Cover

Our City, Our Future

The Our City, Our Future campaign calls on Hamilton City Council, the Province of Ontario, the Pan Am Games HostCo and the Hamilton Tiger-Cats to commit to a downtown Pan Am Stadium that helps build a city with a lively waterfront connected to local and r

By RTH Staff
Published July 14, 2010

On August 10, 2010, Hamilton City Council will vote on the location of the Pan Am Games Stadium. The choice is between two sites - The West Harbour and the East Mountain. The choice is about the type of city we want to live in and what we believe the future of Hamilton is all about.

As citizens, it's Our City, Our Future and Our Money on the line and we have the final say on where the stadium should be located.

http://ourcityourfuture.ca

The following motion will be presented at City Council on August 10 and we urge all who support a dynamic, progressive vision for Hamilton to voice their support for the motion to all decision makers involved. There are a number of ways you can show your support outlined below:

Our City, Our Future: A Motion on the Location of the Hamilton Pan Am Games Stadium

Dear City Council:

Whereas, a new Hamilton stadium for the Pan Am Games represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to accelerate waterfront/downtown revitalization;

Whereas, Hamilton City Council has voted in favour of a West Harbour location, backed up by thorough analysis and a business case presented by Deloitte Canada and a traffic analysis presented by IBI;

Whereas, Hamilton taxpayers have already spent millions of dollars acquiring land on the West Harbour for the project;

Whereas, the City of Hamilton is contributing $60 million of our Future Fund towards the project, while the Hamilton Tiger-Cats are a minority partner;

Whereas, if the East Mountain site is chosen, Hamilton would be one of the only cities in North America to build a suburban stadium in this day and age, and it would send a very poor, regressive message about Hamilton around North America, impacting our ability to retain the best and brightest talent who seek progressive dynamic cities in which to live;

Whereas, not choosing the West Harbour site will impact the timing and viability of Hamilton's case for priority funding for its Rapid Transit plans as it calls into question the City's commitment to revitalization of the Downtown Urban Growth Node under the Province of Ontario Places to Grow Strategy and Metrolinx plans;

Therefore Be It Resolved:

(a) That Hamilton City Council reaffirms the West Harbour location as its choice for the Pan Am Games Stadium to be funded by money through the Future Fund;

(b) That an invitation be extended to the Hamilton Tiger-Cats to be a community partner on new terms that allow for the financial success of the football club at the West Harbour location.

http://ourcityourfuture.ca

59 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By Pat (anonymous) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 16:08:38

Doug Nimick is the MAN!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Josh Cullen (anonymous) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 19:58:13

It only took a year to prove Sam Merulla was right all along. This Pan Am initiative is a colossal screw up and Ivor Wynne is just fine for me.

Bye Bye


Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Highwater (registered) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 22:20:14

So why is your boy Sam compounding the screw up by supporting EM?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By caretaker (registered) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 22:27:57

(b) That an invitation be extended to the Hamilton Tiger-Cats to be a community partner on new terms that allow for the financial success of the football club at the West Harbour location.

Sadly we (the Ticats) have spent months with the City trying to find those "new terms", and there just are not any that would work to build a profitable business hosting large events in the West Harbour.

As West Harbour resident Herman Turkstra argued in the opinion page of the Spec today, we need a stadium that works in Hamilton. The definition of "works" is one that contributes to the tax base in Hamilton, not one that is a burden to the taxpayers of Hamilton.

Cheers, Bob.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Highwater (registered) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 22:51:41

Gah! Bob, it will take $50m to bring the stadium up to a size that will make it "profitable" for your business, and that's only if you include the $60m from the future fund which should not be included as a suburban stadium does not meet the city-building criteria of the future fund. So far you have only offered up $15m. And that's just the stadium alone. Then there's the 6,000 car parking lot, the highway interchange, the road widenings, the stormwater system upgrade that will be required to compensate for all the additional paving, the infrastructure to subsidize the spin off big box development...and on and on it goes.

Sprawl development, like that typified by a suburban stadium, is the reason our tax base is static. If you cared about our tax base, you would support the WH.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 23:11:52

If the stadium ends up at WH it will be interesting what developers jump on board. If there are none, the stadium will end up costing Hamilton taxpayers a lot of money. Not saying that's a bad thing, obviously this is scenario many who advocate for the WH are willing to live with, which is great in many respects.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Highwater (registered) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 23:16:09

HF, sprawl developers cost the city more money than they bring in. Even if no developers jump aboard the WH site, we'll still come out ahead.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted July 14, 2010 at 23:47:34

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By caretaker (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 08:10:46

Then there's the 6,000 car parking lot, the highway interchange, the road widenings, the stormwater system upgrade that will be required to compensate for all the additional paving, the infrastructure to subsidize the spin off big box development...and on and on it goes.

Now compare those costs to the much higher costs of doing the same things in the West Harbour and you'll see why it would be such as mistake to try to shoe-horn a stadium in between residential neighbourhoods there.

Sprawl development, like that typified by a suburban stadium, is the reason our tax base is static. If you cared about our tax base, you would support the WH.

Suburban development does contribute to the tax base of our city, the province of Ontario, and the government of Canada. In very much the same way intelligently planned urban renewal projects contribute. It is poorly planned projects put in the wrong location that do not contribute.

You would be much better off turning your attention and energies to helping ensure a stadium is built that contributes to the future tax base of Hamilton in some viable location. Rather than insisting on building it in the one place in Hamilton that will require subsidies from the City to operate for decades to come.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By z jones (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 08:22:59

Now compare those costs to the much higher costs of doing the same things in the West Harbour

You mean much lower costs. The municipal infrastructure is already there, there are already 5-6000 parking spots within a ten minute walk, there's walking, cycling, transit (with LRT coming) and GO service to offset the number of cars, and already plenty of great restaurants and bars within walking distance so everyone isn't leaving at the same time.

Because the stadium is in the middle of an actual community instead of next to a giant parking lot, there's lots of opportunity for new businesses to spring up in the area to take advantage of thousands of happy people walking through a pleasant neighborhood instead of across a parking lot.

Comment edited by z jones on 2010-07-15 07:30:03

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By frank (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 08:31:35

z jones is right...it won't be necessary to build a 5-6000 car parking lot in a West Harbor location. Bob, sprawl development is in fact poorly planned projects in the wrong location... It's the artificially lowered development charges as well as the increase in infrastructure costs that nullify any benefits, not to mention the increase in transportation costs due to spreading out instead of up/in.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By DBC (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 08:40:46

Bob, you either need new advisors or you need to stop listening to the ones you've got.

It is obvious you do not live here. One need only look around to see that we have been doing for the last 30 years surely isn't working and you say "let's keep doing it".

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Showus thenumbers (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 09:01:42

Bob - Show us the numbers! – What are your cost projections at EM as compared to WH? Not the generic “I will lose $7M”. If you are asking for $60M in local public dollars, show us the numbers to prove it.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Brandon (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 09:41:53

To address the parking issue at West Harbour, all the city would need to do would be to add a few HSR buses doing shuttle runs from downtown. Plenty of parking available downtown as anyone who has paid attention can attest.

Look at that, we just saved $24,000,000! I think that might even trump the $15,000,000 that the 'Cats are proposing...

If the West Harbour was starting from scratch, there might be a point in comparing the cost of building all the support facilities. Given than most of them are already in place, it's somewhat less realistic.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 10:05:51

It's strange that the facilitor Mr. Fenn, whose paycheck in this case came from the Ontario government I would assume, would allow another site to be entertained if the WH was the perfect site and allowed for government mandates like brownfield cleanup, controlling urban sprawl, keeping more cars off the road etc.

Just seems weird when you think of it.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 10:35:03

You would be much better off turning your attention and energies to helping ensure a stadium is built that contributes to the future tax base of Hamilton in some viable location. Rather than insisting on building it in the one place in Hamilton that will require subsidies from the City to operate for decades to come.

Merciful heavens, good man! Can't you see that's what I'm doing? As numerous other commenters have rightly pointed out, the cost of building, servicing, and maintaining a car-dependent sprawl stadium will be far higher than the cost of building in the WH location, even with the required remediation. And unless council is as bankrupt morally as they are intellectually, we will have to do it without the Future Fund.

The WH may not be a silver bullet for downtown revitalization, but there will at least be some economic benefit, and there will be considerable social and cultural benefit to compensate taxpayers for our enormous investment. The EM will only provide economic benefit for a few big box developers like the ones who are advising you, and a car-dependent sprawl stadium will have all the social, cultural, and environmental benefit of a giant sucking wound.

You might have a case if you were offering up the required $50m, but you're not. You are expecting us to pay virtually all the bills while receiving none of the benefits. Would you propose such a lopsided business deal to a private company? As a citizen of this city, I feel abused and disrespected by the deal you are proposing.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By hfs (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 10:46:19


Hi Bob,

I will not bore you with yet another list of logical reasons as to why the West Harbour is a better location for "your" stadium than the East Mountain; I'm sure you have heard them all by now. It has become painfully obvious that you know nothing about, or choose to ignore, current progressive and contemporary urban planning practices. If it does not involve acres of parking or naming rights, you do not want to hear it.

What I will tell you is that you are doing a fine job of polarizing this city and alienating Hamilton Tiger-Cat fans. It is apparent to me, as well as other fans that I have spoken to, that you are striving to cater to everyone other than the traditional Tiger-Cat fan. Your hypothesis that fans from London, Niagara Falls, GTA, etc. will flock to "your" East Mountain location is based on what, exactly? If these fans wanted to attend Hamilton Tiger-Cat games, they would be.

People do not go to sporting events because of ease of access. The best stadium atmospheres in professional sports can be found in dense, URBAN locations across both North America and the world (again, I will not bore you with evidence of numerous examples from wonderfully PROGRESSIVE cities). There is something about walking through historic city streets on the way to the game, or enjoying a dinner and a drink along the way or after, that is lost at a suburban stadium. You preach game day experience; acres of open field/parking and a Home Depot does very little to enhance a fan's game day experience.

So, when you get "your" East Mountain stadium, I'm sure you will get the crowds you desire in the very short-term (heck, you may even get the odd curious fan from London or Niagara Falls that you so desperately desire!). But the novelty will wear off very soon, and what you will be left with is another suburban, North American white elephant of a stadium (except this one will be embarrassingly constructed in 2010 rather than 1970). However, who knows if you will still be around to really suffer any of the consequences? Good luck, Bob.

P.S. As a lifelong Ti-Cat fan, I will never spend another dime on the Ti-Cats if they play on the East Mountain. I doubt that I'm alone.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:14:05

"As a citizen of this city, I feel abused and disrespected by the deal you are proposing"

Funny highwater you mention this, I feel exactly the opposite, for the first time in I don't know how many decades, finally we have a TigerCat owner willing to put some money up for a new facility. As a citizen, I feel more proud and respected with Bob Young's contribution.

And also, the WH, while I like the site for selfish reasons, disrespects the Setting Sail plan calling for more residential apsects to the WH area which in the long run makes the area more sustainable and has people actually living there instead of having a stadium which sits empty most of the time of the year. So more people will spend money in the vicinity ie. downtown area.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By arcadia (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:22:11

"You would be much better off turning your attention and energies to helping ensure a stadium is built that contributes to the future tax base of Hamilton in some viable location. Rather than insisting on building it in the one place in Hamilton that will require subsidies from the City to operate for decades to come."

Bob, I don't like either the West Harbour or the East Mountain. But between the two sites it's an easy choice. Michael Fenn chose this spot and now it's between the two, and we can't dream anymore about Confederation Park or Innovation Park. This is going to a vote and Hostco is breathing down our necks. You can always stay at Ivor Wynne, but we have to make this decision now.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:25:06

Funny highwater you mention this, I feel exactly the opposite, for the first time in I don't know how many decades, finally we have a TigerCat owner willing to put some money up for a new facility.

Get Real, HF. Bob Young is offering a little over half what it will cost just to build the parking lot that he wants to collect all the revenue from. This is nothing short of insulting. Frankly, Bob is counting on the collective low self esteem of Hamiltonians such as yourself. I guess I haven't lived here long enough to have had my spirit completely crushed. A sprawl stadium ought to do it though.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:33:33

Sorry highwater, I disagree with your reasoning. Let me repeat, finally we have a TigerCat owner willing to put up money for a stadium. Why do you think such action caught the attention of some city councillors?

You may find it insulting and that is your right but I'm a prouder citizen of Hamilton since Bob's contribution has been put on the table.

Bob, thank you not only as a citizen of Hamilton but as a TigerCat fan as well. You are willing to work with the city and have shown total respect for the facilitation process.

Comment edited by HamiltonFan on 2010-07-15 10:34:10

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:37:21

finally we have a TigerCat owner willing to put up money for a stadium

In exchange for putting the stadium in a place where it won't do a bit for good for the city's tax assessment and in exchange for the Ticats collecting ALL the money from seat sales, food, drink, and parking for every event. Pretty good deal if you own the Ticats, not so much if your a tax payer.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:47:19

If that actually is the case nobrainer and I'm not going to ask you for proof to back up what you're saying, it should be a very easy decision for council to simply approve the WH site next month. I would gather.

We shall see now won't we? I assume that city council and the Mayor want the city'a tax assessment not to be negatively impacted as you suggest.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:53:06

Methinks you give our councilors too much credit to assume they'll make the best long term decision without some help from the citizenry...

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:54:49

...it should be a very easy decision for council to simply approve the WH site next month...I assume that city council and the Mayor want the city'a tax assessment not to be negatively impacted as you suggest.

You think council's vote will be proof that it's a good deal for our tax base??!! Seriously?! If this were true we wouldn't be one of the highest taxed cities in the country. It's council's chasing after the illusory benefit of sprawl that has put us in the position we are in today. The only thing a vote in favour of EM would prove is that they never learn.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By DBC (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:55:49

From HF: "Sorry highwater, I disagree with your reasoning. Let me repeat, finally we have a TigerCat owner willing to put up money for a stadium. Why do you think such action caught the attention of some city councillors?"

Because the majority are pathetic career municipal politicians who likely can't imagine a future where they aren't. With the shamefully low turnout at civic election time I am sure they figure this will be enough to see them get re-elected.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By caretaker (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:00:57

sprawl development is in fact poorly planned projects in the wrong location...

...but this is simply not true.

If not for "sprawl development" there would be no Hamilton Ontario. Only 200 years ago King and James was a farmer's field. And the equivalent of "Raise the Hammer" communities in Toronto at the time were insisting steel mills should be built at Spadina and Queen.

;-)

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MarkWhittle (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:09:59

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:10:50

If not for "sprawl development" there would be no Hamilton Ontario. Only 200 years ago King and James was a farmer's field. And the equivalent of "Raise the Hammer" communities in Toronto at the time were insisting steel mills should be built at Spadina and Queen.

Sprawl is low density, car dependent development. Your suggestion that the dense, urban development at King and James or Spadina and Queen is merely first generation sprawl is, well, 'disingenuous'.

;-)

Comment edited by highwater on 2010-07-15 11:12:16

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:16:30

Why can't the parking of the EMED be constructed with water permiable surfaces, that obsorb the rain water into the soil below, like our front lawns do?

Because conventional surface parking is already going to cost us $24,000,000 (of which Mr. Young is only offering to pay $15m), and now you want to go with the luxury model? I thought you were all about fiscal responsibility, MAW.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Young Family (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:18:15

caretaker,

I sincerely hope your last comment is in jest. With your family's deep history in this city you should know about the historical growth of Hamilton as an city. It was actually the vision of Hamiltonians at the time that made a conscience effort to plant the seeds that would grow into what would be a very prosperous city and not a suburb of Toronto (BTW - they became extremely wealthy men as a result). I really hope you have the vision that many of us thought you had and can see that the act of a revitalized ticats on a revitalized waterfront could set this city up for the next 50-75 years - a legacy that big-box land simply will not provide. Do you want to be the next Harold Ballard or carry the torch of your family name and be the one to make this happen?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By fd (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:31:00


If not for "sprawl development" there would be no Hamilton Ontario. Only 200 years ago King and James was a farmer's field. And the equivalent of "Raise the Hammer" communities in Toronto at the time were insisting steel mills should be built at Spadina and Queen.

;-)


WOW.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:35:53

Funny highwater you mention this, I feel exactly the opposite, for the first time in I don't know how many decades, finally we have a TigerCat owner willing to put some money up for a new facility. As a citizen, I feel more proud and respected with Bob Young's contribution.

I have felt that way as well. What a breath of fresh air to see how the Tiger-Cats have grown into a professionally marketed team on the verge of greatness, a cleaned up stadium with one of the largest video boards in North America, and really good crowds who all seem to be getting to the current site just fine, and so much going on from fun days to World Record days.

I'll say it for the 100th time. Build the WH site. 15,000 seats. You don't need the Ti-Cats there. Concerts, track and field events, a community stadium for track and related type community use certainly are enough to make it a profitable contributing factor to our tax base.

Then you take that money that was going to be used to up the seating capacity of the 15,000 Pan Am's site, and put that towards the current [IWS site](http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=139933546032519&ref=ts]. Both the WH site and IWS are exactly the same minus the smoke stacks in the background, but the escarpment background is prett impressive. Wrap the north endzone around and build some shelter on that side and hide more of that north end, but really, why are we trying to hide it and impress others? That is us like it or love it. Really. Ya we need to slowly rid ourselves of it for the greater good of the environment, but for now it is us and has been us for many generations.

IWS serves the community on so many levels right now, so how great would it be to have two such locations. One for the Cats, one for soccer? Bob owns teams at both locations. Don't they like smaller venues for soccer anyway that are for soccer only? As long as they don't take the community use away from the WH location like they did at BMO field.

Bob, I have said it before. I have great respect for you as a man, a business man, and an entrepreneur. But we cherish community in Hamilton and we love IWS for that and want to see something similar at WH. Not that you don't cherish community, but from what I have read on here, and other sites like FB, that is what everyone loves about WH.

I don't want to see the Cats go with my whole heart. I don't want to see you go as an owner because there don't seem to be many owners like you in Canada (and I am not just talking about people with deep pockets), but I think above all else, the one thing that is clear here is that everyone wants this to be a community stadium. Those that want the EM I think more just want the Cats to be sustainable for the long term. Me included. I don't know that I would want to live in a CFL-less town. It has been part of me since childhood. Professional sports as Scott Mitchell said in his Spec interview, is so important to our community. I don't want to lose that.

All I am asking from the bottom of my Hamilton loving (first), and Ti-Cat loving (second) heart, is just listen to the people in this city. This city has been going in the wrong direction for so long and I think those that are still passionate enough to fight for their city - for change, deserve to have their voices heard and trusted.

We need to know if the vision the other side holds is actually better for our community - for this world for that matter, than the build a highway down the most beautiful lands in this city/build a stadium by big box stores that we all hate, and encourage and help these little shop owners thrive.

We want to see more Shops Around the Corner, than F-O-X type box stores. I want to walk up and down a tree lined community street and shop, not around a big block of pavement. You think the people on Stoney Creek Mtn really wanted that beautiful area in our city to turn into the big box nightmare that it is? I would think not. Ancaster and Upper James are already a nightmare to get around, and as Stoney Creek continues to be paved in concrete, it will be the same. Nice little communities with no way out.

I am tired of seeing advisors from other big cities coming into to Hamilton saying we want people stuck in traffic so they can admire the stores around them. Bah humbug! You say we want it, we don't.

People on this site and others similar to it (even on the Ticats forums), and the people who care more about people and animals than nature than money, are onto something. Let them be heard and let them give their vision a try. We are all told we need all this 'big money' to make the world go around, but perhaps there is a way to be successful as a community - as a city, without money being such a driving force?

Either find a way to save IW, or just give WH a shot. Perhaps your advisors are wrong. I for one think from the passion I have seen these past couple of weeks surrounding WH, that all of these people will go to no ends, to make WH work for everyone.

As for money and the possibility of saving IW ... I remmeber they built a church up from me (on the Hamilton Mtn), in one weekend. Obviously you need some tradesmen, but for the most part, it seemed like community members that built it. Fast and probably fairly inexpensive as well.

Set up a kids camp at Scott Park field (baseball diamonds, pool (Jimmy Thompson), arena (Scott Park), for my kids to hang during the day (7 days a week), and I'll donate as much time as possible to help the re-building. 12 hours on a weekend, maybe dedicate two weeks of my holiday to the project? Maybe some tradesmen would donate some time and perhaps some materials would be donated or sold at cost all in support of a community project like rebuilding IWS?

As I previously posted, I am not okay with all these dollars being thrown around. There has to be a way to make it cheaper. Much more cheaper. Everything is millions and billions these days. Does it really have to be?

There is a way to make this a win-win situation for all involved. I believe wholeheartedly that there is. So let's listen to all these ideas and pool them all together and build something (or two somethings), that makes us all proud.

Stop thinking dollars and cents (and I know on some level we do have to), but perhaps listening to the depths of our hearts will bring more financial rewards than we could have ever dreamed, buy listening to the community.

I think if we can make the entire feel good and proud of what comes out of this, they will do anything in their power to support it and sell it. I think an entire 500,000 person community selling something to the world, is much more valuable than one company trying to sell something to 500,000 people and the world on top of it. Espcially if you are trying to sell something so many people are against.

I know I tend to be very long winded Bob/forum followers, but this is so important to Hamilton, and not since the Red Hill Valley, has something touched me so deeply. Something that I wanted to get involved in and help bring food to tree-sitters, than than the thought of this city (the one I have lived in for most of my 37 years and would like to live until I am in it's ground), taking a drastic turn down the wrong path, and a franchise I would do anything in my power to support and save from leaving town.

Go up to the top of the Jolly Cut for a couple of hours and look around at the city below the mount. That's where I have always gone to make hard decisions. Take city council with you. It's enlightening.

Watch quietly and let this all soak in. Everything you have had to soak in since this project started. Let that beautiful view, help you realize what is best for the city and Ti-Cat's fans alike. Ivor Wynne looks pretty cool from above - espcially at night when your guys are practising or even better yet, when a game is on and the stadium is full.

This isn't about what other cities have done. THis is about being a world leader and doing what is right for this community.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:46:56

What MAW calls arrogant, I call impassioned.

Beautiful post, lawrence.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 12:49:23

@MarkWhittle

I think it's completely unfair to characterize the city's reaction as rude. They've been very polite with Mr. Young... it's just that the mayor and councillor MacHattie disagree with him.

Disagreement is not rude.

As for this forum... well, welcome to the Internet. It's easier to have an opinion than information, and it's easy to be loud.

Mr. Young is a great businessman who has done wonderful things for the worlds of open source software and self-publishing. He's also done good things for the city by keeping the Cats here when they're obviously a money-pit.

But that doesn't necessarily mean he's right about the stadium thing.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By AnneMariePavlov (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 13:13:47

Very eloquent and moving, Lawrence. You have changed my mind about location.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By caretaker (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 13:31:41

Very eloquent and moving, Lawrence. You have changed my mind about location.

Lawrence's post is exactly why I hang out here. We may not agree with each other's conclusions, but I genuinely respect the thought, effort and passion many of you put into your arguments.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MattJelly (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 13:41:19

MAW is calling someone an armchair critic?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 13:50:56

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 14:15:32

Like the area around Ivor Wynne? This area is an actual community, yet for some reason it hasn't developed into anything but some of the cheapest real estate in the city.

Rebuild the stadium, tear down Scott Park school and arena, build a new twin pad arena. Then, you have a big field with two baseball diamonds, a soccer field, a twin pad arena, a nice shiny stadium, an already new Prince of Whales School, Jimmy Thompson Memorial pool, and perhaps the arena is also a community centre. Wouldn't that increase the worth of the area and encourage 'money' to come in and clean up around it?

Wouldn't that possibly encourage a handfull of the old buildings on King St to be turned into bars/restaurants/shops? Then put a Tiger-Cat store down by this new revitalized stadium.

Look at James St N before the artists moved in. Barton to me seems like it could have that same potentional to be a shopping district again if some major cleanup was done.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 14:19:24

As I've said, I don't really care where the stadium is and IWS works fine for me and my wife now as it is. All I want are two things - for the city to be happy with the money they are contributing and for the TigerCats to be as profitable and healthy as they can be, preferably in Hamilton.

Now I will be brutally honest. I grew up in Lonon, Ontario as an Argo fan and actually hated the TigerCata although loved Garney Henley. Since I've lived in Hamilton since 1986, I've taken the TigerCats on as my team and have had season tickets for many years including this year. But I'm wondering if there are enough TiCat or Argo fans combined in this area, greater GTA to Hamilton to really make a go of two teams? I question that. That is why in some respects while I do cherish the history of the TigerCats in Hamilton, for me I wouldn't mind Hamilton bowing out of the PanAms and Bob and David Braley joining forces to build a stadium somewhere in the GTA with or without the PanAm involvement and perhaps try and keep the two teams going but more realistically combine the 2 teams into one.

I know a lot of you here and in the city don't care about stadiums or the TigerCats so why not allow Bob to move the team. Braley eventually wants to sell the Argos of course since he owns the Lions as well and I think it would be great for Bob to buy them should 2 teams not work at the new stadium.

Perhaps it's time Hamilton and the TigerCats say farewell to each other for the good of many people in Hamilton who don't care about them, and for the CFL actually as I do think that the health of a team closer to Toronto is more important to the league than a team in Hamilton, a much smaller city that is bleeding and really might not be able to afford a professional football team any longer.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Henry and Joe (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 14:30:09

I still think the WH is the best out of the choices that were actually on the table, and much better than this new EM site. A while back I asked about the possibility of rebuilding IWS, and possibly using Scott Park. Maybe Lawrence is right. Maybe this could be a compromise that allows us all to win. Can anyone tell me why we can't use the lands N. of Barton that are bound by gage, lloyd, and lottridge? I haven't seen any industial activity there since Dominion Glass left town, and it could use a serious makeover. I know the steel mills in the backdrop are a deterrant, but the highway, rail, and city access is ideal. Am I dreaming?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 14:32:22

This link was just shared with me on FB

Who couldn't love a site named Tree Hugger.

The title of this piece The Greenest Building is the One Already Standing.

Here are a couple of quick quotes from the piece that stood out:

"The Greenest Brick is the One That's Already in the Wall"

"Historic preservation is, in and of itself, sustainable development" and "Development without a historic preservation component is not sustainable"

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By JM (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 14:46:44

I can't believe what i just read.... combine the two teams?! The rivalry between Hamilton and Toronto is one of the most exciting things of being a Ti-cats and even Argos fan! Go to a game wearing your Ti-cats jersey to SkyDome (of course when the cats are there) - it's an amazing sense of pride even with people heckling at you! It's also a very strong piece of OUR identity and reminds us that we are NOT Toronto.... I drive my car happily around the GTA with my Ti-cats logo on my license plate - proud to show everyone where I'm from!

But if that ever happens, you can kiss the CFL goodbye from Ontario altogether, and roll out the red carpet for the "Toronto Bills"

JM

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 15:29:50

JM, the Argos would be a lot healthier if they played out of a more football specific stadium that is not as cavernous as the RC. And that is much more important to the health of the CFL IMHO than anything to do the TigerCats, Hamilton is not a city high on the CFL list of priorities IMHO, as we know it's a city with a lot of unemployment and is bleeding.

I will say kiss the CFL goodbye from Hamilton altogether but as I say, that's not really that important anyways. No disrespect to Hamilton at all, I love the city to death. But I grew up as an Argo fan so I could easily make the switch back to the double blue.

Actually my wife wouldn't mind going to Toronto for games, she loves all the sushi restaurants there and likes going to Toronto for shopping and that so she'd be all for the TiCats folding or relocating to Toronto. Mind you, all the TiCats stuff she has now, clothing, we'd have to dye it two shades of blue, but those are minor details to be worked out. ;)

Comment edited by HamiltonFan on 2010-07-15 14:33:22

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 15:33:45

I can't believe what i just read.... combine the two teams?! The rivalry between Hamilton and Toronto is one of the most exciting things of being a Ti-cats and even Argos fan!

It is one of the greatest rivalries in sport IMHO.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted July 15, 2010 at 15:39:39

I would like to get involved in supporting Toronto (the Arogos), in getting them out of the RC, and back into an 'Exhibition Stadium' type venue.

A dome does nothing for any outdoor sport. Look at that quote at the top of my article on here. The first oudoor CFL game in BC in 28 years! I think that is another example of a city not listening to what the 'fans' want with regards to their CFL team.

One venue can't work for a million uses. If BC was smart, they wouldn't just have the Lions at Empire Field on a temporary basis while they are fixing up BC Place/dome, they realize that football works better at an outdoor field and leave them there.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By JM (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 15:57:22

I won't dispute the fact that watching football is terrible at the RC....... I had to move up 20 or so rows in order to see beyond the players and coaches. Its the design of the seating - meant for baseball, doesn't really have anything to do with the dome.

Funny you mention enjoying grabbing sushi prior to a game there. Thats EXACTLY what were all trying to promote with the WH location! Becuase you WILL be able to do that..... not on the EM. I would love to enjoy a walk around the Bayfront too, even after the game.... something to keep you around rather than immediately vacate the "parking lot" asap.

JM

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 16:57:28

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 18:40:58

Spec's got another stadium poll up.

http://thespec.com/

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 15, 2010 at 19:34:23

JM, there's a nice little sushi restaurant on the corner of Stone Church and Upper Ottawa on the way to the EM site, in the plaza where Metro is. Anyways, I don't need restaurants near the stadium, wife and me go to a restaurant when we want, not just because there is a game on.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By frank (registered) | Posted July 16, 2010 at 10:56:25

HamiltonFan, the differences between a downtown restaurant and the one you're talking about are immense! To attend at the EM site and then go to that sushi restaurant would require a deviation from what would be the normal means of egress (and the "quickest") plus it requires driving to it from the stadium (no sidewalks, lousy transit access). At a WH location, you can walk to the sushi restaurant and chill by the harbor as you wait for the impatient fools to leave before even getting into your car!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By frank (registered) | Posted July 16, 2010 at 10:58:09

Kind of a useless poll really! I hate polls because the choices are always limited and never actually reflect what I want to say. From here on I decree that all polls must have an "other" button with the ability for me to explain my "other" vote! lol!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By frank (registered) | Posted July 16, 2010 at 11:00:17

Excerpt from Chris Hume's piece in the Toronto Star:

"Given the damage done to Hamilton, often self-inflicted, it’s no wonder it lacks the critical mass that makes a city self-sustaining. Recovering that depth and diversity of urbanity won’t be easy for Hamilton, but it’s not impossible. The availability of cheap but good housing has set the stage for urban renewal. The stadium should be part of that."

Very well put!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MACStudent (anonymous) | Posted July 16, 2010 at 13:43:10

The McMaster Students Union officially supports the West Harbour Stadium:

http://www.msumcmaster.ca/news/msuNews.htm

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 16, 2010 at 15:26:20

Thanks! Great to see Mac students getting involved in local issues.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Pigskin PPP (anonymous) | Posted July 16, 2010 at 20:28:59

"...the rally near the loading docks of the Rheem property at the west harbour...was organized by an ad hoc group of young professionals committed to city core revitalization."

http://thespec.com/News/Local/article/809025

It's only a matter of time before someone comes up with a clever nickname for young urban professionals. ;)


Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Kelly R (anonymous) | Posted July 18, 2010 at 19:19:35

if anyone thinks installing a toilet in the middle of their kitchen is a good idea, they probably support a west harbour stadium

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 18, 2010 at 20:38:01

At least it's indoors, and close to the plumbing. Building a stadium on the East Mountain would be like installing your toilet in the middle of your neighbourhood park: inconvenient to get to, bad for the environment, and costly to provide infrastructure to.

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds