Tag Archives: Canyon Hall

Civic symbolism can have positive impact

CanyonTX1908RandallCountyCourthouse812TJnsn3

I noted recently that Amarillo’s Center City lit up a sign in front of the Paramount Building a decade ago.

Moreover, I noted that there might be some linkage between that singular act and the progress that’s occurred throughout the city’s downtown district since that moment.

There might have been some chuckles around the city over that observation.

But let me take this argument a bit farther.

Randall County performed something similar years ago when it renovated the exterior of its 1909 Courthouse building in the Canyon Square.

The county asked voters to approve a referendum to spend public money on refurbishing the outside of the building. The voters said “yes” to the request. The county then finished the job … and the exterior of that building looks spiffy, shiny and sits in the middle of a well-manicured lawn in the middle of the Square.

The building is still unoccupied. There’s no public business being done inside the building. It’s still rotting. Canyon city officials were considering renovating the interior of the building to move some City Hall functions into it — until they got the price tag for it. No can do.

But what’s happened on the Square since the courthouse building’s restoration? It’s blossoming. Businesses have moved into formerly vacant store fronts.

Randall County has moved some of its functions into the old jail and district attorney’s office building across the street. The bulk of the county’s business, though, is done at the Justice Center across the street from West Texas A&M University.

Did the act of restoring the exterior of a once-dilapidated building spur economic growth in the middle of the Randall County seat? County Judge Ernie Houdashell thinks so, as do Canyon city officials … not to mention many of the business owners who have watched the Square’s rebirth.

Does the lighting of a prominent marquee sign on Polk Street have the same impact on downtown Amarillo’s forward progress?

It could be. Who can doubt it with anything other their own bias?