dave mcbride Posted April 14, 2014 Posted April 14, 2014 Not comparing the two, just saying that the Barclays Center (much like the Prudential Center) have revitalized neighborhoods. I am not saying that putting a stadium there fixes everything. I am saying that the state would and should have an interest in the area. You don't think that Donald Trump (for example) would have an interest in developing that place? I expect the state to be players in the new stadium more so than the county.. The bottom line is that being closer to Toronto will be important to a new ownership group. Barclays didn't revitalize anything (trust me; it's an 18-minute walk from my house). I wasn't opposed to it, but it was always a small part of a much larger development in a neighborhood already bursting with money.
Lurker Posted April 14, 2014 Posted April 14, 2014 But if the state already has plans to make those upgrades Not sure what those upgrades would be from a people moving standpoint. The state dollars going into Niagara Falls are to remove portions of the Robert Moses Parkway (i.e., slow traffic down) through the downtown area. The opposite of what you'd want from a game day transportation perspective.
GG Posted April 14, 2014 Posted April 14, 2014 Not sure what those upgrades would be from a people moving standpoint. The state dollars going into Niagara Falls are to remove portions of the Robert Moses Parkway (i.e., slow traffic down) through the downtown area. The opposite of what you'd want from a game day transportation perspective. The upgrades I'm referring to are the highway links to NF. The old section of Robert Moses that goes through downtown would be part of the rebuild of American Falls access, but that's not the same as improving how people get in and out of NF efficiently, especially for a major sporting event. Again, this is way to early to start talking specifics, because there's not even a proposal out there. But that doesn't mean the state wouldn't want to push the team and the new owners to consider NF as a site, because the state is going to be spending money there. Barclays didn't revitalize anything (trust me; it's an 18-minute walk from my house). I wasn't opposed to it, but it was always a small part of a much larger development in a neighborhood already bursting with money. And to add the perspective from the other side of the river, Prudential is doing very little to Newark. NJPAC, down the road from Prudential in Newark, had a modest effect on the neighborhood, but nowhere near what the developers envisioned. Most attendees just show up for the events and hightail out of there as soon as the house lights come on. Barclays is a different animal because, as Dave says, it's not the anchor in that multi-billion dollar development in a borough that needed more housing.
Delete This Account Posted April 14, 2014 Author Posted April 14, 2014 FWIW, it's clear why NYS would favor a NF site over others in WNY. I think the state knows that no matter which owner ends up with the team, he will have a big stick over the state to throw in development dollars to keep the team in WNY. So since the state already committed to another rebuild of NF, it makes perfect sense they would try to tie the projects together. Whether it works is another matter, but it certainly makes sense for the state to be thinking Niagara Falls over Orchard Park, or even downtown Buffalo, for that matter. As for the travel options, NFL would be a lot easier for Canadians than for Buffalonians. South Ontario would have two bridges to cross, including walking over Rainbow. I imagine Lewiston/Queenston would be easier to upgrade than the mess that is Peace Bridge. For US fans, the biggest infrastructure decision would be to expand GI bridges or to build a new highway along the river or next to NF Boulevard. But if the state already has plans to make those upgrades, placing the stadium in NF would be the logical move from their standpoint. thanks for having the patience to spell that out, GG. owe you one. jw
Lurker Posted April 14, 2014 Posted April 14, 2014 But that doesn't mean the state wouldn't want to push the team and the new owners to consider NF the Buffalo waterfront as a site, because the state is going to be spending money there. Fixed. And there are a lot more voters in Erie County than Niagara...which is the primary thing the Governor and Legislature really care about.
GG Posted April 14, 2014 Posted April 14, 2014 Fixed. And there are a lot more voters in Erie County than Niagara...which is the primary thing the Governor and Legislature really care about. And that has nothing to do with what I wrote. There are also a lot of voters downstate. Should the state stop all development north of Rockland County?
Lurker Posted April 14, 2014 Posted April 14, 2014 And that has nothing to do with what I wrote. There are also a lot of voters downstate. Should the state stop all development north of Rockland County? If the state is going to spend millions, they are more apt to "push development" to where they can get the most "thank you" votes (i.e., Erie County). Niagara County is a pipsqueak from a voter perspective.
Kirby Jackson Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 (edited) If the state is going to spend millions, they are more apt to "push development" to where they can get the most "thank you" votes (i.e., Erie County). Niagara County is a pipsqueak from a voter perspective. That's an interesting perspective but do people really care where they put the team? Is someone from Erie County really going to look at the Bills in NF as a bad thing? I would think that everyone would be elated that they are in WNY. Edited April 15, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
May Day 10 Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 I would be very happy. Not to mention much closer to me... It's just a laughable "possibility" at this point. I actually think the thought is hilarious. Can't blame the council for keeping all the options open this early...
GG Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 If the state is going to spend millions, they are more apt to "push development" to where they can get the most "thank you" votes (i.e., Erie County). Niagara County is a pipsqueak from a voter perspective. By that logic, all development should be south of Rockland County. Development of NF is more than about votes. It's also about getting a greater share of tourist dollars from the Canadian side. So if the state has already committed to improving the American side of the falls, then I can certainly see why they would want to combine that with a possible stadium project. It's not that difficult of a concept.
Mr. WEO Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 (edited) By that logic, all development should be south of Rockland County. Development of NF is more than about votes. It's also about getting a greater share of tourist dollars from the Canadian side. So if the state has already committed to improving the American side of the falls, then I can certainly see why they would want to combine that with a possible stadium project. It's not that difficult of a concept. The few days a year that games are played in a NF stadium won't do much, if anything, to improve the lot of those who live on the US side of the Falls. Canadians (and their dollars) will come in and go right back out after the game. If they are looking for more than the game, they can get all the can get all the other entertainment want on their side of the Falls as they return home. NF isn't suffering because of inadequate roads leading into and out of it....... Edited April 15, 2014 by Mr. WEO
Kirby Jackson Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 The few days a year that games are played in a NF stadium won't do much, if anything, to improve the lot of those who live on the US side of the Falls. Canadians (and their dollars) will come in and go right back out after the game. If they are looking for more than the game, they can get all the can get all the other entertainment want on their side of the Falls as they return home. NF isn't suffering because of inadequate roads leading into and out of it....... What about the American tourists that spend that tourist dollars on the Canadian side?
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 (edited) All theoretical arguments aside, I keep coming back to the fact that Erie County does not want to lose the tax money and other income from a stadium, and that will be a very significant stumbling block. All talk of regionalism aside, there are substantial practical interests involved here, and Buffalo has always been more interested in claiming the Falls for itself than it has been in actually sharing services or amenities with any municipality north of Ellicott creek. The sad state of the City of Niagara Falls is another huge and unavoidable problem. Sure, there is land available, and there are ways to get there, but man oh man the old home town is sliding down down down. For someone to plunk hundreds of millions into a stadium there would require a degree of local patriotism bordering on senselessness. I just don't see it. Much more likely, to my mind, is the Amherst/Northtowns/UB possibility: close to the mainline thruway, the 290, and the 190, still within Erie County, and in a relatively less-blighted area. Edited April 15, 2014 by RJ (not THAT RJ)
Mr. WEO Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 What about the American tourists that spend that tourist dollars on the Canadian side? They will have nicer roads in which to return to Buffalo, I guess. Other than the sad Indian Casino, there is no reason to for an American tourist to favor the US side over the Canadian. No one has the means to, and there is simply no demand for, a duplication of the Canadian side entertainment density on the US side. If it was a great idea, it wouldn't need the prospect of a stadium (an empty one nearly every day of the year, at that) for someone to have thought of it before now.
Kirby Jackson Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 They will have nicer roads in which to return to Buffalo, I guess. Other than the sad Indian Casino, there is no reason to for an American tourist to favor the US side over the Canadian. No one has the means to, and there is simply no demand for, a duplication of the Canadian side entertainment density on the US side. If it was a great idea, it wouldn't need the prospect of a stadium (an empty one nearly every day of the year, at that) for someone to have thought of it before now. I guess that is just where we will end up disagreeing. I have no idea why the state of NY would be content to let all of the tourist dollars be spent in Canada. If they could cash in on some of that money by developing the American side I would think that would be a positive to them -no? Perhaps the stadium would be that anchor that sparks development in that area. I don't see it ever developing to the point of the Canadian side but it can certainly be light years ahead of where it is now.
GG Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 The few days a year that games are played in a NF stadium won't do much, if anything, to improve the lot of those who live on the US side of the Falls. Canadians (and their dollars) will come in and go right back out after the game. If they are looking for more than the game, they can get all the can get all the other entertainment want on their side of the Falls as they return home. NF isn't suffering because of inadequate roads leading into and out of it....... Yet again, you are jumping to conclusions of what the OP never claimed. The AP story plainly reported that in the initial meetings of the stadium working group, NYS wants the team to consider all possible venues in WNY, including Niagara Falls. From the state's perspective, that would be logical because the state is full in to revitalize NF. Again. Now, you and everyone can debate whether that is practical relative to the other options, but from the state's perspective it is the best option because the state's share of the total costs - NF redevelopment and whatever stadium costs the state will incur, will be lower if the stadium is in NF. It is very logical for the state to combine the two projects. And for your assertion that the stadium doesn't attract any economic activity other than on game day, that holds true no matter where the stadium is located. So why would the state spend money on a single use 10-time/year facility, when it can defray some of the cost through a multi-use facility that has a stadium attached to either a massive shopping complex, entertainment center, or a convention center? If I were on the state EDC, I would be pushing for that like crazy. Which it seems what the state is doing.
Prickly Pete Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 All theoretical arguments aside, I keep coming back to the fact that Erie County does not want to lose the tax money and other income from a stadium, and that will be a very significant stumbling block. All talk of regionalism aside, there are substantial practical interests involved here, and Buffalo has always been more interested in claiming the Falls for itself than it has been in actually sharing services or amenities with any municipality north of Ellicott creek. The sad state of the City of Niagara Falls is another huge and unavoidable problem. Sure, there is land available, and there are ways to get there, but man oh man the old home town is sliding down down down. For someone to plunk hundreds of millions into a stadium there would require a degree of local patriotism bordering on senselessness. I just don't see it. Much more likely, to my mind, is the Amherst/Northtowns/UB possibility: close to the mainline thruway, the 290, and the 190, still within Erie County, and in a relatively less-blighted area. This. The Bills are connected to the businesses and politicians of Erie County. Logistics, and toxic waste aside, it's unlikely that all that pie is just going to be taken away, and served to the politicians of Niagara Cnty, and Niagara Falls. So much of the political support that keeps the Bills in the area is dependent on those Erie County based connections. Without that, there isn't nearly the same motivation to keep them in "Buffalo".
plenzmd1 Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 Barclays didn't revitalize anything (trust me; it's an 18-minute walk from my house). I wasn't opposed to it, but it was always a small part of a much larger development in a neighborhood already bursting with money. I mentioned this somewhere else, but Verizon Center(MCI back then) sure as hell turned around a blighted neighborhood in DC. I would even go so far as to say really transformed DC . and the perception of DC, especially neighborhoods outside of the the traditional white neighborhoods, completely around. Now, i do not think a football stadium utilized 10 days a year can have the same impact that a arena with prolly at least 150 events a year..just posting is all
Mr. WEO Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 (edited) I guess that is just where we will end up disagreeing. I have no idea why the state of NY would be content to let all of the tourist dollars be spent in Canada. If they could cash in on some of that money by developing the American side I would think that would be a positive to them -no? Perhaps the stadium would be that anchor that sparks development in that area. I don't see it ever developing to the point of the Canadian side but it can certainly be light years ahead of where it is now. The State has limited funds. They have committed a billion to Buffalo over a decade. My guess is that the State feels there has been little interest in grand scale private investment in NF, so committing hundreds of millions to a "white elephant" of a convention center, etc., won't be money well spent. I think they are smarter betting on Buffalo. For those really dying to go to "Niagara Falls", it's quite simple to simply go over the border to where all they are seeking already exists. The State understands this. Yet again, you are jumping to conclusions of what the OP never claimed. The AP story plainly reported that in the initial meetings of the stadium working group, NYS wants the team to consider all possible venues in WNY, including Niagara Falls. From the state's perspective, that would be logical because the state is full in to revitalize NF. Again. Now, you and everyone can debate whether that is practical relative to the other options, but from the state's perspective it is the best option because the state's share of the total costs - NF redevelopment and whatever stadium costs the state will incur, will be lower if the stadium is in NF. It is very logical for the state to combine the two projects. And for your assertion that the stadium doesn't attract any economic activity other than on game day, that holds true no matter where the stadium is located. So why would the state spend money on a single use 10-time/year facility, when it can defray some of the cost through a multi-use facility that has a stadium attached to either a massive shopping complex, entertainment center, or a convention center? If I were on the state EDC, I would be pushing for that like crazy. Which it seems what the state is doing. NF has tried entertainment (the Casino) and shopping (outlets). It hasn't worked. Why would it now? As for more convention square footage, where is the demand? It would just steal business from the nearby Buffalo Convention Center. Why would the State be interested in that? And exactly how much State money has been committed to the "full in revitalization" of NF? Edited April 15, 2014 by Mr. WEO
Lurker Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 the state is full in to revitalize NF. If you believe USA Niagara (with an annual budget of about $3.5 million) makes the state "full in" on Niagara Falls, I've got some prime land in the North End I'd like to sell you... http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/Stories/2012/Dec18/USANiagara.html Even the Governor's $20 million commitment (over 5 years) to the Downtown Niagara Falls Development Challenge is small potatoes by funding standards: http://www.governor.ny.gov/press/10032013-revitalize-downtown-niagara-falls
Recommended Posts