HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Downtown & City of Hamilton


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2010, 1:48 AM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,335
I like the Kay Drage park location and always have. However there are some problems with that site that would have to be overcome.

The first problem is access. Macklin St. is a two lane residential street. There is no other access to the site, unless they plan on building bridges from the residential streets overlooking the property.

The other problem that I haven't seen mentioned is that it is a former landfill that has been capped. Once they start digging you never know what they are going to dig up. It may be worse than the remediation needed at the bayfront site.

The biggest problem with that site as I see it would be parking. Whether you like it or not people will want to use their cars and if they don't have a reasonable amount of parking within walking distance they will not go to the facility. Public transit is not an option that will entice people to go to the stadium. The majority of people, in this city, including myself will never use public transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2010, 4:53 AM
adam adam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Downtown Hamilton
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post

If the stadium is outside of Hamilton than Hamilton won't fund the stadium.
Obviously if it is outside of Hamilton rather than in Hamilton, THEN Hamilton won't fund the stadium.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 12:09 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,872
Private group planning stadium coup
Don't think harbour site viable

March 11, 2010
John Kernaghan
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/735522

A loose-knit group of city businessmen is hatching plans for an alternative to the city's Pan Am stadium site at the west harbour.

At least three sources confirm the group is crunching numbers on three possible sites.

They are: the Lafarge Canada slag site on Windermere Road; the former Studebaker property at Victoria and Burlington streets; and a parcel of land near the QEW and Centennial Parkway.

The site assessments have been driven by doubts the city's plans for the west harbour will make financial sense for the taxpayer or the stadium's prime tenant, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats.

If the plans come together, the businessmen propose a large developer handle the stadium construction and operation.

"They would take on the entire project using the public money and flip the naming rights to cover extra construction costs, plus develop other elements around the stadium through their own business plan, " said a source with knowledge of the private-sector initiative.

City council left the door open for a Plan B site when it voted 10-5 in favour of the west harbour location near Bay and Barton streets last month.

The B option was pushed by Councillor Bernie Morelli, who likes the Lafarge site at the east harbour. But first, he says, the west harbour should have every chance to pan out.

Councillor Brad Clark, a stadium opponent, says there's a certain fatalism around the west harbour location.

"In a perfect world, with lots of time available, it could work. But there isn't the time, from my experience."

Members of the private-sector group feel soil remediation costs that could run as high as $37 million, limited parking and poor exposure will limit private-sector contributions to build a 25,000- to 30,000-seat stadium at the west harbour.

The estimated cost of Hamilton's 2015 Pan Am Games track and field stadium is $102 million, $55 million of that coming from the city and the remainder from the provincial and federal governments.

But that would deliver a 20,000-seat facility at best, not enough for the Canadian Football League team. It would take up to another $50 million to provide a home for the Tiger-Cats.

While the football club is sitting down with the city in an effort to make the west harbour work, Ticat president Scott Mitchell said an early examination of the location "doesn't have a lot of money in it for us."

Earlier, he said the team's corporate partners were lukewarm to the location.

The club has consistently lost money over six seasons of ownership by Bob Young and is looking for a formula to provide long-term stability.

When the Games bid was announced last year, Young said he was prepared to put up "in the millions" for a larger stadium as home for his team.

A financial analysis by Deloitte Canada identified several sources of income for the city and the team, including an estimated $5 million for naming rights.

The private-sector group's analysis doubts that number due to what it describes as the west harbour's low-profile location and suggests only the prospect of thousands of motorists and commuters going past a stadium daily will elevate naming rights.

At one point in the bidding process for the Games, sources close to Toronto 2015 said a large development company offered up to $25 million for naming rights, but only if it could develop the stadium at Confederation Park. City council took that site off the table last year.

The private-sector scheme has two appealing points, another source said.

"This company would run the stadium for the city at no cost to the taxpayer and taxpayers wouldn't have to subsidize the Tiger-Cats."

According to the Deloitte analysis, the football club has the right to all revenue streams at its current home, Ivor Wynne Stadium, plus it costs the city around $1.5 million to keep the aging facility safe and operating.

But the man who oversees the city's Future Fund, which would provide $60 million for Pan Am facilities, said no other site delivers what the west harbour can.

"It will energize the city's downtown, " said fund chair Tom Weisz.

He pointed out a key element of the fund's mission statement is to use the money to support downtown redevelopment.

None of the three sites being investigated by the private-sector group is located in the downtown.

That city-building aspect is the key logic behind the west harbour site, says Mayor Fred Eisenberger.

He said he's not surprised "different people have different objectives" but stressed the stadium decision is a call that must endure for 50 years and needs to have a lasting legacy on many fronts.

In his view, only the west harbour site is capable of that.

The Toronto 2015 bid book promised the Hamilton track and field stadium "will have an extensive community legacy because of a plan to put the venue at the disposal of grassroots, youth and national-calibre athletes while also creating the opportunity for a variety of non-sport uses."

It's not clear what a private-sector initiative would deliver in terms of community use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #284  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 12:38 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,728
Love how the football backers had little to no interest in this discussion until after the city staked its $60 million. Now they have an opinion because the CFL is all about viable business models... although there's evidently no way the franchise could survive without huge amounts of municipal welfare. Addicted to handouts? Verily, Hamilton's team.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #285  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 3:35 PM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,335
They keep mentioning this group of "business people" but they never mention names or a concrete amount that they are willing to put up.

I am willing to bet that the leader of that group is Dave Braley. He wants the stadium at Confederation park and stated that many times. He is the type that likes to get his own way or he just won't play. I say this time the city should just tell him to go away.

If this group of "business people" wants the stadium in a certain location then they should put up their own money and build it. But don't expect the taxpayer to help in any way financially.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #286  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 3:54 PM
highwater highwater is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,555
This makes me want to scream. No wonder Hamilton is in the state it's in when our self-appointed business 'leaders' are so devoid of vision.

Take the Spec poll:

http://thespec.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #287  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 3:55 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is offline
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,059
Please Confederation Park....it would actually distract people's attention from the industry and give another perspective of Hamilton. Don't forget the pedestrian bridge that will be built over the QEW.
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.

Last edited by realcity; Jan 31, 2011 at 10:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #288  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:00 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is offline
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,059
highwater, yes I agree. But I don't think our elected officials have much more vision.
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #289  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:01 PM
flar's Avatar
flar flar is offline
..........
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 15,170
If people are hoping that a stadium will uplift businesses and vibrancy in the surrounding area, that shouldn't be what determines the location. This kind of facility will probably not have more than 60 events per year even with USL and CFL playing out of it.
__________________
RECENT PHOTOS:
TORONTOSAN FRANCISCO ROCHESTER, NYHAMILTONGODERICH, ON WHEATLEY, ONCOBOURG, ONLAS VEGASLOS ANGELES
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #290  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:10 PM
ihateittoo's Avatar
ihateittoo ihateittoo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hamiltron//montreal
Posts: 268
well then, with the mission statement of the Future Fund, will they still be able to use that money for a stadium outside the downtown without causing political problems for themselves?

I am still on the fence, I still think I like the west harbour site, for one of the most costly reasons and thats the clean-up but like others have said if it isn't a project like this that goes there who is going to ever clean that area up? I still think it will have a positive impact on downtown. Downtown does not simply offer "herbal teas" there are so many restaurants that would cater to the wants of all types of footballers. But I do feel for the neighbourhood impact.

Also who is making the waves about wanting a hotel at confed? My guess is a look into that proposal may lead to the names of the business people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #291  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:27 PM
drpgq drpgq is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hamilton/Dresden
Posts: 1,808
What spinoff benefits are there going to be at the Confederation Park site? We'll just end up having more teams staying at Burlington hotels than we already have now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #292  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:36 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is offline
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,059
I'm sorry if I support private investment in Hamilton. We see very little of it so if there is going to be a hotel built there then great.

I'll tell you who will clean up the area even if the stadium is not built there. Us, Hamilton. the property is worth 1-2 million $ but do you think the owner will pay $37 for clean up on land worth 2$ million? They will go into tax default and the land will become Hamilton's anyway. Then we're still stuck with the $37 million clean up.
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.

Last edited by realcity; Jan 31, 2011 at 10:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #293  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:46 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is offline
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,059
Spin offs like 10 more Barangas, hotels on the strip, condo towers... a break water, sea wall, marinas, a lively waterfront. Leave bayfront for the roller bladers and nature lovers, that way we can have two types of waterfronts.


Portland with beach strip


Baltimore former industrial wasteland waterfront

Probably the best example of what Hamilton's beach strip could be is the story of Baltimore's
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #294  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 6:41 PM
highwater highwater is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by realcity View Post
Please Confederation Park....
But I've said all I could about Confed Park on this thread. I'm glad they are looking at new locations, because right now the two we have both suck.
Except none of the locations are Confederation Park. So you still won't get your wish. Also, two of them are brownfields so taxpayers would still be footing the bill for remediation with no public benefit. Who are these people?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #295  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 7:30 PM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by realcity View Post
Spin offs like 10 more Barangas, hotels on the strip, condo towers... a break water, sea wall, marinas, a lively waterfront. Leave bayfront for the roller bladers and nature lovers, that way we can have two types of waterfronts.

Probably the best example of what Hamilton's beach strip could be is the story of Baltimore's
There wouldn't be any spinoffs in the local area at Confederation Park. It is a park run by the conservation authority. There is no room for condo's or more restaurants. The land around that area is industrial for the most part and already developed. We have a small group complaining about the West Harbour site, if they chose Confederation Park and indicated they wanted to develope the area commercially every environmental nutcase we have in this city would be protesting. It is never going to happen.

I am not critisizing your vision of the area, I would like to see the same sort of thing happen even without a stadium. However, the reality is, it is already being used as a park and any attempts to alter that status will meet huge resistance. The city would have CATCH and Environment Hamilton and all the other whack jobs in this city filing lawsuits and appeals to the OMB for the next ten years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #296  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 7:30 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is offline
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,059
QEW/Centennial? I assumed Confed Park. I'm in favour only if it's on the Beach Strip, go cart area etc.

If they mean the south east area/Service Road off the cloverleaf, then that's Foxcroft's land.
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #297  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 7:36 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is offline
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,059
Well the HCA should be about nature conservation and not operating waterslides, go-carts, batting cages. I think something could be worked out between HCA and the City. There's that land around the stubby observation tower and lakeland pool. All along Van Wagners could be developed. And outward into the water with break walls, piers, marinas

Expropriating all the private residences around the Rheem site is no easy challenge either. OMB and likely people that don't want the nature of Pier4 disturbed. There's some rare locusts that live there you know.
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.

Last edited by realcity; Jan 31, 2011 at 10:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #298  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 8:07 PM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by realcity View Post
Well the HCA should be about nature conservation and not operating waterslides, go-carts, batting cages. I think something could be worked out between HCA and the City. There's that land around the stubby green shed observation tower and lakeland pool. All along Van Wagners could be developed. And outward into the water with break walls, piers, marinas

Expropriating all the private residences around the Rheem site is no easy challenge either. OMB and likely people that don't want the nature of Pier4 disturbed. There's some rare locusts that live there you know.
Those recreational amenities that are located in the area such as the go carts and batting cages help the Conservation Authority pay their bills. Otherwise the taxpayers would be footing even more of the bill.

As for expropriating private residences in the area of the Rheem property, I believe the number was only twelve houses and that would only take place if the current owners refuse to sell. So it would not be a big problem. Most will sell given the opportunity and a fair price. As for Pier 4 it's still quite aways from the Rheem site and there is a railyard in between, so any environmantal concerns would be trivial at most. I would think that the environmental types would just be happy to see the area remediated and redeveloped into something other than an industrial wasteland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #299  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 8:50 PM
geoff's two cents geoff's two cents is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 504
Fifty years, folks. That's a long time to have a stadium in the middle of an industrial strip (unless the city eventually loses all of the industrial jobs there). It would also, as one commentator noted, feature Hamilton taxpayers subsidizing the profits of Burlington hotels. The private interests, here have advertising and naming rights in mind - much more so than community benefits, which would be dismal at best, or simply accrue elsewhere.

As for the beach pictures you provided, realcity, both are much closer to downtown than Hamilton's Centennial/QEW location would be, Baltimore's baseball stadium is smack downtown, and Portland's Rose Garden is an awful lot closer to their downtown (for a much larger city) than Hamilton's would be.

I recognize the difficulties, however, inherent in attracting private sponsorship to a location that isn't on the freeways - where private businesses know most Hamiltonians are much more comfortable. It's a shame (and something worth thinking about) that private sector support cannot be mobilized in favor of the long-term best interests of the city (when Hamilton will no doubt be very different, or face further decay), but must rely on relatively short-term returns on their investment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #300  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2010, 9:12 PM
highwater highwater is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by realcity View Post
If they mean the south east area/Service Road off the cloverleaf, then that's Foxcroft's land.
How much do you want to bet he's one of the anonymous business people?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Downtown & City of Hamilton
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:22 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.