I'm sorry but you are wrong again. All of this information is publicly available on the site I linked. There was a test in 2010 of 30 wells in the Westmount area, north of the river. There was a subsequent test in 2013, where well MW10-6 near Westmount Road displayed an increase in contamination levels above those established in 2010 and at levels hazardous to human health. Contamination was found to be consistent with creosote originating the Canada Creosote site across the river.
Honestly, I'm not trying to be a pain, but I'm not seeing in the report the conclusion that the containment wall is not doing its job.
While i agree with your assessment about MW10-6, it doesn't say that the increase in levels was related to any further contamination from the south bow site.
While the creosote detected is consistent with the south bow creosote site (where else would it have come from, i suppose), it doesn't make any conclusion that new seepages are causing the increase.
Again, if it is in the report, then I will take the report's word for it, but I don't see that conclusion. I'm not debating that there was contamination, just skeptical about the assertion that the retaining walls in place have not stopped the flow.
Assuming that our economy gets out of the toilet and based on absorption patterns from the 2011-2014 development cycle, East Village will be nearing buildout in 2022, which allows for development in the WV to begin in 4 years or so.
possibly even sooner. There is a pretty long project cycle from idea, to sourcing financing, to build out.
The majority of the EV planning is now, or soon will be, on the table. Initial ideas for WV could be spawned relatively soon without it cannibalizing EV much at all.
Not sure if this has been posted but here's King again.
I have no skin in this debate but remembering my daughter's training in track and field, we do need a year round field house. The problem I have is locating it at the WV would cause traffic problems for them having to navigate in downtown rush hour while finding parking. I think it would be far better if they combined the football and field house where McMahon Stadium now is. King says it saves $330M doing it all at WV but he doesn't mention how much saving it would be to just combine the Stadium and Fieldhouse at another location.
I think the ARP discusses some of these. Bow realignment, crowchild interchange, 14th street interchange, new municipal roads akin to East Village, river walk, etc.
The whole concept reeks of Vancouver's stadium/arena district. For that reason alone, it should be shelved.
Honest question for Vancouverites, or those who visit: outside of game nights, is the arena district (whatever it's called) a place that you'd generally go to have a good time? I'm sure there are a few bars within walking distance that are good for game days, but doing a Google drive around there, I didn't see much that would bring me in. It's just a couple of concrete monoliths, crammed inside a spaghetti of roadways and surrounded by condo towers. Not very inviting, IMO.
And that is what will become of the WV if this behemoth is allowed to proceed even remotely as planned. THIS concept is no good.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cube Inmate For This Useful Post:
The whole concept reeks of Vancouver's stadium/arena district. For that reason alone, it should be shelved.
Honest question for Vancouverites, or those who visit: outside of game nights, is the arena district (whatever it's called) a place that you'd generally go to have a good time? I'm sure there are a few bars within walking distance that are good for game days, but doing a Google drive around there, I didn't see much that would bring me in. It's just a couple of concrete monoliths, crammed inside a spaghetti of roadways and surrounded by condo towers. Not very inviting, IMO.
And that is what will become of the WV if this behemoth is allowed to proceed even remotely as planned. THIS concept is no good.
While I wouldn't call it a tourist destination or anything, the Vancouver site isn't bad. I have stayed at hotels in the area and walked to the arena. Easy, plenty of restaurants, etc. A good question would be to ask what was there before? I honestly don't know, but what is there seems to be ok. What is in WV now is a complete waste of space.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
I think the ARP discusses some of these. Bow realignment, crowchild interchange, 14th street interchange, new municipal roads akin to East Village, river walk, etc.
The post I quoted was talking about WV development, not infrastructure.
The post I quoted was talking about WV development, not infrastructure.
I know, but he mentioned CRL funded projects in WV which you asked what would those be.
CRL's are generally used for just infrastructure and neighborhood enhancements, and I believe (havent looked in a while) that the ARP discusses the CRL use for these.
While I wouldn't call it a tourist destination or anything, the Vancouver site isn't bad. I have stayed at hotels in the area and walked to the arena. Easy, plenty of restaurants, etc. A good question would be to ask what was there before? I honestly don't know, but what is there seems to be ok. What is in WV now is a complete waste of space.
On the bolded, the article here has a couple of images from pre-BC Place / GM Place, giving you an idea of what it was like. In a lot of ways, it's similar to what WV is now -- although probably worse on the surface.
I agree that the stadium district in Vancouver is only adequate as a destination area, but I don't think a stadium built in the 1980s and an arena from the 90s are the model to be aspired to here. It's important to note that the Expo lands weren't developed with a coherent plan for an entertainment district, it was moreso a one-off stadium project, an arena built later between viaducts, and residential not integrated with the facilities at all. This is changing now with the construction of the towers adjacent to Rogers Arena.
Speaking of how these projects can be catalysts for transformation, here's an article detailing the way the development of the Expo '86 lands was a catalyst for the transformation of Vancouver from what was a backwater to the modern, vibrant city we all know today. Some parallels can be drawn to our current situation.
The post I quoted was talking about WV development, not infrastructure.
He got it bang on. Remediation, infrastructure and public realm improvements; just like the EV. All things this projects needs anyway on top of the handouts the Flames are asking for.
I agree that the stadium district in Vancouver is only adequate as a destination area, but I don't think a stadium built in the 1980s and an arena from the 90s are the model to be aspired to here. It's important to note that the Expo lands weren't developed with a coherent plan for an entertainment district, it was moreso a one-off stadium project, an arena built later between viaducts, and residential not integrated with the facilities at all. This is changing now with the construction of the towers adjacent to Rogers Arena.
Speaking of how these projects can be catalysts for transformation, here's an article detailing the way the development of the Expo '86 lands was a catalyst for the transformation of Vancouver from what was a backwater to the modern, vibrant city we all know today. Some parallels can be drawn to our current situation.
This is probably the most valuable comment in that article
Quote:
The most positive thing that came out of the whole [sale] was that we chose the right developer.
For WV development it is imperative to consider whether or not a development plan under that manager of the Calgary Sports Entertainment Corporation is the proper way to go. Can they effectively and efficiently develop the land for the benefit of downtown Calgary? From what we have seen so far they don't make me very confident in their ability to get the project done.
The Following User Says Thank You to calgarygeologist For This Useful Post:
Not sure how accurate these 3D models usually are but this is the first time I've seen any type of rendering that shows the North side of the stadium/field house with an upper deck. Maybe if Ken King showed more details, there might be a bit more positive vibe around the proposal.
I agree that the stadium district in Vancouver is only adequate as a destination area, but I don't think a stadium built in the 1980s and an arena from the 90s are the model to be aspired to here. It's important to note that the Expo lands weren't developed with a coherent plan for an entertainment district, it was moreso a one-off stadium project, an arena built later between viaducts, and residential not integrated with the facilities at all. This is changing now with the construction of the towers adjacent to Rogers Arena.
Speaking of how these projects can be catalysts for transformation, here's an article detailing the way the development of the Expo '86 lands was a catalyst for the transformation of Vancouver from what was a backwater to the modern, vibrant city we all know today. Some parallels can be drawn to our current situation.
Check out a bit on the sports district in Melbourne, Australia. Would be awesome if we could aspire to have something like that.
Check out a bit on the sports district in Melbourne, Australia. Would be awesome if we could aspire to have something like that.
So we're building a hockey arena and football stadium downtown, but we should aspire to build a 100k capacity cricket pitch, a couple soccer and rugby stadiums, a tennis stadium and a netball arena that takes up like half our downtown?
The Following User Says Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Just want to point out that I'm a pro-clean up ASAP person, but against the current direction of this proposal. I'm interested to see how responsibility for costs breaks down between city, province and federal. These kinds of environmental/industrial things have never been the jurisdiction of cities, and I think the larger branches of gov't should be taking more responsibility for this.
As for how to proceed with cleanup before having a plan for development, I'd want it to involve a increased greening of the riverbank all the way to 14st with bow trail realignment set as far from the river (and close to the CN tracks) as possible. I'd be fine with a massive dirt lot (like what Railtown currently is) for the foreseeable future until development is ready to go. Of course, make any necessary preparations are this stage for residential development in the north half transitioning more to commercial/office on the south. A large arena/stadium project could certainly still be worked in if the plan is actually a good fit (and deemed to be as beneficial to the city as any other location).
IMO Stampede / Railtown would be much better for the city overall; if the city feels the same way I think any discussion of public funding beyond those locations (or any locations the city feels are most appropriate) is a non-starter.
The Following User Says Thank You to powderjunkie For This Useful Post:
Not sure if this has been posted but here's King again.
I have no skin in this debate but remembering my daughter's training in track and field, we do need a year round field house. The problem I have is locating it at the WV would cause traffic problems for them having to navigate in downtown rush hour while finding parking. I think it would be far better if they combined the football and field house where McMahon Stadium now is. King says it saves $330M doing it all at WV but he doesn't mention how much saving it would be to just combine the Stadium and Fieldhouse at another location.
The stadium is the field house. I believe the savings he talks about are from combining the arena and field house. I thought the savings he threw around was less than $330 million. I don't think I am buying that number in any case.
