HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Arts, Culture, Dining, Recreation & Entertainment


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6401  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 7:54 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Is SkyDome (Rogers Centre) considered a failure?

Regardless, I thought it was a good idea as it could potentially provide more usage and possible profitability to the proposed stadium.
Rogers Centre (SkyDome) was considered by some obsolete with the building of Baltimore's Camden Yards three years later in 1992. Whether that is a failure is for others to decide but as of today Rogers Centre is no longer in the discussion of top venues as it was when it opened.

One ranks it 27 out of 30 (worst stadiums)

27. ROGERS CENTRE, Toronto
Opened: 1989 Capacity: 49,282 Comment: I distinctly remember thinking the then-Skydome was the coolest stadium in the world when it opened 25 years ago. And at the time, it was a true marvel. It had a retractable dome. It had the biggest scoreboard anyone had ever seen. It had a hotel INSIDE the stadium, for crying out loud! These days, it just feels off. Like Epcot Center, you realize this place once felt futuristic but now feels like a bad example of what we thought the future would look like back in the ’80s.

Ranking All 30 Of MLB's Ballparks: First To Worst
This ranking has Rogers Centre 22 out of 30

Making it suitable for baseball is even worse than putting a track around the field further distancing fans from the action. Smaller more intimate stadiums with large party patios are the way things are going now. With the advent of HDTV going to the game has to be more of an event or occasion to get people away from the great viewing experience they can now get at home.
     
     
  #6402  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 8:00 PM
ILoveHalifax ILoveHalifax is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Palm Beach Gardens FL
Posts: 1,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrynorthend View Post
An additional problem is the incongruity between football/athletics stadia and ballparks. I know it has been done before, I think the Expos played at Olympic Stadium, but it is far from ideal.
The Florida Marlins played at the same stadium as the Dolphins for a number of years with a minor adjustment to the seating
     
     
  #6403  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 8:13 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax View Post
The Florida Marlins played at the same stadium as the Dolphins for a number of years with a minor adjustment to the seating
It's been done many times, hence the multipurpose boom of the 70s, doesn't mean that it wasn't a terrible solution. Totally acceptable then, almost unacceptable now. I think MLB has only a few left now, even Rogers Centre is baseball only now and there is no longer a permanent rectilinear convertible setup.
     
     
  #6404  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 8:22 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
The thought that people are not going to drive to this is ludicrous.
It's not that people won't drive to the stadium - it's that driving people would be the only demographic attending. There's a long list of suburban stadiums/arenas that rely solely on people being able to drive to them that are complete failures. I believe MFL has a couple people involved that know all about that difficulty in Glendale.

If the CFL is actually going to push for a younger demographic it would be wise to not restrict attending the event to only those able to drive and who own vehicles. Anyone under 30 is going to be looking to transit/rideshare/sustainable transportation options to attend games. If people have to drive to a sporting event, and if they have no other options and think there's going to be traffic and the commute will be bad, they simply won't go. That's part of the reason why Dartmouth Crossing would have been a poor choice for a stadium.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Meanwhile any facility regardless of location could/should have dedicated shuttles to/from designated locations.
Saying a facility should have transit access is a big difference from a facility actually having transit access.
     
     
  #6405  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 8:31 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka View Post
If the CFL is actually going to push for a younger demographic it would be wise to not restrict attending the event to only those able to drive and own vehicles. Anyone under 30 is going to be looking to transit/rideshare/sustainable transportation options to attend games. If people have to drive to a sporting event, and if they have no other options and think there's going to be traffic and the commute will be bad, they simply won't go.
While I agree with much of this I'm not sure how much of the "millennial" sentiment extends into the Maritimes. I haven't lived in Halifax for 25 some years but in the rest of the Maritimes that I've seen, public transit usage is not so good nor wildly popular. Maybe Halifax is different.
     
     
  #6406  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 8:35 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
While I agree with much of this I'm not sure how much of the "millennial" sentiment extends into the Maritimes. I haven't lived in Halifax for 25 some years but in the rest of the Maritimes that I've seen, public transit usage is not so good nor wildly popular. Maybe Halifax is different.
Halifax has some of the highest public transit/sustainable transit usage rates in Canada.

https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/as-sa/98-200-x/2016029/98-200-x2016029-eng.pdf

"In terms of square kilometres, the Halifax CMA is the fifth largest of all CMAs. Despite its size, when compared with the other mid-sized CMAs (in population terms), Halifax had the second-highest rate of commuters using sustainable transportation. It had the highest proportion of carpoolers (15.6%) and commuters using public transit (11.8%) and the second-highest proportion of commuters using active transportation (9.2%)"

Halifax also has a much younger median age than its surrounding neighbours throughout the Maritimes. Halifax as a CMA is younger than London, Vancouver, Montreal, Ottawa, Hamilton...

Last edited by JHikka; Oct 28, 2018 at 8:47 PM.
     
     
  #6407  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 9:04 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
I'm wondering how much of that is due to it's being a real university town. Dal, SMU, King's, TUNS, The Mount, AST, that's a lotta young people with a place to go, daily.
     
     
  #6408  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 9:28 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is online now
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
I'm wondering how much of that is due to it's being a real university town. Dal, SMU, King's, TUNS, The Mount, AST, that's a lotta young people with a place to go, daily.
It's also one of the better places for young people to move to now that many other parts of Canada have become less affordable.

Halifax has a lot of universities but it's not what I'd call a university town. Or at least it is different from most of those towns where young people almost universally move away as soon as they graduate.
     
     
  #6409  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 10:29 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
It's been done many times, hence the multipurpose boom of the 70s, doesn't mean that it wasn't a terrible solution. Totally acceptable then, almost unacceptable now. I think MLB has only a few left now, even Rogers Centre is baseball only now and there is no longer a permanent rectilinear convertible setup.
But we're not talking MLB here, but AA (or AAA?) baseball to help add yet another use to the stadium to make it more viable. If you look at existing AA or AAA stadiums they are not at the level of MLB, nor do people expect them to be.

Regardless, I hope it can work out by restricting it to only football with limited home games for part of the year. I just hope that this narrow vision isn't the very thing that kills it.
     
     
  #6410  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2018, 11:13 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
But we're not talking MLB here, but AA (or AAA?) baseball to help add yet another use to the stadium to make it more viable. If you look at existing AA or AAA stadiums they are not at the level of MLB, nor do people expect them to be.

Regardless, I hope it can work out by restricting it to only football with limited home games for part of the year. I just hope that this narrow vision isn't the very thing that kills it.
It's not a narrow vision, doesn't matter if it is MLB or AA, the compromises to host both baseball and a rectilinear sport don't work for either. If it is such a great idea how come it's not being done anymore (for the most part) and yes I am aware there are still a few examples left (see one below).

That's probably one thing both the soccer and football people can agree on, no athletic track if possible and definitely no baseball configuration.



Just wondering how closely you follow these things. Baseball franchises don't want to play in that kind of half ass setup either.

And before someone says it will only be used for 10 CFL games please think before you post which is also why I am advocating for a year round structure.

If Regina can build a 300 million dollar stadium and Moncton can build a new arena and a 10k seat stadium (without a big time pro tenant) surely to God Halifax can put something together.

Last edited by elly63; Oct 28, 2018 at 11:24 PM.
     
     
  #6411  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 3:29 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,809
One would hope that committee decision-making does not lead to the construction of a new version of Toronto's old Exhibition Stadium, one of the worst baseball venues since the L.A. Coliseum.
     
     
  #6412  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 4:58 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
It's not a narrow vision, doesn't matter if it is MLB or AA, the compromises to host both baseball and a rectilinear sport don't work for either. If it is such a great idea how come it's not being done anymore (for the most part) and yes I am aware there are still a few examples left (see one below).

That's probably one thing both the soccer and football people can agree on, no athletic track if possible and definitely no baseball configuration.

Just wondering how closely you follow these things. Baseball franchises don't want to play in that kind of half ass setup either.

And before someone says it will only be used for 10 CFL games please think before you post which is also why I am advocating for a year round structure.

If Regina can build a 300 million dollar stadium and Moncton can build a new arena and a 10k seat stadium (without a big time pro tenant) surely to God Halifax can put something together.
I'm not what you would call a 'stadium enthusiast', so it's not really all that important to me. My hope is that it will be many things to many people, and that it will be viable and sustainable. I personally like baseball much more than football, and would be more likely to attend a baseball game at the minor league level than a football game at a semi-major league level. But I am only one person, and thus wish the best for all of the enthusiastic football fans who really want this to happen. I have no problem with you using a portion of my taxes to pay for it, just make sure it's not a white elephant.
     
     
  #6413  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 5:59 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
I'm not what you would call a 'stadium enthusiast', so it's not really all that important to me. My hope is that it will be many things to many people, and that it will be viable and sustainable. I personally like baseball much more than football, and would be more likely to attend a baseball game at the minor league level than a football game at a semi-major league level. But I am only one person, and thus wish the best for all of the enthusiastic football fans who really want this to happen. I have no problem with you using a portion of my taxes to pay for it, just make sure it's not a white elephant.
I AM a stadium enthusiast so it is important to me.

Thankfully, all of the new professional Canadian stadium constructs/refurbs have not included constructing a running track either (BC Place, IGF, Mosaic, TD Place, THF, BMO). For most stadium enthusiasts, a baseball configuration would be a nightmare not even in the mix. Close to that would be the inclusion of a running track.

Aside from BMO, most of the stadiums in the CFL even use the same type of artificial turf (FieldTurf Revolution) While most of them are readily convertible from football to soccer with regards to lines painted on the field, Mosaic in Regina opted to have permanent football markings making the conversion to a soccer looking field much more difficult or not bothered with at all.

For this stadium to work if they are using THF as a model, it HAS to be all things to all people. It hasn't and never will be about just football, it has to include soccer, rugby, concerts, shows, university, high school and community use. That's why it pisses me off when people make ridiculous statements like it will only be used for ten football games a year. I doubt many stadiums in the US could even sustain that.

We all have to contribute taxes to things we don't like so it's a moot point but run properly it should never be a white elephant. That's not to say it would be profitable. If they opt to use THF as a model a winter dome for community use is a must.

     
     
  #6414  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 6:06 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
What goes into building a new stadium and the length of time to do it.

TIMELINE: The road to new Mosaic Stadium
Rob Vanstone Regina Leader-Post June 23, 2017

A timeline of the major developments in the quest for a new stadium:

Dec. 2, 2004: The Saskatchewan Roughriders propose an estimated $12 million in upgrades to Taylor Field with the goal of landing the 100th Grey Cup game, to be played in 2012.

Feb. 28, 2005: The NDP-led provincial government forgives a $2.8-million loan to the Roughriders, principally to assist with plans to upgrade Taylor Field. “We have to be prepared to think big sometimes,” says Eric Cline, the then-minister of industry and resources. “One of the things that attracted us about this project is wanting Taylor Field to be upgraded to a national, if not a world, standard. We don’t want our facility to be behind those in other places.”

June 23, 2006: Taylor Field is renamed Mosaic Stadium following the signing of a 10-year, $4-million sponsorship agreement between the Roughriders and The Mosaic Company. The home of the Roughriders had been named Taylor Field — in memory of former player, coach and executive Neil J. (Piffles) Taylor — since 1947.

Nov. 11, 2007: The Roughriders play host to their first home playoff game since 1988, defeating the Calgary Stampeders 26-24 in the West Division semifinal before a capacity crowd of 28,800.

April 9, 2008: The idea of putting a “bubble” over the playing field to make it accessible year-round is floated. Regina Mayor Pat Fiacco tells reporters that the city has identified $5.8 million in needed repairs to the aging stadium.

Nov. 5, 2008: Fiacco declares “the status quo is not an option” regarding the stadium situation, citing the options as being a new stadium or a complete retrofit of the old one. Fiacco says the cost of the latter option would “easily be over $100 million.” A feasibility study is launched to explore the options in greater detail.

Dec. 9, 2008: Fiacco says the city is looking into what it would cost to build a domed stadium.

July 20, 2009: The Roughriders and three levels of government (federal, provincial and municipal) commit $1 million to a feasibility study regarding a possible domed stadium for downtown Regina. An estimated cost exceeding $350 million is cited. The study will also look at the possibility of a retractable roof. Fiacco envisions a stadium on the current site of the CP rail yards, which are expected to relocate, with the Taylor Field site to become a residential area. The study is announced at the same time the results of a review, conducted by consultants Bill Shupe and Rob Giberson, are released. They recommend a covered stadium as the preferred option. The review adds that a renovation of the existing Mosaic Stadium would cost $109 million over five years, and that improvements to the old facility or a new open-air stadium would do little to increase economic activity downtown. The provincial government covers the $70,000 cost of the review.

March 1, 2010: The feasibility study is released. It estimates that a 33,000-seat covered stadium would cost an estimated $386.2 million — $431.2 million if a retractable roof is added. The study says that an indoor stadium could operate successfully in downtown Regina.

March 1, 2011: One year to the day after the feasibility study is released, the plan for a domed stadium is dead. The provincial government withdraws its funding commitment to the stadium, citing the federal government’s rejection of cash for the project.

April 19, 2011: Fiacco unveils his vision for Regina Revitalization Initiative, which includes a stadium replacement and the vacating of 53 acres of land on the Taylor Field site — to be occupied by housing units and commercial outlets. The new stadium would be located downtown on space opened up in the CP container yards.

Aug. 22, 2011: Regina city council approves the RRI plan, with a $1-billion price tag and a Taylor Field replacement deadline of 2016.

Dec. 19, 2011: City council decides on a P3 (public-private partnership) funding model for stadium construction.

May 4, 2012: A $278-million, 33,000-seat open-air stadium is proposed for city-owned Evraz Place. Regina Exhibition Association Ltd. (REAL) will operate the new stadium. As part of the RRI, the plan will also include 700 affordable housing units, along with retail and commercial development. In addition, $24.4 million is earmarked to tear down Taylor Field and redevelop the site. The overall revitalization project is expected to take 10 to 15 years to complete.

July 14, 2012: Fiacco, Premier Brad Wall and Roughriders chairman of the board Roger Brandvold sign a non-binding memorandum of understanding (MOU), establishing the future funding partners — announcing that a new, $278.2-million Mosaic Stadium will be open full-time in 2017. Including debt servicing and maintenance, the price tag will be $675 million over 30 years.

Sept. 5, 2012: RRI receives unanimous assent of members of the Regina executive committee. The next step is a vote by the full city council (which has approved a design-build-finance procurement model). The plan approves a 0.45-per-cent mill-rate increase for Regina taxpayers for a decade.

Sept. 19, 2012: City of Regina unveils a concept design for new stadium. Riders president-CEO Jim Hopson describes the design as “iconic.”

Oct. 3, 2012: The executive committee unanimously approves the purchase of 17.39 acres of Canadian Pacific Railway land for $7.5 million. The land, along Dewdney Avenue from Albert Street to Broad Street, is to include residential and commercial property as part of the city’s long-term plan to revitalize downtown.

Oct. 9, 2012: CP land purchase is approved by city council.

Jan. 16, 2013: City council’s executive committee approves stadium financing. The deal includes $188.8 million over 30 years for stadium maintenance. The committee also approves a request-for-qualifications evaluation, which is to pare down to three the number of companies eligible to bid on the stadium project.

Jan. 28, 2013: City council approves funding agreements for and conceptual design of the new stadium by a 10-1 vote. Coun. Shawn Fraser casts the lone opposing vote.

Aug. 15, 2013: Demolition of old buildings begins on the stadium site.

July 8, 2013: Council approves a 30-year, $75-million stadium lease with Sask Sport Inc. Sask Sport will receive 10,000 square feet of office space and 600 hours per year of access to the field. Field access is to be given to Sask Sport along with affiliated non-profit sport organizations.

Jan. 27, 2014: Council approves a $100-million loan from the province that will help to finance the stadium project. The term of the loan will be 31.5 years with an annual interest rate of 3.99 per cent. With interest, the city will be obligated to repay $171 million over the full term. There is an option to repay the loan earlier without penalty.

March 14, 2014: PCL Construction is named the preferred builder. PCL is to design, build and provide interim financing for the stadium. PCL’s bid includes HKS (lead design and sports architect), B&H Architects (architect of record) and TD Securities (finance team lead). The short list consisted of PCL, Bouygues Construction Graham Community Partners and Clark Builders/Turner Construction.

May 22, 2014: The official stadium design is revealed by Mark Williams of HKS. A 20-year extension of the naming rights deal with The Mosaic Company is also announced.

June 16, 2014: Ground is broken at the stadium site, beginning the process of excavating 300,000 cubic metres of dirt.

Oct. 29, 2014: Excavation work is mostly complete. PCL Construction is using four cranes — 61, 66, 73 and 87 metres tall — for the first time while doing a commercial project in Regina.

June 16, 2015: One year into construction, 44 per cent of the stadium is complete and steel-structure work is underway. The city unveils a general-admission lounge, which can accommodate 500 people.

Sept. 1, 2015: The Riders’ new lease calls for the team to pay $230,000 per year to rent Taylor Field/Mosaic Stadium. The agreement is two years shorter than usual to cover the transition into the new stadium.

Sept. 5, 2015: “Project Stadium Sneak Peek” allows members of the public to check out the stadium — which is slightly more than half complete — as it takes shape.

Nov. 9, 2015: Stadium is about 60 per cent complete.

March 16, 2016: Stadium 77 per cent complete. The structural-steel roof is nearly finished.

Aug. 31, 2016: The city announces substantial completion of the new stadium, meaning in essence that all basics for the stadium’s intended purpose are in place. The stadium is completed on time and on budget.

Oct. 1, 2016: The University of Regina Rams defeat the University of Saskatchewan Huskies 37-29 in the first football game — and the first test event — at the new stadium.

Oct. 29, 2016: The Saskatchewan Roughriders play their final game at Taylor Field, losing 24-6 to the B.C. Lions. Closing ceremonies include appearances by George Reed, Roger Aldag, Gene Makowsky and Darian Durant.

May 27, 2017: Bryan Adams is the headliner at the second test event at Mosaic Stadium, where 75 per cent of the seats were available — an increase of 25 per cent from Oct. 1.

June 10, 2017: The Roughriders play their first game at Mosaic Stadium, opposing the Winnipeg Blue Bombers in CFL pre-season action.

July 1, 2017: Winnipeg is to visit again — this time in the first regular-season game at the new facility.
     
     
  #6415  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 6:10 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
One would hope that committee decision-making does not lead to the construction of a new version of Toronto's old Exhibition Stadium, one of the worst baseball venues since the L.A. Coliseum.
I don't think we have to worry about that.
     
     
  #6416  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 6:24 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
I AM a stadium enthusiast so it is important to me.
I gathered that.
     
     
  #6417  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 6:39 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
I gathered that.
One of the reasons why it matters is to get off to a good start. Rightly or wrongly, first impressions tend to stick and are difficult to erase. There were a lot of naysayers about the design in Hamilton and the process in Ottawa. Thankfully most of that has been assuaged but that's not a problem that Halifax needs going into this.

Considering that the cost for THF was only supposed to be 120 million (with a 25 million contingency fund), I don't know how anyone can be displeased with the final result.
     
     
  #6418  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 8:33 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
One of the reasons why it matters is to get off to a good start. Rightly or wrongly, first impressions tend to stick and are difficult to erase. There were a lot of naysayers about the design in Hamilton and the process in Ottawa. Thankfully most of that has been assuaged but that's not a problem that Halifax needs going into this.

Considering that the cost for THF was only supposed to be 120 million (with a 25 million contingency fund), I don't know how anyone can be displeased with the final result.
With all that said, I hope that you are somehow involved in getting this going in Halifax - your level of energy and enthusiasm for a new stadium would go a long way to ensure that it is done to its greatest extent.
     
     
  #6419  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 9:07 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
With all that said, I hope that you are somehow involved in getting this going in Halifax - your level of energy and enthusiasm for a new stadium would go a long way to ensure that it is done to its greatest extent.
Unfortunately no, just been following this kind of stuff since the SkyDome design competition.

The sad part is the politicians don't have the time or background to do the best job with this. They'll accept whatever a report recommends and it will go from there. It's my opinion, and likely my opinion only, that Halifax would be far better off spending a little more money (possibly) and building a year round fieldhouse concept (like was planned for Calgary) rather than a traditional outdoor stadium.

A fieldhouse would be far likelier to be used by more members of the community in general and for longer seasonal periods than a stadium. JMO.



     
     
  #6420  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2018, 9:31 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
A fieldhouse would be far likelier to be used by more members of the community in general and for longer seasonal periods than a stadium.
This is essentially why I said a few months ago that Halifax would be better off building and leading its own facility rather than building a facility and letting the CFL owners lead and dictate its parametres. Halifax needs a stadium for Halifax more than it needs a CFL-specific stadium. A Halifax stadium could accommodate a CFL team but that shouldn't be its only/primary purpose.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Arts, Culture, Dining, Recreation & Entertainment
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:05 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.