Comment 46577

By realfreeenterpriser (registered) | Posted August 29, 2010 at 13:11:38

Chris Angel said - "We need to satisfy a need for parking not dismiss it or try and BS it away."

Help us focus here, Chris. Is it JUST about parking now? Because in previous posts you've said it was about "accessibility", "not satisfying the Tiger-Cats owner" and "funneling money into the core". (your terminology not mine)

Specifically, how many more parking spaces than currently exist at, for example, Ivor Wynne or Molson Stadium or Fenway Park or Commonwealth Stadium (built well after WWII) would be enough for you? 100? 200? 6000?

As to the accessibilty "issue": A stadium adjacent to a superhighway would have only one lane in or out and virtually no other roads on which to disperse traffic. The WH already has 3 and 4 lane arterial roads directly connecting it to other arterial roads, mountain accesses and a superhighway and that's without any modifications to one-way/two-way traffic and signals before and after events. How do you respond to this?

What's your personal limit as to how far taxpayers should yield to satisfy Bob Young's demands?

Where do you personally feel taxpayers in a post-industrial city with a deteriorating downtown SHOULD "funnel their money"?

What SPECIFIC changes would have to be made for you to say Bob Young should locate the Tiger-Cats at WH?

Comment edited by realfreeenterpriser on 2010-08-29 12:14:12

Reply | Permalink | Context

You must be logged in to vote on this comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds