Agendas and Staff Notes From Velodrome Committee Meetings

By RTH Staff
Published August 30, 2011

One of the issues that came up at yesterday's General Issues Committee meeting on the Velodrome proposal was a complaint by Councillors that they had not received any updates on Velodrome planning prior to the report they received this past Friday.

In an email to RTH yesterday, Councillor Russ Powers, a member of the Velodrome committee, explained that it was an "advisory committee" that meets with staff but does not report to the General Issues Committee or to Council. No city clerks were in attendance and so the meetings did not have published agendas or minutes.

RTH has obtained agendas and staff notes for the April 20, 2011 and May 26, 2011 Velodrome Advisory Committee meetings. We will post more notes if and when we receive them.

Meeting on April 20, 2011


  1. Update on Velodrome Process

  2. Update on Velodrome Locational Assessment

  3. Council Report Discussion: -

    • Timing
    • Report Content
    • Presentation
  4. Support Strategy

  5. Other Business

Items from past meeting/minutes to bring forward for discussion at future meeting:

Copies to:

David Adames
Trish Chant-Sehl
Greg Mathieu
Jim Crosscombe
Wayne Atanas
Lloyd Fairbairn
Matt Kelly
Clr Brian McHattie
Clr Robert Pasuta
Clr Russ Powers
Clr TerryWhitehead
Mark Chamberlain
Sue Palmer-Komar
Chris Herstek
Daryl Bender

Meeting Notes

Present: David Adames, Trish Chant-Sehl, Clrs. B.McHattie, R.Pasuta, R.Powers, T.Whitehead, Mark Chamberlain, Daryl Bender, Greg Mathieu (via teleconference), Peter Lowry, Connie Thomas

Absent: Jim Crosscombe, Matt Kelly, Wayne Atanas, Lloyd Fairbairn, Sue Palmer-Komar, Chris Herstek


Item 1: Welcome, Introductions

David A opened meeting with introductions around the table. David A advised he and Trish CS recently met with the new NCCH representative - Lloyd Fairbairn and his alternates Debbie Marinoff-Shupe and Peter Lowry - to provide an update on the project. Due to a scheduling conflict, Lloyd F is not available to attend today however Peter L will participate on his behalf.


  • Update on Velodrome Process
  • Update on Velodrome Locational Assessment
  • Discussion on Council Report
  • Support Strategy

Item 2: Velodrome Process

Update: Trish CS provided a copy of the functional program presented in a spreadsheet format and advised it will be costed by Infrastructure Ontario. The next step is to provide a site. Once site selected and design on paper, the architect, B+H, will be meeting with the cost consultant. Selection of site pending. TO2015 is fully on side through their Board of Directors for realizing a permanent velodrome.

Once site selected we will move to the next phase which is the conceptual design. In discussions with TO2015 and I.O. we will continue to engage in the RFP process. The Draft Business Plan was received by Council in August 2010. In the new program seating has been reduced along with some other changes which will be included in the Final Business Plan to be in the next Council report.

Research has been undertaken by the Stakeholders. Canadian Cycling Association has met with UCI, the official cycling body and discussed types of training, hosting, etc. Note to include annualized maintenance and capital costs being accounted for in the operation of the facility. What has been built into the Business Plan will be refined based on the new functional program.

Consideration to doing an economic impact analysis (ie National Team, NCCH). Suggested that under legacy in the Multi-Party Agreement the velodrome is identified as 1 of 3 centres of excellence, it will receive annualized funding to support that. Trish advised 75% goes toward on-going maintenance capital and 25% goes towards programming and access for high performance and amateur sport. It is not clear what the annual disbursement would be.

A presentation is planned for Council and OTP, CCA and other associated cycling bodies will actively participate. Greg M advised CCA has had discussions with OTP for this opportunity for a high performance facility to be sustainable over time. This is a big opportunity for Canada. Confident this will change the image of the City making Hamilton the cycling capital, not only competitively but also within our community. It was suggested incorporating the 'grassroots' component (lifestyle value between recreation and public health) into the strategy.

Suggested we keep an open eye to any PA events, similar to the BMX and road cycling, which may present an opportunity for Hamilton to participate in should any further changes occur.

Item 3: Velodrome Locational Assessment

Other interest has come forward in siting the velodrome which may present a opportunity for a partnership with the City. At this time there remain a number of details to be worked through.

Discussions ongoing

Item 4: Council Report

David confirmed the West Harbour site is still the standing approved site.

As the May 9 GIC agenda is already heavy and we are bringing in speakers and other support, the Advisory Committee would like to ask for a special meeting for only the velodrome report. Present timeline with TO2015 requires a May 11th Council recommendation.

Request for Special GIC meeting (preferably before May 11 Council meeting)

UPDATE: This date will most likely be in late May/early June.

Item 5: Support Strategy

Proposed/anticipated speakers include CCA to speak about high performance sport; OTP and their work supporting the high performance; may or may not have Olympic Committee; NCCH will speak of their quick success and as a result the potential for a couple of their athletes participating in the 2015 Games.

Suggestion to speak with Joe-Anne Priel to include the quality of life components. RFP is ready to go out to the 3 proponents on schedule. Pre-screening was completed on the interested site. She stressed the timelines and that originally looked at end of April and now May 9 and this is tight because they need 2 months to get ready for the RFP (deliverable as of July 28/11).

Report will recommend 1 site.

Future meeting or teleconference with Advisory Committee prior to GIC meeting

Item 6: Other Business

No new or additional business

Item 7: Adjournment

Meeting adjourned at 4:45pm

Meeting on May 26, 2011


  1. Update on Velodrome Locational Assessment

  2. Council Report Discussion: -

  1. Discussion - Velodrome Programming

  2. Communications

  3. Other Business

Copies to:

David Adames
Trish Chant-Sehl
Greg Mathieu
Jim Crosscombe
Wayne Atanas
Lloyd Fairbairn
Matt Kelly
Clr Brian McHattie
Clr Robert Pasuta
Clr Russ Powers
Clr TerryWhitehead
Mark Chamberlain
Sue Palmer-Komar
Chris Herstek

Meeting Notes

Present: David Adames, Councillors McHattie, Pasuta, Powers (teleconferenced), Greg Mathieu, Jim Crosscombe, Wayne Atanas, Matt Kelly, Lloyd Fairbairn, Mark Chamberlain, Trish Chant-Sehl, Connie Thomas

Absent: Councillor Whitehead, Sue Palmer-Komar


Item 1: Welcome, Introductions

David A welcomed and introduced Lloyd Fairbairn, NCCH President, as the new NCCH stakeholder to the Advisory Cmte.

Today's meeting is to provide a general update on the velodrome project including where we are with TO2015, I.O., with the functional program and concept plan. The RFP will go out this Summer.

Item 2: Update on Velodrome Locational Assessment

Trish C-S took the Advisory Cmte through the concept plan including a cross-section of all levels. This is a very preliminary design concept.

Velodrome footprint is approximately 140,000 sq ft The concourse would go around with the flexibility to add temporary seating. The concourse could also provide a 300m, 4-lane surface for running. Basement level will include high grade fitness centre, change rooms (including doping control).

Ground level incorporates fitness space, café, security and control which will meet community needs.

Permanent seating for 750 will be accommodated on each side with opportunity for additional seating and also "standing room only" area. Top level will house a meeting lounge with view of track. This will provide an opportunity to generate revenue.

Specifics can be addressed in detail through the RFP document.

This concept is very preliminary and there will be some changes and at present it is going through the I.O. process for costing.

TCS advised there is still time to make changes/additional comments. The Project Specific Output Specifications (PSOS) development is underway and it is of most importance in the concept of this design as these are the specifics the bidders will be looking at.

On inquiry of other surface options for the track you can run on to make it more versatile, TCS advised there is some innovative flooring on the market at present which can achieve a dual purpose.

It is reconfirmed that the main goal is to get a permanent multi-use velodrome which will provide a legacy for cycling and community recreation. Presently awaiting information from I.O. re costing.

Anticipate framework for MOU by Friday, June 3/11.

Item 3: Council Report Discussion (Timing, Content, Presentation)

Anticipate the report to go to a Special GIC and Council mid-June. If approved it will go forward through the RFP process (more a costing process). We will not know the complete cost until January 2012 however we will know a benchmark in June 2011. With regard to Council's funding framework, advised of the $60M, $55M is earmarked for the stadium with $5M towards the velodrome. TCS noted the 56/44 cost share between TO2015 and the City..

Confirmed that the $5M from the Future Fund is still available for this project.

It was noted there are potential sources/methods to fundraise; the community has the capability. Once the certainty and location of project is confirmed then we will be in a stronger position to determine how to fundraise.

Advised originally TO2015 contribution would be 56% of an $11M temporary velodrome; however, now based on a $50M permanent facility TO2015 will contribute up to $28M. As another legacy facility, noted it is one that generates money, medals, and has the ability to host many events.

TCS sought group/individual thoughts on presentation. With the diverse nature of stakeholders we will have a strong presentation at GIC/Council. Key players are the NCCH with their youth programs, Greg M re the national team, with overtures from Own the Podium.

We have been successful in moving TO2015 from $6.4M to $28M. Our goal is to not go to the taxpayer for any additional funding; Provincial/international approach with stakeholders having a national interest. Focus on why affordable and of its low risk to Council.

Suggested approaches include the value of partners, our large population, heavy usage, and to push the full image not just the cycling track.

Clr Powers wants our message to become the story for the media instead of the media telling their story.

Agreed by all that report is best presented as only item on GIC agenda.

Discussion on legacy funds and its distribution. Noted that the funds reside with a Legacy Fund Corporation with representatives from various groups, bound by an agreement. The MPA identifies 3 facilities of which the velodrome is one.

NOTE: TO2015 has since this mtg confirmed their commitment to increase their contribution to $28M

Seek letter(s) of support re a running concourse.

Item 4: Velodrome Programming

Advised of discussions with cycling associations. Program being assessed and will be part of the MOU. Program is critical to success. TCS advised they are looking at a 3rd party with someone who has the experience/expertise managing a velodrome.

Looking at the track there is a large community component with a huge community potential. CCA put together for the velodrome track (including National Team use): -

7:00-9:00am - community members
9:00am-1:00pm - High Performance Cycling
1:00-4:00pm - target schools
4:00-7:00pm - NCCH
7:00-close (10:00/11:00) - community members/cultural clubs

Weekend schedule would be somewhat different. The cycling training program could be done on the track floor. Possible international events: -

  • from youth events to world championships
  • World Cups - possibly 4 events per year
  • Goal is to have one of the major events each year

The above will definitely put us on the map. This will be a superior facility than the one in Los Angeles. Canada has a strong hosting ability.

Greg Mathieu to send events calendar for reference

(RECEIVED May 31, 2011)

Item 5: Communcations

Key messaging will be centralized with DA for the time being.

Information/communications to be provided to stakeholders as available

Item 6: Other Busness/WrapUp

Discussion on information to Council on locational assessment. At present West Harbour as preferred site. We must speak to the process.

Clr Pasuta encouraged brief presentations as we do not want Councillors leaving the Chambers while speakers have the floor.

Item 7: Adjournment

Meeting adjourned at 3:30pm

POST MEETING NOTE: - The velodrome design has changed since this meeting.


View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 30, 2011 at 07:54:43


I'm looking at the document from yesterday.

The Velodrome Advisory Committee was initiated in September of 2010. 23 sites were originally examined.

The 'leaders' were eventually ranked:

1) Mohawk Sports Park 2) Olympic Sports Park 3) T.B. McQuesten Park 4) West Harbour.

Mohawk was endorsed on January 7th. (What was the official Council stance at this point? West Harbour?)

On May 26th, the Advisory Committee unanimously passed a new motion, 'The Hamilton Velodrome Advisory Committee supports the direction to partner with Mohawk College as the preferred site for the Hamilton Velodrome.'

So I'm wondering, Ryan, if you've asked any of the Councillors on the Advisory Committee a) if any of their colleagues were told of the Committee's actions/decisions over the near-year it was active, b) if so, why was all this such a surprise to everyone, and c) if the information wasn't shared along the way, why not?

Comment edited by mystoneycreek on 2011-08-30 07:55:37

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By rednic (registered) | Posted August 30, 2011 at 09:38:48

by laws or not these notes do not ever mention Mohawk per say (am i missing it ?) only that ' At present West Harbour as preferred site. We must speak to the process.' If i read these notes i would never know any difference. Was this decision made at a prior meeting ? Is there a mohawk rep in attendance ?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By JoeyColeman (registered) - website | Posted August 30, 2011 at 09:39:30

So there was a May deadline from Hostco.

This deadline became end of July, which became today, and is now September 15. How many extensions do we need?

Permalink | Context

By Art Brut (anonymous) | Posted August 30, 2011 at 13:28:42 in reply to Comment 68644

If I'm not mistaken, Sept 15, 2011 is the anniversary of our first Pan Am stadium site selection deadline. In honour of that milestone, we should consider that a firm deadline -- or, in the interests of historic continuity, press to extend it again and again.

Permalink | Context

By drb (registered) - website | Posted August 30, 2011 at 13:39:10 in reply to Comment 68681

Perhaps you meant "millstone"?

Permalink | Context

By Steve (registered) | Posted August 30, 2011 at 13:16:25 in reply to Comment 68644

Joey, remember we are Hamilton...

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Derek Wheeler (anonymous) | Posted August 30, 2011 at 14:01:00

New Twitter feed regarding the Velodrome . . .

Follow: @HamiltonVelo

Hashtag: #HamiltonVelodrome

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools