Tim Hortons Field | 40m | ? | Complete

[devil's advocate]

Actually, Valley Park is nearly a 30 minute walk from the ORC land.

My mistake I thought the proposed site was the land of Highland-Up. Mt. Albion-Stone Church-Pritchard. Where an old unused scientific lab building stands with open acres around it, but it is further south bordering Rymal road correct? If so it is still under a 15 minute walk, as I use to walk from Rymal/Pritchard from a friend’s home whenever I missed the 22-Upper Ottawa bus to the 11-Parkdale bus stop.

[isaidso]

If this is a car oriented site with lots of land, will there at least be parkland and room for tailgating? That's the only way I can see them improving the football experience when they've stuck it in the middle of nowhere.

[SteelTown]

Google map of the proposed East Mountain stadium site

http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&q=Hamilton+ontario&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamilton,+Hamilton+Division,+Ontario&ll=43.195134,-79.818807&spn=0.007837,0.021887&t=h&z=16

It's right of Leon's and left of Pro Hockey Life. Next to a big box complex.

[bigguy1231]

My mistake I thought the proposed site was the land of Highland-Up. Mt. Albion-Stone Church-Pritchard. Where an old unused scientific lab building stands with open acres around it, but it is further south bordering Rymal road correct? If so it is still under a 15 minute walk, as I use to walk from Rymal/Pritchard from a friend’s home whenever I missed the 22-Upper Ottawa bus to the 11-Parkdale bus stop.

You weren't mistaken that is the site along with land North of that.

[realcity]

I'm looking at that map, a little off topic, but I love that we have a street called "Old Mud"

[SteelTown]

Meeting is done, council to pick final stadium location on August 12th.

[realcity]

Big surprise. Come Aug 12 they will say they need until Aug 31 to decide. Bunch of do nothings. They know their decision they just like playing professional politician and don't have the guts to speak.

[SteelTown]

From now until August 12th they have to complete the techincal report on both stadium locations. We know next to nothing about the East Mountain site location.

August 12th timeline also allows the City to work with the Katz Group. You can bet Mayor Fred will be speaking to Patrick LaForge. Maybe the Katz Group will come to the table with more money and turn the table around.

After the report council will make the final decision.

[devil's advocate]

You weren't mistaken that is the site along with land North of that.
Thank you for the clarification; I still do not see where mark got the 30 minute walk from. None the less this is a horrible location for a stadium, the 43-Stonechurch and 11-Parkdale only run once an hr after 7pm in that area with no Sunday service for the 43. So public transit would have to be greatly beefed up, but we they will most likely run a few extra game day buses from Lime ridge mall which they already do. Plus the issue that there aren't any sidewalks on those streets besides the newly placed sidewalks East of Up.Mt. Albion.

Also wasn't there supposed to be low rise apartments being built on the corner or Highland and Mt.Albion (Behind Janet Lee Public School). Anyone know what happened with that because I know they did ground levelling a few years back and almost certain began foundation on a small portion of that land.

[SteelTown]

I think you are going to see a movement to have an amphitheatre built at the West Harbour.

[calvinkool]

THIS IS ABSURD. Leave it to this city to bend over and take it like a *****. Every major economist that has weighed in on this issue agrees the west harbour is best for the revitalization of this city, not to mention this is supposed to be a PAN AM STADIUM. Let's all rise up and put a stop to this before it gets out of hand. A stadium out in the massive sprawl we call the upper city is an awful idea, its ludicrous and frankly anyone who supports the east mountain location is an idiot. The point of the west harbour site in the first place is to promote green living, so where is the sense in catering to all the red necks that cant walk 10 feet from the loads of parking lots in the core to the harbour. **** Bob Young, since he clearly has no vision let the ti cats leave. Who even cares if they stay THEY SUCK ANYWAYS. If the city can't find it's balls and put their foot down my tolerance will finally be broken. I used to support Eisenberger but clearly he doesn't have what it takes to lead this city into the future.

[markbarbera]

THIS IS ABSURD. Leave it to this city to bend over and take it like a *****. Every major economist that has weighed in on this issue agrees the west harbour is best for the revitalization of this city, not to mention this is supposed to be a PAN AM STADIUM.

I think you are getting caught up in emotion. Name one major economist that has studied the West Harbour location. I know of two studies, one conducted by a consultant hired by the city and another conducted by one hired by the Ticat organization. The two studies were at odds over the viability of the stadium site, and the city study had some pretty hefty assumptions applied to it in order to get a marginally favourable viability result.

I have found from my readings on the subject that many economists are actually sceptical about the real contribution a stadium makes to downtown revitalization. Healthy downtowns are brought on by people living and working there, not by coming down a couple dozen nights of the week to see a game then go home. Refocusing on the priorities of the Setting Sail plan is what will revitalize the area.

[drpgq]

THIS IS ABSURD. Leave it to this city to bend over and take it like a *****. Every major economist that has weighed in on this issue agrees the west harbour is best for the revitalization of this city, not to mention this is supposed to be a PAN AM STADIUM. Let's all rise up and put a stop to this before it gets out of hand. A stadium out in the massive sprawl we call the upper city is an awful idea, its ludicrous and frankly anyone who supports the east mountain location is an idiot. The point of the west harbour site in the first place is to promote green living, so where is the sense in catering to all the red necks that cant walk 10 feet from the loads of parking lots in the core to the harbour. **** Bob Young, since he clearly has no vision let the ti cats leave. Who even cares if they stay THEY SUCK ANYWAYS. If the city can't find it's balls and put their foot down my tolerance will finally be broken. I used to support Eisenberger but clearly he doesn't have what it takes to lead this city into the future.

Eisenberger only has one vote. The Chamber had been in favour of WH, but who knows what they'll say now.

[highwater]

I have found from my readings on the subject that many economists are actually sceptical about the real contribution a stadium makes to downtown revitalization.

What do they have to say about the contribution suburban stadia make to downtown revitalization?

[highwater]

I think you are getting caught up in emotion.

And we can't have that! That might lead to a lively forum!

[markbarbera]

Thank you for the clarification; I still do not see where mark got the 30 minute walk from.

I guess I walk slower than you. For what it's worth google maps puts the walk at 17 minutes, which is exactly halfway between my 30 min walk estimate any your initial 2 minute walk estimate.

From what I understand the fireworks were cancelled not because of the road infrastructure, but because the park could not handle the crowds of over 20,000 people. At least that was Brad Clark's take on it in this Spec article (http://www.thespec.com/article/773800). He says Upper Stoney Creek will have fireworks returning next year, but in a larger venue. Possibly in the near future they'll be fired off at a Pan Am stadium should it end up there.

[markbarbera]

What do they have to say about the contribution suburban stadia make to downtown revitalization?

Likely as effective as putting a stadium downtown.

A football stadium simply is not a catalyst for urban revitalization. Building one in a downtown brownfield just fills the doughnut hole. It does not fix the problem, it just hides it.

[dennis1]

One thing guys; NHL>CFL.

[dennis1]

Google map of the proposed East Mountain stadium site

http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&q=Hamilton+ontario&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamilton,+Hamilton+Division,+Ontario&ll=43.195134,-79.818807&spn=0.007837,0.021887&t=h&z=16

It's right of Leon's and left of Pro Hockey Life. Next to a big box complex.

I wonder what all the homes in the area will have to say about a bunch of drunk football fans coming.

[dennis1]

If this is a car oriented site with lots of land, will there at least be parkland and room for tailgating? That's the only way I can see them improving the football experience when they've stuck it in the middle of nowhere.

This is acutally so bad. You have an NHL in a downtown setting. A CFL team in a field? More bad planning.

Go with the Original plan.

[drpgq]

Building one in a downtown brownfield just fills the doughnut hole. It does not fix the problem, it just hides it.

I would much rather the football stadium there than what is there now. I would hardly call that hiding the problem.

[thistleclub]

A pithy observation made at the Ticats' Fanzone, one that seemingly eluded the Spec (http://forums.ticats.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=55543&start=1425#p927283):

"The challenge remains, at either the west harbour site or the east mountain site, as to how to pay for an increase in the stadium seating capacity from the 15,000 to 20,000 range up to the 25,000 to 30,000 range (or the 24,000 to 26,000 range recommended most recently by Mr. Fenn). The Deloitte report estimated that it would cost about $50 Million to achieve this increase in the seating capacity.

The Deloitte report estimated that it would cost approximately $14.6 Million to create 3,000 parking spaces at the lands near the airport. One could expect a similar cost to create 3,000 parking spaces at the east mountain stadium site. Therefore, the $15 Million proposed contribution by the Ticats would, at this time, seem to basically pay for 3,000 parking spaces for a stadium containing 15,000 to 20,000 seats."

[BCTed]

A pithy observation made at the Ticats' Fanzone, one that seemingly eluded the Spec (http://forums.ticats.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=55543&start=1425#p927283):

"The challenge remains, at either the west harbour site or the east mountain site, as to how to pay for an increase in the stadium seating capacity from the 15,000 to 20,000 range up to the 25,000 to 30,000 range (or the 24,000 to 26,000 range recommended most recently by Mr. Fenn). The Deloitte report estimated that it would cost about $50 Million to achieve this increase in the seating capacity.

The Deloitte report estimated that it would cost approximately $14.6 Million to create 3,000 parking spaces at the lands near the airport. One could expect a similar cost to create 3,000 parking spaces at the east mountain stadium site. Therefore, the $15 Million proposed contribution by the Ticats would, at this time, seem to basically pay for 3,000 parking spaces for a stadium containing 15,000 to 20,000 seats."

I am OK with the east Mountain location. I just hope that the stadium does not wind up being a low-budget hunk of garbage.

[thistleclub]

GO Transit bought land across from the site two years ago with plans to make a bus station/park and ride here. I expect that's how you'd get here. If you have been taking GO in from Toronto for games, you're used to the GO Bus anyway, seeing as there is no GO Train service to Hamilton for those weekend home games...

Metrolinx is considering a second Hamilton GO train station for the CN line at Centennial to serve this new Pan Am stadium which will be linked to the east mountain site by shuttle buses. It's a shame the former TH&B track was ripped up for the rail trail a few years back as it ran east from Hunter GO Station right up the hill to Dartnall and Limeridge, then south to Caledonia. Ideally, this route could be used to extend existing GO service up to to a new station at Dartnall and Stone Church, which would directly serve the ORC site.

Metrolinx, as we all know, is considering many things. I would imagine that GO service would be game day only, and would be a reduced frequency schedule. Unless the CFL pays the province for a charter service, I would anticipate it being demand-driven, and run on a GO-like schedule. It makes little sense to run a specialty express from Toronto to Hannon (healthy demand for Argos matchups, not as reliable for other contests), but the economics of additional service works sufficiently well when it's scaled appropriately to demand. On the face of it, the only thing currently comparable I can think of would be the Pearson-Richmond Hill intra-city run: Like that, it couldbe a premium event-day connection for those connecting through the Hunter Street terminal, or simply lower city fans who don't mind paying a buck or two above the HSR ticket to roll direct to the stadium rather than mucking about for an hour or more making a transfer at Parkdale or Eastgate. Young's letter does mention "our strategic regional bus/ticket marketing program that we will launch with the CFL throughout Southwestern Ontario," which I'm guessing would emulate the HSR ride-free policy, though in the case of regional carriers, it's more likely a reduced fee.

[dennis1]

The TiCats are trying to rip the city. Hamilton will get an NHL team soon. Let the CFL go if they are going to screw the games for all of us.

[markbarbera]

Metrolinx, as we all know, is considering many things. I would imagine that GO service would be game day only, and would be a reduced frequency schedule. Unless the CFL pays the province for a charter service, I would anticipate it being demand-driven, and run on a GO-like schedule. It makes little sense to run a specialty express from Toronto to Hannon (healthy demand for Argos matchups, not as reliable for other contests), but the economics of additional service works sufficiently well when it's scaled appropriately to demand. On the face of it, the only thing currently comparable I can think of would be the Pearson-Richmond Hill intra-city run: Like that, it couldbe a premium event-day connection for those connecting through the Hunter Street terminal, or simply lower city fans who don't mind paying a buck or two above the HSR ticket to roll direct to the stadium rather than mucking about for an hour or more making a transfer at Parkdale or Eastgate. Young's letter does mention "our strategic regional bus/ticket marketing program that we will launch with the CFL throughout Southwestern Ontario," which I'm guessing would emulate the HSR ride-free policy, though in the case of regional carriers, it's more likely a reduced fee.

GO Transit bought their parcel of land at this intersection two years ago, so they must have had a long term vision for servicing the area long before a potential stadium was added to the mix. Likely weekday rush hour train meet service to Burlington GO via RHVP and QEW is what was envisioned. The addition of a stadium would alter that service to cover game days as well no doubt.

[dennis1]

If this new location gets the go ahead, how does one get to there from the GO Train station? Is it within walking distance or do you have to take transit? How much would a cab ride between these 2 points be? I go to Hamilton from Toronto on a regular basis to attend games. If they're interested in marketing to fans outside of Hamilton, surely they don't expect us to purchase cars just so we can go?

Maybe I'll have to switch my allegiances to the Toronto Argonauts? At least I can get to their games on the subway.

Bud you will have to take a bus all the way into town.

[realcity]

What has Copps done for downtown? What has IVW done for the east end? I'd rather see condos on the Rheem site like you see in downtown Burlington. Then you'd have a year-round, everyday population, maybe that would spur west harbour development. But then people will complain that the tranquility of west harbour is ruined with condos.

[isaidso]

Bud you will have to take a bus all the way into town.

Looks like I'll be making very few trips to this stadium, I don't do the bus. If I can't get there by walking, subway, LRT, or a short cab ride, it's not happening.

[thistleclub]

GO Transit bought their parcel of land at this intersection two years ago, so they must have had a long term vision for servicing the area long before a potential stadium was added to the mix. Likely weekday rush hour train meet service to Burlington GO via RHVP and QEW is what was envisioned. The addition of a stadium would alter that service to cover game days as well no doubt.

Long-term, we might have a spiderweb of LRT to every major node in the city. As I say, I imagine it would be a finite premium service. Historically, GO has shown itself to be very sensitive to cost efficiency when it comes to service. For example, they only started offering seasonal service to Niagara Falls last year. And while round-trip fare for the HSR is easy enough to absorb (currently $5.50 adult fare), round trip from Burlington GO to Hamilton GO, whether bus or rail, would be another matter entirely (currently $9.60 adult fare). Of course, Halton residents are not very keen on public transit. While Halton residents do commute to Toronto via GO, they do so to allow themselves a productive 40 minutes without crazy-making gridlock and exorbitant parking fees. Admittedly, white-collar professionals may not be the team's standard demo. But given the relative proximity to the east mountain site (~21 minutes across the Skyway driving from Brant and Fairview) and the fact that they're even more car-dependent and transit-averse than Hamiltonians, my guess is that it'll be an challenge to get Halton on board (crazy-making gridlock and exorbitant parking fees would be helpful). One solution might be to run it Burlington>Aldershot>403>Linc (possibly making stops at Meadowlands East and West before East Mountain Stadium). That's ~35 minutes, and you'd potentially get some Waterdown Cats fans in the bargain.

And yes, I'm aware that I'm talking bus rather than rail. That's simply because bus would allow more flexibility of use and efficiency on short-haul back-and-forth runs, IMHO. You could stagger inbound trips across a couple of hours, for example, but stage a synchronized exodus. (Pre-game festivities are more of a draw than hanging out in an east mountain parking lot for an hour when the party's over.) I would think that it might be prohibitively expensive to attempt the same inbound options with rail.

[Dalreg]

Looks like I'll be making very few trips to this stadium, I don't do the bus. If I can't get there by walking, subway, LRT, or a short cab ride, it's not happening.

Your loss then, not Hamilton's. I really can't stand closed minded people.:haha:

Not everyone can have the luxury of living near a transit line or downtown Toronto. In fact the majority of public transit is probably done by buses, over all the other types.

[thistleclub]

More to the cost efficiency angle: Currently, only five of GO's 30 routes hit three or fewer stations. Looking at rail alone, the numbers aren't any better. Of GO's 10 rail routes, only one (Richmond Hill>Toronto) hits fewer than four stations; they generally average 5-6.

[markbarbera]

Long-term, we might have a spiderweb of LRT to every major node in the city. As I say, I imagine it would be a finite premium service. Historically, GO has shown itself to be very sensitive to cost efficiency when it comes to service. For example, they only started offering seasonal service to Niagara Falls last year. And while round-trip fare for the HSR is easy enough to absorb (currently $5.50 adult fare), round trip from Burlington GO to Hamilton GO, whether bus or rail, would be another matter entirely (currently $9.60 adult fare). Of course, Halton residents are not very keen on public transit. While Halton residents do commute to Toronto via GO, they do so to allow themselves a productive 40 minutes without crazy-making gridlock and exorbitant parking fees. Admittedly, white-collar professionals may not be the team's standard demo. But given the relative proximity to the east mountain site (~21 minutes across the Skyway driving from Brant and Fairview) and the fact that they're even more car-dependent and transit-averse than Hamiltonians, my guess is that it'll be an challenge to get Halton on board (crazy-making gridlock and exorbitant parking fees would be helpful). One solution might be to run it Burlington>Aldershot>403>Linc (possibly making stops at Meadowlands East and West before East Mountain Stadium). That's ~35 minutes, and you'd potentially get some Waterdown Cats fans in the bargain.

And yes, I'm aware that I'm talking bus rather than rail. That's simply because bus would allow more flexibility of use and efficiency on short-haul back-and-forth runs, IMHO. You could stagger inbound trips across a couple of hours, for example, but stage a synchronized exodus. (Pre-game festivities are more of a draw than hanging out in an east mountain parking lot for an hour when the party's over.) I would think that it might be prohibitively expensive to attempt the same inbound options with rail.

We're getting a bit off-topic talking about GO, but to clarify, GO has had land in this area for two years with the intention of providing bus service from the RHVP/LINC interchange to the Lakeshore West line, likely bus feeder to Burlington GO. I assume this is more for the benefit of east end Hamilton commuters heading to Burlington, Oakville and Toronto. This is what I see as service to the site, including game day service.

I was dreaming out loud when talking about rail service along the old TH&B southern spur. Having said that, train service to a station at Dartnall and Stone Church would be one added stop to the existing Lakeshore line that currently ends at the layover facility east of Hunter GO Centre. Regardless, if this stadium does get built here the Niagara Rail service will have a rail station added at Centennial, and that station could be used as a node for several HSR routes, including the future S-line bus service envisioned in the HSR's BLAST plan, whose existence would obviously be accelerated should the stadium be built at the newly identified alternate location.

[thistleclub]

I don't doubt that it'll see GO service. It's more a question of the form it'd take.

Same thing with the stadium – odds are they'll build on the east mountain site, but form and finish is a wild card.

[realcity]

But we're so certain that Hamilton will have an LRT line that would service the west harbour? I think McQuinty will have to get two more mandates before he even has to begin to commit to Hamilton's 2015 LRT.


I don't think the business plan really cares about people that can't get there by car. The Cats will be more profitable with this stadium regardless of the lack of transit options. I feel sorry for those that want to throw a tantrum because they can't have it their way. By calling Mr. Young names and telling his management to eff off, that's good.

This location is not ideal, it's a compromise. I'll take it. IMO it'll work better than west harbour would, and do about as much for downtown redevelopment as a north end stadium would.

Now I just hope that it's architecturally awesome and the land around it can be landscaped designed just as well. Maybe a hotel, a variety of f&b venues, this will employ more people too.

I think it will look cool when you're coming up the RHV.

[dennis1]

Looks like I'll be making very few trips to this stadium, I don't do the bus. If I can't get there by walking, subway, LRT, or a short cab ride, it's not happening.

I love the bus but this location is horrible. I cannot believe this! Why would young do this. The city is still on the hook after Young gives "74 million"! He claims he has three offers from cities to move. Lets call his bluff and see.

[SteelTown]

I guess the Canadian Football Hall of Fame won't be relocating any time soon.

[dennis1]

SteelTown I am so mad at the CFL right now I could care less. We will get the NHL team and TiCats will be an afterthought whether they stay or not.

[markbarbera]

Have Your Say
Hamilton Spectator
July 8, 2010
http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/article/803795

Yesterday's question was:

The Tiger-Cats say they'll kick in $74 million for a new stadium on the east Mountain. Should city council reverse its position that west harbour is the best choice for the city?

Yes 74% 1,904 votes

No 26% 682 votes

[bigguy1231]

Let's just wait until the total cost of building on the East mountain is revealed.

Once they have figured out all of the extra costs associated with building there, the councillors who are jumping ship on the West Harbour location will be climbing back onboard.

Land aquisition costs alone will be double what they have paid for the West Harbour site. Then there is the infrastructure costs that will be needed for upgraded roads and sewers. They are also talking about a new on ramp from the site to the Linc that will cost millions alone. I know they have said that the province may donate the land and infrastructure money could be used for the road improvements. But anyway you look at it the taxpayer is going to pay more.

The 74 million being offered by the Ticats is nothing more than they will have to spend over the next 10 years whether the stadium is there or somewhere else. Like someone else said it is all smoke and mirrors. Hopefully, city council will see through this and make the right decision to build it where it will do this city best and that is the West Harbour.

[dennis1]

Let's just wait until the total cost of building on the East mountain is revealed.

Once they have figured out all of the extra costs associated with building there, the councillors who are jumping ship on the West Harbour location will be climbing back onboard.

Land aquisition costs alone will be double what they have paid for the West Harbour site. Then there is the infrastructure costs that will be needed for upgraded roads and sewers. They are also talking about a new on ramp from the site to the Linc that will cost millions alone. I know they have said that the province may donate the land and infrastructure money could be used for the road improvements. But anyway you look at it the taxpayer is going to pay more.

The 74 million being offered by the Ticats is nothing more than they will have to spend over the next 10 years whether the stadium is there or somewhere else. Like someone else said it is all smoke and mirrors. Hopefully, city council will see through this and make the right decision to build it where it will do this city best and that is the West Harbour.

Exactly. On point too.

[Jon Dalton]

I would be furious if the province paid millions for road widening and interchanges while we suffer from the worst transit investment in the region. Every lane kilometer of road added brings more traffic to an already congested system onto which we will be forced, whether in our own vehicles or buses in mixed traffic.

Looking to 2015, we'll still have 4 GO trains in and out of downtown, rush hour peak direction only. We'll have hourly train service to James North that's a crap shoot as to whether the bus is faster (likely still diesel trains)
And we STILL don't know if there's a chance of LRT by then.

Nowhere else in world would you see a city the size of Hamilton as close as we are to a major metropolitan area with such pitiful transit. And they have the nerve to even suggest pissing money away on interchanges to serve a private interest.

[realcity]

Green fields have always been much cheaper to build on than brownfields. why is this situation different? And don't you think they looked at that? No appropriations of land, no building removal and no soil cleanup, before you get to where you're at with this land already.

The bitterness from the people that didn't get their way is astounding, no scratch that, not surprising. It;s a compromise like most things are. I didn't ever consider a mountain location to be a good one, but I'm glad it has a better chance of being built in Hamilton.

Either it is by one of our highways or by a Toronto hiway. It seems like if people didn't get what they want they would rather have nothing. Sounds like a bunch of teenagers.

[Jon Dalton]

It seems like if people didn't get what they want they would rather have nothing. Sounds like a bunch of teenagers.

If you wanted a million bucks but got a flaming bag of shit instead, would you be happy? Would you be thankful you at least got a bag of shit? Or would you start to wish you got nothing?

Many of the west harbour proponents were not crazy about the stadium, but if the city seemed resigned to spend our future fund on it, wanted it to be downtown. The objective here is not a stadium, it's investment in the downtown.

By 'nothing' what you really mean is $60 million available for downtown and west harbour projects. Instead, we have maybe $45 pissed away on a guaranteed long term failure that will divert private investment and infrastructure funding away from downtown, and the scraps left over to salvage our waterfront plans. That's where I'm coming from.

[highwater]

And they have the nerve to even suggest pissing money away on interchanges to serve a private interest.

A ten day a year private interest, no less.

[BrianE]

I wish I were a local millionaire. Bob Young offers $15 Million to build a stadium and then lists his expenses of running a CFL franchise over the next 10 years and calls them "Investments"

Fine! I'll offer the City $20 Million towards the construction of the stadium. I'll even be a nice guy and offer to run this brand new maintenance free stadium for the next 10 years and pocket the profits. Including parking fees and even some development around the site. Which I will also make a profit on.

In return, all the City and province have to do is pony up the rest of the $150 million and hand the stadium over to me.

Now that's what I call a gift! I put up around 10% of the up front costs, you give me a new maintenance-free stadium to collect 10 years of profits off of. Then after 10 years is up and the toilets need to be changed out and the gutters need a good cleaning and coat of paint I'll give it back to you.

Sweet.

[geoff's two cents]

The bitterness from the people that didn't get their way is astounding, no scratch that, not surprising. It;s a compromise like most things are.

realcity, where exactly do you see the compromise? No matter which way I look at it, this is the complete antithesis of a West Harbour stadium, with all the consequences for city economics that that term implies.

[bigguy1231]

Green fields have always been much cheaper to build on than brownfields. why is this situation different? And don't you think they looked at that? No appropriations of land, no building removal and no soil cleanup, before you get to where you're at with this land already.

The bitterness from the people that didn't get their way is astounding, no scratch that, not surprising. It;s a compromise like most things are. I didn't ever consider a mountain location to be a good one, but I'm glad it has a better chance of being built in Hamilton.

Either it is by one of our highways or by a Toronto hiway. It seems like if people didn't get what they want they would rather have nothing. Sounds like a bunch of teenagers.

It may be a greenfield, but it is worth about $25 million. It ain't free. The one parcel of land needed for that site, about 1/3 of the total land needed is listed for sale on the ORC website for I believe 7.8 million.

As far as teenagers not getting their own way, I could go back and begin quoting some of your most recent rants if you would like.

[markbarbera]

For all those wailing and gnashing their teeth over the identification of the alternative site in a suburban area, please allow me to refer to my post back on March 16:


The optimist in me hopes desperately that council will realize they need to find an alternate downtown site because there is too much risk that the Barton and Tiffany site development will fail. But the debate is closed and we're supposed to happily pretend the stadium will be built 'downtown' when we all know the Tiffany has been deliberately selected so it will fail and council will 'have no choice' but build in the plan B site (out by the airport).

From what I recall, my attempts to draw attention to need to identify alternative sites in the downtown area was generally met with scorn from die-hard West Harbour proponents (you know who you are). Yet among you there is a surge of surprise and indignation now that the (easily predictable) inevitable outcome to this farcical exercise is unfolding before our eyes. Granted, I was wrong about the specific location of the plan 'B' site, I'll give you that. But is it really shocking that it has come to this?

[dennis1]

Green fields have always been much cheaper to build on than brownfields. why is this situation different? And don't you think they looked at that? No appropriations of land, no building removal and no soil cleanup, before you get to where you're at with this land already.

The bitterness from the people that didn't get their way is astounding, no scratch that, not surprising. It;s a compromise like most things are. I didn't ever consider a mountain location to be a good one, but I'm glad it has a better chance of being built in Hamilton.

Either it is by one of our highways or by a Toronto hiway. It seems like if people didn't get what they want they would rather have nothing. Sounds like a bunch of teenagers.

Why would they move to Toronto? Bob Young does not have anywhere to go. Play at the west harbour or stay at Ivor until it falls to the ground.

[dennis1]

For all those wailing and gnashing their teeth over the identification of the alternative site in a suburban area, please allow me to refer to my post back on March 16:



From what I recall, my attempts to draw attention to need to identify alternative sites in the downtown area was generally met with scorn from die-hard West Harbour proponents (you know who you are). Yet among you there is a surge of surprise and indignation now that the (easily predictable) inevitable outcome to this farcical exercise is unfolding before our eyes. Granted, I was wrong about the specific location of the plan 'B' site, I'll give you that. But is it really shocking that it has come to this?

Props to you sir. We should have had a back up plan.

[geoff's two cents]

Mark, I don't think anyone disagreed that it would have been nice to have one or two other options downtown, especially right downtown. I suggested one or two myself in an above post - that vacant space just east of Hess Village would be alright.

It was a moot suggestion, however, as the city itself wasn't concerned with having additional options. Civic enthusiasts, then, are faced with a dilemma: Dilute support for the one downtown (i.e. comfortable walking distance from King and James) location by supporting one or another additional downtown locations; or make one's enthusiasm for the one downtown site unambiguous so as to show city leaders where one's preferences lay.

In an ideal world, it would have been nice to approach the city in a coordinated fashion and agitate for more options downtown, while simultaneously showing that a downtown location (regardless of wherever) is preferable to a distant suburban location.

However, not only did the process move too quickly for such agitation to present itself in an organized fashion; the city's own position was very pro-waterfront until Bob Young himself made his misgivings public at the eleventh hour.

In any case, to judge by the Spectator's online poll (not scientific by any means but still a decent indicator), Hamiltonians are by and large suburban-minded in the fullest sense of the word. Not only do they not mind spending their entertainment dollars elsewhere at the expense of the city's cultural heart (or what's left of it); there's been little or no negative response that I've seen to the possible re-branding (i.e. name change) of the Ticats to a regional (i.e. placeless) franchise.

When so many citizens themselves are of such a mind-set (or don't care to make their opinions known at all, which amounts to the same thing), can you honestly blame city councilors for abandoning the interests of the lower city, mortgaging its future for a half-baked airport development scheme, building useless expressways, approving the redevelopment of vibrant inner city neighborhoods along the lines of placeless, big-box suburbia, and going for broke (literally) in placing one of the city's cultural meccas on its periphery?

Much as I hate to admit it, most Hamiltonians don't care one way or another for their (soon to be more) hollowed out cultural centre. Toronto is a place with a coherent and recognizable identity; Hamilton, if the past month is any indication, is destined to be a suburb where people eat and sleep when they're not somewhere else.

Any hope I have left is that a certain Edmontonian will help save the city from itself. Otherwise, Hamilton is one city that would actually drive me nuts if I had to live there. Unfortunately, my personal connection to the city is such that I choose to care.

[SteelTown]

Hearing council there appears to be more hurdles coming out for the East Mountain location....

ORC will want full asking price for the land, could be well over $10 million and the City only has $2 million left for land acqusition for the stadium. The province only donates land for conservation.

Karst Conservation is nearby and that might interfere

Karst conservation group might take this to the OMB

The land is zoned as employment. Therefore zoning changes would be needed. Conversion of these employment lands to commercial/entertainment uses contradicts Ontario’s Smart Growth initiatives. Therefore Hamiltonians for Progressive Development could take this to the OMB as well.

[bigguy1231]

Hearing council there appears to be more hurdles coming out for the East Mountain location....

ORC will want full asking price for the land, could be well over $10 million and the City only has $2 million left for land acqusition for the stadium. The province only donates land for conservation.

Karst Conservation is nearby and that might interfere

Karst conservation group might take this to the OMB

The land is zoned as employment. Therefore zoning changes would be needed. Conversion of these employment lands to commercial/entertainment uses contradicts Ontario’s Smart Growth initiatives. Therefore Hamiltonians for Progressive Development could take this to the OMB as well.

They also mentioned the Hydro right of way and pipeline right of way having to possibly be moved.

Then there are the issues they didn't mention. Such as roads being widened and sidewalks being added as well as sewer upgrades and probably a few other things that I am missing.

The site will be a political nightmare especially if the losers from HPD stick their noses in, which will surely happen since they like costing the taxpayers money.

[realcity]

How many people live at King and James? for gawd sakes.

Let's suppose you live on the east mountain. and are a season ticket holder. How do you get to the west harbour stadium? hmmmm. Let's see.... about the same way anyone from downtown, east end, west end, Corktown, Westdale etc will get to the stadium at east mountain.

Does the complaining only go one way? Like our our streets? Give it up. There are probably more people living within a 1k walking distance, cycling distance than there would be at west harbour. Or more people with more than $20 in their pocket. Sorry guys. Face the facts. I am. I'm not more thrilled than you are about a Carmens location. But at least it will be in Hamilton.

Either it is located near a highway in Hamilton or near a highway in North York. You decide. If you can't have it your way, then go stamp your feet away from the box office. because i guarantee the MBAs and experienced successful business managers, owners will go boo hoo to you too.

You're all suggesting that this east mtn location has more obstacles than the west harbour? I guess you were all privy to the negotiations. Something I and everyone else doesn't know about. Except the stakeholders in this deal, you guys know more. interesting. #stamp stamp stamp#

I'm happy we at least get a new stadium -- that is not embarrassing -- for the TiCats. No one gives a crap about what they can see once in their seats , except their view of the ball field. Usually under spotlights, it could be Mount Nemo in the distance if any could care. they came to watch a football game.

[realcity]

The taxpayers of this city are putting up the lions share of the money for this facility and will be on the hook for operating expenses for the lifetime of the stadium. Therefore we, our elected officials, will decide whats in the best interests of the city, not the Ti Cats.

So in that case, let's put the stadium in a location that will lose more money than just a bit of money.

[bigguy1231]

So in that case, let's put the stadium in a location that will lose more money than just a bit of money.

The whole arguement is irrelevant now since the Ticats have stated that they will cover any loses for 10 years if they get what they want. I am not so sure they will but we will have to take their word for it.

[realcity]

3% chance it gets built at West Harbour
97% chance it gets built at the Airport

close,,, back in Feb, "where's my fee?" waahhhhh

[realcity]

The whole arguement is irrelevant now since the Ticats have stated that they will cover any loses for 10 years if they get what they want. I am not so sure they will but we will have to take their word for it.

lol.... whatever,, run for public office. even when put in your face you have a ridiculous answer to deflect.... actually that's talent

[dennis1]

Mark, I don't think anyone disagreed that it would have been nice to have one or two other options downtown, especially right downtown. I suggested one or two myself in an above post - that vacant space just east of Hess Village would be alright.

It was a moot suggestion, however, as the city itself wasn't concerned with having additional options. Civic enthusiasts, then, are faced with a dilemma: Dilute support for the one downtown (i.e. comfortable walking distance from King and James) location by supporting one or another additional downtown locations; or make one's enthusiasm for the one downtown site unambiguous so as to show city leaders where one's preferences lay.

In an ideal world, it would have been nice to approach the city in a coordinated fashion and agitate for more options downtown, while simultaneously showing that a downtown location (regardless of wherever) is preferable to a distant suburban location.

However, not only did the process move too quickly for such agitation to present itself in an organized fashion; the city's own position was very pro-waterfront until Bob Young himself made his misgivings public at the eleventh hour.

In any case, to judge by the Spectator's online poll (not scientific by any means but still a decent indicator), Hamiltonians are by and large suburban-minded in the fullest sense of the word. Not only do they not mind spending their entertainment dollars elsewhere at the expense of the city's cultural heart (or what's left of it); there's been little or no negative response that I've seen to the possible re-branding (i.e. name change) of the Ticats to a regional (i.e. placeless) franchise.

When so many citizens themselves are of such a mind-set (or don't care to make their opinions known at all, which amounts to the same thing), can you honestly blame city councilors for abandoning the interests of the lower city, mortgaging its future for a half-baked airport development scheme, building useless expressways, approving the redevelopment of vibrant inner city neighborhoods along the lines of placeless, big-box suburbia, and going for broke (literally) in placing one of the city's cultural meccas on its periphery?

Much as I hate to admit it, most Hamiltonians don't care one way or another for their (soon to be more) hollowed out cultural centre. Toronto is a place with a coherent and recognizable identity; Hamilton, if the past month is any indication, is destined to be a suburb where people eat and sleep when they're not somewhere else.

Any hope I have left is that a certain Edmontonian will help save the city from itself. Otherwise, Hamilton is one city that would actually drive me nuts if I had to live there. Unfortunately, my personal connection to the city is such that I choose to care.

Sad but true. People care more about the NHL and and the ongoing saga that comes with it.

Beautiful post.

[c@taract_soulj@h]

Maybe the LRT plan wasn't really an issue for the area (stadium proposal but I live close-by), because the East Mountain site wasn't to anyones attention until the other day. Although a stadium shouldn't really dictate a new transit line, it should be the other way around which it isn't in this case but that's neither here or there and I won't talk about downtown development as that's for a new thread. As for the stadium itself, it isn't in a 'bad' area if anyone wants see at it that way. It is less attractive than being on the waterfront I'll admit but as for the area that surrounds it, will take longer than 2015 to clean (c'mon, it's Hamilton decision making we're talking here). I know I'm not the only one that agrees on that statement.

The aerial flyovers during commercial breaks won't be as sexy heh unlike the waterfront and harbour nature but, we actually found a site that ends this months long mish-mash...or maybe Bob Young made a deal sold his NC home to Eisenburger for a buck and he couldn't resist lol. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon per-se but it's a clean area, suburban yes but highway access, room to park I'm sure and good eateries are all in abundance. That's three strikes West Harbour currently has against it and nothings even been built yet. The East Mountain site may be the Scotiabank Place of the CFL :haha: although Kanata is more parallel to downtown Ottawa transit wise than the East Mountain is to ours, yet the uber convenient Transitway does reach the area.

As for the LRT not reaching the proposed site for awhile if at all, BooHoo, you're all just worried you won't live to see trains serve the stadium in your lifetime and that's if we even get LRT as well. I'll admit that councils choices need fine-tuning, but maybe they sometimes like to make future plans for 'bad' decisions that actually become approved rather than being turned down at the 11th hour.

In short, I'm just more along the lines of taking what we can get as we've all been through enough. Here's a mindbender cause I know you'd all still be happier than a pig in shit if a new arena was built in Waterdown for some reason and we landed an NHL Team ;)

Food for thought!

[isaidso]

Your loss then, not Hamilton's. I really can't stand closed minded people.:haha:

It is my loss, and that's why I'm disappointed. There's only so far I will go to get myself to that stadium. I've certainly gone far further out of my way to get to Ivor Wynne than most Tiger-Cats fans ever do.

I live in Toronto, and it takes a lot of effort and about 3-4 hours to get to Ivor Wynne. I've still made that trip despite the problems getting there. This latest move to put this stadium even further out of reach for me is the straw the broke the camels back.


Not everyone can have the luxury of living near a transit line or downtown Toronto. In fact the majority of public transit is probably done by buses, over all the other types.

Putting a stadium near major public transit corridors increases accessibility to more people. Both public transit users and car owners can get there. Suburban stadiums basically cater to car owners at the expense of everyone else.

Not everyone has the luxury of a car. That's why you put these things somewhere central so that the most number of people can get there. Car owners can get to both locations, transit users can only get to one of them easily. If the Tiger-Cats really are serious about drawing fans from outside of Hamilton, they have a funny way of showing it.

It may be my loss, but if a couple hundred or a few thousand other potential customers come to the same conclusion as I (that I need a car to get there), it will be the Hamilton Tiger-Cats loss as well.

This looks like a done deal. Season's tickets to the Tiger-Cats? I'd like to, but not if I need a car to get there.

[highwater]

The whole arguement is irrelevant now since the Ticats have stated that they will cover any loses for 10 years if they get what they want. I am not so sure they will but we will have to take their word for it.

Bob will be looking to sell within 10 years, mark my words, and we will have lost the opportunity to sell to Katz who likes the West Harbour site. But I guess that's what makes him such a lousy businessman.

[dennis1]

Bob will be looking to sell within 10 years, mark my words, and we will have lost the opportunity to sell to Katz who likes the West Harbour site. But I guess that's what makes him such a lousy businessman.

Hopefully we will get the NHL by then. I will no longer support the TiCats because of this garbage. If they want to leave, let them go. They will make less money in Halifax.

[geoff's two cents]

Bob will be looking to sell within 10 years, mark my words

I've had the same thoughts, and I also can't help but wonder if the team's new "regional branding" will lead to it's being called the "Golden Horseshoe Ticats" or something to that effect. I would expect a negative public reaction.

[dennis1]

I've had the same thoughts, and I also can't help but wonder if the team's new "regional branding" will lead to it's being called the "Golden Horseshoe Ticats" or something to that effect. I would expect a negative public reaction.

Glanbrook TiCats.

[bigguy1231]

Bob will be looking to sell within 10 years, mark my words, and we will have lost the opportunity to sell to Katz who likes the West Harbour site. But I guess that's what makes him such a lousy businessman.

I agree. I don't like the East mountain site, but when you can buy off the opposition you win. Unfortunately, the citizens of this city are the ones who are going to end up paying for this choice in the long run.

[bigguy1231]

lol.... whatever,, run for public office. even when put in your face you have a ridiculous answer to deflect.... actually that's talent

It doesn't matter where they put the stadium it's going to lose money. Thats just the nature of the beast. Stadiums in this country are all supported by the taxpayers. Except the Rogers Centre that is privately owned.

Just because Bob Young has stated that he will cover losses for a specific period doesn't mean he is actually going to do it. He may decide to sell or move the team 5 years from now. In the meantime the city should be doing whats in the best interests of the city. Building a stadium outside of the downtown is not in the city's best interest. It does nothing to help the downtown and it does nothing to enhance this cities image. A view of the West harbour on TV is going to look much better than a view of 2 highways and an industrial park.

[c@taract_soulj@h]

Suburban malls have killed the downtown, not suburban stadiums. Don't get me wrong, the harbour site would clearly spur economic activity but I'm sure the city won't leave it a brownfield if we don't build a stadium.

It's a major shot in the arm but we can only hope that future development along the water will help the core in due time. Maybe Katz has other plans up his sleeve?

[realcity]

It doesn't matter where they put the stadium it's going to lose money. Thats just the nature of the beast. Stadiums in this country are all supported by the taxpayers. Except the Rogers Centre that is privately owned.

Just because Bob Young has stated that he will cover losses for a specific period doesn't mean he is actually going to do it. He may decide to sell or move the team 5 years from now. In the meantime the city should be doing whats in the best interests of the city. Building a stadium outside of the downtown is not in the city's best interest. It does nothing to help the downtown and it does nothing to enhance this cities image. A view of the West harbour on TV is going to look much better than a view of 2 highways and an industrial park.


uumm how do i explain this.? Everything is for sale. So if Young is looking to sell in 10 years... so what? Maybe he'll sell in 2 months... if the price is right.

All the same, if the TiCats have a new owner, that new owner, will still have the same objectives.

[realcity]

The 2-second B-rolls of a waterfront seem to be a big thing here.

There are no rules that say when the CBC rolls B , that it has to show the actual stadium. Mostly these shots are stock and they can still show 'west harbour' in the roll with or without a stadium in the 2-second moment.


When the Road Cycling Race was here in 03, was it absolutely necessary to for CBC to ONLY view the actual road race? No. they gave great pan shots of the city, featuring the waterfront, escarpment etc. The same thing goes for any CFL game broadcast on CBC or TSN, they can and will shoot whatever B-roll they want.

[geoff's two cents]

All the same, if the TiCats have a new owner, that new owner, will still have the same objectives.

Yes and no.

Yes, because businesses are all in it for profit.

No, because there is more than one way of making money. A different individual in the know and with the funds to back it up (someone like, oh, I don't know, a certain Edmonton businessman) could well look at the West Harbor and see squandered stadium potential.

[realcity]

If this city employed an active and competent 'marketing' department, these b-rolls would've already been supplied to the television broadcaster to be cut-in between commercial breaks.

It's amazing to me still how much tv can influence people. People on this forum seem obsessed with the b-roll, pan shots of Hamilton on CBC. That more than anything else, determining the location, should be that it photographs better than it functions.

That you actually think they are live shots from the Goodyear Blimp on game day. Our City Marketing Dept should be controlling that image.

In Summary: the stadium could be in Aldershot, it doesn't stop the broadcaster from showing (out takes) or (B-Rolls) of smoke stacks or waterfalls or the actual stadium. Usually not. Unless the stadium has extraordinary visual value. Has the CBC ever shot the snack bars at IVW?

It's good to know that self-proclaimed intelligent, aware, people think they are so smart that I can't still fool them using television as a medium.

you guys are awesome

[realcity]

Yes and no.

Yes, because businesses are all in it for profit.

No, because there is more than one way of making money. A different individual in the know and with the funds to back it up (someone like, oh, I don't know, a certain Edmonton businessman) could well look at the West Harbor and see squandered stadium potential.

Geoff, we don't live in Narnia. I can't understand how 'profit' is bad. If someone didn't profit from something you'd be homeless.

For the TiCats to profit is necessary, is this so bad?

Go watch kids play soccer and football at your nearest sports park then. There is actually a market (a group of people) that wants to watch and enjoy and pay for watching some of the worlds greatest expert athletes employ their ability.

Forgive the free market (Bob Young) for capitalizing on a market that wants to pay for an experience.

[geoff's two cents]

Geoff, we don't live in Narnia. I can't understand how 'profit' is bad. If someone didn't profit from something you'd be homeless.

For the TiCats to profit is necessary, is this so bad?

Go watch kids play soccer and football at your nearest sports park then. There is actually a market (a group of people) that wants to watch and enjoy and pay for watching some of the worlds greatest expert athletes employ their ability.

Forgive the free market (Bob Young) for capitalizing on a market that wants to pay for an experience.

1) Narnia? What the hell are you talking about? Did you even read my post?

You said "All the same, if the TiCats have a new owner, that new owner, will still have the same objectives."

2) I pointed to the (obvious) fact that different owners would see potential for greater profit in different locations. These same owners see different potential in up-and-coming players.

By the same token, not every restaurant serves the same food; not every clothing store sells the same brand of jeans.

The fact that Daryl Katz, billionaire Oilers owner, Rexall owner, and current naming rights holder for the Rexall Arena, sees economic potential in a West Harbour PanAm Stadium suggests that Bob Young is little more than a wealthy, narrow-minded curmudgeon ideologically fixated on a suburban stadium, and shows your statement for the facile over-generalization it truly is.

3) The fact that such profit-minded differences of opinion exist between millionaire- and billionaire sports franchise owners indicates that the city would do well to listen to Mr. Katz before selling out its economic well-being just because a one morally bankrupt team owner thinks he has preferential access to the city's purse strings.

If the Ticats end up playing in the new stadium on the suburban periphery under its current owners, have you thought of the possibility that their "regionally branded" name will no longer have "Hamilton" in it? Imagine the irony when it emerges that the city bankrupted itself funding a sports franchise that drops the city's name!

If, on the other hand, the Ticats leave for Halifax or Moncton, is there not a good chance the city would land a new franchise (perhaps run by a certain Edmontonian) at a brand spanking new stadium? Has the CFL not been talking for years about expanding?

What evidence does Young have that the CFL will actually approve his prospective move?

4) If the stadium ends up being built at the proposed location in Hamilton's hinterland, it would be the most suburban stadium in the entire league.

-BC Lions: downtown
-Calgary Stampeders: 7.5km from downtown, with an LRT stop
-Edmonton Eskimos: 2.8km from downtown, with an LRT stop
-Saskatchewan Roughriders: 1.4km from downtown, directly beside an established shopping centre
-Winnipeg Bluebombers: currently 3.5km from downtown; currently building a new stadium on the University of Manitoba campus, with established transit access
-Ottawa Roughriders: In an established, waterfront, inner-city, pedestrian-friendly, and culturally vibrant neighborhood
-Toronto Argonauts: downtown
-Montreal Alouettes: downtown

-Hamilton: 11 or 12km from downtown, no transit access to speak of. Wow.

5) This is not just about CFL television audiences; it's also about the PanAm games, and the parts of southwestern Ontario's winning bid that impressed the committee the most - transit access, cultural legacies, etc. The city has a mandate to fulfill on behalf of Hamiltonians and Ontarians at large. To compromise these responsibilities because of one, unelected, intransigent "business" interest is ethically abominable.

6) My two cents: Build the stadium on the waterfront as planned, with provisions to expand seating to CFL dimensions if Young's on board. If he isn't, build it on the waterfront to minimum PanAm specs but so that it's expandable to CFL/Grey Cup or USL proportions when the right owner comes along.

7) Based on my above reasoning, to follow through on the RHVP location would be fiscally irresponsible and morally reprehensible. It would amount to a gross misdirection of public "legacy" funds for the sake of a private interest. There is absolutely no reason (economically, politically or ethically) why the city need cower in the face of Young's (most likely empty) threats.

[markbarbera]

I think people are banking too much faith in Katz. Looking at how his negotiations in Edmonton are going for a new arena presinct development, you must see his promises are at best vague and fluid.

As far as his interest in the West Harbour, I would say they are pedestrian in nature. His real interest is in Copps. His passion is for the NHL, and even then he is an early entry to that line of business (he has owned the Oilers for all of two years). Nonetheless his proposal to Eisenberger was due to an interest in Copps Coliseum operations. West Harbour talk is an add-on, likely at Eisenberger's urging in an attempt to have some leverage against Young.

Even council sees Katz' non-binding memorandum of understanding for its real value. Think about it, if there was any solid promise to his actual involvement in West Harbour revealed during their closed-door meeting with Katz, councillors would have been rallying behind the West Harbour site and thumbing their noses at Bob Young and the east mountain alternate proposal at last Wednesday's council meeting.

A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.

[geoff's two cents]

I think people are banking too much faith in Katz. Looking at how his negotiations in Edmonton are going for a new arena presinct development, you must see his promises are at best vague and fluid.

As far as his interest in the West Harbour, I would say they are pedestrian in nature. His real interest is in Copps. His passion is for the NHL, and even then he is an early entry to that line of business (he has owned the Oilers for all of two years). Nonetheless his proposal to Eisenberger was due to an interest in Copps Coliseum operations. West Harbour talk is an add-on, likely at Eisenberger's urging in an attempt to have some leverage against Young.

Even council sees Katz' non-binding memorandum of understanding for its real value. Think about it, if there was any solid promise to his actual involvement in West Harbour revealed during their closed-door meeting with Katz, councillors would have been rallying behind the West Harbour site and thumbing their noses at Bob Young and the east mountain alternate proposal at last Wednesday's council meeting.

These are good points.

A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.

I'm less convinced of this, however. In many ways, Hamilton's "bird in hand" is at least as much a liability to this cash-strapped city (and province) as a benefit.

[Berklon]

Hasn't the trend for the last 10 years or so been to build arenas/stadiums closer to the downtown core as opposed to in the middle of nowhere?

[flar]

Hasn't the trend for the last 10 years or so been to build arenas/stadiums closer to the downtown core as opposed to in the middle of nowhere?

That is the trend, but as you can see with the Man vs. Nature Highway this stadium will be built beside, Hamilton prefers to buck the trends and do things in the tried and failed manner of the 50s and 60s.

[Berklon]

That is the trend, but as you can see with the Man vs. Nature Highway this stadium will be built beside, Hamilton prefers to buck the trends and do things in the tried and failed manner of the 50s and 60s.

So basically Hamilton prefers to learn by their own mistakes instead of learning from the mistakes of others.

[highwater]

Think about it, if there was any solid promise to his actual involvement in West Harbour revealed during their closed-door meeting with Katz, councillors would have been rallying behind the West Harbour site and thumbing their noses at Bob Young and the east mountain alternate proposal at last Wednesday's council meeting.

Bob Young is refusing to sell, so Katz is in no position to be making any promises on the West Harbour at the moment.

[realcity]

Hasn't the trend for the last 10 years or so been to build arenas/stadiums closer to the downtown core as opposed to in the middle of nowhere?

Yes, and Hamilton was far ahead of the trend curve when it built the hugely successful Copps Coliseum downtown in the 80s

[highwater]

So basically Hamilton prefers to learn by their own mistakes instead of learning from the mistakes of others.

I wish. But no. We don't even learn from our own mistakes.

[markbarbera]

Generally stadiums built in downtown settings are not open-air like the proposed Pan Am stadium, and open-air stadia tend to be located outside the city's downtown core.

Here are some facts about other open-air CFL stadiums:


Canad Inns stadium, Winnipeg, built 1953, 100% publicly financed, suburban setting, 4km from downtown.
Commonwealth Stadium, Edmonton, built 1978, 100% publicly financed, urban setting 2.5 km from downtown
McMahon Stadium, Calgary, built in 1960, 100% publicly financed, suburban setting, 7 km from downtown
Mosaic Stadium, Regina, built in 1927, 100% publicly funded, urban setting, 2 km from downtown
Molson Stadium, Montreal, built in 1915, 100% publicly funded, urban setting, 3 km from downtown

[Berklon]

Yes, and Hamilton was far ahead of the trend curve when it built the hugely successful Copps Coliseum downtown in the 80s

What's your point?

[markbarbera]

Bob Young is refusing to sell, so Katz is in no position to be making any promises on the West Harbour at the moment.

Nor has Katz expressed any desire to buy.

[SteelTown]

It's been hinted a few times that Katz would like to build a new arena and would like to build it next to his entertainment precinct.

I wouldn't be surprised to see renderings from Katz within a few weeks.

Wouldn't be surprised to see renderings from the Ti Cats as well.

[markbarbera]

Perhaps Katz may be interested in Barton and Tiffany as a new arena site. We'll have to see what (if anything) is proposed on August 31 when Katz is supposed to firm up his non-binding understanding with the city.

[SteelTown]

They might release information earlier than Aug 31. This way they can try and get $45 million from the city from the Future Fund.

[Berklon]

Off topic (kind of):

I find this talk about a possible new arena hard to believe. Although it's not at the Waterfront, we already have one that would be quite nice if someone would spend "only" 100+ million to upgrade it.

Is this supposed new arena contingent on getting an NHL team, or will it be built (if true) with the hopes of landing an NHL team at a later time? It would be quite odd to have two NHL-sized arenas and no NHL team... while there are cities much larger than Hamilton with an NHL team (and some with an NBA team as well... ie. Toronto, etc) with only one arena. It's like the bizzaro world.

[BCTed]

It's been hinted a few times that Katz would like to build a new arena and would like to build it next to his entertainment precinct.

I wouldn't be surprised to see renderings from Katz within a few weeks.

Wouldn't be surprised to see renderings from the Ti Cats as well.

SteelTown, I think you are really really grasping at straws here.

I don't think that Katz has ever hinted that he would build a new arena or anything of the sort --- I don't even know how serious he is about managing the existing arena. Goodness knows that the whole Edmonton arena situation is far from sorted out.

I do not expect to see any kind of arena renderings from Katz any time soon, if ever, and I certainly do not expect him to ever fund a new Hamilton arena.

[realcity]

I don;t understand Katz. He doesn't seem like the billionaire that would fool around like this. But at the same time, I don't understand his proposal? If he is for real, I would give him any piece of City-owned land to do what he wanted.

[markbarbera]

SteelTown, I think you are really really grasping at straws here.

I don't think that Katz has ever hinted that he would build a new arena or anything of the sort

Actually, he has. Laforge, his point man on the issue made direct reference to that possibility, as reported by Emma Reilly in the Spec on June 30th:

If Katz took over ownership of Copps, the arena would need a complete overhaul to meet NHL standards, LaForge said. Alternatively, Katz's group would consider building a new arena to host a hockey team -- though exactly where remains to be seen.

"The best-before date regarding (Copps hosting an NHL team) is rapidly running out, if it's not done already," he said.

http://www.thespec.com/article/799099

However, I too am highly skeptical about Katz' sincerity in his expression of interest. To quote that famous line from Jerry Macguire, "Show me the money!"

[BCTed]

SteelTown, I think you are really really grasping at straws here.

I don't think that Katz has ever hinted that he would build a new arena or anything of the sort


Actually, he has. Laforge, his point man on the issue made direct reference to that possibility, as reported by Emma Reilly in the Spec on June 30th:

If Katz took over ownership of Copps, the arena would need a complete overhaul to meet NHL standards, LaForge said. Alternatively, Katz's group would consider building a new arena to host a hockey team -- though exactly where remains to be seen.

"The best-before date regarding (Copps hosting an NHL team) is rapidly running out, if it's not done already," he said.
http://www.thespec.com/article/799099

However, I too am highly skeptical about Katz' sincerity in his expression of interest. To quote that famous line from Jerry Macguire, "Show me the money!"

The words are those of the reporter, not those of LaForge. I do not believe that he stated that Katz would consider building a new arena. I heard a few interviews with LaForge and the closest paraphrasing I can come up with from memory is that Katz would like to manage a renovated or new arena, which is just peachy.

There is quite a controversy going on in Edmonton --- it seemed that there was a rough understanding that Katz would offer $100 million to the cost of Edmonton's $400 million arena, but he is now saying that he will offer that amount of money to an overall downtown redevelopment project.

If Katz can't put up one quarter of the cost of an arena in Edmonton, you can bet that he will never consider putting anywhere near that fraction into a Hamilton arena.

[SteelTown]

Fans give west harbour edge for stadium site

July 12, 2010
Andrew Baulcomb
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/805994

With less than a month remaining until city council votes on the new stadium site, diehard Ticat fans seem more divided on the issue than ever.

In a halftime survey of 50 people at Saturday's home opener against the Calgary Stampeders, it was the west harbour that came out on top -- but only by a hair.

Of the 50 random fans selected, 26 said they would still be in favour of the west harbour site in the city's North End. Council named the west harbour its preferred stadium site back in February, following a 10-5 vote.

Still, 22 fans said they prefer the new east Mountain suggestion -- a greenfield site in Stoney Creek, bordered by the Red Hill Valley Parkway and Lincoln M. Alexander Parkway.

Two fans abstained from the vote altogether, saying they would never attend another Ticat game outside of Ivor Wynne Stadium.

[markbarbera]

Apparently the city actually has nothing as far as a deal with Katz goes, at least according to this interview with LaForge which appeared in the Vancouver Sun July 6:

LaForge on Hamilton rumours: 'No, no, no'
Karen Kleiss, edmontonjournal.com
July 6, 2010

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Oilers+owner+Daryl+Katz+Hamilton+plans+conflict+interest+says+league+official/3237657/story.html

EDMONTON — Oilers president Patrick LaForge reiterated Monday the Katz Group's interest in Hamilton's hockey business has no bearing on the company's operations in Edmonton.

"It's not about the Oilers, it's not about Edmonton, it's not about Katz Group's owning even the tiniest part of another NHL team," he said. "We don't have a deal with Hamilton. There is no proposition. We haven't even had the first meeting yet."

LaForge was responding to a Hamilton Spectator report Friday that revealed leaked details about the company's negotiations with the City of Hamilton.

Citing anonymous sources, the story said Katz wants to secure the NHL rights to Copps Coliseum and the new Pan Am stadium for the next four years, and that if Hamilton doesn't have an NHL team when the four years is up, Katz will give the city $1 million.

The Spectator said the details were outlined in a proposed memorandum of understanding that LaForge presented to Hamilton city councillors at a special meeting last Tuesday.

LaForge said Monday no such memorandum exists.

He said Hamilton city councillors voted unanimously to have city staff start work with Katz Group representatives to draft a non-binding memorandum of understanding that will be presented to council before Aug. 30.

...

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Oilers+owner+Daryl+Katz+Hamilton+plans+conflict+interest+says+league+official/3237657/story.html#ixzz0tT1ENv3J


This is further evidence why there was no rallying behind Eisenberger and West Harbour proposal following the Fenn report. This story does not hold much promise for Katz/AEG lining up behind the West Harbour with fists of cash in hand...

[Berklon]

In a halftime survey of 50 people at Saturday's home opener against the Calgary Stampeders, it was the west harbour that came out on top -- but only by a hair.

50 people? Really?

The sample size is so ridiculously small, it's not even worth posting the results. I got 50 people in my lotto pool at work without even trying. I'm sure I bumped into at least 50 people on the way to work this morning.

Is someone going to do a REAL survey for this?

[highwater]

50 people? Really?

The sample size is so ridiculously small, it's not even worth posting the results. I got 50 people in my lotto pool at work without even trying. I'm sure I bumped into at least 50 people on the way to work this morning.

Is someone going to do a REAL survey for this?

The Ticats did a survey of their existing fans but hey haven't made the results public. Their desire for a 'driveway to driveway' experience is based on the imaginary fans that they hope will materialize in the future. Hell of a gamble.

[markbarbera]

The Ticats did a survey of their existing fans but hey haven't made the results public. Their desire for a 'driveway to driveway' experience is based on the imaginary fans that they hope will materialize in the future. Hell of a gamble.

Are they obliged to make the results public? It is property of the Ticats after all. Whatever results are contained in that survey, they obviously feel the east Mountain location is less of a gamble than West Harbour.

It's a shame the city didn't see the value in having an additional 'urban' site alternative identified two years ago. If they did what they should have done, we wouldn't be in such a mess.

[highwater]

No they aren't obliged, but they keep claiming that their fans want a 'driveway to driveway' experience. Making the results public would bolster their claim. Keeping them private makes it look like their existing fans aren't as desperate for a suburban stadium as the Cats claim they are.