So what exactly is it that I'm suggesting?

To my way of thinking, there are five 'major players' in the 'game' known as Downtown Stoney Creek. (I would say six, but this sixth is only one because of its presence alone, not because of anything it could do to impact the reinvention of Downtown Stoney Creek...save for selling and relocating. I'm referring of course, to The Royal Canadian Legion.) These five major players effectively control, or about to control, or may possibly control most of what constitutes the downtown; they are the primary landowners.

In a way, this is a good thing. Having just a handful of them. It means that there are less variables than if each of the three dozen or so properties on King from Lake to Elm were owned by separate entities.

But it's a bad thing, because of the pitfalls associated with long-term inertia, staidness, and the draining effects of treading water.

In a nutshell, Downtown Stoney Creek is in a development stasis. (That it seems to have been for a very long time is a topic worthy of discussion.) From my perspective, the last major 'development' was the transition where the IGA section of town became the Tim Hortons (et al).

Wow.

Anyway, from my vantage point, what's required is a) fresh blood, b) new ideas, and c) the result of the combination of these two.

But in my teeny-tiny existence of a life, I've learned a few things.

1) Without change, nothing changes.

2) Every situation has a ceiling on its potential...unless some new influence is introduced.

3) In order to properly and successfully address a problem, the problem first has to be acknowledged. Then an understanding has to be fostered about how everything arrived at this point, how this 'problem' came to be. Finally, the correct solution has to be applied.

Now, I'm very aware of the fact that the development of a downtown is primarily the result of forces at play in our free-market, capitalist democracy. So while levels of government can promote certain movement, even nudge along factors towards a particular goal, when it comes down to it, things happen because someone has decided to endeavour to accomplish something they feel is worthy of the effort. It's a risk-based economy out there, like it or not.

I'm sure that the 'major players' I've mentioned could explain why it is -at least from their perspective- that we've ended up with a pretty nondescript downtown. Why there's little vibrancy, why the basics of any functional, excursion-enticing main street, city center, village hub are absent. Because of what I've proposed in #3 above, maybe it's time to ask this question...albeit phrased a mite better...of those who are in the best position to actually effect a change, to promote, to nudge things along to a better place...if in fact they can recognize the merits of doing so in relation to their own motivations and priorities.

So I guess that's my next task: to ask that question...and spur all the resulting discussion.