Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
Tourists will not come here to see the bridge on its own if that is what you mean...just like no one comes here to see the Calgary Tower on its own. It doesn't mean that the Tower is not a tourist attraction though?
|
Yeah, I think it's part of developing an amazing waterfront, something that should be a priority for Calgary's tourism spending; the river (clean, safe, beautiful, full of fish) is one of the best assets that we have. Taking a city like Portland as an example (often a good comparable for Calgary), people may not go to Portland because of their waterfront, but people who do go to Portland usually spend a lot of time and money at the businesses along there. I think it's unfortunate that almost everywhere, we have a row of housing or a traffic corridor between the river and the business locations (Inglewood, Bridgeland, Kensington), but pretty much the whole stretch of communities through there benefit from a better waterfront.
Now, I'm not totally on-board with this particular project: the timing wasn't great, and the optics of it were so poorly managed, and I'm not totally sold on the location, either. But I can appreciate the idea behind it and the importance of projects like this in an overall vision for the city.