let's say that Calgary gets the Olympics and there are cost overruns. who pays for those? does Calgary get even more form the province and feds? is the city responsible?
it should be made clear to the public who is on the hook.
I'm pretty sure the bus barn move is part of the green line funding? Totally separate from an Olympic bid.
I don't think it is. The last I heard they were trying to get the green line around the bus barns but not willing to spend the money to go under them because they aren't going to be there for the long term. So they need to accommodate the barns but not too much cause they might not exist in the future.
I think the key in the article is that there will be expenses the city is "compelled to pay". So it's not just the bus barn. We've had two or three indications now that there will be other expenses but yeah...5.2 billion.
I think the bus barn move is consider a part of the CMLC plans for the rivers district and therefore should be considered separately from the bid tab. It will need to happen in and around the 2026 timeline.
Calling this a secret report is kind of ridiculous as well.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
It’s been talked about, but never actioned because here’s no funding for the replacement garage - this isn’t some abandoned bus barn, it’s still very much in use with hundreds of buses parked and maintained there. CMLC can pay for the demo and remediation, but the biggest cost is building the new building to take its place (which can’t be paid for by CMLC because it’s not going to be in East Village). Green line was not removing the garage, simply taking a small slice of the employee parking lot.
This image is from the CMLC site for the Rivers District redevelopment.
The area in the foreground of the image is where the bus barn currently sits. I believe the road is 11th Ave, which currently stops at 6th St because that's where the garage is.
Within the next decade (assuming they can get funding for this), the Transit Garage will be moved anyway. I'm not sure how that sort of thing would be financed between Calgary Transit and Council normally with or without the Olympics. It makes perfect sense to me that you wouldn't include the cost of the new garage into the costs of the replacement buildings.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
I think following cities like Gold Coast and Melbourne is interesting. They've leveraged funding from hosting Commonwealth Games and invested heavily into their infrastructure and worked to diversify their economies.
Here's a neato video on the Gold Coast and I think something like this would match well with Calgary.
__________________
MOD EDIT: NO!!!
The Following User Says Thank You to Two Fivenagame For This Useful Post:
Kind of surprised we haven't seen any polling now that the details are out. It was close before the details came out, and now I'd suspect it's more against hosting than for, but it'd be nice to have something other than online polls which are like 75-25 against hosting (though I can dream those are right...).
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Kind of surprised we haven't seen any polling now that the details are out. It was close before the details came out, and now I'd suspect it's more against hosting than for, but it'd be nice to have something other than online polls which are like 75-25 against hosting (though I can dream those are right...).
From what I've heard I think 75-25 is correct. this is going to be a landslide.
Remember it's a non-binding vote to just bid. I think Stockholm wins anyways.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
From what I've heard I think 75-25 is correct. this is going to be a landslide.
Remember it's a non-binding vote to just bid. I think Stockholm wins anyways.
Really, 75% are against bidding? I would have thought that "yes" wins in a landslide because they have a funded and organized campaign. The turnout will be low, and the only real GOTV action will be on that side. I don't think they get to 75% either, but they should win this.
Really, 75% are against bidding? I would have thought that "yes" wins in a landslide because they have a funded and organized campaign. The turnout will be low, and the only real GOTV action will be on that side. I don't think they get to 75% either, but they should win this.
I think this is the narrative the NO side tries to tell, to make them seem like the underdogs.
If the turn out is low, it favours the no side, because people are more likely to go and vote if they dislike something than if they're okay with it.
At the information session during the lunch hour on Thursday, they asked for a show of hands before it began and the overwhelming majority were "Yes", with the remainder being split between "No" and "Undecided".
Obviously, with something like that, it's hard to know how representative the sampling is, but if the people who attended are the most-likely to vote, it would appear the Yes votes have the edge.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
To be fair, if you're not interested in the Olympic process proceeding forward with all the information that is out there now, you'll probably not bother to go to the open house about it. Your mind has been decided.
My gut instinct is the no side is more motivated, and unless an arena deal is part of the thing bid, the plebiscite is likely to lose. But I am also terrible at predictions, so I have no clue, really.
