New Arena for Downtown Edmonton - Page 315

Coldrsx · #**6281** Posted **Jun 3, 2014, 10:15 PM**

2001 census, obviously different now, but you can see where things were... are.

http://censusdocs.edmonton.ca/DD34/MultiSource/NEIGHBOURHOOD/DOWNTOWN.pdf

Daveography · #**6282** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 3:40 PM**

Mack has a write-up of the construction update with lots of photos:

http://blog.mastermaq.ca/2014/06/03/photo-tour-rogers-place-construction-is-well-underway/

Hallsy's Toupee · #**6283** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 4:58 PM**

^ Since when has this self-important blogger been considered 'media'? Wouldn't he need credentials and such?

MalcolmTucker · #**6284** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 5:06 PM**

There is no credentials body, no press pass like in movies looking back at the '20s.

Daveography · #**6285** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 5:18 PM**

^^ Welcome to the 21st century. Today "the media" includes bloggers ("self-important" or otherwise), tweeps, and other non-traditional methods and means of journalism. You may not like it, but that's the reality.

I for one appreciate and embrace getting information from more numerous sources with differing perspectives.

Airboy · #**6286** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 6:05 PM**

Interesting that people are better informed by show like Colbert and the Daily show than traditional media.

I also like to have multiple sources of information even if I do not like them.

http://http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/stephen-colberts-civics-lesson-or-how-a-tv-humorist-taught-america-about-campaign-finance/

Hallsy's Toupee · #**6287** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 6:56 PM**

Thing is, Mack's railed against the arena in the recent past (or against about any downtown renewal initiatives that doesn't involve 104 St or his food trucks). Remember when he was bitching about DECL's support of the arena? So that's why I was puzzled by his invite.

Daveography · #**6288** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 7:04 PM**

^ Someone questioning the deal the city agreed to, and questioning the DECL's official involvement does not necessarily mean someone is against the arena itself. Not being 100%, all-for and gung-ho about something doesn't mean they are completely against it.

In any case, this argument is stupid. If you look at the post, it's completely objective and has some great photos. If you're too hung up on what Mack may or may not have said in the past to see the individual post for what it is, that's your issue, not his or anyone else's.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**6289** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 7:09 PM**

Let's just say I've come to detest this dweeb. Okay?

hilman · #**6290** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 7:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Let's just say I've come to detest this dweeb. Okay?

Likewise, I find negative tones in his arena update.

Daveography · #**6291** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 7:53 PM**

^^ Yeah, what a detestable dweeb; being one of the biggest and most positive boosters in the city, volunteering incredible amounts of his time to organize events that get people out and exploring their city, volunteering for the campaign to get one of the best mayors we could imagine elected, supporting local small businesses, volunteering his time on city committees, helping build and maintain a community of tech startups, asking tough and critical questions about issues rather than just blindly taking black-or-white positions, taking the time to write thoughtful blog posts on city events and issues (on top of weekly aggregate updates of goings-on)... yeah, screw that guy. So negative. He must just hate Edmonton.

ue · #**6292** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 7:59 PM**

lol you guys. Mack's ok. I don't really follow his blog but I don't have anything against him. I know the post of his in question where he was more critical about the arena and how slow things were moving and how we don't know if there's any demand for the surrounding developments, and while I disagreed wholeheartedly with that post, I don't think that's a reason to hate him. He has done a lot in this city, positively.

Daveography · #**6293** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 8:11 PM**

I apologize for my last post, I may have gotten a bit out of hand with my point. I guess I just don't understand how the word "detest" gets used against someone who has done so much good for this city, just because you don't see eye-to-eye on one or two parts of a much larger matter.

hilman · #**6294** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 8:18 PM**

https://twitter.com/RogersPlace/status/474280281675821056/photo/1

Hallsy's Toupee · #**6295** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 8:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTA

I apologize for my last post, I may have gotten a bit out of hand with my point. I guess I just don't understand how the word "detest" gets used against someone who has done so much good for this city, just because you don't see eye-to-eye on one or two parts of a much larger matter.

Well, maybe "detest" is too strong a word for someone who does a lot of good in this town, more than many people, and I applaud him for that. But there's plenty about him that rubs me the wrong way. But we digress.

So yeah, arena. Would love to see that time lapse once the arena is done.

hilman · #**6296** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 10:11 PM**

Quote:

Brian Burke says Saddledome is ‘embarrassing,’ wants new arena

By Doug Vaessen and Tamara Elliott

CALGARY- It’s time for the Calgary Flames to get a new home—at least, according to the team’s president of hockey operations.

While speaking to a sold out crowd at the Chamber of Commerce on Thursday morning, Brian Burke said a new facility to replace the Saddledome is needed sooner than later.

“It’s embarrassing,” he said, of the aging facility. “There is one building worse than ours…the Islanders.”

Saying it was a state of the art building back in 1988, he adds it simply doesn’t measure up anymore.

“Lower bowls in a newer arena are nine thousand seats minimum. Ours is what, six? So we are not generating revenues like other NHL buildings are.”

Burke said the whole city could benefit from a new facility.

“The weight load that the roof will bear is tiny, so a lot of the big stage acts don’t come here. So it’s not just what a hockey team gets, what it adds to a hockey team, it’s what it does to a downtown core.

“We need a new arena in Calgary. There is absolutely no reason we should watch a new building going up in Edmonton, and we should play in a 1988 arena here.”

http://globalnews.ca/news/1376991/brian-burke-says-saddledome-is-embarrassing-wants-new-arena/

Wasn't their arena just renovated

Coldrsx · #**6297** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 10:17 PM**

Jealous of Edmonton are they

EdmTrekker · #**6298** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 10:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hilman

http://globalnews.ca/news/1376991/brian-burke-says-saddledome-is-embarrassing-wants-new-arena/

Wasn't their arena just renovated

Yes and the Government that did not contribute a dime to ours - and as I understand it also helped with dollars to remediate and reconstruct parts of the flood damaged arena in Calgary.

speedog · #**6299** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 11:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

Yes and the Government that did not contribute a dime to ours - and as I understand it also helped with dollars to remediate and reconstruct parts of the flood damaged arena in Calgary.

Well considering the Saddledome is owned by the city of Calgary, I would expect that city tax dollars went into it's renovation/repairs/whatever, no?

Now the new Edmonton arena would appear to be getting some public monies (tax dollars) per what Wikipedia says - link. Or does the Wikipedia page have to be corrected?

EdmTrekker · #**6300** Posted **Jun 6, 2014, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by speedog

Well considering the Saddledome is owned by the city of Calgary, I would expect that city tax dollars went into it's renovation/repairs/whatever, no?

Now the new Edmonton arena would appear to be getting some public monies (tax dollars) per what Wikipedia says - link. Or does the Wikipedia page have to be corrected?

At issue is money from the Province...not the City.