12-11-2024, 02:32 PM
(12-11-2024, 11:44 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(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: 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.
(12-11-2024, 01:58 PM)Kodra24 Wrote:Just curious as to if this is based on you visiting downtown frequently or just on what you hear about downtown. My wife and I don’t live downtown and not really in the suburbs either. I like to think of us as inbetweeners. We visit frequently in the summer for events and to walk in Victoria park. Never felt unsafe. We sometimes take our adult children downtown for dinner when they are in town They grew up here and are surprised by our downtown. And they both live in Leslieville in Toronto.(12-10-2024, 12:28 PM)MidTowner Wrote: This is a matter of perspective. I think downtown is safe, I walk down there with my young children all the time. Sometimes we're at risk of being struck by a car driven by someone who doesn't obey the rules, but generally there's less of that downtown than in other parts of downtown.
It is a work in progress, of course, it could get better, and everywhere is always changing.
I guess it is a matter of perspective as I definitely wouldn't bring my children there, it's funny you mention cars but not the hoards of addicts - I guess we see a different reality