Comment 26149

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 31, 2008 at 15:57:40

I think your argument would hold more water if two-way conversions were extremely costly, but much of the frustration you see here is due to the fact that conversions are a relatively low-cost solution that have been proven. You say there are other means of creating new business and increasing assessments that are more effective. What are they, and are they less costly than conversions? Because recent history in Hamilton shows us that the usual 'solutions' to generating jobs and revenue involve multi-million dollar investments in highway expansions and infrastructure in outlying areas (with limited results to date). The paltry few million it would take to convert downtown streets seems like a very wise investment in comparison.

Don't dismiss the importance of quality of life issues. Jobs chase people these days, and companies looking to invest in communities are looking at quality of life issues - walkability, access to amenities and arts and entertainment, etc. A vibrant downtown will attract people who wish to live, work, and play there, and investment will follow.

Also, you still haven't explained the seeming contradiction between your position that we shouldn't "alienate" your mountain constituents by making downtown driving any slower for them, and your support for traffic calming measures (which would presumably also cost a certain amount of money).

Also, kudos for your classy response to g.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools