Comment 5626

By Sharchy (anonymous) | Posted February 24, 2007 at 10:29:29

For anyone who has read the Hemson report it presents three scenarios. The first is Hamilton maintains its current level of population and job activity maintaining its urban boundary. The second is Hamilton pursues middle growth and attracts some new economic activity in new sectors. The third Hamilton pursues aggressive growth and develops heavily new forms of employment (involves fully developing lands around the airport). The reality of the matter is that there needs to be some consensus about what people in this city want. Does Hamilton want to remain basically the same in its economic scale and attract more conventional manufacturing activities to the lakefront? Or does Hamilton envision itself as a multi-modal employment hub offering employment in traditional sectors as well as new sectors that involve airport imports? Does the city have a more green vision for it waterfront (this is the case in Toronto where conventional port activity has significantly declined)? The Hemson report just presents the reality of the three cases. It is up to Hamilton and its citizens to decide what role the city will play in the growth of the Golden Horseshoe. Failure to build consensus will just lead to more problems involving the airport being developed in the conventional ways that make Mississauga such a failure. If Hamilton really wants to avoid airport development present a plausible case for how job growth can occur elsewhere in the city that is visionary and economically feasible.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds