Comment 53427

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted December 21, 2010 at 10:40:39

"I guess there was no point in illustrating that a 50k seat stadium fits on the land at Confed Park. As well land for GO and parking and all along the waterfront trail where Barangas is, is plenty of parking and space for a boardwalk type of a commercial strip, like Ocean City or Atlantic City."

No, you showed that a stadium fits, along with what looks like a small parking lot and a GO symbol much smaller than a GO station actually needs to be. That's not "plenty of parking" - that's a small lot about 20% of the size of what the Ticats say they need - and no street and almost no lot parking in the area to make up the difference.

As for the waterfront trail, do I really need to remind you that you just plopped the stadium down on top of it!? Your plan you showed above would destroy the waterfront trail. It will cease to exist. (You also stuck it on top of the only access road to your proposed site, a very tight 2-lane roadway without shoulders, but I was happy to call that a detail - presumably they can shave a corner off the stadium or something).

Kudos, seriously, for trying to find the good buried in the Confederation Park site proposal. But the proposal would entirely destroy a part of the city that is one of its best resources for sensible future development.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools