Sports

Bratina Can Support Revised West Harbour Plan

By RTH Staff
Published July 28, 2010

In an email response to a constituent, Ward 2 councillor Bob Bratina just acknowledged that he may now be willing to support the West Harbour for a Pan Am stadium. He wrote:

The original plan called for a large new commercial area to be built around the stadium north of Barton, west of Bay. This would have harmed, not helped the rejuvenation of our Downtown core.

We've made some revisions to the plan which you will see in the next few days that would bring significant new development in the core which would support the Barton Tiffany stadium location.

I'm confident now that we can support the West harbour site if the revised plan is accepted.

This new development represents a change of mind for Bratina, who formerly opposed the West Harbour location as it was originally envisioned.

19 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By Jarod (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 13:24:38

Let's hope its not just lip service to get people off his back.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By d.knox (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 13:36:49

Terry Whitehead, Ward 8, has a poll on his website to gauge public opinion: http://www.terrywhitehead.ca/

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By rayfullerton (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 13:46:54

Hopefully all the councillors will use the results from the public opinion polls for their voting decision on August 10.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Henry and Joe (anonymous) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 13:55:32

This is good news. I am optimistic that democracy is working here. People are writing letters and making their wishes known to politicians. Hopefully our provincial politicians are getting the message as well.

It's coming from the silence on the dock of the bay
From the brave the bold the battered heart of chevrolet
Democracy is coming to the U.S.A....L. Cohen

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By skully2001 (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 14:08:17

Dare I say it, but there appears to be a slow (but sure) shift of momentum back over to support for the West Harbour...maybe common sense will prevail after all!

Or am I just imagining it?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By E. Gray (anonymous) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 14:27:36

It's good to see the council member for downtown Hamilton begin to actually swing over to the West Harbour camp, especially when it BENEFITS downtown. Go figure. No idea what he's doingon council for downtown if he's actually driving business away from downtown. Then again, look what he helped turn Hess Village into. Total bedlam.

There is time for change yet. There is hope.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By arcadia (anonymous) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 14:29:38

slow shift in momentum? Besides the OurcityOurfuture campaign we've had support for the harbour from: architects, doctors, the downtown BIA, the Mcmaster Student Union, the Future Fund Board of Governors...and I'm sure I'm missing a few. Oh and before this mess we had the Chamber of Commerce, Council, Hostco, and the province. And for the East Mountain? The Ti-cats and the guy who runs Carmens. This is so ridiculous and there's still a good chance we'll lose.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 14:41:20

Don't forget the Realtor's Association of Hamilton Burlington.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By skully2001 (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 14:44:51

lol...I meant politically

Hey, speaking of the illustrious PJ Mercanti, just saw that his banquet hall is hosting a rally for the EM supporters on Thurs Aug 5th...apparently anybody remotely associated with the Ticats (including the players and cheerleaders!) is going to help explain why the EM is the ONLY Solution for a financially sustainable stadium in Hamilton.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 15:49:01

Arcadia, why would "you" lose if there is overwhelming evidence, rather than just opinion of course, that the WH is the best location as council votes on? I'm sure the supporting documentation from all the groups involved will make the decision a rather easy one for council therefore.

Or are you saying that Bob Young's dollars, as insignificant as some suggest, and his thinking, as flawed as it is, might actually have some influence on councillors? And should these have influence? If not, then council will choose the WH no problem I would think.

All I want to see is what our elected officials deem as the best choice for Hamilton taking all things into consideration. If that even means no stadium, then that is fine by me.

Comment edited by HamiltonFan on 2010-07-28 14:50:55

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Kourt (anonymous) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 16:05:11

Mercanti (owner of Carmens banquet hall and likely future hotel situated right by the proposed east mountain site) should be absolutely embarrassed by how shamelessly he's promoting the east mountain for his OBVIOUS PRIVATE INTEREST...not sure why Young would want this guy as an ally...guess he'll take what he can get at this stage.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 17:20:30

Why should Mercanti's private interests debar him from participating in the debate? His private interests are fully divulged for everyone to see. That's not improper at all.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By highwater (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 18:20:51

It's not improper, but you wouldn't know that from the way Scott Mitchell et al have tried to smear White Star, the Molinaro group, and anyone else who might benefit from the WH site.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Kourt (anonymous) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 18:20:52

Tybalt...I hear you and I fully encourage everyone to enter into the debate...don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want to debar him from the debate...just want to highlight his private interest motivations to dynamically promote the east harbour.

i

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By JimmyS (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 18:26:42

Does Bratina know that the WH site is downtown? I thought his mandate was to oppose any new project for downtown?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Kourt (anonymous) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 18:31:22

,,,sorry - my last comment should end with "east mountain" not "east harbour: (oh no..they're morphing into one!)

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Capitalist (anonymous) | Posted July 29, 2010 at 11:50:31

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Crapitalist (anonymous) | Posted July 29, 2010 at 12:14:11

News flash. A business man demands for the city and the province to buy him a hundred million dollar stadium next to a highway the city is still paying for so the business man can build a big parking lot and charge Ticat fans to park there.

That sound like "capitalism" to you?

And since when is the stadium a left wing v. right wing issue? Oh yeah, for Capitalist EVERYTHING is left wing v. right wing. No wonder your so often wrong.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mb (registered) | Posted January 24, 2011 at 22:57:49

Does Bratina know that the WH site is downtown? I thought his mandate was to oppose any new project for downtown?

No, it's not. Downtown stops at Barton Street. Pretty soon you'll say Westdale is downtown.

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds