
$300 milion is the down payment on the Arena right?
IMO, stating that City Council needs to WAKE UP and get an arena deal done is where their impromptu(?) get together crossed the line from opinion piece to propaganda piece.
They easily could have left it as "a new building needs to be built and the 2 sides need to sit down and work this out".
But they didn't. Rather, they UNANIMOUSLY agreed that any lack of progress on a deal is the fault of the City's representatives. Seems pretty clear to me they've taken sides.
YMMV of course.
So if they have an opinion and s side, they're automatically part of the propaganda piece? Man, how do I get in on that? Because I'm on their side too, but Flames have yet to pay me for helping them spread their propaganda.
The Following User Says Thank You to The Yen Man For This Useful Post:
