Garber to Whitecaps: No Stadium...No MLS

[Vancouversoccerman]

As the Seattle Sounders announced they'll be joining Major league soccer in 2009, MLS commissioner Don Garber had a very clear message for soccer fans in Vancouver: No Stadium. No MLS.

According to the Vancouver Sun, Garber is quoted as saying "...we are unable to make any commitments to Vancouver....We would give priority to the cities that have proper stadiums and the right business plans. Vancouver can only get into that mix with a proper stadium."

Don Garber had much to say about MLS expansion and the Stadium situation in Vancouver. You can read the article here:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=4db679a1-f503-4b12-95ec-6b7605145e46&k=42608

[piltdownman]

Anyone think that this coming on the day that MLS comes to Quest Field is a bit odd?

[Richard]

No surprise really. Wonder whether even this will get the attention of Vancouver City Hall.

[Grizzly]

Garber's comments are also the strongest indication yet that Montreal is now a serious candidate. A year ago it looked like Vancouver was going to be the next Canadian team and now it seems like it will be Montreal. Vancouverites can completely blame city hall for that.

[Vancouversoccerman]

Btw, Garber was in attendance at BC Place for last Wednesday's Galaxy game.

[Richard]

This is not news for the Whitecaps either. Lennarduzzi has been saying for a long time now that any discussion about them moving to MLS is moot till they have a stadium. In fact it has only been quite rcently that he has been willing to even talk about it to the media. Previously he would just brush off questions about MLS with a statement that the club was committed to the USL for the foreseeable future, what else could he say anyway.

[Vancouversoccerman]

You're quite right, Richard...it's no surprise. There were some in the media trying to spin the "BC Place as a starter home for MLS" in the days after the Galaxy game, but Garber's comments squashes any ambiguity. '

[Massive Attack]

Anyone think that the Whitecaps may have asked Garber to say this? To maybe help lobby the city councillors to finally approve the stadium.

[Vancouversoccerman]

Garber was responding to reporters' questions about Vancouver.

Gotta say, I had a good laugh over Terry Bell's piece in The Province this morning:

"Of course, there's a stray cat living in an alley near that stadium site, a beast that could be deeply traumatized by the arrival of 20,000 soccer fans. A focus group is now trying to catch the cat to determine if it's in favour of a stadium or opposed."

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/sports/story.html?id=f6775178-1a78-492d-b177-0d4f4ecd1712

[Gian-Luca]

Hopefully this will spur some municipal action in Vancouver.

On the other side, it does seem that Montreal is getting mentioned more and more prominently in these expansion talks, so that's a good sign at least.

[Mpenza]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

On the other side, it does seem that Montreal is getting mentioned more and more prominently in these expansion talks, so that's a good sign at least.


You bet. I really wonder what the heck we would do with a brand new stadium in a crumbling low level league. Worst case scenario, Montreal doesn't make it to MLS. What's next? We go back to the USL with Seattle departing, Portland and Vancouver looking to get out asap and the Impact openly saying for months it was going the MLS way. How good would that look?

There's no turning back for the Impact now. People in Montreal are not stupid, Saputo has been waving the MLS flag at them for a while now and they will not settle for anything less.

It's MLS or bust, nothing less. 2010 is a clear possibility, but 2009 is not out of the question, if you ask me. (Yes, I know about that exclusivity deal...)

[CanadianSwede]

I think that Toronto should back down on this exclusivity deal, and allow other canadian teams to come in. This wouldn't hurt their market, 16000 sold out seats next year. No worries. But it would help build soccer in the region and even a close rival. Got to love those rivalalries.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

I think Montreal having their stadium physically built already gives them a big edge. Playing in a soccer stadium from day one is essential and I'm sure from seeing Toronto FC, Garber will subscribe to this notion.

[An Observer]

I personally agree that Vancouver should have a stadium in place before being granted a team. This being said, the fact that they will put a team back in San Jose which had very poor support and no shovel in the ground on a new facility, and then into Seattle in Qwest field which seats 72,000 brings into question Garber's management skills. Maybe I am wrong, but I cannot see 25,000 filled seats looking good in a 72,000 seat stadium. Personally, I think these are very poor decisions. And frankly, these are not even crucial markets like Philadelphia for example. It would have been better to not expand, stick at 13 teams, and wait for proper ownership groups, in proper stadiums, in locations that fit strategically with the vision of the MLS moving forward. These decisions will simply result in failed franchises, teams moving, and a poorer overall support as they undermine the overall buzz of the league playing to half empty stadiums. Better to have 10 Torontos, than 20 Kansas Cities.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

I watched Garber's press conference yesterday and he basically admitted that this goes against the grain of requiring an SSS however he said the most important aspect is that the stadium is in a prime downtown location, is owned by the team (control all revenue streams), and was built with soccer in mind. I'd be ok with it as long as it was grass. I know it rains a lot in the Northwest but maybe they could install the Grassmaster system like at Invesco Field or the Emirates Stadium.

[CanadasBest]

So Garber states a minimum 18,000 seat stadium, what does the current Whitecaps planned stadium accomodate?

[CanadianSwede]

quote:Originally posted by gwallace76

So Garber states a minimum 18,000 seat stadium, what does the current Whitecaps planned stadium accomodate?


Good point to be made for both Vancouver and Montreal, although i think that Stade Saputo can be eventually expanded to 17 000. On a random thought, will the impacts continue to be non-profit if they join the MLS? While the idea of non profitability is nice, is it the best option? Personnaly speaking, it would be great to see George Gillette involved with the impact. Not only does he have a presence in Montreal with his ownership of the Canadians, but he also partly owns liverpool....

[Mpenza]

The Impact probably will restructure if they join the MLS.
Stade Saputo can be expanded to 17,000 quickly (probably in less than 3 months, judging by how quickly the stands went up at the new stadium).

But you know, Garber says this, Garber says that, Vancouver needs a stadium or won't join, but neither SJ or Seattle have plans for a SSS. Garber also said the minimum seating required was 20,000, now it's 18,000... but KC and SJ will play in smaller venues next season (10,000-12,000 roughly).

So you know... I think that as long as you can put the money on the table, and present a solid organization with a decent stadium, you have a good chance to make it. :)

[CanadianSwede]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

So you know... I think that as long as you can put the money on the table, and present a solid organization with a decent stadium, you have a good chance to make it. :)


The sooner the better. I would find it rather amusing if Montreal became the next franchise after Seattle. I think they should because they have all the necessary tools to do so. Philly and St. Louis maybe but, only after Montreal.

[Mpenza]

Well, I think the same. When you look at what it takes to join the MLS, Montreal has everything, while the others just have plans and promises to build this or that. Montreal is ready to go and in my opinion, is a far better choice than the last two franchises awarded (especially SJ). However, it might come down to the way Saputo will be allowed to run his team. If he can find a way to keep as much control as possible, he will do it. He's not stupid, the USL is not the way to go for the Impact and he knows it...

[CanadianSwede]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

Well, I think the same. When you look at what it takes to join the MLS, Montreal has everything, while the others just have plans and promises to build this or that. Montreal is ready to go and in my opinion, is a far better choice than the last two franchises awarded (especially SJ). However, it might come down to the way Saputo will be allowed to run his team. If he can find a way to keep as much control as possible, he will do it. He's not stupid, the USL is not the way to go for the Impact and he knows it...


Maybe Saputo is too cheap to pay that 30 million entrance fee. It would be nice to see an owner like Gilette with a lot of ambition. Not saying that Saputo isn't ambitious (the stadium provides this truth) it just doesn't seem like there is any urgency to move the team to the MLS. IMO Greg Kerfoot has much more present ambition than Saputo.

[Mpenza]

Well, Gillett was asked a question about MLS soccer at the beginning of the habs' season. He avoided it and look embarassed.
Reports say Saputo met Gillett. Now what's the deal, we don't know.
One thing is for sure, there hasn't been a better time to pay that 30 million US dollar entrance fee than right now for anyone in Canada, seeing how it's worth 8 million less than at the same time last year.

But hey, this thread is about Vancouver... :)

[CanadianSwede]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

Well, Gillett was asked a question about MLS soccer at the beginning of the habs' season. He avoided it and look embarassed.
Reports say Saputo met Gillett. Now what's the deal, we don't know.
One thing is for sure, there hasn't been a better time to pay that 30 million US dollar entrance fee than right now for anyone in Canada, seeing how it's worth 8 million less than at the same time last year.

But hey, this thread is about Vancouver... :)


Better do it while the Canadian dollar is stronger hahahaha, it would save a minimal amount but none the less!

[Vancouversoccerman]

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if both Vancouver and Montreal get in (assuming we win the stadium battle of course). With a Vancouver stadium, both cities are light years ahead of all of the expansion markets in the U.S. when it comes to infrastructure, ownership and PROVEN soccer interest.

[Gordon]

MLS is an american league and I think the considerations will always be different for American markets...things like size of television market, regional impact considerations i.e. Can now tell sponsors of a presence in the American Northwest. These are things that Vancouver or Montreal can not add to the mix to sweeten their bids. I am personally of the opinion that MLS would be happier to not expand any further into Canada and as long as their are Seattles, San Joses, Portlands, Philadelphias and the like ready to pony up, they will be preferred to a couple of Canadian cities. Indeed, the best case scenario for MLS is to have only Toronto in the League along with a bunch of viable american franchises. Things like Beckham signing are bad news for MLS coming to additional Canadian cities simply because its piques interest in American markets. And American markets is where MLS wants to be.

[Ed]

Vancouver has spent too much time poking the pooch. I think Montreal would be welcomed with open arms but Vancouver may have lost their spot in the line.

[ag futbol]

I understand that the ultimate goal is a TV deal, but you can’t ignore quality when you’re seeking that (like the NHL did). You can cover all your markets but if you can’t put a quality product together for television or things will fall apart.

That’s where I’d feel that a place like Vancouver and Montreal have an advantage. Both have stadiums (or a planned stadium) in the actual cities they represent (unlike a lot of mls clubs who play out of distant suburbs). It seems more likely that you can be successful in this type of environment as opposed to operating out of the fringes.

Despite the fact it’s in its first year and north of the boarder, MLS used TFC as a selling point for the league because of the quality of the product they had. With similar conditions in Montreal and Vancouver things can really take off in terms of selling an attractive product to a TV audience. Once you project that image of success on TV you can fan out and sell pretty much anywhere. I’d use NASCAR as an example, it was highly regional, but the fan base was so strong and people were so excited, by the time it hit TV it really caught fire. From there they expanded outwards as opposed to the opposite strategy used by the NHL which was locate everywhere (even if the support is mild) and then beg for a TV contract based on being in a bunch of markets.

[Canucks fan]

Caps look at other stadium options

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/sports/story.html?id=506b14d9-bc0d-4816-96d2-762b03331a82

Waterfront location still in the cards as talks with Port Authority continue
Dan Stinson, Vancouver Sun
Published: Thursday, November 15, 2007
The Vancouver Whitecaps and the Vancouver Port Authority are continuing to negotiate for Port Authority-owned land, on which the proposed Whitecaps Waterfront Stadium might be built.

But Whitecaps president Bob Lenarduzzi said Wednesday the club is also looking at other waterfront options for the location of the stadium after four years of talks with the City of Vancouver and, more recently, with the Port Authority.

"We want to be proactive on this and look at all of the options available to us," said Lenarduzzi. "In the meantime, our negotiations with the Port Authority will continue."

Recent talks between the Whitecaps and the Port Authority have been focused on a possible land exchange on Vancouver's waterfront in the Gastown area. The Port Authority owns 5.2 hectares of land adjacent to the Helijet Airways pad. Whitecaps owner Greg Kerfoot owns 7.4 hectares of rail yards land between Granville Square and Main Street.

Anne McMullin, the Port Authority's director of communications and public affairs, said the Canada Marine Act prohibits the sale of Port Authority-owned land, adding the Port Authority is governed by the Marine Act.

"The Marine Act does not allow for a sports stadium to be built on the land," said McMullin. "But it does allow for the exchange of real estate property of comparable value. The land has to be of comparable value, and that's the process we're in with Whitecaps at the moment."

McMullin said an independent appraiser is assessing the market value of the land owned by the Port Authority and Kerfoot.

"The assessment is ongoing, and the Whitecaps have not come back to us on the proposal yet," said McMullin. "They have to come back on the proposal, which would be based on the assessed value of the two parcels of land."

Lenarduzzi clearly wants the stadium issue to be resolved. Talks for the proposed 15,000-seat facility started in January 2003, when then-Vancouver mayor Larry Campbell discussed the possibility of a waterfront stadium with Kerfoot.

Negotiations with the City of Vancouver continued through 2006, and resulted in three site relocations.

The stadium was originally earmarked for construction adjacent to the SeaBus terminal, but transit issues forced relocation to the Kerfoot-owned land. More issues followed, including the transportation of dangerous goods along the rail lines, leading to the current Helijet pad location.

"We are in total agreement with the Port Authority on all the issues they have raised," said Lenarduzzi. "But four years of talks are more than long enough. There's a frustration that it's taken four years without much progress. That's why we're looking at all of the options available to us for a waterfront location."

The Whitecaps' frustrations also stem in large part from Major League Soccer's decision to not consider Vancouver as a possible expansion franchise until new stadium plans are firmly in place.

"The key for Vancouver is being sure they have a stadium plan," MLS commissioner Don Garber said Tuesday after he announced that Seattle will join the league as an expansion franchise in 2009. "We are unable to make any commitments to Vancouver until that happens."

But Garber also said that Vancouver "is a wonderful soccer market that has had a lot of success in soccer."

The most recent evidence of that was the announced crowd of 48,172 that took in a Nov. 7 exhibition game between the Whitecaps and the Los Angeles Galaxy at BC Place Stadium, with Galaxy star midfielder David Beckham the main attraction.

"There's never been a better case for MLS in Vancouver than our game against the Galaxy," said Lenarduzzi.

"That's why the stadium issue is so frustrating. We clearly have the fan base to support an MLS team."








I wonder where exactly these "other waterfront options for the location of the stadium" are...

While I'd love to see the stadium where it's planned over any other location, 4 years is riduculous. Let's get something done at least before the MLS ship completely sails if it hasn't already...

[Johnnie Monster]

Food for thought...

Vancouver city hall began courting Greg Kerfoot & the Whitecaps in 2002. They spent the next three years telling Kerfoot his stadium would have to be somewhere near Main & Terminal in False Creek, then yanked the rug out from under him and told him they were zoning the whole region for welfare housing and mixed residential / retail.

Kerfoot then buys his waterfront site in July 2005 with the city's blessing and encouragement... but when it starts to move ahead, the rug is yanked out again. We've been through countless hearings and consultation and reports and surveys, and now that site isn't good enough for the city either.

This process has been going on for close to ***SIX YEARS*** and Vancouver's no further ahead than it was before Kerfoot showed up to spend his own money on his own land.

Meanwhile, it has taken Toronto all of two and a half years to assemble an ownership group, negotiate a stadium site, secure three levels of government funding and win MLS franchise rights. Then they went on to build the stadium and have just completed a full season of play.

There is something horribly, horribly wrong with my city.

[Richard]

Whilst Vancouver City Hall has much to answer for with the sorry stadium saga the current holdup is not the City of Vancouver but the Vancouver Port Authority.

[piltdownman]

I can't believe how patient Kerfoot is. My hats off to him, if it were me, I would have bought a club in Europe years ago and said good riddance to Vancouver and its endless red tape.

[Vancouversoccerman]

Just to clarify the article from today's Sun that Canucks Fan posted....I spoke with the Whitecaps today about it. When Bobby said "other Waterfront sites", what he really meant was the FINAL footprint of the stadium between the land owned by them and the Port. They do not mean another location in another area of downtown or elsewhere in the city. They also made it clear that the ONLY sight they're looking to build on is the current one.

Cheers,
Bill Currie

[piltdownman]

Thanx Bill

[Vancouversoccerman]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Whilst Vancouver City Hall has much to answer for with the sorry stadium saga the current holdup is not the City of Vancouver but the Vancouver Port Authority.


While Richard's right that the ball is in the Port's court right now, City Hall can't shirk it's responsibility here either.

Despite the fact that every councillor has voted in favour of the stadium at some point, not one of them has been actively involved in the process. Not one councillor has offered to sit in on the negotiations with the Port. Not one councillor has so much as picked up a phone to call Ottawa and lobby on the stadium's behalf. This is the type of involvement and, dare I say it, enthusiasm from Council that we're looking for right now.

Suzanne Anton's comments were encouraging the other day, but it has to be backed up with action. And I think that's the message we should all deliver to council. Write them again and tell them loud and clear that they have to stop treating this community asset like it were a condo or a supermarket. And tell them we'll hold them accountable if they don't deliver before the next election.

We're also writing letters to the Federal Minister of Transport, Lawrence Cannon, in hope that he can expedite the land exchange between the Whitecaps and the Port. If you write him, please keep in mind that he's probably completely uninformed on this issue. It's probably enough to let him know the benefits of the stadium for soccer and Vancouver, and that the stadium enjoys broad, popular support.

To write council, the address is mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca

To write Lawrence Cannon, here is his contact info below:

Cannon.L@parl.gc.ca
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: (613) 992-5516
Fax: (613) 992-6802

Thanks again,
Bill Currie
Friends of Soccer

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Johnnie Monster

Food for thought...

Vancouver city hall began courting Greg Kerfoot & the Whitecaps in 2002. They spent the next three years telling Kerfoot his stadium would have to be somewhere near Main & Terminal in False Creek, then yanked the rug out from under him and told him they were zoning the whole region for welfare housing and mixed residential / retail.

Kerfoot then buys his waterfront site in July 2005 with the city's blessing and encouragement... but when it starts to move ahead, the rug is yanked out again. We've been through countless hearings and consultation and reports and surveys, and now that site isn't good enough for the city either.

This process has been going on for close to ***SIX YEARS*** and Vancouver's no further ahead than it was before Kerfoot showed up to spend his own money on his own land.

Meanwhile, it has taken Toronto all of two and a half years to assemble an ownership group, negotiate a stadium site, secure three levels of government funding and win MLS franchise rights. Then they went on to build the stadium and have just completed a full season of play.

There is something horribly, horribly wrong with my city.


Tax money goes a lot longer than private money.

[Richard]

A spokesman for the Port Authority was quoted in the media a couple of weeks ago explaining the issue of disposing of Port Authority land because an outright sale is prohibited under the federal marine act. Apparently a swap for land deemed to be of equal value is allowed and this is the stumbling block in negotiations with the Whitecaps.

[Keano]

quote:Originally posted by Gordon

MLS is an american league and I think the considerations will always be different for American markets...things like size of television market, regional impact considerations i.e. Can now tell sponsors of a presence in the American Northwest. These are things that Vancouver or Montreal can not add to the mix to sweeten their bids. I am personally of the opinion that MLS would be happier to not expand any further into Canada and as long as their are Seattles, San Joses, Portlands, Philadelphias and the like ready to pony up, they will be preferred to a couple of Canadian cities. Indeed, the best case scenario for MLS is to have only Toronto in the League along with a bunch of viable american franchises. Things like Beckham signing are bad news for MLS coming to additional Canadian cities simply because its piques interest in American markets. And American markets is where MLS wants to be.


Could be but I hope you're wrong. I'd like to think that maybe the MLS would relish the ideas of 1) expanding coverage and visibility in the francophone world 2) having not just a team for the canadian market to follow, but a rivalry, and 3) adding a second SSS sold out with rabidly chanting knowledgeable soccer fans, essentially another Toronto; in other words a second venue for soccer not to be seen by the majorty of the fan-base as a minor curiosity, but a major attraction.

[rodfern2007]

Let's go to Surrey then. Or Burnaby. Oh wait isn't there a stadium there already?. Why yes, Swangard Stadium. Well then, problem solved. Everybody saves, and everybody wins. WINS, WINS.

[piltdownman]

With Swangard Stadium only the City of Burnaby wins. They get to schedule all their high school track meets, community events, and give the caps the remaining dates. And while they are at it they get to keep all the money from parking, food and beverage.

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by piltdownman

With Swangard Stadium only the City of Burnaby wins. They get to schedule all their high school track meets, community events, and give the caps the remaining dates. And while they are at it they get to keep all the money from parking, food and beverage.

Yes, but think of the children, the ones who like to run around the track, ..., like horses:D.

[Soju]

Swangard should be turned into a historical reenactment site where we can dress up like 86ers and win the CSL again and again.

[The Ref]

I understand that next month will be exactly 5 years since the initial negotiations between the city and the Whitecaps for a new stadium. People get old in that length of time! Now there are talks of a land swap between Kerfoot and the Vancouver Port Authority, such deal if they were to reach an agreement will be subject to rezoning process, which according to The Province could take another year and half. So being optimistic we may have a stadium in 2010. That will be 7 or 8 years from the initial idea. I only have one question, why does the stadium have to be located downtown next to the water?

[piltdownman]

I think downtown is a must. Its just the way people think in Vancouver. Downtown is where the Canucks and Lions play, not to mention where all the major transit ends. As for why next to the water, its the only available land. Have a look:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=vancouver,+bc&ie=UTF8&ll=49.278837,-123.098717&spn=0.023238,0.059395&t=h&z=14&om=1

The only bare land, is where the caps want the stadium and that part near the terminal train station which was the original site, until the city took it away so they can build a hospital some time in the future.

[rodfern2007]

But why haggle with city which clearly demonstrates that it is not interested in having a stadium built downtown? It's been 5 years as you say. Shouldn't that tell you something? Besides, you already have a home at Swangard, it will always be there for as long as you want it. I see nothing wrong with it, what with the mountains and those magnificent trees.

[Richard]

And only 5,200 seating capacity with absolutely no prospect of increasing capacity as the City of Burnaby is not willing to yield one square inch more of Central Park land for the purpose.

[Johnnie Monster]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007

Besides, you already have a home at Swangard, it will always be there for as long as you want it. I see nothing wrong with it, what with the mountains and those magnificent trees.

...ahh yes, the magnificent trees... although that's just a nice way of saying "a poorly lit junkie jungle filled with meth-addicted purse snatchers and sexual deviants preying on joggers and seniors."

Bring the family! Good times!

[The Ref]

Didn't Swangard get some additional seating for the U20 WC? albeit temporarily. So would it be possible to make that permanent addition and build more upwards, like a second floor or something.

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Didn't Swangard get some additional seating for the U20 WC? albeit temporarily. So would it be possible to make that permanent addition and build more upwards, like a second floor or something.


Exactly. That would be an ideal solution.

[Danny Boy]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Didn't Swangard get some additional seating for the U20 WC? albeit temporarily. So would it be possible to make that permanent addition and build more upwards, like a second floor or something.


Exactly. That would be an ideal solution.


No it wouldn't. I live 5 blocks from the stadium and I'd rather go downtown to a proper building for an MLS game. There aren't very many amenities near by to make it a fun destination. Transit is decent but Kingsway is a bitch to drive down. Plus they'd have to some MAJOR upgrades to Swangard to get it even close to MLS standards.

[rodfern2007]

Oh come on Danny Boy, who said Vancouver or Montreal are going to get an MLS franchise. Get with the program, the next cities that are most likely to get franchises are Philadelphia, St-Louis and possibly a second franchise in New York. And when that happens, the league will put a halt to any further expansion because it does not want to dilute the player pool. Remember, the MLS's primary objective is to promote and develope soccer in the US and the fact that it awarded a franchise to Toronto is the sole exception to the rule. Therefore, for Vancouver, Swangard's the place to be, the USL-1 the league for them, either for the time being or permanently. It would not be in their best interest to pursue this stadium, especially since the city of Vancouver has stonewalled for the last 5 years on this issue.

[Krammerhead]

Are you clueless or just trolling? The Whitecaps gets no money from concessions at Swangard, and very little money from the inadequate parking (used to be about $2 a car). The stadium is little more than an outdated slab of concrete with a roof and benches (and now a few bucket seats which they overcharge to sit in). Just one mens and one womens washroom in the whole stadium, and very little amenities as mentioned.

There is a reason why they started removing the temporary seating immediately following the U20 WC. It's not a soccer only stadium and there are plenty of other events held there. You can't have the temporary seats behind the goals because they are situated on what is football end zones and running track for the track and field. The large north side bleachers were on the north side running track, and taking up a good portion of the north parking lot. The parking is for the park as well (you know where the lovely trees are that conceal all of the illegal activity that goes on it the park), can't just get rid of the public parking.

[rodfern2007]

Then I don't know what to tell you. If Swangard is inadequate and the city of Vancouver continous to stonewall on the stadium issue, then what's left? What is the solution? What do you propose?

[Krammerhead]

Personally I don't know or care. Vancouver has become too expensive of a city to live in or near, so I'm gonna leave as soon as the time is right.

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead

Personally I don't know or care. Vancouver has become too expensive of a city to live in or near, so I'm gonna leave as soon as the time is right.

So that's that then. Perhaps the Whitecaps should relocate to an American city. So ends the great Canadian experiment.[V]

[Cashcleaner]

^ I hate to say it, but I think you're right about that, Ed. You can only drag your feet too long in this case and I think Vacounver has lost it's consideration by the league for another candidate city.

[SthMelbRed]

I don't buy that. Vancouver is known as one of THE soccer towns in North America. The Whitecaps name is probably the most known from the NASL days after NY Cosmos and LA Aztecs. In fact, the Whitecaps name was still probably more known in Britain than any MLS club before Beckham signed with MLS earlier this year. MLS knows this and if the stadium gets any positive momentum in the next year, I'm sure Vancouver will have the opportunity to get into MLS. What I think could sink it, though, is if they specify a franchise fee that is beyond what Kerfoot can pay. Thirty million is already getting pretty high for the returns that can be reasonably expected.

[ag futbol]

^ If that's the case, Kerfoot should look to line up some sort of minority ownership. Maybe the scummy pension fund (MLSE pacific equiv., name escapes me) will play ball.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Didn't Swangard get some additional seating for the U20 WC? albeit temporarily. So would it be possible to make that permanent addition and build more upwards, like a second floor or something.
Yes it would of course be possible, but in order to build the temporary U-20 WC stands they removed the perimeter fencing and built the temporary bleachers extending from the inside edge of the running track right across into the parking lot. The City of Burnaby wishes to retain use of the running track for other community events. Burnaby is not interested in any permanent expansion of Swangard because they will not allow any further encoachment into Central Park. Swangard is not a solution to the Whitecaps MLS needs for this and many other reasons.

[SthMelbRed]

If construction work was started on the waterfront stadium, I'm sure that MLS would allow a Vancouver Whitecaps expansion franchise to temporarily play home games at Swangard, even though it's capacity is nowhere near up to standard. The main thing is to get the stadium started. After that, I'm quite certain that all the other MLS chips will fall into place.

[Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by Richard


quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Didn't Swangard get some additional seating for the U20 WC? albeit temporarily. So would it be possible to make that permanent addition and build more upwards, like a second floor or something.
Yes it would of course be possible, but in order to build the temporary U-20 WC stands they removed the perimeter fencing and built the temporary bleachers extending from the inside edge of the running track right across into the parking lot. The City of Burnaby wishes to retain use of the running track for other community events. Burnaby is not interested in any permanent expansion of Swangard because they will not allow any further encoachment into Central Park. Swangard is not a solution to the Whitecaps MLS needs for this and many other reasons.


I have never understood Burnaby's rigidity on this. They have this amazing opportunity to expand the stadium, to a bit more than double the size. They can do it on the same terrain as if you take out the track and dig down you could almost keep the same exterior line to the building. So you would not have to kill your ridiculously precious trees lining two sides of the stadium.

You share the costs of the new construction with the Whitecaps MLS team and have them as part of the deal build you another track and field facility with minimal stands somewhere else, and in a more central location in the municipality (Swangard for those who don't know is right on the border between Van and Burnaby). The impact on the park would be minimal as you play more or less with the same frequency, and only are talking about 7-10 thousand more people every two weeks, 15 times a year. Of course you are going to have to do better with public transit, such as with shuttle buses and more skytrains in peak hours.

And you associate Burnaby's name with MLS, which also means economic benefits to the community. One way is if you set up a clearly defined way to get visiting supporters or teams to stay in Burnaby hotels and not in Vancouver. In fact just by defining set of basic tourist attractions in Burnaby -there are a few, not great but they do exist- and putting them into a brochure you have your promotional campaign done with the team's automatic association with the city. Not to mention other jobs going to Burnaby in terms of all the services needed to make the Caps work in MLS at Swangard.

You could also work it so that Burnaby is specifically benefitted from the presence of the team, for example in setting up a youth academy especially catering to Burnaby kids. So you promote sport amongst increasingly fat and lazy youth, have that elite option for the ones that might excel, use the Caps to reinforce sport and health models in the schools.

I see it as so basic, but it is obvious that Burnaby politicians are total bumpkins, they defend ridiculous shibboleths like the heritage value of a half a dozen fir trees instead of minimally contemporary planning ideas, and this is just as bad in Vancouver. The backward thinking, ecological hypocrisy and lack of foresight is just outstanding.

[redhat]

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.
I see it as so basic, but it is obvious that Burnaby politicians are total bumpkins, they defend ridiculous shibboleths like the heritage value of a half a dozen fir trees instead of minimally contemporary planning ideas, and this is just as bad in Vancouver. The backward thinking, ecological hypocrisy and lack of foresight is just outstanding.


I share your perspective Jeffrey. Keep in mind that these are the
same politicians that tried to pass a "smell bylaw" that would
affect or limit the aroma from ethnic restaurants (Asian, Italian,
Greek, etc.). Crazy, but symptomatic.

[Danny Boy]

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.


quote:Originally posted by Richard


quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Didn't Swangard get some additional seating for the U20 WC? albeit temporarily. So would it be possible to make that permanent addition and build more upwards, like a second floor or something.
Yes it would of course be possible, but in order to build the temporary U-20 WC stands they removed the perimeter fencing and built the temporary bleachers extending from the inside edge of the running track right across into the parking lot. The City of Burnaby wishes to retain use of the running track for other community events. Burnaby is not interested in any permanent expansion of Swangard because they will not allow any further encoachment into Central Park. Swangard is not a solution to the Whitecaps MLS needs for this and many other reasons.


I have never understood Burnaby's rigidity on this. They have this amazing opportunity to expand the stadium, to a bit more than double the size. They can do it on the same terrain as if you take out the track and dig down you could almost keep the same exterior line to the building. So you would not have to kill your ridiculously precious trees lining two sides of the stadium.

You share the costs of the new construction with the Whitecaps MLS team and have them as part of the deal build you another track and field facility with minimal stands somewhere else, and in a more central location in the municipality (Swangard for those who don't know is right on the border between Van and Burnaby). The impact on the park would be minimal as you play more or less with the same frequency, and only are talking about 7-10 thousand more people every two weeks, 15 times a year. Of course you are going to have to do better with public transit, such as with shuttle buses and more skytrains in peak hours.

And you associate Burnaby's name with MLS, which also means economic benefits to the community. One way is if you set up a clearly defined way to get visiting supporters or teams to stay in Burnaby hotels and not in Vancouver. In fact just by defining set of basic tourist attractions in Burnaby -there are a few, not great but they do exist- and putting them into a brochure you have your promotional campaign done with the team's automatic association with the city. Not to mention other jobs going to Burnaby in terms of all the services needed to make the Caps work in MLS at Swangard.

You could also work it so that Burnaby is specifically benefitted from the presence of the team, for example in setting up a youth academy especially catering to Burnaby kids. So you promote sport amongst increasingly fat and lazy youth, have that elite option for the ones that might excel, use the Caps to reinforce sport and health models in the schools.

I see it as so basic, but it is obvious that Burnaby politicians are total bumpkins, they defend ridiculous shibboleths like the heritage value of a half a dozen fir trees instead of minimally contemporary planning ideas, and this is just as bad in Vancouver. The backward thinking, ecological hypocrisy and lack of foresight is just outstanding.


It's not as basic as you think. While I agree that a stadium could properly be constructed on site, I don't think it is in the best interest of Burnaby. If the Whitecaps (and maybe local soccer groups) were the only tennants imagine how dodgy the park would become if it were only hosting 30-40 events a year. Plus there are only 2 hotels in the area and they are like 2-3 kilometers apart.

Plus, I just don't think there is enough commercial enterprise within a 10 minute walk to justify sticking a proper MLS stadium there. The park kinda separates the stadium from the 'heart' of Burnaby. And if people traffic is to go down Kingsway, I think it'll congest that area even more than it already is.

[Richard]

Plus the only option for parking is to tear up yet more of Central Park. Not going to happen.

[Danny Boy]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Plus the only option for parking is to tear up yet more of Central Park. Not going to happen.


not necessarily... if that scenario were to take place they could build some under/overground parking and still not interfere with the park. Don't forget in this scenario you get rid of the track which would theoretically open up space on the east side.

I've thought about this scenario a few times and I think from a stadium construction point of view it could work, but from a business/success point of view there are too many negatives about the location.

[morbital]

swangard is not a long term solution, its current capacity is its current capacity, theres no way a large stadium could work there without the infurstruture, transit and commercial, the u-20s illustrated everything that would be wrong with a big stadium there, theres just not enough parking, no hotels, no pubs, nothing

its served its purpose as the caps home field, but has never been the caps home stadium, the caps need a proper facility located in the the central waterfront near gastown, this is the only solution

[Danny Boy]

quote:Originally posted by morbital

swangard is not a long term solution, its current capacity is its current capacity, theres no way a large stadium could work there without the infurstruture, transit and commercial, the u-20s illustrated everything that would be wrong with a big stadium there, theres just not enough parking, no hotels, no pubs, nothing

its served its purpose as the caps home field, but has never been the caps home stadium, the caps need a proper facility located in the the central waterfront near gastown, this is the only solution


bingo

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by morbital

swangard is not a long term solution, its current capacity is its current capacity, theres no way a large stadium could work there without the infurstruture, transit and commercial, the u-20s illustrated everything that would be wrong with a big stadium there, theres just not enough parking, no hotels, no pubs, nothing

its served its purpose as the caps home field, but has never been the caps home stadium, the caps need a proper facility located in the the central waterfront near gastown, this is the only solution
No argument there.

[SthMelbRed]

The Whitecaps affiliation with Swangard is fine for USL but can't be expanded or reworked for MLS. Swangard is a community facility. Anybody can go down there on a non-event day and use the running track. It is the home to SFU rugby and soccer, all of the local school's track and field competitions, and numerous other community events throughout the year. I am a supporter of soccer and would love for Vancouver to have an MLS team. However, as a son of Burnaby, I would see something along the lines of what Jeffrey is proposing as a net loser for the people of Burnaby. Besides that, making it's permanent home at Swangard would be suicidal for the long-term viability of a Vancouver MLS team. For the good of Vancouver, MLS, and all Canadian soccer fans, there needs to be a new stadium downtown. I stop short of saying 'soccer-specific' as I think it's important to have the new facility adaptable to other uses in order for it to be financially viable. Concerts, rugby, perhaps future Vanier Cups, etc. would pay the bills far better than a mere fifteen MLS home dates per year.

[rodfern2007]

Who said that Vancouver was a shoo in for the MLS. Let me remind you people that St-Louis, Philadelphia and New York are the current front runners to be next in line for an MLS franchise. All this talk about building a stadium when it is obvious that the city of Vancouver is not interested, is just a load of nonsense.

[piltdownman]

I wouldn't way the city of Vancouver is not interested. I think the problem is Mayor Sam Sullivan is a man of indecision. I get the feeling he is so afraid of making a mistake that he doesn't do anything. Has he done anything in the way of programs or policy? "Ecodensity" was just existing city plans with a new name. And "Civil City" simply asks the provincial and federal government to fix vancouver's problems. I have a feeling the next election will force the Stadium. One candidate will pledge their support to the project, and all others will jump on the bandwagon.

[SthMelbRed]

And when is the next civic election? If it isn't soon, it'll be too late. I honestly believe that for Vancouver to get an MLS team, they need to have already started to build the stadium. That gives less than a year before the next MLS expansion decision will probably be. If they start the stadium and can commit to the expansion fee, I think it's a no-brainer on MLS's part. If they don't get the stadium started, they will very soon miss the boat and it'll be USL forever.

[Richard]

The problem right now is not the City of Vancouver but Ports Canada which is a federal agency. They are the ones dragging their feet. My sense from talking to Whitecaps front office folk is that if the land issue with Ports Canada could be resolved the program would now be fast tracked by the City of Vancouver as the latest proposals are quite acceptable to all the local parties. The Whitecaps need to do more lobbying in Ottawa in my opinion but the Steven Harper conservative government has shown zero interest in helping them stick handle this project through - bear that in mind when the federal election happens next year.

[Vancouversoccerman]

On the Ports front, the Mayor made a trip to to Ottawa about 2 weeks ago to meet with the Transport Minister on the Stadium. I don't know the results of the meeting, but Mayor Sullivan went on record as saying the stadium is now a city priority. This is the kind of advocacy stadium supporters have been looking for from ALL of council for two years. Talking to a couple of councillors, it seems that they finally understand what we could miss out on if we don't act.

I don't think it's just the Whitecaps who have to lobby Ottawa. I believe the City has an obligation to do this along with all of us who want to see a stadium in Vancouver. From a layman's perspective, the Port appears to be getting a good deal...trading off a parking lot for improved access to the railway yard they need to operate. The area can't be turned into additional container cranes, as there's little road access, and it's too close to downtown.

In the end, we're going get this done through hard work and sheer will. Yes...it sucks that we can't get it done the way Toronto or Montreal did, but if we keep the pressure up, we'll do it.

Cheers,
Bill Currie
Friends of Soccer

[Vancouversoccerman]

And by the way, the next Civic Election is in November...don't think we're not prepared for that. :-)

[Tractor Boy]

quote:Originally posted by morbital

swangard is not a long term solution, its current capacity is its current capacity, theres no way a large stadium could work there without the infurstruture, transit and commercial, the u-20s illustrated everything that would be wrong with a big stadium there, theres just not enough parking, no hotels, no pubs, nothing

its served its purpose as the caps home field, but has never been the caps home stadium, the caps need a proper facility located in the the central waterfront near gastown, this is the only solution


I have never heard such sense come out or Morbitals mouth! [:p]

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

The problem right now is not the City of Vancouver but Ports Canada which is a federal agency. They are the ones dragging their feet. My sense from talking to Whitecaps front office folk is that if the land issue with Ports Canada could be resolved the program would now be fast tracked by the City of Vancouver as the latest proposals are quite acceptable to all the local parties. The Whitecaps need to do more lobbying in Ottawa in my opinion but the Steven Harper conservative government has shown zero interest in helping them stick handle this project through - bear that in mind when the federal election happens next year.

This is so typical of the Federal Government. For any other sport, soccer included, they won't lift a finger. But I'm quite sure they would be very accomodating if it were for a new hockey arena. And please don't take this to mean that I hate hockey, because I don't. I enjoy watching it and playing it. I just saying that the Federal Government seem to have a fixed set of priorities.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


quote:Originally posted by Richard

The problem right now is not the City of Vancouver but Ports Canada which is a federal agency. They are the ones dragging their feet. My sense from talking to Whitecaps front office folk is that if the land issue with Ports Canada could be resolved the program would now be fast tracked by the City of Vancouver as the latest proposals are quite acceptable to all the local parties. The Whitecaps need to do more lobbying in Ottawa in my opinion but the Steven Harper conservative government has shown zero interest in helping them stick handle this project through - bear that in mind when the federal election happens next year.

This is so typical of the Federal Government. For any other sport, soccer included, they won't lift a finger. But I'm quite sure they would be very accomodating if it were for a new hockey arena. And please don't take this to mean that I hate hockey, because I don't. I enjoy watching it and playing it. I just saying that the Federal Government seem to have a fixed set of priorities.


It's easier to justify a new arena than a new soccer stadium. The former is more likely to get heavy usage.

[DinamoTFC]

So what is the date of the next council meeting or whatever is need to let this stadium to go to the next step?

What are they currently negotiating - is it still the land swap?

[Richard]

Until the land swap with the federal port authority is finalised the City of Vancouver has no futher involvement, they are not holding up the process at all at the moment it's the Harper federal government.

[DinamoTFC]

So when is this land swap meeting or decision occuring?

[Richard]

Whitecaps management told me in December that club representatives talk with port authority folks about twice a week. You can be sure nobody wants this whole issue resolved and stadium construction underway more than the Whitecaps.

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Whitecaps management told me in December that club representatives talk with port authority folks about twice a week. You can be sure nobody wants this whole issue resolved and stadium construction underway more than the Whitecaps.

Twice a week, you say? Hmmm, something tells me that the Port Authority is stalling deliberately because they must want to hold out for something a little more profitable, like another condo development, commercial, whatever. These things would fill up the government coffers faster than a waterfront soccer specific stadium. I hate to sound pessimistic, but all the signs point to that possibility. It seems to me at this point that the Whitecaps will not be getting the stadium that they want, and that they'd better resign themselves to stay at Swangard for the time being.

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


quote:Originally posted by Richard

Whitecaps management told me in December that club representatives talk with port authority folks about twice a week. You can be sure nobody wants this whole issue resolved and stadium construction underway more than the Whitecaps.

Twice a week, you say? Hmmm, something tells me that the Port Authority is stalling deliberately because they must want to hold out for something a little more profitable, like another condo development, commercial, whatever. These things would fill up the government coffers faster than a waterfront soccer specific stadium. I hate to sound pessimistic, but all the signs point to that possibility. It seems to me at this point that the Whitecaps will not be getting the stadium that they want, and that they'd better resign themselves to stay at Swangard for the time being.


Knowing the area that the Whitecaps want to put the stadium, I don't think there is much possibility for anything that you suggest on that land. Whatever is built there has to go on top of the rail tracks. I doubt too many people would want to live over a rail yard. Besides, by law, Canada Ports can only swap the land for a similar piece of land (which Kerfoot has, right next door), not sell it outright. How many people do you know who would develop land that they don't own freehold?

[Richard]

Two-thirds at least of the stadium will be built over water, there is no land involved that would be suitable or even available for residential condos.

Kerfoot owns the land the railtracks are on which are crucial to the port authority and the adjacent container terminal. Kerfoot is in a fairly strong negotiating position I would think. Part of the problem I blieve is that the port authority is currently preoccupied with the merger of several of the lower mainland port authorities into one large organisation.

[Calgary Boomer]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Whitecaps management told me in December that club representatives talk with port authority folks about twice a week. You can be sure nobody wants this whole issue resolved and stadium construction underway more than the Whitecaps.


I know at least one of those people representing the local Port Authority is a HUGE soccer guy. He used to be the president of Wesburn Soccer Club.

[Mpenza]

quote:
Besides, by law, Canada Ports can only swap the land for a similar piece of land (which Kerfoot has, right next door)


If Kerfoot owns a similar piece of land right next door, why isn't he using THAT land instead?

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza


quote:
Besides, by law, Canada Ports can only swap the land for a similar piece of land (which Kerfoot has, right next door)


If Kerfoot owns a similar piece of land right next door, why isn't he using THAT land instead?


"The stadium was originally earmarked for construction adjacent to the SeaBus terminal, but transit issues forced relocation to the Kerfoot-owned land. More issues followed, including the transportation of dangerous goods along the rail lines, leading to the current Helijet pad location."

taken from the newspaper article on the 2nd page of this thread.

[Blue and White Army]

The Port Authority has already launched the land value assessment study... things are progressing nicely. Stay tuned.

[Richard]

This month old article from the Vancouver Province may help fill in some of the gaps on where the whole business stands.

Assessment under way of land swap between Whitecaps, port authority
December 4, 2007

Lora Grindlay - The Province

An independent financial assessment is under way of a land swap between the Vancouver Whitecaps and the Vancouver Port Authority to make way for a $75-million waterfront stadium.

Port authority spokeswoman Anne McMullin said it could take months to determine whether the land exchange proposed by the soccer team is of "comparable market value" and to determine whether land obtained by the authority can be used for shipping and navigation purposes. Both factors are required by federal legislation, she said.

The exchange involves Whitecaps-owned land over rail yards along Waterfront Road and vacant port land close to the Helijet terminal.

McMullin said any deal would have to be approved by Transport Canada.

The proposed stadium was on the table yesterday in a meeting between Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan and Transport and Infrastructure Minister Lawrence Cannon in Ottawa.

'Caps president Bob Lenarduzzi was encouraged that the stadium was a topic of discussion in Ottawa.

"It is frustrating that it has taken this long but we have another meeting with [the authority] this week and we hope to make some headway at that time."

Discussions between the city and the Whitecaps regarding a new stadium began in January 2003.

Once a location and an agreement with the port authority is finalized, the team faces a rezoning and development process with the city that could take up to 18
months.

"Our desire, our hope is that it would take far less than that," Lenarduzzi said.

Timing is important, Lenarduzzi said, if the 'Caps have a hope of clinching a Major League Soccer expansion franchise.

"There are a number of cities that are in the mix right now, us being one of them, but without having a confirmation of our venue we wouldn't be in the mix," he said.

lgrindlay@png.canwest.com

© The Vancouver Province 2007

[Fort York Redcoat]

Wow. I'm surprised that Vancouver sat on their hands when they were the underdog to the competition just across the border in Seattle. Clearly MLS is American biased even with this so called Canada exclusivity of TFC. I guess this shouldn't be a surprise. The Leafs and MLSE certainly couldn't handle any competition for fans. Then they'd have to perform for support! But back to 'Couver I'm disgusted that MLS are gonna make not one but 2 more teams whose grounds I wouldn't visit if you payed me. SH has 3 sides to it. Bush! Where do Seattle play? With the Seahawks?

[DinamoTFC]

So wheres the news!!! How long does it take them to do an assessment of land. 15 years?

[Richard]

This is the government we're waiting on!

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by DinamoTFC

So wheres the news!!! How long does it take them to do an assessment of land. 15 years?


That about seems right.

[Franky]

i don't get it. If there was any city that desereved an MLS calibre franchise, it should be Vancouver hands down.

i can't believe your government is putting you through the spin cycle like this, ohhh, but you got your WInter Roid-lympics on the horizon, just fabulous. Tons of winter sports that no one follows except every four years, except hackey, of course. gotta enjoy those Roid-lympic ideals.

anyone know or should i say, should anyone care, who will win the gold in the SKELETON!!

i wish you guys all the best of luck with this stadia project.

thank gawd Toronto loses in their Roid-lympic bids, everytime.

[Blue and White Army]

It's not the local municipal council holding things up, it's the Port Authority - an arm of the federal government,

[SthMelbRed]

As every day passes without a resolution, it becomes more and more likely that we've missed the boat. If we have a stadium approved by the time the next MLS decision comes up, we'll be a shoo-in. However, I think the beaureaucrats may have f@#%ed this one up for us. No stadium and no MLS for the best soccer city in Canada or the US.

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by SthMelbRed

As every day passes without a resolution, it becomes more and more likely that we've missed the boat. If we have a stadium approved by the time the next MLS decision comes up, we'll be a shoo-in. However, I think the beaureaucrats may have f@#%ed this one up for us. No stadium and no MLS for the best soccer city in Canada or the US.

Well look on the bright side. At least you still have a team in the USL, and you still have Swangard, which isn't really such a bad place when you think about it, what with the trees and mountains. Plus we now have a new continental championship in the works, the CONCACAF Champions League, with Canada guaranteed at least one spot. That means that now Vancouver, along with the Impact and TFC, can challenge for that spot, and who knows, probably win the cup, all without the benefit of joining the MLS. This could be a good thing you know. And the best part is that the club and the taxpayers won't have to fork out millions of dollars to build a waterfront stadium, which by all accounts will probably never get past the drawing board anyway, not to mention the go ahead from the Port Authority.

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007
And the best part is that the club and the taxpayers won't have to fork out millions of dollars to build a waterfront stadium, which by all accounts will probably never get past the drawing board anyway, not to mention the go ahead from the Port Authority.


The biggest tragedy is that no taxpayers' money is required or being sought to build the waterfront stadium. Greg Kerfoot intends to take on the financing of the stadium in its entirety on his own.

[rodfern2007]

Well now he'll save a bundle. He can use that money to buy players that can win a championship (USL or CONCACAF). It's win-win.

[Danny Boy]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007

Well now he'll save a bundle. He can use that money to buy players that can win a championship (USL or CONCACAF). It's win-win.


not really when no one cares about the USL. Vancouver got a collective golf-clap from the media when they won the USL championship. Unfortunately the Whitecaps need MLS more than the MLS needing the Whitecaps.

[Krammerhead]

They hardly got a golf clap from the Vancouver sports fan, let alone the media, when they won the USL championship.

[Calgary Boomer]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


quote:Originally posted by SthMelbRed

As every day passes without a resolution, it becomes more and more likely that we've missed the boat. If we have a stadium approved by the time the next MLS decision comes up, we'll be a shoo-in. However, I think the beaureaucrats may have f@#%ed this one up for us. No stadium and no MLS for the best soccer city in Canada or the US.

Well look on the bright side. At least you still have a team in the USL, and you still have Swangard, which isn't really such a bad place when you think about it, what with the trees and mountains. Plus we now have a new continental championship in the works, the CONCACAF Champions League, with Canada guaranteed at least one spot. That means that now Vancouver, along with the Impact and TFC, can challenge for that spot, and who knows, probably win the cup, all without the benefit of joining the MLS. This could be a good thing you know. And the best part is that the club and the taxpayers won't have to fork out millions of dollars to build a waterfront stadium, which by all accounts will probably never get past the drawing board anyway, not to mention the go ahead from the Port Authority.


Sorry, but that's little consolation...and there are a lot of people in the organization who will be without jobs if they can't get a stadium or MLS.

The USL is irrelevant in the Vancouver sports landscape.

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by Calgary Boomer
[brThe USL is irrelevant in the Vancouver sports landscape.


This is one of the reasons that it is so vital that Vancouver, as one of the the 3 major soccer centers in the country gets the MLS team that it deserves. It is an issue of importance to football fans across the whole country, not just on the west coast. It may be time that supporters of the game nationwide start contacting their MPs to put pressure on Ports Canada, a federal agency, to move on this issue swiftly.

[Calgary Boomer]

I contacted the MP for the area Libby Davies. What a waste of time. She's a left wing NIMBY sympathizer who says she was "totally against" a soccer stadium for an area which should be use for "industrial purposes".

I'm not sure if people in Ottawa take her seriously...

[SthMelbRed]

Libby Davies is the MP for Vancouver East and Dr. Hedy Fry is the MP for Vancouver Center. I'm not sure which riding Gastown falls into. Both are similarly kooky and probably not the most obvious champions for the cause. However, they would be forced to take notice if they received significant levels of contact in support of the stadium. As the stadium is an issue for the whole of the lower mainland, flooding all MPs in the GVRD with emails supporting the stadium might be in order.

[SthMelbRed]

The MPs representing ridings in close proximity to the area are Libby Davies(NDP-Vancouver East), Dr. Hedy Fry(Lib-Vancouver Center), Ujjal Dosanjh(Lib-Vancouver South), David Emerson(Con-Vancouver Kingsway), Don Bell(Lib-North Vancouver), Bill Siksay(NDP-Burnaby-Douglas), and Raymond Chan(Lib-Richmond). I am going to send emails to all of them canvassing their opinions on the stadium issue. If and when any of them respond, I'll report back here.

[Krammerhead]

quote:As the stadium is an issue for the whole of the lower mainland, flooding all MPs in the GVRD with emails supporting the stadium might be in order.


..Just an aside, the GVRD is now known as Metro Vancouver.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Vancouver should've thrown some sod on a parking lot downtown and said that was their temp stadium. San Jose are doing it and they don't even have 4 sets of stands!

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by SthMelbRed

The MPs representing ridings in close proximity to the area are Libby Davies(NDP-Vancouver East), Dr. Hedy Fry(Lib-Vancouver Center), Ujjal Dosanjh(Lib-Vancouver South), David Emerson(Con-Vancouver Kingsway), Don Bell(Lib-North Vancouver), Bill Siksay(NDP-Burnaby-Douglas), and Raymond Chan(Lib-Richmond). I am going to send emails to all of them canvassing their opinions on the stadium issue. If and when any of them respond, I'll report back here.


NDP and Liberals? They don't sound like the type who would lobby for things like a stadium. They'd probably fight for something like a community centre, clinics, social housing, etc. Don't be surprised then if the whole stadium projet falls through. Besides which, these people seem to have support from people who are anti-poverty, advocates of social reforms, and who probably lobbied against the Winter Olympics coming to Vancouver.

[Winnipeg Fury]

quote:Originally posted by SthMelbRed

Libby Davies is the MP for Vancouver East and Dr. Hedy Fry is the MP for Vancouver Center. I'm not sure which riding Gastown falls into. Both are similarly kooky and probably not the most obvious champions for the cause. However, they would be forced to take notice if they received significant levels of contact in support of the stadium. As the stadium is an issue for the whole of the lower mainland, flooding all MPs in the GVRD with emails supporting the stadium might be in order.



Isn't Hedy Fry the moron that stated 'crosses were being burned' in BC. When asked for details, she had nothing to say.

[Canucks fan]

yeah thats her.


I'd imagine Emerson would be probably be the best person to try and get a response from. Even though it's not technically in his riding he is the minister for the Olympics as well as Pacific trade or something like that, and he's probably more pro-stadium than the others

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by Winnipeg Fury


quote:Originally posted by SthMelbRed

Libby Davies is the MP for Vancouver East and Dr. Hedy Fry is the MP for Vancouver Center. I'm not sure which riding Gastown falls into. Both are similarly kooky and probably not the most obvious champions for the cause. However, they would be forced to take notice if they received significant levels of contact in support of the stadium. As the stadium is an issue for the whole of the lower mainland, flooding all MPs in the GVRD with emails supporting the stadium might be in order.



Isn't Hedy Fry the moron that stated 'crosses were being burned' in BC. When asked for details, she had nothing to say.






That is correct. She is also regarded by her own Liberal party colleagues as a bit of a kook.

Enjoy your stay at Swangard. It looks like you will stay there for a good long time.

[rodfern2007]

As for Libby Davies, the MP for Vancouver East, here is what your up against: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Davies

[royalcity]

quote:Originally posted by Fort York Redcoat

Vancouver should've thrown some sod on a parking lot downtown and said that was their temp stadium. San Jose are doing it and they don't even have 4 sets of stands!


We don't need temp sod on a downtown parking lot. There is some perfectly good grass at the old Empire Stadium site. :D

[Bertuzzi44]

quote:Originally posted by royalcity


quote:Originally posted by Fort York Redcoat

Vancouver should've thrown some sod on a parking lot downtown and said that was their temp stadium. San Jose are doing it and they don't even have 4 sets of stands!


We don't need temp sod on a downtown parking lot. There is some perfectly good grass at the old Empire Stadium site. :D

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/past_stadiums/vancouver_empire.jpg
Empire stadium, Vancouver.

The Whitecaps never should have moved to BC Place... [V]

[SthMelbRed]

But for the lack of it being on a SkyTrain line, it'd be a great alternative venue for a new outdoor stadium. Downtown is still by far the best way to go, I think.

[CanadianSwede]

I think eople have mentioned this but couldn't they just reconstruct Swangard so there isnt a running track but stands instead? Looking at picture of Swangard, it seems that this could be completed with minimal ecological damage etc..

[SthMelbRed]

Swangard is a municipal facility that is home to a multitude of community sports and events. It's not in the City of Burnaby's interests to eliminate the track at Swangard, as it would then have to find another home for track and field events from elementary school level through high school. It's unfair to ask Burnaby to provide the facility because Vancouver and the federal government lack the wherewithal to clear the hurdles that are preventing a privately funded facility.

[Streets]

It would be interesting to know which mp's really care about this stadium project before the decision comes down as they all seem quite cautious.Look forward to any response you might receive SMR.

[Richard]

Whitecaps Waterfront Stadium effectively stalled
Word from the Whitecaps front office suggests there has been no real progress for months despite best efforts from the Whitecaps. You Can Help - Contact Minister Cannon – the federal minister responsible for Transport Canada and your local MP and encourage the government to endorse a deal between the Whitecaps and the Port. Contact Mayor Sam Sullivan and Councillor's and reinforce the need for council to show leadership in establishing a priority timeline for the stadium rezoning and development process.

www.bcsoccerweb.com (http://www.bcsoccerweb.com)

[Calgary Boomer]

Here's Lawrence Cannon's e-mail: Cannol1@parl.gc.ca

Let's get cracking!

[Mpenza]

Why don't they use the old Empire Stadium site anyway?
It looks like it's not too far from Downtown Vancouver and with Playland and the Pacific Coliseum around, it must be easy to get to and from the site by bus/train and parking must be just fine, right?

[tmcmurph]

" Why don't they use the old Empire Stadium site anyway?"

Not on Skytrain path and the owner isn't the team. You must own your own stadium (for good reasons).

[Richard]

The only public transit to the old Empire Stadium site is bus and it would be quite a walk from the bus stop too, there is no Skytrain station for many miles. The downtown site is by far the best option from that POV, can't be matched by any other location in the Lower Mainland. It has all the transit options within 5 minutes walk, Skytrain, bus, Seabus and West Coast Express commuter rail, plus Greg Kerfoot owns a multi-level parking garage within the five minute walk radius too. Easy walking access to all the downtown pubs and restaurants which can't be said for the Empire Stadium location. There are very good reasons why BC Place and GM Place were built where thay are downtown, there is even a Skytrain station called Stadium right there and extra trains are laid on whenever there is a major event.

[piltdownman]

I don't think anywhere but downtown can be an option. They have already sold everyone on how great this downtown stadium is going to be. I understand that a stadium somehwere else might be the only option soon, but anywhere but downtown after all the hype is a major letdown.

[SthMelbRed]

When the Canucks played at the Coliseum, attending an NHL game consisted of going home after work, grabbing something to eat, then driving to East Van for the game. When the game was over, you drove home. There was one not-very-good pub within easy walking distance and a smallish restaurant across the street.

Now that the games are downtown, there is a buzz in the whole city when there is a game. All the pubs and restaurants in the downtown core pack out before the game as people with tickets meet their friends with or without tickets for a pre-game meal and some drinks. When the game is on, many of the bars remain busy (it helps that every game is now on TV as opposed to only about half of them back in the Coliseum days) until the game ends, when the ones closer to GM Place pack out again for a couple of hours.

For a club with any sort of ambition to become an enduring, major player on the local sports scene, downtown is crucial. Everybody knows when there is a Canucks' or Lions' game on, whether they're fans or not, because of the atmosphere downtown. When the Whitecaps play, only those that go to the games know about it. There is no buzz in the city as the games are out of the way and the crowds are much smaller. An MLS team playing at the PNE site would probably draw an average of 10,000ish fans to games. An MLS team playing downtown would sell out all it's matches.

[Mpenza]

Ok... the Empire Stadium site looked good... in Google Earth. :D
I figured transportation wouldn't be much of an issue. Weird how we in North America build things to attract people and just don't manage to make them accessible at the same time...

[Richard]

Yeah, it is in most other respects a lovely spot. For automobiles it would also seem pretty convenient, right close to the Trans Canada Highway but at peak times that would make it well nigh inaccessible by car due to gridlock.

[SthMelbRed]

The junction of Hastings St. and the Trans-Canada Highway at the Cassiar Connector is pretty bad for traffic on a regular day during evening rush hour. Adding sporting crowds to the mix makes it a nightmare. Accessability issues aside, you'd get some spectacular sceneries from a stadium there looking out towards the North Shore. Downtown is definitely the way to go, though.

[Krammerhead]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

Ok... the Empire Stadium site looked good... in Google Earth. :D
I figured transportation wouldn't be much of an issue. Weird how we in North America build things to attract people and just don't manage to make them accessible at the same time...


Back in the NASL Whitecaps day, Empire stadium was far more accessible than it is nowadays. There were houses right by the stadium and bus stops. Once the stadium was gone the area underwent changes and it's a place that you now drive by, not to.

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead
[Back in the NASL Whitecaps day, Empire stadium was far more accessible than it is nowadays. There were houses right by the stadium and bus stops. Once the stadium was gone the area underwent changes and it's a place that you now drive by, not to.


It didn't hurt that East Vancouver was basically the beating heart of soccer in Canada at the time, or at least western Canada. The Lennarduzzis grew up a few blocks away from the PNE grounds which housed Empire Stadium.

[Calgary Boomer]

If it doesn't have skytrain access, it's not going to be considered as an option...

[Calgary Boomer]

The DUZE was on the radio today. When asked about Greg's patience level, Bobby said it was "huge" and that he intends on seeing the process through to the end. It's Waterfront or nothing...

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by Calgary Boomer

The DUZE was on the radio today. When asked about Greg's patience level, Bobby said it was "huge" and that he intends on seeing the process through to the end. It's Waterfront or nothing...


Then it's nothing, because the Federal government will never let go of anything that will generate revenue and fill their coffers. It would not make sense for them to do so.

Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard.

[masster]

quote:Originally posted by Calgary Boomer

The DUZE was on the radio today. When asked about Greg's patience level, Bobby said it was "huge" and that he intends on seeing the process through to the end. It's Waterfront or nothing...


What station and show was he one?

[Calgary Boomer]

He was on the Rick Ball Show on the TEAM 1040. It was about 2:15pm

[piltdownman]

I really admire Kerfoot. I would have moved to Europe and bought a club there if I were him.

[Canucks fan]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard.


may I ask why you seem to be so negative towards the Whitecaps stadium and their MLS ambitions in almost every one of your posts?

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by masster


quote:Originally posted by Calgary Boomer

The DUZE was on the radio today. When asked about Greg's patience level, Bobby said it was "huge" and that he intends on seeing the process through to the end. It's Waterfront or nothing...


What station and show was he one?
Check www.bcsoccerweb.com for a link to the podcast.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by piltdownman

I really admire Kerfoot. I would have moved to Europe and bought a club there if I were him.
He made it abundantly clear when he bought the club that his motive was sustaining professional soccer in Vancouver and developing Canadian soccer. I doubt he has any interest in dabbling in Europe.

[Krammerhead]

quote:Originally posted by Canucks fan


quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard.


may I ask why you seem to be so negative towards the Whitecaps stadium and their MLS ambitions in almost every one of your posts?


Because he's a troll.

[Krammerhead]

quote:Originally posted by piltdownman

I really admire Kerfoot. I would have moved to Europe and bought a club there if I were him.


Where's the challenge in that?

[rodfern2007]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead


quote:Originally posted by Canucks fan


quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard.


may I ask why you seem to be so negative towards the Whitecaps stadium and their MLS ambitions in almost every one of your posts?


Because he's a troll.


OK no need for name calling. I don't do it you or anybody else on this forum. First off, I hope I am wrong and that the Whitecaps do manage to get their stadium built. Lord knows we could use another new stadium, not just for Vancouver, but the whole of Canada. In fact I would like to see new stadiums being built all over the country, not just for hockey, but for the soccer and the CFL as well (that concept drawing for the new Blue Bombers stadium looks really good, and I hope it does get built). As someone who works in the architectural field, this sort of thing excites me more than you can possibly imagine. But that excitement is tempered by years of constant disapointment by our elected officials you have a history of promoting projects to the public that in the end never see the light of day. My comments with regards to the Whitecaps stadium, while it may seem negative, almost cynical, is and should be understandable. We as Canadians are at the whim of elected officials who flip flop on many issues that it has left many of us feeling jaded and cynical. That's all. If the Whitecaps succeed to build their stadium and then get into the MLS, then power to them.

But again, please, lay off the name calling.

[Krammerhead]

I could be wrong but when you make posts like "Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard" or some of the other things in this this thread (and in the Montreal expansion threads) as Canucks fan alludes to, it certainly sounds like you are trolling for a response. Surely we aren't the only ones to notice this.

[Grizzly]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead

I could be wrong but when you make posts like "Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard" or some of the other things in this this thread (and in the Montreal expansion threads) as Canucks fan alludes to, it certainly sounds like you are trolling for a response. Surely we aren't the only ones to notice this.


Krammerhead, haven't other posters accused you of the exact same thing you are accusing rodfern of, ie. being a troll because of constantly negative or cynical posts on certain subjects?

[Krammerhead]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly


quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead

I could be wrong but when you make posts like "Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard" or some of the other things in this this thread (and in the Montreal expansion threads) as Canucks fan alludes to, it certainly sounds like you are trolling for a response. Surely we aren't the only ones to notice this.


Krammerhead, haven't other posters accused you of the exact same thing you are accusing rodfern of, ie. being a troll because of constantly negative or cynical posts on certain subjects?


I don't think anybody accused me of being a troll in those instances. Accused of being just about everything else, but not a troll.:D

[Footy]

Sorry Rodfern2007 I agree with Krammerhead with comments like stay in the USL and stay in Swangard you are asking for someone to call you out TROLL. [:o)]

[Calgary Boomer]

quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007


quote:


Then it's nothing, because the Federal government will never let go of anything that will generate revenue and fill their coffers. It would not make sense for them to do so.

Stay in the USL and stay in Swangard.


Were you protesting outside the Hyatt today for the Olympic countdown gala?

[rodfern2007]

No.

[SthMelbRed]

So, I sent an email to the seven MPs I listed in one of my previous posts. After ten days, I have received only two replies. I will post them in my subsequent posts. Here's the original email I sent:

Subject: Waterfront Stadium issue

Dear Sirs and Madams,

I am writing with regards to an issue that I consider to be of great significance to all residents of the Lower Mainland, namely the proposed new outdoor stadium on the Vancouver waterfront. As federal members for the immediately surrounding areas of the proposed site, I would like to both solicit your opinions on the proposed development, as well as to urge you all to do whatever is in your power to make the development a reality.

As you should all know, Mr. Greg Kerfoot, the owner of the Vancouver Whitecaps Football Club, wants to build a new outdoor stadium on the Vancouver waterfront, adjacent to Gastown. He has already purchased land on which he wishes to build and he plans to finance the construction on his own, free from and public funds. I think it is diabolical that such a proposal that presents such a wonderful opportunity for our city has been bogged down in beaureaucratic red tape for nearly five years. Currently, the development is being held up by Ports Canada, a federal agency.

Should Mr. Kerfoot be cleared to progress with his plans, Vancouver stands an excellent chance to receive a team in the largely US-based Major League of Soccer (MLS). A Vancouver franchise in MLS would be a great boost for soccer development in the whole country, providing an opportunity for Canadian players to pursue professional careers in a sport that has had higher participation numbers than even hockey in Canada for many years. A new stadium would also allow Vancouver to host matches of the Canadian Men's and Women's national teams, as well as other international sporting events and concerts in an outdoor setting that would do much to showcase the beauty of Vancouver, the Lower Mainland, and the province.

The Lower Mainland is home to a large base of soccer fans who are hungry for the opportunity to see high-level live soccer. Last summers U-20 World Cup is as much evidence of this as was the recent, sold-out exhibition match held at BC Place involving the LA Galaxy. Take a drive down Commercial Drive during any major, international soccer event and you will be left in no doubt that the demand exists for such a stadium. The fact that we can achieve this without having to dip into the public purse makes this a no-brainer, as far as I am concerned.

As we are getting near the point of no return with regards to a Vancouver MLS team, it is imperative that this project is not allowed to languish in its planning stages for very much longer. I urge you all to do whatever you can to encourage this project towards completion.

Sincerely,
Amrit Xxxxx Xxxxxx
native Vancouverite and lifelong soccer fan

PS-I think it only fair let you know that I intend to post any replies (or lack thereof) on the message board of the Voyageurs, the supporters group for Canada's national soccer teams.

[SthMelbRed]

Here's the first response I got, from Libby Davies:

Dear Amrit,

Thank you for your email to let me know about your support for a soccer stadium. I have a number of concerns about the location of the proposed stadium, which are based on much feedback that I've heard from constituents, who are overwhelmingly in opposition to the stadium.

For your background, to help you understand my position, I'm including below some letters that I've written on this issue.

I do thank you for letting me know about your support for it, as I appreciate very much the variety of feedback I receive from folks, as it helps me to make informed decisions.

Sincerely,
Libby Davies, MP (Vancouver East)

[SthMelbRed]

first of 3 letters she's written in opposition that she forwarded to me in her reply:

June 30, 2006

Mayor and Council City of Vancouver By Fax: mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca <mailto:mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca>

Dear Mayor and Council,

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposal for a soccer stadium in Gastown.

I have spoken to many residents who already feel besieged by the rapid pace of development in the Gastown and Downtown Eastside neighbourhoods. The intense and overwhelming nature of a soccer stadium is neither compatible nor respectful of the neighbouring residential community.

The Gastown and Downtown Eastside neighbourhoods have more than their share of challenges, not least of which is maintaining a strong sense of community in the middle of a big and increasingly unaffordable city. However, through hard work, creativity and community activism, residents have persevered and made their urban corner of Vancouver a neighbourhood and a home. They have built a thriving, tight-knit neighbourhood in one of Canada's poorest areas.

But a fragile balance exists between the needs of commerce and those of the community. Undoubtedly the two can co-exist, but cities throughout Canada and North America are littered with tragic examples of what happens when the balance is tipped and communities are overwhelmed.

My major concerns include, but are not limited to, the problems created by:

· The transport of hazardous materials travelling along the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks, under the proposed stadium. The transport of hazardous materials by rail is a serious matter that has gained higher profile recently due to the numerous CN derailments in 2005 and 2006.
· Gastown and particularly the Downtown Eastside are fragile neighbourhoods, which have historically suffered the brunt of people from outside the area coming upon it to wreak havoc. The perception that "anything goes" and that the "rules don't apply," especially in the Downtown Eastside, encourages public disorder, which will only be compounded by the presence of a soccer stadium.
· There is no comprehensive plan for the area. In the absence of such a plan, I question whether a soccer stadium is truly the highest and best use of such prime waterfront land. A soccer stadium will have serious impacts on the livability of the area and make it far less enjoyable for its residents.
· There is a lack of affordable housing in this city. I applaud your EcoDensity initiative introduced at the World Urban Forum, and hope that you would use its guiding principle of ecologically responsible development to create affordable housing and community amenities for this land. The less well off in our city are forced to live elsewhere because of the lack of affordable housing. Increased housing supply may help drive market prices down and make tenure more affordable, and increased densification will not only help urban neighbourhoods thrive, but also simultaneously reduce our ecological footprint.

I wish to emphasize that the fundamental issue here is the lack of foresight and planning for Gastown and the Downtown Eastside. I think that it is premature and shortsighted to consider large-scale development in a community that does not even have a comprehensive plan. With such a plan in place, expectations are articulated and mutually beneficially goals are identified. As a result, many problems associated with development proposals can be avoided. Therefore, I urge you to proceed with a planning process for this community as soon as possible.

The idea of a soccer stadium with its attendant nuisances - in a residential neighbourhood no less - is shortsighted and incompatible; it is not in any way neighbourhood-friendly, and will only serve to be a permanent nuisance at best, and devastating at worst. I respectfully urge you to reject this ill-conceived proposal.

Sincerely,
Original signed by...
Libby Davies, MP (Vancouver East)

[SthMelbRed]

second letter:

March 13, 2007

Hon. Lawrence Cannon, Minister Transport Canada
House of Commons Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6

Hon. Loyola Hearn, Minister Fisheries and Oceans
House of Commons Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6

Dear Ministers,

Re: Waterfront Soccer Stadium in Vancouver, BC

I am writing in opposition to the proposal to build a private soccer stadium on public waterfront administered by the Vancouver Port Authority. I have written to Vancouver's Mayor and Council in the past (attached), and my concerns remain unchanged. In addition to the municipal issues, I also have additional concerns of a federal nature that must be addressed.

Specifically, I wish to bring to your attention that a private stadium on public waterfront demonstrates a lack of foresight, and is not the highest and best use of this land. There are also federal liability issues regarding the transport of dangerous goods by the busy railyard adjacent to the site. Moreover, I believe that there will be significant negative environmental impacts should the development proceed.

I have also attached an email from my constituent, Bruce Clarkson, which details the principal federal problems with this proposal.

To propose a large scale complex with its attendant nuisances, and potential harm, so close to a residential area - and next to a public park, which includes a sensitive marine habitat - is misguided and shortsighted at best, and devastating at worst.

I believe that your capacity as Ministers obligate you to view this proposal in the context of the damaging consequences that it would have on both residents and marine life alike.

I respectfully urge your comprehensive and thorough assessment of this situation. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Original signed by...
Libby Davies, MP (Vancouver East)

Cc: Mayor and Council, City of Vancouver
Captain Gordon Houston, President & CEO, Vancouver Port Authority

[SthMelbRed]

3rd letter:

November 22, 2007

Hon. Lawrence Cannon Transport Canada
House of Commons Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6

Dear Minister,

RE: Waterfront Soccer Stadium on Vancouver Port Authority Lands in Vancouver, BC

I am writing to express my concerns and opposition to a current proposal to build a soccer stadium on waterfront property at Vancouver's port. I have been contacted by many constituents, as well as businesses and community organizations, who have also expressed their opposition.

Specifically, I understand that a private developer (in the form of the Whitecaps soccer team) wishes to exchange its own property, which incorporates CP Rail's yard, located between the Station and Waterfront Road, for federal property managed by the Vancouver Port Authority (VPA). Both parcels in question are situated between Canada Place and Crab Park. A portion of these parcels is in my riding of Vancouver East. The Whitecaps' intention for the swap would be to build a soccer stadium/entertainment complex on the new site, while the port is seeking to acquire the rail yards.

The VPA's long term corporate mandate is to sustain Vancouver's port as a major transportation hub. Given BC's geographic prominence in the Asia-Pacific region, and the port's status both nationally and internationally, both the VPA and the City of Vancouver have a longstanding policy and long term interest in sustaining the port as a modern, working waterfront that is integral for our economic future. As Canada's largest port, and by virtue of its competitive access to the globe's most dynamic economies, Vancouver is inextricably linked to the nation's economic interests.

I believe that port land is not an appropriate location for the proposed soccer stadium.

I am also concerned that any disposition of port land may put Crab Park at risk. The park is valued and needed in the Downtown Eastside community and must be fully protected.

As a neighbourhood gentrifies, lower-income people are displaced, sometimes with heartbreaking consequences. Already, the Downtown Eastside has experienced significant change that impacts on its low income community because of redevelopment. Rising homelessness has been one tragic result.

I believe that a core value for the VPA is to develop, sustain and enhance port infrastructure as a nexus for trade and transportation for the long term; and that this value serves local, regional and national economic interests - none of which is compatible with the development of a soccer stadium.

I further believe that a core value for the community is livability, and this livability is manifest in its determined efforts to protect Crab Park, and to ensure that any development does not exacerbate vulnerable residents' ability to live in and enjoy a neighbourhood that is already under threat.

In summary, a soccer stadium is not the best use for prime waterfront property. The site should be protected as a special entity for public benefit, not private interests; and must ultimately be used for the benefit of all, not a few. While hotels and sports stadiums may bring profits, both the economic and social costs are too high. Long term value for the public must be paramount. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
(original signed by)
Libby Davies, MP Vancouver East

[SthMelbRed]

My reply to Libby Davies:

Dear Ms. Davies,

I thank you for your reply. However, it must be said, I find your response to be sadly predictable. I have been a lifelong supporter of the NDP and have worked on a number of campaigns on behalf of your former colleague Sven Robinson in my home riding of Burnaby-Douglas. However, the dogmatic opposition towards any kind of development displayed by many in the party is a serious turn-off.

You describe Gastown as a 'residential neighbourhood.' I have travelled extensively and lived in a couple of other world-class cities. Vancouver is the only place I've encountered where development within the central core of the city is opposed in order to 'protect' the residential flavour of the area. Living downtown has its merits. However, we have to accept that it IS downtown. Downtown is synonymous with Central Business District, not funphobic warehouse of the narrowly self-interested.

While the area does contain a segment of residents, it has always been a commercial area. The fact that it is as run-down as it is is a serious indictment of the leadership our city has endured for decades. The proposed stadium could lead to a rejuvenation of an area that could and should be the beating heart of a world-class city. Overnight, the tacky souvenir shops and boarded up storefronts would be replaced by restaurants and pubs that would transform Gastown into an area where all Vancouverites would want to go, rather than a strip to be avoided at all costs.

I assure you, East Vancouver has historically been the heart of soccer in Canada. The first family of soccer in the country, the Lennarduzzis, call your riding home. Perhaps it's time that you got out of your constituency office and spoke to all the residents of East Vancouver rather than just relying on your buddies at DERA in order to get a true reading of where the feelings of your constituents lie. In the coming year, there will be both muncipal and federal elections. The proposed stadium will be pushed by its supporters as an issue of relevance when those times come. It may be prudent for you to gauge the position of ALL your constituents before you cement your position.

On a final note, I would like to ask you what your position was in the early-nineties when the Vancouver Canucks were proposing to build a new downtown arena. Were you as ideologically opposed to that development as you are to this one? If so, could you forward me copies of the letters you wrote at that time? I have a feeling that they would make for interesting reading.

Sincerely,
Amrit Xxxxx Xxxxxx

[SthMelbRed]

the latest response I've received (from the office of Lawrence Cannon):

Dear Amrit Xxxxxx:

The office of the Honourable David Emerson, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics, has provided the office of the Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, with a copy of your correspondence of February 5, 2008, regarding the proposed Vancouver Whitecaps soccer stadium project. Minister Cannon has asked me to reply on his behalf.

The Minister appreciates receiving your comments and has noted your support for this project. Please rest assured that the Vancouver Port Authority will exercise proper due diligence for this or any other proposed land transaction.

Again, thank you for writing to the federal government.

Yours truly,
Andrew Walasek
Special Assistant - Ontario and Western Canada

c.c. Office of the Honourable David Emerson, P.C., M.P.

[Krammerhead]

Libby Davies: If she can't eat it, she don't like it.

[Blue and White Army]

Libby can eat it, alright...

[rodfern2007]

SthMelRed, ask her where she would put the soccer stadium (assuming of course she would even want one constructed anywhere) if it were up to her.

[Johnnie Monster]

quote:Gastown and particularly the Downtown Eastside are fragile neighbourhoods, which have historically suffered the brunt of people from outside the area coming upon it to wreak havoc. The perception that "anything goes" and that the "rules don't apply," especially in the Downtown Eastside, encourages public disorder, which will only be compounded by the presence of a soccer stadium.

I can't help but wonder if, when she refers to the "people from outside the area" who "wreak havoc" on the downtown eastside, she is referring to the well publicized crisis of illegal immigrants who are repeatedly deposited into the neighbourhood by drug suppliers with the express purpose of selling their deadly poisons to the very people she is so concerned about. Perhaps Ms. Davies should worry about ridding the area of drug peddlers and their greedy masters before worrying about a small contingent of soccer fans who *might* cause a disturbance.


quote:I have also attached an email from my constituent, Bruce Clarkson, which details the principal federal problems with this proposal.

Just so you know, this is the same Bruce "Toxic Armageddon" Clarkson who claimed to have witnessed a number of recent Hazmat repsonses to "disasters" at the CN rail yard, although investigation of those claims showed neither the police nor the fire department had any record of having attended there. He also claims to live in a building overlooking the rail yard for several years… so my question is this: if his public safety concerns are as legitimate and as serious as he claims them to be, why hasn't he moved?

Clarkson is either nuts, or he was put up to it by the now defunct Gastown Neighbourhood Coalition (which I exposed as being a bogus front for developer Jon Stovell and his business partners, who, *surprise surprise!* just happened to have their OWN plans for a development on Kerfoot's land similar to Fishermen's Wharf in San Francisco.)

At any rate, we haven't heard a toxic peep from Clarkson in over a year. Choked on fumes from his bong water, I suspect.

If there's any comfort in any of this, it's that Libby Davies stands no chance of influencing any part of the decision making process.

Since it looks like we've got an election coming up, soccer fans would be wise to canvass opinions from Tory and Liberal candidates in the Vancouver area as they are announced. Libby Davies and the NDP don't have the numbers to form Opposition, let alone government.

[DinamoTFC]

SthMelbRed,

I appauld you on your efforts of emailing the ministers. If we keep sending more letters explaining how the proposed stadium would help the city and that there is a large support, maybe it will turn their eyes.

I guarantee you any money if this was a stadium for the Canucks, it would already be built.

[Calgary Boomer]

Libby Davies is a political has-been, desperately clinging to her seat on the backs of those on the dole. She will have no influence on this decision one way or another, and by employing the old Clarkson "toxic armegeddon debate" further proves what an insignificant lightweight she is (in the political sense anyhow).

I agree with Johnny...we should be canvassing the other candidates in her riding, and if there is an election, make sure they understand the issue, and how weak and ridiculous her argument is. She's actually advocating more industry on that site. How is that going to help her constituents? Or the business in her riding?

I've sent my letter to minister Cannon, and City Council, and I encourage people reading here to do the same.

[Blue and White Army]

I've sent letters as well.

[Canucks fan]

while its not in the riding, there is a by-election coming up in Vancouver-Quadra next month I believe. When I find some time, I may send a quick email to the candidates asking what their or their party's position is on the stadium and just the general state of soccer or sports in the city and what they would do to improve it.

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by Canucks fan

while its not in the riding, there is a by-election coming up in Vancouver-Quadra next month I believe. When I find some time, I may send a quick email to the candidates asking what their or their party's position is on the stadium and just the general state of soccer or sports in the city and what they would do to improve it.


I believe the biggest football club in the area is Dunbar. Maybe you could contact them and see if they'd be willing to put out some information to their members about the stadium. On the other hand, that by-election may be scrubbed if Harper's budget doesn't pass and we get a general election before the end of spring. That would be a blessing to the stadium project, I think, as long as the stadium's supporters can mobilise and put a bit of pressure on the relevant candidates during the campaign.

[Calgary Boomer]

Vancouver East is the federal riding which Libby Davies has held since 1997, and the one immediately impacted by the Stadium. I think the more important people to canvass are the business owners/operators in that area, which includes Chinatown.

[Canucks fan]

found this on a site that discusses development issues in the lower mainland. It's what translink wants to do with the Waterfront Station area.





The following are exerts from Translink's Waterfront Station Transportation Hub Conceptual Plan Request For Proposal.

The South British Columbia Coast Transportation Authority ("the SBCTA" or "TransLink") is seeking consultant services to develop a Waterfront Hub Transportation Concept Plan ("Transportation Concept Plan") for Waterfront Station, located on West Cordova Street at the gateway between the Core Business District (CBD) and Gastown. The Concept Plan will be used as a key input into the City of Vancouver's ("CoV") Central Waterfront Transportation Hub (the "Hub") Study. The intent of the Plan is to guide the development of a world class transportation facility that is highly functional, accessible to a variety modes and users and a destination in and of itself. It must keep pace with increasing transit ridership and reflect the importance of the station as a multimodal transit hub.

It is planned that the Hub be a showcase for the city and that it meet the highest international standard for transportation hubs for the next 50-100 years.

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/1272/hubstudyareaiz3.jpg
Waterfront Station Transportation Hub Conceptual Plan - Page 56

As part of the CoV Hub Study, the City will be engaging an engineering consultant to carry out feasibility analysis and develop preliminary structural concepts and construction cost estimates for a number of elements of their Concept Plan, including: a viaduct road network north of Cordova Street and east of Howe Street; a new transit concourse north of the Waterfront Station building; two new development sites above the railway tracks south of the new Canada Place viaduct extension; and a new entrance to the Granville Square parkade from Cordova Street. The results of this work are expected in late April, 2008. TransLinkYs consultants will be required to review the results of this engineering work, and where necessary, incorporate findings into the Transportation Concept Plan.

The centrepiece of the Waterfront Hub area is Waterfront Station, a landmark heritage building originally built as the CPR railway station. Waterfront Station features limited retail and office space and is served by a number of key regional transportation lines (Expo Line SkyTrain, West Coast Express commuter rail, SeaBus passenger ferry, local and express bus service, future Canada Line and a potential streetcar). Overall, the space at Waterfront Station hub does not live up to its potential as a dynamic multimodal interchange. Integration between transportation modes and the physical and visual connections to the surrounding neighbourhood must be improved

Waterfront Station is the terminus and seventh busiest station of the SkyTrain networkand forms an integral part of the regional transit system servicing Metro Vancouver.


Current and potential future transportation services at Waterfront Station include:

SeaBus to Lonsdale Quay:
-3.2 km passenger ferry linking North Vancouver with downtown Vancouver.
-Two vessels, each carrying up to 400 passengers serve an average of 17,700 weekday passengers.
-Annual ridership in 2007 was 5.4 million boardings, a 4% increase over the previous year and projections suggest an additional 4% in 2008.
-A third SeaBus is to enter service in 2009, to address forecasted increased demand for SeaBus service by allowing service every 10 minutes in peaks, up fiom every 15 minutes today.
-North Shore bus service feeding the Seabus is also expected to improve significantly with frequencies increasing from 15 to 10 minutes when the third SeaBus enters service.

Expo & Millennium Line SkyTrain Terminus
-Both SkyTrain routes (Expo and Millennium) terminate at Waterfront Station.
-Trains every 108 seconds in peak periods.
-Weekday SkyTrain boardings at Waterfront are estimated at 15,600, with 10,400 boardings Saturdays and 7,000 Sundays.
-The AM peak hour sees 1,350 boardings and 2,000 alightings at this station.
-The PM peak hour sees 2,700 boardings and 1,825 alightings at this station.
-There is significant "reverse peak" travel at this station, generated by transfers to and from SeaBus and West Coast Express.

West Coast Express (WCE) Terminus
-Commuter rail service linking Mission, Port Haney, Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, Port Coquitlam, Coquitlam and Port Moody with downtown Vancouver.
-Five trains operate only in the peak direction, weekdays only.
-Trains operate approximately every 30 minutes with passenger volumes of up to 1,300 per train arriving and departing Waterfront.
-Annual ridership in 2007 was 2.4 million boardings, a 4% increase over the previous year.
-Since opening in 1995, ridership has increased steadily from about 5,000 riders a day to well over 9,000, with an overall growth rate of 60 per cent.

Bus Terminus:
-It is intended that the Hub become more of a regional rapid transit centre serving multiple modes of rail, SeaBus, and regional higher order bus services as well as local services. Part of the study will be to determine the overall desire for services, the number of bus routes and type of route including potentially Bus Rapid Transit service along Hastings to Simon Fraser University as well as limited stop B-Line services and local trolley service.

Heliiet Port
-Helijet scheduled helicopter service operates to Victoria from a floating dock adjacent to the SeaBus terminal.


In addition to existing transportation services, the following services are planned or are potential future additions to the hub, which will need consideration as part of this study.

Canada Line Terminus
-The Canada Line rail rapid transit system to Richmond and the airport will open in late 2009, replacing the #98 B-Line that now starts on Cordova Street in front of Waterfront Station. The Canada Line will terminate below Granville Street, just south of Cordova Street, with one of the station entrances leading to the main hall of the CPR station to provide connections to other transit services at Waterfront Station. A second entrance at Granville and Hastings will serve much walk-in traffic tolfrom the CBD that now uses the #98 B-Line stop at Burrard Station, as well as some bus connections

Future: Downtown Streetcar
-The City of Vancouver has proposed a streetcar network for downtown Vancouver with a phase 1 line extending from Waterfront Station around False Creek to Granville Island. More information can be found at: http://www.city.vancouver.bc.calengsvcs/transport/streetcar/index.

Future: Passenger Ferry Services
-Private inter-regional passenger ferry services to Victoria and Nanaimo have operated in the past from the outside berth of the SeaBus terminal and should be provided for in the future. TransLink may also expand passenger ferry services within the region to Bowen Island, West Vancouver and potentially other destinations.

Future: Intercity Passenger Rail Services
-While not currently on the horizon, consideration shall be given to providing passenger and track capacity for future intercity passenger rail services (e.g., to Seattle and Portland) within the facility given its strategically central location and lack of alternatives.

Future: Transit Expansion
-The Province of British Columbia recently announced a plan to invest $11 billion in the regional transit network. This plan includes a major expansion of the rapid transit, rail and bus system, as well as significant upgrades to existing facilities. This investment will significantly increase transit ridership and thereby add considerable volume to existing transit facilities, including Waterfront Station.

Potential Future: Whitecaps Stadium
-The study should take into account the possible development of a 15-30,000 seat stadium within the Central Waterfront Port Lands, currently under discussion between the Whitecaps and the Vancouver Port Authority.


Options should acknowledge the diverse mix of users (commuters, workers, tourists, cyclists, residents, etc.) of the station hub and surrounding area and propose ways to enhance its function, vitality, and public image and visibility both as a transportation hub and a destination. Specifically, options should: Identify passenger and facility improvements that will enhance access, connectivity between modes, comfort, safety and wayfinding throughout station area;

-Address multi-modal transportation integration and expansion (e.g., bus, train, SkyTrain, SeaBus, streetcar, passenger ferry, cycling, walking, etc.);
-Identify preferred locations for transit services within the facility (.e.g., specific locations on street or within a designated terminal area).
-Identify special zones (e.g., transit priority, ticket purchasing areas, fare paid zones, potential fare gatelticket barrier cordons), indicating required capacity and widths, passenger amenities, wayfinding and information improvements within the station and the immediate Hub area.
-Optimize all at-grade, above grade, vertical and horizontal connections to and within the station hub, including Canada Line and bus transfer zones, and to the surrounding pedestrian and cycling network.
-Maximize the legibility of vertical and horizontal wayfinding and orientation opportunities for pedestrians and cyclists to all modes.
-Identify vertical connections between the modes, key destinations and street grade, and any other facilities (e.g., ramps) required to service bicycles and people with limited mobility.
-Incorporate principles of safety and security in ways that enhances the Station as a public space, both day and night and throughout the year.
-Propose scenarios for expanding people conveyance systems such as locations of elevators, stairs, escalators, walkway widths, etc.
-Improve cycling access and wayfinding from the surrounding proposed street system.
-Explore options for providing cycling storage at the station.
-Assess and identify any retail opportunities within the station, including cycling facilities.
-Identify ways to appropriately integrate the station with the neighbourhood and to create a better connection with the waterfront.
-Propose innovative ways of expanding the existing building / space while respecting the heritage and character of the CPR station building.

[Canucks fan]

*apparently* it seems as though the Whitecaps have given up on trying to negotiate with the port and are back to looking at site 2 (over the seabus terminal) and aiming to work with translink.

[SthMelbRed]

quote:Originally posted by Canucks fan

*apparently* it seems as though the Whitecaps have given up on trying to negotiate with the port and are back to looking at site 2 (over the seabus terminal) and aiming to work with translink.


do you have a source for that?

[Richard]

^ I suspect Canucks fan is drawing conclusions from the diagram posted above which does not actually cover the area proposed by the Whitecaps and currently the subject of negotiations with the Port Authority.

[Canucks fan]

well I was hesitant to post it, hence the *apparently*, but the information came from a poster on this site http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=161 who is some sort of insider with a development company or something involved with the city. Obviously I know it sounds skeptical and by no means take my word for it, but this guy is always releasing insider info on projects throughout the city before they are made public and it almost always seems to be correct. He is definitely someone credible. I wouldnt bring it up if it was just random speculation. He had been hinting that something was up for the last few days.

he was also the one who released the above document a few days ago which has not actually been made public yet

[SthMelbRed]

If it's true, it's good to know that Kerfoot has some sort of a Plan B, since the PoV and Ottawa seem intent on f@cking this up for all of us. I think TranLink will be much easier to deal with than Ports Canada, as they have more local concerns and having the stadium located at the hub of SkyTrain, Seabus, WestCoast Express, and many buses will be a major boost for transit ridership and a very good PSA for the benefits of mass transit.

[tmcmurph]

Please please please just let / make something happen. 5 years and still nothing. Sigh. Montreal will be the next Canadian city to get MLS'd and then we need Vancouver in. With 3 MLS and maybe 2 or 3 other cities doing USL-1 we could build a great development structure.

I grew up in BC during the 70s so there is a lot of great memories for me as far as the Whitecaps go. I was hoping they would be in the MLS before Seattle. Shows how little I know :)

[Johnnie Monster]

If you're familiar with your BC politics, then you might be aware that the BC gov't recently restructured the existing TransLink board. This bodes very well for the Whitecaps.

The original board was comprised of mayors and councillors from across the region. The problem with this structure was that major regional projects were stalled again and again because the NIMBYish politicians always wanted to put their own political interests (and the interests of their city) ahead of the needs of the collective region. It was also subject to political infighting between left leaning NDPers and right leaning BC Liberals. Add in the fact that the board members were rotated in and out on a yearly basis, and you end up with a never-ending revolving door of competing interests.

A few months ago this system was scrapped by the BC gov't. The board is now comprised of business and transportation experts appointed by a provincial selection committee. They do all the policy and planning work, and their work is rubber stamped by an arm's length "council of mayors." This means that transportation issues are finally being resolved by *experts* instead of councillors and mayors who are politically handcuffed to voting in line with their party ideologies.

What this all means is that if the Caps want to re-propose their plan at the Seabus terminal site, the new board is much more likely to take action and move forward than the previous one. If there's an opportunity to improve transit service and generate some revenue for the regional transportation system, the new board will hopefully leap at the chance without having to worry if the stadium pleases or angers voters, NIMBYs and the local poverty pimps.

[Martyr]

quote:Originally posted by Johnnie Monster

The original board was comprised of mayors and councillors from across the region. The problem with this structure was that major regional projects were stalled again and again because the NIMBYish politicians always wanted to put their own political interests (and the interests of their city) ahead of the needs of the collective region.

Sound familiar?

[Mpenza]

Question for you guys on the West Coast...
What is that huge vacant lot just north of Pacific Central Station and why is it not considered as a possible site for the stadium?

[Danny Boy]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

Question for you guys on the West Coast...
What is that huge vacant lot just north of Pacific Central Station and why is it not considered as a possible site for the stadium?


I've heard reports that it actually was at one point, but I don't remember the details.

[Calgary Boomer]

That was the initial Main and Terminal site, which then Mayor Larry Campbell pitched to the club. Then, I believe they pulled it off the table, because it was earmarked for what would be the new St Pauls Hospital. That was 2003. This is 2008.

I Think that would have actually been a decent location...close to skytrain etc, but not nearly as spectacular and accessable as the Waterfront.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by Danny Boy


quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

Question for you guys on the West Coast...
What is that huge vacant lot just north of Pacific Central Station and why is it not considered as a possible site for the stadium?


I've heard reports that it actually was at one point, but I don't remember the details.
That is the False Creek Flats district and where the new St Paul's Hospital is to be built. The current St Pauls buildings on Burrard Street in downtwon Vancouver will probably be torn down and replaced with municipal tax generating condos, with some limited space allocated to medical clinic style activities.

The False Creek Flats location was considered for the Whitecaps stadium for a while but it would be a poor second choice compared to the magnificient waterfront location. If I were a betting man I would put my money on Greg Kerfoot winning out with his waterfront plan.

[Mpenza]

Sure it's not as spectacular as the waterfront site, but it looks like a really good location, easily accessible by skytrain.
Is the new hospital project set in stone? Doesn't look like it from what I could gather on the web.

[Richard]

The provincial government recently confirmed the False Creek Flats as the site for the new hospital and Kerfoot only really gave the site cursory consideration for his stadium, sure it is relatively close to a Skytrain but there is no comparison between that location and the proposed downtown Waterfront location, the latter is far superior in every respect. It is also far more likely to attract events other than sports than one on the mud flats. I can't see organisations such as CIBC Run for the Cure, House of Blues Concerts Canada, Nettwerk Music Group, Tourism Vancouver, Vancouver International Jazz Festival, Vancouver Multicultural Society, Vancouver Symphony Orchestra being terribly interested in that location, all of whom and more have endoresed the Waterfront site.

[speedmonk42]

So what are the theories speculative, concrete, wild or conspiratorial, on who is killing this thing?

It makes so little sense, it is not possible to comprehend.

[Cashcleaner]

^ NIMBYism. Plain and simple from what I can tell.

[speedmonk42]

quote:Originally posted by Cashcleaner

^ NIMBYism. Plain and simple from what I can tell.


Nah, I don't think so.

The one citizens group turned out to be fraud created by PR firm and public opinion seems very positive.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by speedmonk42

So what are the theories speculative, concrete, wild or conspiratorial, on who is killing this thing?

It makes so little sense, it is not possible to comprehend.



BC gov doesn't want the "beautiful" BC Place to become any more of a white elephant than it is.

[speedmonk42]

quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph


quote:Originally posted by speedmonk42

So what are the theories speculative, concrete, wild or conspiratorial, on who is killing this thing?

It makes so little sense, it is not possible to comprehend.



BC gov doesn't want the "beautiful" BC Place to become any more of a white elephant than it is.


Well I suspect a current tenant would like a place to live, and I think that tenant would much rather have the city/province pay for a stadium.

Kerfoot must be throwing some kind of monkey wrench into any short, medium, or long term plans the Lions have.

Not blaming them, just saying that I think there is a lot more going on than futsy city councilors.

If it wasn't for the lions, we may not have the Whitecaps today.

[Richard]

^ Vancouver City Council has already voted in favour of the Waterfront Stadium project in principle, it is Stephen Harper's 'Canada's New Conservative Government' regulated Port Authority who owns the land that is holding up the process... you know, the party David Emerson has always been committed to despite what he said during the last federal election campaign when he was running for, which party was it again?

[Calgary Boomer]

Big update...and I'm not sure if it's good great or indifferent. But an insider says the Port has now offically appraised the land, and as of about 10 days ago, given a valuation. My understanding is, it's THROUGH THE ROOF. Okay for residential and commercial purposes, but maybe not for a stadium, which the owner has already said he'd foot the bill for.

But at least there is a willingness for the Port to say they're ready to give up some land, and here's what it will cost. So the ball is now in Mr Kerfoot's court, and and I'm sure the REAL negotiating will commence soon. (Afterall, this is a public facility, which will allow other infrastructure to come along, and piggyback sewer, and road access etc.)

The person I talked to, who's invloved with the Vancouver Port Authority, felt it was a positive step in the stadium process.