Comment 70447

By Ryan (registered) - website
Posted October 11, 2011 at 22:10:01

What frustrates me the most is that Council could have taken the savings from the IWS refurbishment and applied it to the Velodrome ... if only Council had been given the option of realizing the savings rather than spending the same money on a full rebuild. Instead, that decision was made for us earlier this summer and Council wasn't even advised until the end of August. (I suspected something was going on in July but couldn't get a straight answer from anyone.)

So we end up with a brand-new stadium on the site of the old stadium that will do little or nothing to achieve the city's goals of community building and economic development, while the waterfront land that was supposed to host the new stadium remains an un-remediated industrial brownfield.

Meanwhile, the velodrome, which would actually have advanced the TO2015 goal of promoting high performance amateur sport, will go to another municipality. I was conflicted about the Velodrome, not least because of the secretive process and desperation planning that accompanied it; but if I had to choose just one of the two Pan Am legacy facilities, I would pick the one that did more to advance both the City's and TO2015's objectives.

Reply | Permalink | Context

Common sense is that which tells us the world is flat.
-- Stuart Chase

Comment Score: 11 (13 votes)
You must be logged in to vote on this comment.

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Site Tools

Feeds