Tim Hortons Field | 40m | ? | Complete

[SteelTown]

Need a solid 20 acres of land for the stadium and the warm up track.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by bornagainbiking

To find a place is important and fairly soon to meet the completion deadline. So how much area is required. The WH area is nice but could be small. The downtown is not viable. The airport is just dumb, another huge area with minimal usage.
There is so much room in the north harbour but so industrial.
Has anyone thought of the area between the HGH (hospital) and Burlington Street and Victoria and Wellington. There is plenty of area along Victoria (abandon bldgs) and plenty of parking at the HGH on evening and weekends (hospital revenue).
This is just as close to the downtown as WH.... And that area could use the lift. North End Wellingtton to Bay
Look at a map. next to the railroad tracks and easy access empty land
Did I mention the harbour and Discovery Centre to park your vehicle.
Lots of the area near here could be parking as it is brown fields now.

They already have the location and it has been approved. No further discussion is needed.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Still wouldn't fit, would be extremely tight and no space for a warm up track and field.

There is plenty of room for a warmup track at the north end of the park. The park already houses two full soccer ptiches and two baseball diamonds, so there definitely is room.

Originally Posted by highwater

As a commenter on the Spec blog pointed out, construction on this site would impact Cootes Paradise, and there is an RBG owned naturalized area and restored wetland immediately to the east of Kay Drage. From an environmental point of view, I think it's pretty safe to say this site is a non-starter.

Actually, there is a possibility that construction, if not properly planned, may impact Cootes Paradise environmentally. However, the construction can easily be planned and managed to be completed without an environmental impact, so it really cannot be labelled as a non-starter. After all, recent CN and CP rail track improvements were completed without an environmental impact. In fact, recent CN work was completed within the naturalized RBG area without any environmental impact. In fact, the construction gave the opportunity to enhance and restore the natural habitat.

Of course this discussion is all academic, because council artifically restricted the sourcing of feasible locations at the start of this process and is more interested in keeping their agenda instead of making the best possible decision for the city.

Council apologists will say move on, but some in this city are tired of seeing bad decisions being propped up for the sake of saving face or with the intension of blindly keeping up a flwawed agenda. Thing is, if enough heat is kept on this council perhaps they will realize it is okay to revisit a bad decision to see if it can be corrected before it is too late.

[thistleclub]

Dreschel in Friday's Spec: "Quoting an unnamed source, The Spectator yesterday reported that a loose-knit group of businessmen are looking at three possible sites -- Windemere Road, Victoria and Burlington streets and land near the QEW and Centennial Parkway....[Foxcroft] does point out that, when he relocated his trucking company to Burlington and Ottawa streets a few years ago, the cost of cleaning up the land came in at 600 per cent above budget."

Okay, so let's rule out Lafarge. And Burlington Street, which is probably too close to Birge and Emerald's skin trade to be family-friendly anyway. Good thing those level-headed businessmen have another fail-safe. What's next? Oh, right...

"A loose-knit group of city businessmen keen on having a Plan B scheme ready if the west harbour fails believes Confederation Park in combination with land on the other side of the QEW and connected by a pedestrian bridge could be a good option. That is the former Waxman scrapyard on Centennial Parkway near the QEW now owned by developer SmartCentres. A plan for the 15-hectare site is being appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board."

The city's options may have been artifically constricted, but it's telling that nobody has come up with an unproblematic alternative. I mean, if "a fallback position is just good business practice," why have your next best option a site that's already embroiled in an OMB appeal — with the fabled Confederation Park synergy reliant on a pedestrian bridge spanning some 17 lanes of traffic?

Wasn't this process entered into years ago -- not just with the Pan Am Games, but with previous attempts to nail down the Commonwealth Games? Did nobody think about the realities of building a stadium to replace Ivor Wynne until the 2015 bid came through?

[SteelTown]

So apparently city staff envision turning Bay and James St one way opposite direction when there is an event at the stadium.

[adam]

Great idea! We should also turn Upper James and Ancaster Meadowlands into 1-way on weekends to accomodate heavy shopper traffic.

[markbarbera]

Why is it in this city every suggested alternative immediately shot down without any serious thought given to it? Why is this city so afraid to think big and go for a real city-changing project (west harbour stadium is not city changing).

I know I have been plugging Kay Drage but that's mainly because its location would satisfy all parties involved and it would be a hell of a lot less expensive than the mess we will be getting into at west harbour. And it wouldn't force the eviction of any 80-year-olds or blind ladies (please see the article in today's Spec - I am sure Steetown will be posting it soon )

I do have a bigger vision for the stadium in this city, one that would require a leader and collaborator to bring together all the parties needed to do something that will leave us all going 'Wow!' rather than 'Meh'. Okay, here is my thought - let's place the stadium smack dab in the city. Where? King and Bay.

The parcel of land bordered by Main, Bay, King and Caroline is mostly vacant and derelect. The land on the west side of Caroline between King and Main midway to Hess are also mainly vacant. Why not acquire the land in this area and build the stadium here? A kick-ass stadium with a built-in Hotel fronting either Main or King.

The practice track can be placed on the Board of Ed site, with connecting skywalk to stadium. Once the Pan Am's are done, the practice track can be redeveloped into a brand new convention and hotel complex, something HECFI says we need to do to attract more conventions. Imagine a convention floor stretching along the east side of Bay from King to Main, with a new office tower at the King end and a hotel at the Main Street end, all this linked to the existing convention centre, art gallery and Hamilton Place, and Copps one block north. Now that would be a lasting legacy.

Imagine in 2020, we would have a 30K-seat stadium downtown linked to a new convention floor across the street with a couple hotels. Retail can be built under the bleachers fronting directly onto King and Main. The new LRT would have a stop not a 15-minute walk away from the site, but right at the site's doorstep.

Any civic leaders out there willing or able to run with an amazing project like that? I didn't think so.

[SteelTown]

Wouldn't you think it would be a huge waste of land to drop an open air stadium and a warm up track and field right in the middle of the downtown core? I do especially for a place what would be used the most 40 times a year.

I don't see an article about some blind lady this moring, woke up extra early so perhaps they posted it later on.

I do know they have started the eviction process and should wrap up by the end of the year. The city also wants soil collection from people's yards, but only with permission from the owner.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Wouldn't you think it would be a huge waste of land to drop an open air stadium and a warm up track and field right in the middle of the downtown core? I do especially for a place what would be used the most 40 times a year.

Is it a waste having Copps in the downtown core? How could it be a waste, this land has been basically vacant for a decade now. A multipurpose facility would really engage the area, especially if it included a hotel complex. And if you reread my post, I suggested the warmup track and field be developed into new convention space once the Pan Am was done. That's exactly what the downtown needs.

It's about dreaming big, which most in this city fail to do. Look at these architectural proposals for Regina's new stadium:


Photograph by: Leaderpost.com illustration, Leaderpost.com illustration

This is my favourite:

Photograph by: Courtesy of Douglas Cardinal Architect Inc.

The Douglas Cardinal design is spectacular. Check out the gallery here

This is planned for smack dab in the core of Regina. Not off in the periphery of the general downtown area, not between industrial land and residential homes, right in the core. Which is the way it should be done.

[SteelTown]

Copps isn't a waste since it's not an open air venue, plus it’s multi use and the sound can be confined inside Copps. Also Copps is compact and doesn't require large space. An open air stadium is bulky and square that takes up a lot of space.

We simply can't afford a retractable stadium like Rogers Centre. I highly doubt Regina will ever get its wet dream stadium.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I don't see an article about some blind lady this moring, woke up extra early so perhaps they posted it later on.

I do know they have started the eviction process and should wrap up by the end of the year. The city also wants soil collection from people's yards, but only with permission from the owner.

It was in the print edition this morning, so it must have been posted on the site last night at press time. But regardless, here it is:

'A fair shake'

Some residents want city to pay costs of moving and renovations, others say 'get the hell out of here'

Jenni Dunning
The Hamilton Spectator

(Mar 16, 2010)
Barton Street residents are tired of waiting.

Fed up with the city's tight-lipped attitude, they want to know whether they'll be forced to move to make way for a proposed Pan Am stadium site.

"The only thing I want to hear is for them to get the hell out of here," said Rose Benassi of the city's interest in her neighbourhood. "They're driving me crazy."

She's just one of 60 land owners -- about 45 residential -- from whom the city wants permission to conduct environmental soil testing.

The city's also launching discussions about buying the properties, which are on the north side of Barton between Queen and Bay streets.

But most of the residents -- some of whom have lived there for nearly 80 years -- aren't willing to budge.

Benassi, who's legally blind, said she'll "get lost" if forced to move away from her neighbourhood, which she has memorized.

"I don't think they have the right to tell me to leave," she said.

Expropriation might be only one problem facing neighbours.

If the city backs out of a purchase based on negative test results and the cost of cleanup, residents might be left with unsellable homes.

"It can wipe out all its value," said John Hicks, a Burlington general practice lawyer.

"It can be hundreds of thousands of dollars to clear a (contaminated) site."

During a sale, homeowners must disclose to a real estate agent whether their land's contaminated.

Royal LePage sales representative Steve Ribaric is representing one of the residents and is willing to represent more.

If forced to move, residents should get compensation for moving costs and recent renovations, he said.

"That's all they want, a fair shake."

Councillor Bob Bratina, whose ward includes the proposed site, sent a letter to residents that suggested they hire a lawyer.

Manfred Rudolph, an expropriation law expert and lawyer, has met with 10 residents and is representing some of them.

The city sent a letter March 1 to residents about the testing, which he said is too vague.

"The letter is less than clear about what the city's intentions are in the neighbourhood," Rudolph said.

"I don't think that's fair to the residents."

If owners refuse the tests, the city would have to wait until they own the land by purchase or expropriation.

But there's a sense of helplessness on Barton Street, with many residents saying their fight might go nowhere.

"If they're going to kick me out, what can I do?" said Anthony Godin, 81.

"I'll fight it, (but) if they want this place, they'll take it."

[thistleclub]

Intriguing proposal, but problematic for the residential reasons that have been identified repeatedly in this thread. Forgetting about the logistics, I think politicians already have an uneasy relationship with Hess Village and its attendant noise complaints and hooliganism. Throw a much less profitable 25,000-seat open air stadium into the mix and you'd have the DNA in a rich, creamy lather.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by thistleclub

Intriguing proposal, but problematic for the residential reasons that have been identified repeatedly in this thread. Forgetting about the logistics, I think politicians already have an uneasy relationship with Hess Village and its attendant noise complaints and hooliganism. Throw a much less profitable 25,000-seat open air stadium into the mix and you'd have the DNA in a rich, creamy lather.

So, what you're saying is it's okay to place an open air stadium in a residential neighbourhood north of King, say at Barton and Tiffany, but don't even think of an area south of King? Residents in the south end are of more consequence than those in the north end? Interesting. I wonder how residential concerns are ranked, geographically, socio-economically, or...

[SteelTown]

The U shape stadium is facing towards the waterfront. Sound will reflect towards the water.

[TimB09]

My apologies as I haven't been able to read everything in this thread.
What is the status of the stadium? Have they picked a place to build it and have they picked a design?
And, being that I am a HUGE CFL fan, are the Ti-Cats going to get to play in the stadium when all is said and done?

Thanks

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by TimB09

My apologies as I haven't been able to read everything in this thread.
What is the status of the stadium? Have they picked a place to build it and have they picked a design?
And, being that I am a HUGE CFL fan, are the Ti-Cats going to get to play in the stadium when all is said and done?

Yes, Council has voted on the site for the stadium, West Harbourfront.

Will the Ti-Cats play at the new stadium? Yes, if the private sector cough up $50 million to increase the size of the stadium from 15,000 to 25,000ish.

[TimB09]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Yes, Council has voted on the site for the stadium, West Harbourfront.

Will the Ti-Cats play at the new stadium? Yes, if the private sector cough up $50 million to increase the size of the stadium from 15,000 to 25,000ish.

Thank you!

I would think and hope Bob Young would step up and put some of his money forward to help this happen for the Ti-Cats. I've seen a game at Ivor Wynne and as nice and cozy as that stadium is, they do need a new one.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

The U shape stadium is facing towards the waterfront. Sound will reflect towards the water.

Water being the perfect propogator of sound, I am sure all those Burlington residences on the north shore of the harbour would be thrilled by that design element. From a noise supression point of view, it is far more beneficial to place it in a restricted that will absorb sound than to allow it to travel over open water. A downtown stadium should obviously be designed without an open end.

But why are we all still speculating on sites? 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).

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

So, what you're saying is it's okay to place an open air stadium in a residential neighbourhood north of King, say at Barton and Tiffany, but don't even think of an area south of King? Residents in the south end are of more consequence than those in the north end? Interesting. I wonder how residential concerns are ranked, geographically, socio-economically, or...

Wonder all you like. I'm not weighing the relative socioeconomic merits of Ward 2 neighbourhoods. I'm simply anticipating what might prove to be a robust NIMBY reaction based on politicians' track records thus far. That's why I invoked the four-block Hess Village, which becomes a policing hot potato every summer and fall, as an example. (NB: I'm not even debating the merits of politicians' stands on Hess.) My suspicion, again, is that the DNA, one of the city's oldest activist neighbourhood groups, would probably be able to kill a stadium proposal before it was ever put to a vote... even though it would technically not even be in their footprint.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

So apparently city staff envision turning Bay and James St one way opposite direction when there is an event at the stadium.

Ugh. Hopefully this is at most a temporary measure until A-line rapid transit is up and running. It would be a shame to finally have a destination in the north end of downtown, only to reduce any potential neighborhood spin-off effects by turning James and Bay into expressways. Then again, I can't say I'm surprised by anything I hear from this city anymore.