so much for green space :-)

Story in the Spec highlites objections now cropping up to include a hotel in the Confederation Park renovations...

It appear there's still lots of other "development" within the much coveted "green space"... restaurants, boutiques/shops, moving go-karts closer to the Wavepool, etc

Unfortunately, hopes of raising the Hamilton and Scourage schooners and placing them in CP is dead due to their probable condition and expense but where would that exhibit have gone?

"green space" - definitions

  1. open grassy land for recreational use
  2. retail space for making (green) money

Which definition was Chad Collins using when, out-of-hand and with no debate or study, he rejected Confederation Park for the PanAm stadium to supposedly protect and preserve "green space"?

Which definition did most people THINK he was using?


There are plenty of stadium threads here that relate to the Ti-Cats. I think discussing city park plans might be better suited fior the OFF TOPIC forum.

Wrong Captain...

Other than claims of poor access to a stadium in Confederation Park,Greenspace was the biggest excuse for not having a new stadium there.It looks like it was just an excuse because development seems to be the ticket for Stoney Creek City Hall.And now we have frankly a poorer location(in many ways) foisted on everyone by Hamilton City Hall.

OK Captain...

You being a staunch supporter of automatically excluding Confederation Park and of Collins' actions, I can see why you don't want this story highlighted so I'll add my post to one of the other stadium threads.

Didn't you like this topic being noted, but in a different light? :slight_smile:

The stadium issue (and it's ultimate location) is vital to the future survival of the Tiger Cats in Hamilton so anything that points to the pros, cons, business implications and politics involved should not be ignored or brushed under the rug as unimportant.

The PanAm Games are the obvious first consideration re the stadium but the TigerCats (and potential corporate sponsors and contributors) also play a big role, need to be considered and should be consulted in any decision made.

The handling of Confederation Park as a site makes the planning and consultation process rather farcical.

(Proof is suggestions of the industrial space in the east harbour being suggested as "Plan B". Maybe it's just me, but I would not like attending an outdoor event so close to industry... much like having a picnic in the shadow of grimy smoke stacks.)

People live right near there, what's the problem? I wonder if they ever have a BBQ in their backyard? Close to the lake, easy access and loads of parking and lots of visibility from a major highway for stadium naming rights and close to CP and Lake Ontario, a great recreational area for cycling, walking, swimming in the pool. Has the potential to be added to very easily in case the fanbase of the Cats mushrooms.

London is using a huge industrial site for the the summer Olympics, makes sense to me.

IMHO I think the Lararge property is ideal, it's not like it's in the middle of the steel factories for pete sakes. I'll go to CP for my picnic before the games come to think of it, a stones throw away and then just take a couple minute drive to the stadium or leave my car at CP and take a shuttle to the stadium, works perfectly. :?

(sigh).... okay... let's do this yet again....

First of all, provide sources for Collins' words and his reasoning.

Secondly, where in this park would you put the stadium.

Thirdly, what part of this is not a park with lots of greenspace?

[url=] ... 20plan.jpg[/url]

Exactly how many times does it need to be posted for you? Why should we bother you won't accept it anyway.

I would put it in the parking area to the west of the WaterPark and build an environmentally friendly grasstype draining lot where the camp grounds are

“I have some big concerns with the whole issue of using Confederation Park as the host site of a new stadium,? he stated.

Pointing to the “amount of parking that is required? and the desire to have hotels, restaurants and other development near the stadium, he argued it would mean the end of the lake front greenspace.

“Basically it’s no longer Confederation Park,? he said. “It becomes a parcel of land with a municipal address that has a stadium located on it.?

The part thats not green space is the hotel and lakefront village. It actually paves parts of the park I propose stay as is

Anyone else think that if we locked Captain Kirk & AKT in the same room together that there's a very good chance that they might just..........

..............kiss? :lol:

Don’t forget Earl, we both want Earl :cowboy:

Hmm...interesting choice of emoticon :stuck_out_tongue: Not that there's anything wrong with that!

Well, 2's company, 3's a crowd as they say. But I want access to all the highlights please! :smiley:

Yeah. We gotta straighten him out on that LaFarge delusion of his. :wink: (just kiddin' Earl)

Um...yeah. I agree with that.

I don't see your point. Having BOTH the stadium and the park plans would indeed essentailly pave the park. What am I missing here?

Hey, I just want want Bob Young and Braley want more than anything. Ok, I'm an as* kisser to them but I'll take them over Hamilton city council, gov't any day of the week thank you very much.

I'm not paving anything to provide parking. Essentially the present parking lot is not enviromentally friendly so building over it costs no green space. Making a state of the art parking area at the campground can be done using grass gravel lots of drainage catch basins to recycle runoff water to irrigate the grass. Heck it may even be possible to install the precious soccer fields on such a lot since it will only be used for large event. The fact is it doesn't matter since Collins dismissed it out of hand to promote an even more intrusive environmentally unfriendly proposal. Besides I wasn't the one to say that we can't have a stadium because it will destroy greenspace, That would be Chad Collins

Not just Collins. It was the entire council.

No, it was only Collins that was quoted as saying that it was because of a concern of losing greenspace. I showed you the quote. You keep choosing to ignore it. I am also beginning to wonder what your relationship is with Mr Collins. Your defense of him is unhealthy unless you are related or have a financial stake in his plan and need his vote

A stadium there would lose greenspace.

Did you look at the preliminary plan for Confederation Park that I posted? Here it is again, if you hadn't. Take a look. There's plenty of greenspace there in the plan.

[url=] ... 20plan.jpg[/url]
I am also beginning to wonder what your relationship is with Mr Collins. Your defense of him is unhealthy unless you are related or have a financial stake in his plan and need his vote
What he says makes sense. What he has said he would do, is what he's done so far. He's been consistent.

From the article you quoted, (emphasis mine) "city council voted overwhelmingly last week to eliminate Confederation Park as a possible site for a new stadium. Only one councillor spoke in favour of the using the east-end greenspace "

Not Collins, city council "overwhelmingly".