Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 3.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Charles St GRT terminal redevelopment
(12-11-2024, 11:11 AM)cherrypark Wrote: Whether or not a new arena/event centre/convention centre is worth the enormous price tag is certainly worth a debate but the premise that it wouldn't contribute to more people coming to and patronizing downtown businesses and spaces is a bit silly. If we are going to ask for people to embrace facts about densification, transit, et al. can we at least have a good faith discussion that event destinations like this do, in fact, promote business activity? Including those that already exist.

That said, I do think that some of the programming at comparable arenas would eat what is otherwise on the program at CITS. Maybe funds to build improve the CITS area and the Aud would be better off than a new location downtown (especially if a Phase 3 ION were passing by the Aud...)

Nobody is suggesting that there would be zero impact on downtown businesses. We are all discussing the degree to which it affects businesses, and the otherwise lost opportunity cost of doing so.

To dismiss these points as "silly" or "ridiculous" does not a healthy debate make. It suggests that folks aren't even willing to understand the points being made here.

(12-11-2024, 10:06 AM)westwardloo Wrote:
(12-11-2024, 02:27 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: So what you're saying is that if downtown is already a desirable place that people want to go, then people who go to the games will choose to be there for some time.

Which is precisely what I said, the arena won't change whether people want to be downtown, which right now, the majority of people in the city don't want to be.

8-10k people aren't just "entering" downtown. Most of them are driving downtown--even with transit 90+% will still drive.

I don't think the arena would do anything to fix the problems with downtown, it would create 34 nights (plus some concerts of whatever) of a transient population who will just drive home afterwards. The rest of the time, the place will sit empty (say at least 300 days of the year) and contribute nothing to the activation of downtown. For 300 days of the year, it will be equivalent to an empty office building.

I'm not saying that an arena shouldn't be downtown, all I'm saying is that it would do nothing to help downtown, unless downtown is already healthy and thriving. London's downtown is not healthy and thriving, but if you go around the *gag* budwiser gardens *gag*--apparently now Canada Life Place, an improvement to be sure on a non-game day (300+ days of the year), it's a ghost down, it has done nothing to active downtown. If you go on one of the 34 game days + some concert days, it's just one big traffic jam.

As an aside, I never understand why people keep saying that the Aud must be replaced. It being old doesn't mean it must be replaced, buildings can be renovated and modernized as needed, I live in a city with buildings 100s of years old.
34 nights was just a minimum OHL schedule. In reality the london arena hosts 125 - 150 events per year. That is 100-200k additional people that enter the downtown core that would not otherwise be there. It 100% changes whether people will go to dt, as they will be going to an event in the dt. Not everyone drives in and drives out, Lots of people go out for dinner before a show or a game.  I bet most dt london business owners see a bump in transactions during events at the arena / convention centre.  

The building in its current form can not be renovated to support a urban population of 1 million people without spending $150-200 million. This is a ridiculous statement that will ensure nothing ever gets done.  how many of those 100 year old buildings are arenas or stadiums? Different buildings uses have different life expectancies.

If it only cost 150-200 million to renovate, that would be a fraction of the cost of a new development downtown, that being said, I suspect it would cost more to renovate, but this doesn't mean we shouldn't do so, our society is far too eager to demolish and build new.

As for the 125-150 events per year, I do not believe that it hosts 125-150 sold out events per year, I know, I used to live in London, it was pretty clear when it was empty or near empty at the arena. I don't know the specific nature of their schedule, but the arena is often very quiet.

Again, this is not a case of zero impact, this is a case of opportunity cost, and about thinking about what actually makes a place successful.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
RE: Charles St GRT terminal redevelopment - by danbrotherston - 12-11-2024, 11:44 AM
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - by ac3r - 11-19-2021, 10:01 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 6 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links