Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Double Vision- Which do you prefer for West Harbour?

A proposal put forth by a group of North End residents, may see a vision for the west harbour lands, transformed from a commercially laden area ( as was approved by the city earlier this year), to a residential area, bringing with it townhouses, condos and shared public spaces. 

While this re calibrated vision relies on CN moving its Stuart street rail yard to allow for this vision to be realized, Clr. Collins was willing to explore the possibility in tandem with an alternative option; should the CN yard not be moved.  Collins' motion passed, allowing the city to include a Plan A and Plan B scenrio in their study. The Mayor will bring the issue forward when he meets with CN in a few weeks, on other matters.  See Spec write up here, or purchase the print version.

Which vision would you support? The one that was previously approved with an emphasis on commercial activity, or the citizen driven one that calls for residential?

7 comments:

  1. People FirstAugust 15, 2012

    9 times out of 10, I'll go with a community supported vision. Hamilton is hungry for tax revenues to the point that giving priority to industry can be done without any regard to the health of people. People first is what I say!

    ReplyDelete
  2. From The Spec's article 'The view of Pier 8 from here':

    "I certainly want to look at the North End and see a child- and family-friendly community. And I want to maintain it as a livable community during the process of development. The design process has already happened. We don't need to re-invent a whole bunch of new visions, we need to look at what we have planned. We need to look at what is there and what has been supported by the City and the residents. This has been a dream of Hamilton for a long time. There are really good planning strategies that are already there."

    Sheri Selway Vice-president of North End Neighbours, former President

    (Not sure why this article doesn't show up in an online search.)

    To me, these observations raise some very compelling questions. Amongst them, 'How should input be balanced regarding that of 'locals'?' 'How much of a say should local residents have in what unfolds in their own lives, looking right out their front doors? I see this as valid a discussion as the one surrounding the possibilities of the West Harbour.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The proposal was not put forth by a "group of North End residents." As per The Spectator article back in July, the group consists of a number of people who do not reside in the North End. Some are North Enders, some Ward 2 residents. Other wards? I'm not sure.

    Interesting to note that the proposed development is not in the North End but Barton Tiffany. Todays's Spectator lists two North End residents speaking on behalf of a proposal in Barton Tiffany. I will take this "group" seriously when they appoint at least one Barton Tiffany resident as co-spokesperson when appearing at City Hall.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, I'm curious as to how you see the 'North End'. In the City's official map, the 'North End West' and 'North End East extend from Queen to Wellington. The Barton-Tiffany area exists within what is commonly known as the 'North End'. It's not a separate entity. Unless you know something I don't.

      And your first point highlights the one I'd made: who has a right ('more' of a right?) to express opinions about development in a particular area? To what extent should 'home-grown' interests hold sway? Is it wrong for 'outsiders' to presume to present ideas that might actually have merit? (Which is a funny discussion when you consider that all Councillors vote on issues regardless of who they represent in the City...)

      Delete
    2. As with anything, it is a matter of balance. "Outsiders" may have ideas with merit, but they are also usually driven be self interest (ie: profit) and not necessarily the public good.

      I always have believed that the people who have resided in an area should be afforded a great deal of respect i also believe that if you go in, respecting the residents, you get further. If you are combative, you end up wasting your time and money.

      Guru U

      Delete
  4. On a trip to Vancouver a couple of years ago, I ran into a wise seasoned gentleman from the west coast, whom told me this after noting my obvious frustraton at WHAT VANCOUVER DID TOO THEIR WATERFRONT!! HIghrises ensconce and block what used to be a beautiful and easy to access vista and oceon front. He said he would like to have a dictatorship in this country for just long enough to expropriate all the waterfront land from landowners, businesses, whom have capitalized and suffocated out what I believe belongs to all the people of this land. Not just the rich.

    Having said that, I look at what a beautiful job Barrie has done with their waterfront. Something to learn from.

    Hamilton has to make the right choices now, before its too late for everyone.
    I like to know who this group of NOrth End residents ARE?

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are welcome. Please abide by the blog's policy on posting. This blog facilitates discussion from all sides of issues. Opposite viewpoints, spirited discussion and even pointed comments are welcome, provided they are respectful. Name calling is not allowed and any posts that violate the policy, will simply not be authorized to appear. This blog also reserves the right to exclude comments that are off topic or are otherwise unprofessional. This blog does not assume any liability whatsoever for comments posted. People posting comments or providing information on interviews, do so at their own risk.


Comments posted on this blog, may be used as excerpts in whole or in part, in other media sources .
This blog believes in freedom of speech and operates in the context of a democratic society, which many have fought and died for.

Views expressed by commentators or in articles that appear here, cannot be assumed to be espoused by The Hamiltonian staff or its publisher.