11-27-2019, 01:04 PM
|
#61
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
|
I think this all goes down tomorrow. Woolley puts it out there, Farkas seconds and then it goes to a vote (maybe after some debate?). I dunno exactly, I don't follow council like I used to.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:05 PM
|
#62
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North of the River, South of the Bluff
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torture
That seems like a reasonable position.
|
Its a common position. If this was about flood mitigation people outside the river communities say the same thing.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:06 PM
|
#63
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
The green line scope needs to be re-evaluated since the province is backing down. A BRT may be the right solution if the Feds were to buy in.
300 million doesn’t meaningfully change the outcome of a 4.5 billion dollar project
|
quoted for truth
This "motion" is nothing more than posturing/grandstanding at a time where the Flames are vulnerable on multiple fronts and its not surprising when you look at the those involved.
The Project is doomed whether they get this 300 million or not, either way the green line project wont happen.
Really sad imo, especially as a Flames fan.
Last edited by Royle9; 11-27-2019 at 01:08 PM.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:06 PM
|
#64
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
It will be fine if the Hitmen is the only game in town. Which it surely will be if this were to go through.
|
Simple amendment to the agreement whereby the Flames stay in the Dome for 5-7 more years and the money in the short term can be transferred to the Green Line. When you are balancing the provincial budget everyone can pitch in. It is a win win for Albertans and Calgarians.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Aarongavey For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:07 PM
|
#65
|
Loves Teh Chat!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch
Its a common position. If this was about flood mitigation people outside the river communities say the same thing.
|
Common Position ≠ Reasonable Position
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:08 PM
|
#66
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarongavey
Makes sense to me, the city’s budgetary situation recently changed and this money can be better used on transportation. The Dome is fine.
|
I would say the City's transit situation is fine.
Green line has always been pointless in my mind, there is already tons of transit options on Centre street, 14th st, and edmonton trail.
a train line up there doesn't serve "the population" very well, is exorbitantly expensive and truly will give less people enjoyment or use than a new arena.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:08 PM
|
#67
|
Franchise Player
|
Should this pass I would expect an immediate announcement by CSEC that the Flames will not re-negotiate with the City and will be exploring all relocation options.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:09 PM
|
#68
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames
I don't live in the SE, so imo the green line can pound sand. Mackenzie towners can take the bus a while longer.
|
LOL, nor do I *checks location*.
And yet, I can see the value in having a meaningful discussion about the merits of using taxpayer dollars to build infrastructure to help ease road congestion, lessen the need for downtown parking, make working commutes easier, create accessibility to various education institutions and entertainment districts, and you know, reduce greenhouse emissions. Compare that to the merits of a new entertainment facility that is the home to a team that resonates with city identity and creates a lot of charitable work.
I can see the reasoning on both sides. I'm still in favour of the new building overall, but there is an entirely rational position behind NOT allocating taxpayer dollars towards a new building.
And you could see how it's equally silly for someone who doesn't love hockey to say "I'm never going to use a new arena, so those hockey fans can go pound sand."
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
|
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:10 PM
|
#69
|
Loves Teh Chat!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder
I would say the City's transit situation is fine.
Green line has always been pointless in my mind, there is already tons of transit options on Centre street, 14th ave, and edmonton trail.
a train line up there doesn't serve "the population" very well, is exorbitantly expensive and truly will give less people enjoyment or use than a new arena.
|
I'm not so certain residents of the SE and NE / North centre (?) would agree that a train line to their communities doesn't serve the population very well.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:11 PM
|
#70
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
LOL, nor do I *checks location*.
And yet, I can see the value in having a meaningful discussion about the merits of using taxpayer dollars to build infrastructure to help ease road congestion, lessen the need for downtown parking, make working commutes easier, create accessibility to various education institutions and entertainment districts, and you know, reduce greenhouse emissions. Compare that to the merits of a new entertainment facility that is the home to a team that resonates with city identity and creates a lot of charitable work.
I can see the reasoning on both sides. I'm still in favour of the new building overall, but there is an entirely rational position behind NOT allocating taxpayer dollars towards a new building.
And you could see how it's equally silly for someone who doesn't love hockey to say "I'm never going to use a new arena, so those hockey fans can go pound sand."
|
It's actually not equally silly. One is public infrastructure and one is for private enterprise.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji
Johnny eats garbage and isn’t 100% committed.
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nik- For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:12 PM
|
#71
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manhattanboy
Should this pass I would expect an immediate announcement by CSEC that the Flames will not re-negotiate with the City and will be exploring all relocation options.
|
I would expect the Flames to be in the Toyota Center in Houston within 12 months. The City would have made an actual enemy, and it would be a sad, sad turn.
Good thing it won't happen.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:12 PM
|
#72
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torture
I'm not so certain residents of the SE and NE / North centre (?) would agree that a train line to their communities doesn't serve the population very well.
|
good for them, they are entitled to their opinion. I think more buses would do the trick just as well and cost us a hell of a lot less.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:13 PM
|
#73
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Calgary
|
So what is the shortfall on funding of the Green line if they actually do this? I suspect neither project happens.
__________________
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.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:13 PM
|
#74
|
It's not easy being green!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In the tubes to Vancouver Island
|
Prudent thing to do given the current budget challenges that the city is facing. Green line is dead anyway in my mind unless the city can get the federal government to put in money up front.
If you want someone to blame, look at the UCP. There was a way forward prior to their budget, but it's evaporated.
__________________
Who is in charge of this product and why haven't they been fired yet?
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to kermitology For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:14 PM
|
#75
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik-
It's actually not equally silly. One is public infrastructure and one is for private enterprise.
|
They both provide value to the public. Not everyone needs the Green Line transit and not everyone needs a new entertainment facility (not just for Flames games you know). Yet, they both add value to the city for various reasons.
Yes, it is silly. You'll have to reckon with that reality at some point.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
|
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:15 PM
|
#76
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
They both provide value to the public. Not everyone needs the Green Line transit and not everyone needs a new entertainment facility (not just for Flames games you know). Yet, they both add value to the city for various reasons.
Yes, it is silly. You'll have to reckon with that reality at some point.
|
Again, no they don't. An arena provides value to its customers. Infrastructure and public transit provides value to the public, even the people that don't use it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji
Johnny eats garbage and isn’t 100% committed.
|
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:17 PM
|
#77
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
|
So who are votes that will be a "lock" to go against Woolley's motion? I'm thinking:
-Magliocca
-Sutherland
-Davison
-Demong
-Nenshi
-DCU
That right there ends it.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:18 PM
|
#78
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik-
Again, no they don't. An arena provides value to its customers. Infrastructure and public transit provides value to the public, even the people that don't use it.
|
I can tell you now that I get less than zero value from them building the Green Line. I cannot foresee a situation where I will ever end up riding it, or being impacted by the "decrease" in traffic by more people taking it.
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:19 PM
|
#79
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtime
So who are votes that will be a "lock" to go against Woolley's motion? I'm thinking:
-Magliocca
-Sutherland
-Davison
-Demong
-Nenshi
-DCU
That right there ends it.
|
Really wish Woolley wasn't my MLA... What a fool
|
|
|
11-27-2019, 01:20 PM
|
#80
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder
I can tell you now that I get less than zero value from them building the Green Line. I cannot foresee a situation where I will ever end up riding it, or being impacted by the "decrease" in traffic by more people taking it.
|
Ok, but reduced traffic and emissions still exist, whether you want to feel impacted by it or not.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji
Johnny eats garbage and isn’t 100% committed.
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to nik- For This Useful Post:
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:35 AM.
|
|