[Emanuel Nicolescu]

I agree about the need for a variety of uses. My point is the loss of the current industrial capacity. It will be needed in the future, and if it is dismantled now, it will cost a lot more to rebuild in the future. Once the Stelco/Dofasco lands are remediated and converted to other uses (commercial/residential/institutional/recreational, it will be practically impossible to return to industrial due to public opposition and cost. Once conversion of Stelco lands begins, the momentum will eventually call for conversion of the Dofasco lands as well. It does, therefore look like an either/or situation.

Small Toronto example: the Red Path sugar factory sits on Queen's Quay at Jarvis. Condos have been going up north and west of it, and now local residents are vocal about how much of an eysore the factory is and about how it blocks views of the lake. It would be so nice, they say, to redevelop the site as a park or, inevitably, more condos. Incidentally I find it interesting how, in the Toronto narrative, highways, warehouses and factories visually separate the lake from the rest of the city, but condos don't.

Again I'll re-iterate my previous comment. Hamilton has the advantage of one of the largest ports on the Lakes, rail connection and highway connection in the middle of an important economic corridor. Once Stelco and other industrial complexes are removed/lost, the advantage is wasted. Once the port lands are redeveloped, and the rail yards north of Barton Street are further removed, the advantage is eventually lost. Hamilton would suffer from this in the future. Keeping a token industrial firm in the area to keep up the mixed use image would do no good. Clustering of similar uses is needed for prosperity, not isolation.

So go my muddled arguments. I'm very curious to see how the Hammer will develop in coming decades.