Comment 16395

By Larry Di Ianni (anonymous) | Posted December 28, 2007 at 17:26:06

Ryan, at some point the argument becomes circular and non productive, but in the spirit of enhancing the discussion I offer these points:

1. The RHVP is a project that should have been built many many years ago. The history of its delay is well known. That infrastructure is as much about catching up with development on the east mountain as promoting new industrial development. The Hemson study which has been shelved for poor reasons, I maintain, speaks volumes about these issues. The Glanbrook industrial park hasn't been looked at in 25 years because the RHVP was not built; and money for servicing was needed. The province helped with the funding and the road is now causing businesses to take a real interest in the Park.
We need a vibrant down town no question about that and we need to put real resources behind it from a tripartite perspective: the city, the province and private money. (On this I say hooray, Mr. Stinson who sings from the same song book.) We also need to fund the investments in our downtown. We can't do that unless we grow the economy and jobs for our citizens. Brownfields redevelopment is VERY important, but so is attracting businesses like Proctor and Gamble who were looking away from Burlington street where they were, and chose Brantford because we had no comparables to offer. There are other examples and I've written about them.
A firm urban boundary, as much as that can be done (again see my latest thoughts on Sprawl on can only be achieved through a united city. That is one of the tangible benefits of amalgamation. And our GRIDS process was addressing this in a sustainable way.
Some thoughts for now.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools