Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Soloeye t1_jbs39x7 wrote

>Love all the people that don't live in the city coming here to call those of us that do live here NIMBYs because we don't want another Ill conceived piece of real estate built in the city that will sit half empty for years til they come begging for a bail out then it becomes dorms like the buildings they put in downtown near waterplace park.

I'm still upset the plan to put the PawSox there fell thru. Beyond the finances it would have been a great place to have concerts and I think it would have helped the PawSox attendance.

5

frenetix t1_jbtogol wrote

On of the conditions demanded by PawSox ownership what that the taxpayers subsidize a billionaire's already successful business. Now Worcester's homeowners get to pay that.

5

Soloeye t1_jbtoo92 wrote

Yeah. That’s why I said financial/budget reasons aside, it would have been awesome to have a ballpark by the river.

3

Silentjosh37 t1_jbu0jww wrote

That was one big part I did not like. I was sad to see them leave but the cost just wasn't worth it. McCoy needed some updates but was still a fun and decent stadium.

2

The_Dream_of_Shadows OP t1_jbv0j8y wrote

I'm amazed that they're even considering tearing McCoy down. I get that it's functionally useless at the moment, but I wonder what baseball fans would think of the government trying to tear down the site of the longest baseball game ever played. That seems like enough historical reason to keep it, even if you only let local schools use it. Turn it into a museum or something. Especially since the new school they want to build there will probably be shit, given their track record this year of opening new elementary schools...

2