LA84 Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 According to a report, it would cost $500m dollars to tear down the "Big Owe." :shocked: Demolishing Big O would cost $500M: report Perhaps this video might give them an idea of how to do it a little cheaper KABOOM!!!!!!!! Stupid idea anyway . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexico1968 Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 ok..what???????? WHAT!??? :rock: :rock: Are this guys seriously..they can bring down the stadium...is a Architectural (i really dont know how to write it)..Jewel..i mean.is the Olympic "White Elephant" stadium of Montreal.. This guys must be in drugs.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Oh great, add another 15 years of debt. Me thinks they’d best just stick with the stadium and learn to appreciate it. That half billion would be better spent on other things. The upkeep on the Big O would never cost that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ryan04 Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 why would a city destory an Olympic Stadium it is the greatest honor a city can get Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.x Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 personally, after paying the debt for the stadium for three decades, Montreal should renovate the stadium. it costed billions to build, years to pay, a landmark.....why not renovate it, go through the extra mile after spending so much on it. also, demolishing it means another stadium will have to be built in the city for CFL needs as well as an expanded convention centre. don't demolish it!....and how the hel! can demolishing the stadium cost half a billion?!!! :oo: why would a city destory an Olympic Stadium it is the greatest honor a city can get well, the stadium has been a curse for the province of Quebec for the last few decades. it wasn't even close to being finished when it hosted the Olympics in 1976, completed in 1981 i think. it was originally budgeted at $150 million....it's more like 15 times more.........other than that, so much was spent on it and it's a landmark - it shouldn't be demolished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA84 Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 why would a city destory an Olympic Stadium it is the greatest honor a city can get well, the stadium has been a curse for the province of Quebec for the last few decades. it wasn't even close to being finished when it hosted the Olympics in 1976, completed in 1981 i think. it was originally budgeted at $150 million....it's more like 15 times more.........other than that, so much was spent on it and it's a landmark - it shouldn't be demolished. There was another article I read after I found this tidbit that said between the initial cost of the stadium and the tower being built, plus the cost for the two roof replacements and the projected cost of tearing it down if they did, the total cost would go over 3 billion :help: I think we should send someone our suggestion of turning that into a Canadian training facility since obviously some idiot is running the place if they are looking into tearing it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerrybymoonlight Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 To be honest, if they can go one up on the stadium, I thik they should implode it. But really, why on earth would 500 million be spent on destroying that facility? Could that be right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA84 Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 To be honest, if they can go one up on the stadium, I thik they should implode it. But really, why on earth would 500 million be spent on destroying that facility? Could that be right? I don't get that either, since the whole stadium was built in a "prefab" manner in sections, and to me, not an engineer, you pull out the edge of the cantilever and that section falls down. Or am I being too logical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aronious Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 Blow it up.. as soon as possible. Landmark or not, it by international standards is an absolute sh!t stadium. Blow it up, sell of the land (being on prime property it would be worth a lot) to residential development and use the funds (and some contributions from the government) to build a more realistically sized and safer facility else where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexico1968 Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 i love the stadium but is true..sometimes is better said goodbye...maybe if they build a new staidum they could bid again!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 The government of Quebec owns the stadium. My guess is that they want to keep the stadium and the study was done to show that the cost of destroying it would be far too much for the people of Quebec to entertain the notion. I can see why it would cost so much to destroy it. There is a lot of concrete in there. Not easy stuff to remove and not exactly material that can be re-used. Plus the complications the tower - which was recently renovated and leased out - means they will probably have to keep it and imploding the stadium could cause structural damage...thus if destroyed, the stadium would probably have to come down piece by piece, not in one big blast. If you are going to have to spend another half billion dollars and 2.5 years of construction work, wouldn't it just be better to modernize the damn thing? Berlin did it. Its essentially a concrete shell and correct me if I am wrong, but aren't the only concrete in the awnings to be found in the beams and technical ring with some kind of metal in between? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.x Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 good point Kendegra. why spend $500 million on tearing down the stadium when you can save it. it's still a good stadium...there may be a few problems but they can always be solved. if they're gonna tear it down, call for a airstrike! that should put a dent into the concrete. i love the stadium but is true..sometimes is better said goodbye...maybe if they build a new staidum they could bid again!! after decades of paying and suffering through a huge debt, Montreal won't bid for a Summer Games for a long time to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
can135 Posted January 14, 2005 Report Share Posted January 14, 2005 after decades of paying and suffering through a huge debt, Montreal won't bid for a Summer Games for a long time to come. Let alone ever being successful again - ain't going to happen this century Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA84 Posted January 14, 2005 Report Share Posted January 14, 2005 Your response is probably right on the money Kendegra. I am sure there are many up there that want to blow it up, so what better way to put that to rest than say - "O-tay, well you want to put out another $500m to get it done?" :shocked: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 14, 2005 Report Share Posted January 14, 2005 I have an idea: put out some secret feelers to certain int'l fugitives holed up in the Pakistan/Afghan mountains. Tell them you have a concrete bunker waiting (the Big O); and once they accept the invitation and move in, bomb the place to bits!!! That'll make it cost-effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suit U Sir !!! Posted January 14, 2005 Report Share Posted January 14, 2005 Blow it up.. as soon as possible. Landmark or not, it by international standards is an absolute sh!t stadium. Blow it up, sell of the land (being on prime property it would be worth a lot) to residential development and use the funds (and some contributions from the government) to build a more realistically sized and safer facility else where. I think you totally missed the point here. If demolition were cost like $10, then fair enough, knock it down, but if it is really going to cost $500million to demolish it, why pour even more money into a stadium which has already cost way too money and caused 30 years of debt for Montreal. I'd say leave it be..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted January 14, 2005 Report Share Posted January 14, 2005 And just to clarify...the Big O is not exactly on prime real estate. Its city owned property on the east side that was earmarked for sport/recreational development as far back as the 1920's. All around it are low rise residences, warehouses, parks and hotels and restaurants that sprung up because of the stadium. It won't exactly become a prime area for high rise condo development. Take a look...pretty flat all around there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 According to an article in the Montreal Gazette, demolition would require removing 20 tonnes of debris every seven minutes for seven hours a day for 2.5 years. That is a LOT of concrete!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 According to an article in the Montreal Gazette, demolition would require removing 20 tonnes of debris every seven minutes for seven hours a day for 2.5 years. That is a LOT of concrete!!! Wow! More concrete than was hauled away at the World Trade Center?? It took them like, what? 9-10 months to clear the site -- and I think that was working only during the daylight hours. So what do the people of Montreal want to be done with the stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Angeles Guy Posted January 21, 2005 Report Share Posted January 21, 2005 Yah, lets add some more debt to what they are still paying off! I can't beleive that this is a real article. They paid so much money to have that Architectural milestone built, and now they want to blow it up less than thirty years later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA84 Posted January 21, 2005 Report Share Posted January 21, 2005 Yah, lets add some more debt to what they are still paying off! I can't beleive that this is a real article. They paid so much money to have that Architectural milestone built, and now they want to blow it up less than thirty years later? Exactly. You look at a picture of it's beauty like this and your like, "O.K. - I know it's a sore spot but look what you built!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.