Halifax Stadium Discussion

[elly63]

Originally Posted by someone123

Thankfully not all humans think this way. If they did we would probably have died out or would still be foraging for berries and roots in the woods somewhere (on rare days when we didn't see our shadow and go into hiding).

I posted something like that once, about if everybody was a naysayer we'd still be living in mud huts.

Do I think this thing is going to make money, no, but like a library, theatre and a museum, it is needed infrastructure for a big boy city. I just wish that they would have went outside the box for a field house like structure and spent more money, if necessary, for a permanent year round structure for better serving all the community.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

This was discussed earlier in this thread. One of the City Councillors came out and said this rumour is 100% fake.

That was Mason though. Believe him at your own risk.

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by JET

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/m...-cfl-stadium-may-cost-50-million-259145/
I was sort of stadium neutral until I heard that it could cost $50,000,000 to move the power lines for the stadium.
Just to confirm it doesn't rain any more over the May house than it does anywhere else, and is often quite sunny there.

It must be where he gets his sunny disposition from.
What I understood, was that the cost that would be covered by NSP as it's their tower on leased land. Whatever got built in Shannon Park, it would have required moving the power lines. They can't build residential underneath them and the area is valuable overlooking the water so it was going to happen stadium or no stadium.

I worry we'll look this gift-horse in the mouth, where finally a privately led group that is not looking for any direct funding wanting to own and operate it. I'm not a big fan of P3 but it works better in some situation like this.
Shannon Park has sat empty since the CWG bid almost 13 years ago due to indifference. We act like things happen in a vacuum here sometimes but cities that are investing are being rewarded. We have an enormous waterfront property in the core of our city that we still can't seem to figure out what to do with. Isn't that a real problem?

We're paralyzed by listening to reactionaries and thinking they are the majority. The average person doesn't show up to support a lot of infrastructure meetings because they expect things are done in a half sensical fashion. So the narrative gets hijacked and nothing gets done. These projects are the impetus that keep the tax base growing with nothing big on the horizon for Halifax.

Keith, don't get me started about the assessment cap I thought you'd be against public subsidies for the wealthy. We wouldn't be talking about tax increases if the high end homes of suburbia paid their fair share.

We're going to be experiencing a labor shortage so having people to do these jobs is going to get harder. This is happening quicker than most thought with the performance of the economy lately. The cities with the talent are the ones that are growing quickest. Halifax has added 15 000 residents in two years, which is awesome growth. But we can't sit on the sidelines and waste this opportunity as a city to pass up on needed infrastructure. There's so much going on in the city, if properly encouraged we could maintain this pace. Offering the families that are being raised here the option of staying instead of heading westward. This decision is larger than just if we should help build a stadium, this would inform all the newcomers about this cities tradition of spoiling a good thing with small minded thinking. Have you ever heard the saying "Make hay, when the sun is shining."?

[Keith P.]

NSP would not spend a penny to move those lines on their own, because there is no business need for them to do so. So the cost of doing that, whatever it is, will be borne by someone else. Probably HRM because the proponents of the team are not going to pay for it, no way.

It's true that HRM has a lot of infrastructure needs. A stadium of this size on that site is far, far down on that list. Roads, transit infrastructure, yes, but not a stadium. In fact the preliminary plans discussed for Shannon had a new community being floated for that location, not a stadium. I can see why the proponents chose it, because they know they won't be paying for it, so why not pick a site that will look pretty in pictures and on TV, but plunking down a stadium there should not be a priority for HRM.

My opposition to an assessment cap removal is merely due to the inevitable HRM tax grab that will occur as a result. Their addiction to wasteful spending is stronger than the need of a junkie for a fix. They are floating a 3% tax increase this year despite the growth they have already experienced and the resulting windfall in revenues. Should that growth slow or stop it would be likely we would be seeing double-digit tax increases to support their bloated bureaucracy. The lack of will to do any critical examination of their spending is troubling. Plus remember that the reason for the cap in the first place was not due to wealthy people getting a break, it was due to skyrocketing assessment values for property in certain areas that created their own disparities. Someone with a run-down house on a suddenly gentrifying street is not necessarily wealthy. OTOH one could argue that someone buying a McMansion probably is.

Back to the topic at hand - HRM could do a lot to support that influx of new residents with hundreds of millions of dollars in capital spending. This falls somewhere in the category of bike lanes as being way, way down on that list.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

Keith, don't get me started about the assessment cap I thought you'd be against public subsidies for the wealthy. We wouldn't be talking about tax increases if the high end homes of suburbia paid their fair share.

The data re assessment cap shows the main beneficiaries as being on the peninsula, primarily the south end and the NW Arm.
I have 7 years of data for every home in Halifax,Dartmouth,Bedford with an assessed value of $1,000,000 or more.
I also have the ownership data.
And some people have more than 2 homes with a capped assessment. One family has over 30 capped properties.
I also have data for homes outside HRM.
A stupid programme supported by all 3 parties.

[OldDartmouthMark]

A lot of people here seem to confuse Colin's contrarian views (while presenting factual information) with being a nasty person. From where I sit, he's just presenting information that provides insight into the business dealings of this proposal that we should all be aware of.

Does that mean I think the stadium shouldn't happen? Certainly not. I want to see a CFL team come to Halifax, even though I am not personally a football fan. I think the net benefit to the area will far outweigh the negatives.

Getting angry at Colin or insulting him just because he presents views that you either don't agree with, or go against the result that you want, doesn't bolster your case - it merely makes it look like you don't have a case. Looking at only one side of the argument while ignoring the other has gotten the human race into trouble many times through history - don't ignore the counterargument... value it.

Food for thought...

[Corker]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

NSP would not spend a penny to move those lines on their own, because there is no business need for them to do so.

NSP may not have a choice. If they are in a lease with CLC, it would be for a specific period of time. The communication tower leases that I am familiar with are in most cases renegotiated every ten years. CLC may simply choose not to renew the lease with NSP when it expires, whenever that may be.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by elly63

Not from where I'm sitting.

Funny how the city had to restrict water usage this summer in Dartmouth because of not enough water if it rains all the time

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Haliguy

Funny how the city had to restrict water usage this summer in Dartmouth because of not enough water if it rains all the time

I believe the quote was only over Colin's house.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by elly63

I believe the quote was only over Colin's house.

Ahh...I see (:

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Corker

NSP may not have a choice. If they are in a lease with CLC, it would be for a specific period of time. The communication tower leases that I am familiar with are in most cases renegotiated every ten years. CLC may simply choose not to renew the lease with NSP when it expires, whenever that may be.

The law is quite clear. The utility has a right-of-way and the landowner will not be able to force a utility, such as NSP, to move infrastructure that is vital to the wider community. The right -of-way remains in place until NSP relinquishes it through the usual legal process.

[Corker]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The law is quite clear. The utility has a right-of-way and the landowner will not be able to force a utility, such as NSP, to move infrastructure that is vital to the wider community. The right -of-way remains in place until NSP relinquishes it through the usual legal process.

Interesting detail. So it is quite different from just a land/tower lease that would cease after a period of time. Thanks.

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The law is quite clear. The utility has a right-of-way and the landowner will not be able to force a utility, such as NSP, to move infrastructure that is vital to the wider community. The right -of-way remains in place until NSP relinquishes it through the usual legal process.

It seems to me that it is completely within the legal right of the landowner to do this. That sticking point would have came up during the multiple studies done around a stadium on the site. It's actually seen as a foregone conclusion compared to the legal dilemma you suggest.

"Mans and his team referred to a 2006 analysis done as a precursor to Halifax’s abandoned 2014 Commonwealth Games bid that indicated moving the towers and burying the transmission lines to accommodate a stadium would cost between $20 million and $30 million."

"For his part, LeBlanc said Maritime Football will only be purchasing land when it is development-ready."

Take from that what you will.
I think its more about who will be paying for the moving it, not if they will.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

It seems to me that it is completely within the legal right of the landowner to do this. That sticking point would have came up during the multiple studies done around a stadium on the site. It's actually seen as a foregone conclusion compared to the legal dilemma you suggest.

"Mans and his team referred to a 2006 analysis done as a precursor to Halifax’s abandoned 2014 Commonwealth Games bid that indicated moving the towers and burying the transmission lines to accommodate a stadium would cost between $20 million and $30 million."

"For his part, LeBlanc said Maritime Football will only be purchasing land when it is development-ready."

Take from that what you will.
I think its more about who will be paying for the moving it, not if they will.

Yet no clear or definitive information to be seen anywhere, just speculation.

[IanWatson]

I wonder if NSP gets their guaranteed return on capital investment if someone else is paying for that capital investment.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

It seems to me that it is completely within the legal right of the landowner to do this. That sticking point would have came up during the multiple studies done around a stadium on the site. It's actually seen as a foregone conclusion compared to the legal dilemma you suggest.:tu will.

The law is clear. The easement remains when the deed is transferred. You buy the land and the land includes the easement. Or you can pay the person/entity who has the easement the money they are willing to accept. You cannot block the access and must live with the terms of the easement. I live in an older area and there are a lot of residential properties with easements allowing access for neighbour/s. The courts are full of arguments over blocking and access over an easement. Block an easement and you will lose the argument.

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Yet no clear or definitive information to be seen anywhere, just speculation.

You mean besides all invested parties seeing it as a non-issue. One of the towers sits on Turtle Grove and I don't see the band wanting it in the middle of their parcel of the land either.
I can't get my hands on the study from 2006 but I'm sure the details are all laid out in it.

"Chris Millier, director of real estate for Canada Lands, said in an email that the Crown company has been in discussions with Nova Scotia Power and other stakeholders.

As part of Canada Lands’ development process, we have ongoing discussions with stakeholders, including utilities such as NSP, about our and their plans, both short and long term, Millier said."

Again, no clear proof except a government agency is going ahead with the plans, which would indicate no legal issues exist.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

You mean besides all invested parties seeing it as a non-issue. One of the towers sits on Turtle Grove and I don't see the band wanting it in the middle of their parcel of the land either.
I can't get my hands on the study from 2006 but I'm sure the details are all laid out in it.

"Chris Millier, director of real estate for Canada Lands, said in an email that the Crown company has been in discussions with Nova Scotia Power and other stakeholders.

As part of Canada Lands’ development process, we have ongoing discussions with stakeholders, including utilities such as NSP, about our and their plans, both short and long term, Millier said."

Again, no clear proof except a government agency is going ahead with the plans, which would indicate no legal issues exist.

Fair enough, but we don't know whether they actually see it as a non-issue. We only know that we don't know.

From all I've seen, none of the parties involved have recently (like in the past year) released any detailed information about it. Sure, they've said they are in discussion with NSP, but that's it - if somebody can post some actual info, please do.

It could be, as you say, a non-issue. Or, it could be that all parties want this to happen and have decided to not openly discuss an additional cost that might sway public opinion about it.

Either is a possibility, but we don't really know, therefore my comment regarding speculation.

[dtown]

https://www.tsn.ca/schooners-plan-enters-critical-stretch-1.1251888
Dave Naylor, TSN.ca

A couple of new pieces of news in this article. The original design for a stadium that was said to be in the $180 million range has been scaled back to more of a 'bare bones' stadium in the $130 million range, and they also confirm that the stadium will be domed in the winter, and that Sport NS is being heavily involved to ensure the facility is used more than 10 times a year. It also mentions that the regular season CFL game in the Maritimes this season will not be held in Halifax, but Saint John, Moncton and Antigonish are all possibilities.

All seem like positive revisions, espically since we all know this will never work if it is soley a CFL facility. Also seems encouraging that it was Mike Savage's suggestion to scale back the bells and whistles of the proposed stadium to something more practical that has the possibility to be improved and expanded over time if all goes well.

[MonctonRad]

Given the parsimonious nature of the new Higgs government in NB, and given the recent Francophonie Games debacle, I can't imagine the NB government giving one red cent towards any CFL game in the province this year. If I were to guess, I would suggest the front runner for the Touchdown Atlantic Game this year will be Antigonish........