Arena Capacity and Expansion Study

[Bandit]

The arena capacity study has reccomended a 5000 seat arena with two extra ice pads and room for a 4th, a new recreation facility development charge, and going ahead with the centre 70 twinning.


http://www.cityofkingston.ca/pdf/council/agenda/2004/A06_Rpt_18.pdf

$50K seems kind of expensive to find out the rinks are old??

Especially when the mayor's task force has already decided they should consider a single ice pad.
http://www.cityofkingston.ca/cityhall/press/release.asp?mode=show&id=1046

[macphail]

Originally posted by Bandit
Especially when the mayor's task force has already decided they should consider a single ice pad.

I think I read the same thing in Rosen's campaign literature, not that he has any undue influence on the whole process (tongue firmly planted in cheek). ;)

D.

[keoadmin]

A copy of the Arena Capacity and Expansion Study to be presented to City Council on February 3, 2004 is attached below:

:cool:

[macphail]

So not only will Kingston be looking at building a new Memorial (LVEC, whatever) Centre, but the need will still exist for a 3-pad arena to replace our other aging ice pads.

Kingstonians may (if any of this is ever built) have a lot of nice skating facilities (well, the 3% of the population that uses them will at least), but too bad there aren't many decent jobs to keep/attract people here, affordable housing to ensure that everyone has a roof over their head, and infrastructure that is maintained in order to protect people and the environment.

It is time that Kingston and Council focused on the real issues. It may be nice to rush a process because our Mayor included it in his campaign, but the attention it is receiving is a smoke screen to hide the bigger issues. Kingston has social and economic problems that will not be solved by building a LVEC.

Cheers, Derek

[Bandit]

This just goes from bad to worse. I would have thought the only consideration would have been between a single pad/keep the old arenas or a new multi pad facility. To now be talking about two new facilities, using two sperate sites and losing whatever efficiencies there are having them together is just nuts. And this is comming from a councillor who was recently the top pursuer of the service review/need for financial sustainability. What happens when the big spenders on council get a chance to amend the task force recommendation?

[Bandit]

The recommendation for Centre 70 twinning is in...

What started out as a $3M project, with $400K added for "green" energy...is now at $4.5M for a bare bones no lobby plan, and the "most appealing twinning concept" according to staff and and architects at a whopping $5.8M.

http://www.cityofkingston.ca/pdf/council/agenda/2004/A09_COWrpt.pdf

Lets hope staff do a better job estimating the LVEC and recreational facility costs.

[macphail]

Originally posted by Bandit
Lets hope staff do a better job estimating the LVEC and recreational facility costs.

They can be as far off base as they like; after all, the LVEC isn't going to cost taxpayers a dime. ;)

Cheers, Derek