Comment 76264

By ScreamingViking (registered) | Posted April 26, 2012 at 18:07:44 in reply to Comment 76259

Yes, but I think the stadium would still not be the catalyst for that. The other new development would make sense in that downtown location because it may benefit from locational, agglomeration, density, or market advantages of the downtown.

I was pretty young during the debate over Copps Coliseum, but according to some it was supposed to help rejuvenate the downtown too. As an arena and convention space it's been a fairly successful building (and I know some don't feel that way) but it has hardly been a catalyst for more growth downtown. Even if it had become home to an NHL team, I doubt that would have mattered.

A downtown or near-downtown stadium would have been nice. But there are probably other more economically beneficial developments, which have a wider every-day impact, that can better make use of that land.

That's the flipside of the stadium location debate for me. And perhaps the irony too - right or wrong, Young's "highjacking" of the stadium funding may allow us to achieve a different and perhaps better vision for the downtown and west harbour lands.

Thing is, it will take hard work and planning even with the slow momentum that seems to be occurring downtown, and a lot of smaller steps, rather than hoping a single big one will get us there faster.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds