Thursday, April 19, 2007

My editorials part IV

It still boggles my mind that people are complaining about the project with arguments that can not even be deemed valid. CHECK IT OUT

The second editorial states:

I like the concept of Harrison Square, but I have some concerns. The first is that the main attraction is a baseball stadium. Hardball Capital has been known as developers; only recently have they been involved with sporting activities. I have no doubt Hardball will be involved in this project with or without a baseball stadium. No, actually Hardball will not be involved in the project, why would the put their money into a project that has essentially cut their business out of the project? Its suggested late you would support a water park - Maybe if Hardball was in the slip-n-slide business, they would stay on this project. BUT, why would Hardball develop condos around a water park that they are not associated with? They would most likely start counting their money and figure out how to dump $12M into our old stadium, which cost us $6M.

I have been actively involved with the Fort Wayne Wizards for 10 years. The last couple of years I have conversed with many of the season ticket holders. Not one of them that I have questioned plans on following baseball downtown. I feel that within five years, after a move downtown, Fort Wayne will not have a baseball team. I have never heard a baseball fan, or a any sports fan complain about a brand new facility and claim they wouldn't go to the games at the new facility. There isn't any logic in that - thats just being stubborn and immature. You haven't heard anyone say, "If they don't build HS, I'm going to stop going to the games."

Dayton has almost nothing around its stadium. It has a large military presence, which makes its baseball stadium feasible. HUH? what does that mean? Our military base should be growing due to the consolidation. Are military personnel the ultimate baseball fans? Also, we are guaranteeing that there will be amenities around the stadium, thats the beauty behind HS. Its not called Harrison Stadium, because it includes a hotel (which will include a restaurant and other amenities), condos, retail, and multi use buildings as well. Its not like we are ploping a stadium down in the middle of a field and expecting business to flock to it (i.e. Arizona Cardinals new stadium).

The second concern that I have is the public tax burden. The general public is greatly concerned about tax increases. Hasn't this one been covered yet?

I strongly urge the City Council to vote this project down if the stadium is included in the plans. There are so many different avenues of public entertainment that could be considered such as a water park. I find that would be more successful than a baseball stadium. I know for a fact I would take my grandchildren downtown for such an event. Anyone still urging a water park over a new ball diamond, please refer to my previous posts. Hey, a GREAT indoor water park would be nice, but as a cornerstone project, catalyst, and the first project for downtown redevelopment - its not. Its funny that the author refers to going to a water park as event. An event is a single occurrence. A baseball season is not an event, they are reoccurring events.

6 comments:

DReed said...

Diamond Jim must be filling peoples heads with downtown water park ideas. The reason it didn't work the first time was location right? If Fort Wayne thinks that a waterpark is an answer to downtown development, they will be the laughing stock of every future downtown developer.

Anonymous said...

These people look like idiots. A WATER PARK to spur downtown development? My god.

Rachel said...

My parents live near Sandusky, Ohio; land of the latest surge in indoor waterparks, plus the area has a few other attractions (an amusement park and drunkeness on the Lake Erie islands comes to mind). First of all waterparks need huge parcels of land to accommodate the surface parking. Next they tend to be built in tourist-y areas, like Sandusky, the Wisc. Dells, etc. And they are not a boon to the overall economy. They are self-sufficient attractions, giving no one an incentive to travel beyond the sea of asphalt. There is no salvation in a waterpark. Plus how are we going to get there if there are no interstates running through our fine city?

Anonymous said...

Tell that to Mr. Referendum

Parson said...

I think this is a key statement
"I find that would be more successful than a baseball stadium. I know for a fact I would take my grandchildren downtown for such an event."
This isn't one of the "young professionals" I hear so much about the city needing. It's a older person that might take the grandkids down there maybe once a year. Plus they call it a "event" like it's just a limited time thing , like 3 rivers festival is a "event"

Anonymous said...

I liked the first letter:

"I look forward to the day that I have to struggle through the traffic to get home. That’s just one sign of a healthy economy with people who will endure a little traffic to enjoy a robust economy where our homes grow in value and jobs are plentiful."

What's she been smokin'?