Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Provincial Super Lab - South Campus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    I think we can all agree that the current medical lab in downtown is embarrassing to look at since it was a 'make work project' from the '90s. I would love to see that scar from our past removed.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by BalancedOP View Post
      Originally posted by moahunter View Post
      Originally posted by B.ike View Post
      I just want this finalized and built anywhere in Edmonton before the UCP comes in, cancels it, and then builds it in Calgary at a later date.
      Its more likely the other way round - NDP desperately needs votes in Calgary to have any hope of forming next government. UCP would be looking for votes in Edmonton (although may not need it if can form Calgary / rural coalition).
      Calgary got the Cancer centre, and the south Medical Campus a few years ago. we got......an announcement that we may in the next few years get a new SW Hospital Campus and up grades to another one. None of that money has been allocated as far as I can see.
      the southern half of the province - through calgary laboratory services - already operates in a manner similar to what is being proposed for here in edmonton.
      "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

      Comment


      • #93
        There are so many advantages for the South Campus location, I'm surprised anyone is still debating it. Among the advantages. The site is already owned by the province. It's on the U of A South Campus where most future development will take place due to land constraints on the North Campus. It's right next to an LRT station. It's adjacent to other provincial labs like OS Longman.

        While the Edmonton lab will be newer and more advanced than its Calgary counterpart, it will likely have a similar design (3 to 4 storeys in height with room for loading docks and ancilliary buildings). Aerial photo of the Calgary lab here: https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.08357...!3m1!1e3?hl=en

        The super-lab is just not well suited for a downtown location.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by ThomasH View Post
          I think we can all agree that the current medical lab in downtown is embarrassing to look at since it was a 'make work project' from the '90s. I would love to see that scar from our past removed.
          Well, I think most of us would agree - along with the Staples on 101 st (thank goodness gone now), the old Baccarat building and a few other "gems" of the grunge era too.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by IanO View Post
            Originally posted by kkozoriz View Post
            So, everyone downtown is now working to prevent the construction of the new lab?

            OK, downtown is off my list of destinations. Screw them for putting their selfishness ahead of the good of the rest of the city and the entire capital region.

            I'll be contacting all the business I regularly visit and letting them know that they've lost me as a customer and telling them exactly why until the DBA stops their obstructionism.

            Thanks for the heads up Ian.
            Far from, but we all are mindful of our Provincial finances, vacancies in both Edmonton and Calgary and priorities to correct where we are now. This does not align or support any of that.

            BIAs represent, support and advocate for very specific geographic areas. If a BIA from any part of the city believes it is ok to sit idly by when a major employer of that area is potentially leaving, they are not representing their area, members (all for profit businesses within that boundary) or their organization.

            We are for Downtown, not for dilution of it.
            if you really wanted to be mindful of everyone's end objectives instead of whining, you would have dba encouraging the lab to move as planned; to see the development of an expanded cluster relationship between the u of a and the lab and the private sector; and for the province to give neil crawford centre back to the u of a to house that cluster, along with some of their other expansion needs, and move a few thousand provincial government employees back downtown where they belong. that would be mindful on all fronts by all parties.
            "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

            Comment


            • #96
              kcantor for DBA Executive Director!
              “Son, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmonton’s skyline.”

              Comment


              • #97
                I am unsure why people here are so confused about a BIA defending its existing employment base.

                Are there opportunities if and when Dynalife moves, absolutely, but a bird in the hand.

                We are funded by and represent Downtown Businesses who rely on patrons from nearby residences, visitors and employers.


                Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by IanO View Post
                  Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                  Originally posted by IanO View Post
                  For the record, I didn't say a change in Government, I said a 'new government'.
                  for the record, in the context of this conversation - or even just in the context of that post in particular - what's the difference between a "change in government" and a "new government"?
                  Come on now Ken.

                  An election is forthcoming and be it the NDP or another, we WILL have a new Government.

                  Is this expenditure the right one at the right time? I say no.

                  Will this have a negative impact on the Downtown, absolutely.
                  Ian, take this as the friendly advice that it is and not me chastising.

                  You’re splitting hairs when you’re saying change of government versus new government. Nobody in a very general colloquial sense differentiates between “change of” or new. The biggest reason why? The Government of Alberta exists in perpetuity. Unless some major force comes and dissolves either Canada or the Province of Alberta, the Government of Alberta will continue to be there. It is the governing administration that will change. The new administration will inherit all the best parts, all of the sins of the previous one, and can and will be sued for, applauded for, or chastised for their actions on the actions of the previous administration. Does that sound confusing? I hope not. That is why the United States always talks about administrations. The government of the US does not go away according to the Constitution. Who administers it changes.

                  So, you are suggesting that the new administration, or change of administration, could or would make a difference. That entails at its core a complete change in the administrating party, or for an outlier, a minority government consisting of the current administration augmented by people from the opposite point of view. We all know how minority governments can stand up. Therefore, if there is no change in the administrating party of the Alberta Government, then there is no new administrating party of the Alberta Government regardless of the number of seats won. By suggesting new government, your words are being understandably interpreted as brand-new administration. If the current administrative party wins, there is no change, and there is no new.

                  That’s the danger of even suggesting that your position could be helped or hindered by a new administration. Very few people consider the 44 years of Progressive Conservative rule in the Province of Alberta as new government regardless of the premier and or caucus running the administrating party. Everybody calls it 44 years of Tory rule. Unfortunately, by merely stating new government, you’ve quite easily and readily fallen into the political trap of, accidentally or otherwise, advocating for a change in administration. Welcome to politics. It’s a blood sport.

                  You may feel this expenditure is wrong now. Understandable. However, don’t be surprised when people interpret that fiscal prudence as organizational selfishness versus an understanding or empathy for the taxpayer. Odds are very high this expenditure is going to happen anyway regardless of administration. The current set up downtown was always temporary. When it was announced, it was announced to be temporary. I can understand, empathize, and support the stance that the Downtown Business Association is extremely concerned about the loss of headcount. I can understand, empathize, and support the stance that the Downtown Business Association is concerned about the trickle-down effect of losing that headcount without having anything in the wings readily available to absorb that headcount loss. I can understand, empathize, and support the Downtown Business Association being a bit selfish and trying to lobby to keep the headcount downtown and to research ways to make that fiscally prudent. I cannot understand, empathize, and support the DBA’s stance that it is fiscally irresponsible look at this move, to look at this consolidation, or to look at this in a holistic standpoint that takes every possible neighbourhood into account – because quite simply, it’s going to take a lot of convincing to talk to people about a downtown location being the most prudent when the scope, mandate, and execution of this lab virtually necessitates it having a large, sprawling floor plate immediately adjacent (or as close as possible) to a large research, training, and delivery centre such as the University of Alberta. I think the DBA can understand the term location, location, location. Downtown just doesn’t have it on this one.

                  You’re spending a lot of unnecessary political capital on this. Take it for what it’s worth, but my opinion would be that the DBA’s position should be that you understand the complex nature of healthcare delivery services, that the DBA's asking to be included in this conversation so that it can be able to assist the Government of Alberta research its options for the downtown location so that an apples to apples comparison can be made. Leave new or old or current administrations out of it. This lab, should it be built, will be done hopefully on a very empirical basis. Frankly my friend, a downtown location would have avery large uphill battle in convincing anyone that a lab of the scope belongs there.

                  President and CEO - Airshow.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Not to troll anyone here lol.. but I actually heard some news in regards to this Lab. "They" have expressed interest on the north side; around past 137ave out toward St.Albert area.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RichardS View Post
                      I am probably more surprised to the reaction that IanO and the DBA are not happy with the move out of the core than with the position that the DBA (via extension of its hired leader/spokesperson) is taking. To expect that the DBA does not like losing headcount is like being surprised that union leaders dislike headcount losses.

                      ...
                      I for one am not surprised by the DBA's position; that doesn't stop me from pointing out how distasteful it is.

                      Moreover--unlike others who discount the DBA's influence--I have concerns that their influence actually carries some weight. Certainly their position on this matter has been echoed by municipal politicians:

                      http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...alife-downtown

                      Mayor Don Iveson said a potential Dynalife move is “a very real concern for us as we try to build a more dynamic downtown.”

                      Provincial officials should consider renovating and expanding the current lab because “it’s a great employment node for downtown,” he said.
                      http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...-stay-downtown
                      Edmonton’s major downtown DynaLife health lab has signed a new lease to March 2022, giving hope to those who want its 700 downtown employees to stay put.

                      “It’s great news and will give everyone time for sober second thought,” said Coun. Scott McKeen, a vocal opponent of a provincial plan to create a new super lab facility outside of downtown.

                      Edmonton needs continued investment in downtown, not a flight from the centre, he said, suggesting the province supported that approach in years past.
                      http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonto...-location.html
                      Ward 6 Coun. Scott McKeen said he's disappointed about the hundreds of staff potentially leaving downtown, and will fight the move if it’s not in the city’s best interests.

                      He's concerned how the relocation could affect businesses, transit use and the overall vibrancy of downtown.

                      "It will cause further downtown office vacancy. Their move undermines a tremendous amount of good work by the private sector and I would argue by the City of Edmonton to raise the fortunes of our downtown."

                      Comment


                      • Rich - As always, I appreciate your mature responses with thoughtful comments, even if I disagree in part.


                        Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by IanO View Post
                          I am unsure why people here are so confused about a BIA defending its existing employment base.

                          Are there opportunities if and when Dynalife moves, absolutely, but a bird in the hand.

                          We are funded by and represent Downtown Businesses who rely on patrons from nearby residences, visitors and employers.
                          I think most people DO get the predicament, and that if the DBA wanted to defend its employment base, it should.

                          What they don't get is...

                          a) why the DBA would even dare mention any change in administration helping or hurting their cause,
                          b) the unnecessary political capital spent on what is most likely the wrong windmill to tilt at, and
                          c) why the DBA isn't pushing harder for new businesses to come to Edmonton and locate downtown...or for new ones to start thinking downtown from Day 1.

                          It's about spending your time and resources attracting more appropriate businesses that can exist in a cubicle farm, open floorplate, or readily accessible existing space. Labs...not so much. It is more a question of form, fit, and function. Remember...we aren't Tokyo or Manhattan. People and labs here do have a choice...
                          President and CEO - Airshow.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by piglet View Post
                            Not to troll anyone here lol.. but I actually heard some news in regards to this Lab. "They" have expressed interest on the north side; around past 137ave out toward St.Albert area.

                            One of the proposals had the site in the old Golden west golf course site, Now owned by Qualico I believe. Mr kantor can correct me if I am wrong.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by IanO View Post
                              Originally posted by kkozoriz View Post
                              So, everyone downtown is now working to prevent the construction of the new lab?

                              OK, downtown is off my list of destinations. Screw them for putting their selfishness ahead of the good of the rest of the city and the entire capital region.

                              I'll be contacting all the business I regularly visit and letting them know that they've lost me as a customer and telling them exactly why until the DBA stops their obstructionism.

                              Thanks for the heads up Ian.
                              Far from, but we all are mindful of our Provincial finances, vacancies in both Edmonton and Calgary and priorities to correct where we are now. This does not align or support any of that.

                              BIAs represent, support and advocate for very specific geographic areas. If a BIA from any part of the city believes it is ok to sit idly by when a major employer of that area is potentially leaving, they are not representing their area, members (all for profit businesses within that boundary) or their organization.

                              We are for Downtown, not for dilution of it.
                              (Emphasis added)

                              So the DBA is advocating for intervening in the policies and planning of a publicly-funded concern (potentially to the detriment of all Alberta taxpayers and, in particular, patients of the healthcare system) in order to support the bottom lines of for profit businesses downtown?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by IanO View Post
                                Rich - As always, I appreciate your mature responses with thoughtful comments, even if I disagree in part.
                                It is ok to disagree...just don't be disagreeable. A very wise CAF member told me that...and I live by it.
                                President and CEO - Airshow.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X