Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka
I still feel as though parking garages and underground parking is too tight for large trucks/buses carrying multiple players at once. People travelling need space and ease of transport for their equipment. Doing so indoors would make it difficult.
|
I envision a drop-off/turnaround and parking area for a handful of buses at the main entrance, so they wouldn't have to make use of the garage, which would be more for spectators, players and
soccer hockey moms. Carrying bulky bags and equipment is certainly not a major issue in parking structures at airports, for example. We could help by including one of those fancy two-sided glass elevators with plenty of space like they have at Montreal-Trudeau's terminal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka
Underground parking would set you back a decent amount and I don't believe there is enough room at the site for a parking garage. Besides, there's nothing really wrong with the current LBR as is, but would essentially have to be completely removed to make room for your 4Plex plans. I just don't see the LBR site being feasible for any sort of development whatsoever.
|
There's no question it would be a more costly undertaking with structured parking, but I would expect the same concerns for compactness in a good Long Wharf proposal.
I also have an affinity for the current LBR, having played schoolboy hockey there way back in the day. This is why I hope any redevelopment will retain or be architecturally based on its more iconic features.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka
How long are we willing to wait for a developer to show up at Long Wharf as it sits empty? 5 Years? 10? 20?
|
I'm willing to wait as long as it takes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka
One thing that does need to be made sure of is that this facility does not run at a deficit. Currently, the RVCC in GBW, the QPlex in Quispamsis, and the 8th Hussars in Sussex all run in the red, and those are just the arenas that i'm aware of off-hand. There's no sense building a big new shiny facility if it can't pay for itself (Hi, SJ Transit  ) |
Is it actually feasible for a public arena to pay for itself? Certainly the economies of scale associated with co-locating 4 ice surfaces will bring down the facility's operating costs considerably while bringing in the same amount of user fees, but I'm not familiar enough with the cash flow for a typical arena to know if that'll mean red ink or black ink. A big question mark right now is how much the long-term lease from the Port will end up costing.
BTW, arenas are exempt from provincial property taxation, so there won't be an extra financial 'punishment' from the province for choosing to build a higher-quality, LEED-certified rink (
the Q-Plex pays no taxes, for example). The lack of a similar exemption for transit facilities is just another way New Brunswick is indirectly subsidizing automobile travel on the backs of its cities, especially SJ.
Like I said, if we're going to go for the cheapest possible box of a facility, Long Wharf's prime waterfront location probably isn't the best option. IMO, the absolute worst way we could develop Long Wharf is by throwing down a metal-sided box while retaining the site's endless sea of tarmac for use as surface parking, which is exactly what we'll get with the 'budget' 4-Plex. Long Wharf is an iconic site that deserves an iconic and progressive design, even if it's more costly. For the fully suburban Agar-Plex option, I'm with magee_b in suggesting a location off of Bayside Drive or Crown Street near the Courtenay Forebay as an acceptable combination of centrality, access, available space and precluding opportunity costs.
TL,DR: Long Wharf is a great location for a 4-Plex if we're going to go for a five-star, great-looking urban facility. Long Wharf is a terrible location for a 4-Plex if we're looking to go as affordable as possible.
Prev
Linear Mode
