reasons this is frustrating:
1. the sfu oval was part of the original bid and was one of the reasons burnaby was supportive.
2. simon fraser university would benefit from the infrastructure and use it better than the city of richmond, no matter how many trade shows they claim they will lure from bc place
3. richmond won on the basis of their cheaper bid and claims they wont have any cost overrun that will be covered by taxes. the people of montreal are laughing their arses off im sure.
4. theyre building it on the bloody waterfront, below sea level, the most dangerous part of an earthquake-prone area that is due for an earthquake.
5. sfu recently got direct skytrain access via the 145 bus at production way station and the 144 bus at sperling-burnaby lake station. richmond has the 98 b-line and crowded bridges and airport traffic. oh right - the rav line! the non-existent rav line! the imaginary rav line! the rav line i have seen no progress on whatsoever! the rav line that only makes headlines when it looks like herb dhaliwal's taxi company links make him look like he has a conflict of interest!
6. derek corrigan, oval-loser that he is, will probably be re-elected even though his failure to make the burnaby bid more attractive to the 2010 committee lost simon fraser a valuable asset.
7. the calgary oval is but 13 hours away, and that's where the national team is based. consequently, the proposals were evaluated with using the facility for something other than speed skating in mind. this relates to point 2.
8. richmond is closer to downtown, which means it's closer to a place that will be uber crowded during the games. spreading the masses out between vancouver, burnaby, and whistler might not be a bad idea at all.
9. the view of the city and the fjords from burnaby mountain vs the view from the richmond flatlands - what do we want to show the tourists?