Halifax Stadium Discussion

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I'm not sure why anyone would want to wreck nice, quiet, attractive residential neighborhoods by shoehorning a stadium without parking or access into them. So forget Gorsebrook or Brightwood.

The problem with Wyse Rd isn't that so much as the fact the the land is all privately owned and hence expensive. The part of it adjacent to the MacD bridge is a good location otherwise. Not sure there's enough land for ancilliaries.

Wanders Grounds gives me a headache. You cannot park there right now with the hospitals and it gets even worse once HRM takes away the remaining on-street parking to create you-know-whats. Traffic and access is hopeless too. Forget it.

Seaport lands are federal and hard though not impossible to acquire with the right connections. However access is hopeless. And anything on the ocean is 10 degrees cooler than a few blocks away, an advantage only at peak summertime. Nope.

The only practical location on the peninsula is the area around Windsor Park. Again it is federal land with the same challenges, bit it is ideally sited and access is excellent. Failing that it is DC I am afraid.

I agree.
The Wyse Road properties were all sold recently in 3 transactions on the same day. Centre Plan has them marked for dense development.

[ns_kid]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Part of the reason why these work so well, especially Lansdowne in Ottawa, is because they're located centrally in a very urban part of the city. It's very easy to go to the stadium area on non-sport days (i'm personally there more for the theatres and gym than any sporting events). (...) Halifax would do well with a similar setup in an urban setting (Peninsula, perhaps Shannon Park less so) but most of the potential locations don't feed into that same mold as Lansdowne.

I once did an overlay of the Lansdowne precinct on the Shannon Park lands. In fact Lansdowne's footprint fits almost perfectly within the triangle formed by Princess Margaret Blvd./Iroquois Dr., Nootka Avenue and the CN right of way. Given Shannon's proximity to a major highway and the harbor bridges, possible access by commuter rail and/or water crossing, and potential growth impact on adjacent residential/commercial neighbourhoods, I still believe a broad stadium-centered development is the highest-value use for the Shannon Park lands.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Part of the reason why these work so well, especially Lansdowne in Ottawa, is because they're located centrally in a very urban part of the city. It's very easy to go to the stadium area on non-sport days (i'm personally there more for the theatres and gym than any sporting events). Lansdowne is on the way to many places and is accessible to a large swath of Ottawa by foot. It's accessible and nearby and easy for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users to get to.

Halifax would do well with a similar setup in an urban setting (Peninsula, perhaps Shannon Park less so) but most of the potential locations don't feed into that same mold as Lansdowne. If you're building in Dartmouth Crossing you're probably looking at a CTC/Tanger Outlets type of building or a sports stadium surrounded by box stores: Near to a highway with loads of parking for everyone who doesn't live nearby. It's a completely different environment and vibe.

One of the big criticisms with respect to Investors Group Field in Winnipeg is that it was built on the edge of a university campus which is set apart from surrounding neighbourhoods. The stadium's surroundings are really not that walkable which is a bit of a downgrade from the previous location where there was at least a mall and various shops, restaurants, bars nearby.

Of course, the challenge is finding a plot of land in the urban core that would lend itself to that kind of development. Ottawa is lucky to have had Lansdowne Park since forever, as without that legacy use there's no chance that a stadium would currently be located on that site. I know in Winnipeg some thought was given to a downtown stadium but the only sites available were on the periphery of downtown and quite lacking as a result. Other centrally located stadiums in Canada were built in eras that were much different compared to now, e.g. BC Place would never be built in its present location today. It would be great if Halifax could find a way to do it.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by ns_kid

I once did an overlay of the Lansdowne precinct on the Shannon Park lands. In fact Lansdowne's footprint fits almost perfectly within the triangle formed by Princess Margaret Blvd./Iroquois Dr., Nootka Avenue and the CN right of way. Given Shannon's proximity to a major highway and the harbor bridges, possible access by commuter rail and/or water crossing, and potential growth impact on adjacent residential/commercial neighbourhoods, I still believe a broad stadium-centered development is the highest-value use for the Shannon Park lands.

I'm not super gung-ho on a stadium, but I have to agree this is the best location. It balances ease of access for urban residents with access for those coming from out of town, it will have minimally disruptive effects on any existing area, and it will create a worthwhile land use in an otherwise vacant central location.

I know some people think a peninsula location is best, but Shannon Park is still in the regional centre, after all; it's not the boonies. Crossing the bridge doesn't seem like such a big deal, and given the peninsula population (60-70k) vs the rest of the region (350k,) it stands to reason that the majority of people attending any particular event would be coming from off peninsula, making the pre- and post-event traffic much worse if it were on the peninsula. You could put the stadium right in the middle of downtown and I'd bet 90 percent of people are still going to be getting there by car or transit, not on foot.

Obviously traffic shouldn't be the only concern, but I also think there are better uses of central land (i.e., residential intensification) than a stadium.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by Colin May

...full of upper income south end kids.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Snide remarks taking knocks at the income of a child's family only act to demean the point you are making. I am disappointed in you. Usually you can be counted on sticking to facts and backing up your arguments with facts rather than making generalizations, and have always appreciated you doing so. If you had argued that this school's future should be examined because the 2015 report indicated only 50% with a slight decline over the coming decade, and therefore this site should be examined as a potential site, I would have disagreed but would have respected the debate. This is the only english program elementary school program servicing this area, and to knock it down would require each and every 5 year in the south end to be bused/driven to Tupper, something that should be frankly a non-starter in an urban environment. Nor should it be that we decide to spend money building a new school on a separate site. That is why I feel it would be wrong to knock down this school. Not because the kids are from the south end.

Regardless, I have said it before and will say it again... the cheap shot generalizations about "those people" demean the healthy debate on this forum.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I'm not super gung-ho on a stadium, but I have to agree this is the best location. It balances ease of access for urban residents with access for those coming from out of town, it will have minimally disruptive effects on any existing area, and it will create a worthwhile land use in an otherwise vacant central location.

I know some people think a peninsula location is best, but Shannon Park is still in the regional centre, after all; it's not the boonies. Crossing the bridge doesn't seem like such a big deal, and given the peninsula population (60-70k) vs the rest of the region (350k,) it stands to reason that the majority of people attending any particular event would be coming from off peninsula, making the pre- and post-event traffic much worse if it were on the peninsula. You could put the stadium right in the middle of downtown and I'd bet 90 percent of people are still going to be getting there by car or transit, not on foot.

Obviously traffic shouldn't be the only concern, but I also think there are better uses of central land (i.e., residential intensification) than a stadium.

Yes, and IIRC someone123 suggested that this location could open up the possibility of using a ferry for transit from DT Halifax, DT Dartmouth, and Woodside on event days. This would have both practical and novelty benefits to the location.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by beyeas

Regardless, I have said it before and will say it again... the cheap shot generalizations about "those people" demean the healthy debate on this forum.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I'm not sure why anyone would want to wreck nice, quiet, attractive residential neighborhoods by shoehorning a stadium without parking or access into them. So forget Gorsebrook or Brightwood.

Hey, something I agree with Keith on. I have no problem with dropping medium-rise buildings or well-designed, properly located high-rises into these neighbourhoods. The locals' objections to modest infill like the Gorsebrook condo building come off as totally hysterical to me.

But a stadium? It would dramatically shift the character of the area from a residential area tom basically, a stadium district. I don't think you'd find any comparable stadiums wedged into residential neighbourhoods anywhere in Canada. (Before anyone tries to say "Lansdowne Park", that's at the edge of the neighbourhood, not the centre. It also only borders residential buildings on one side, and it completely dominates that district of the city, which is not what we'd want in the South End.)

It would create a permanent traffic clusterfuck as thousands of people try to get in and out of the neighbourhood along a few narrow streets every single time there's an event. And it would require the destruction of the park, which isn't some empty site begging for a building; it's a neighbourhood park.

I'm surprised anybody would think Gorsebrook is a good location, and even more surprised people would dismiss the inevitable opposition as mere NIMBYism. It will never happen, ever, in a million years, nor will it ever be considered in any serious way, so it's pointless even to float the idea.

As for walkability, I'm all for walkability and urbanism--I think the de-concentration of public services facilities from the city core is incredibly dumb. But a stadium is one thing for which walkability is not a major concern. It will draw from the entire metro area, and the entire province, for that matter. Even in Toronto, how many people are walking to Rogers Centre? Very few.

[MonctonRad]

The only reason why I like Gorsebrook as a site is because of it's proximity to both SMU and Dal. There would be tremendous synergy there and I imagine the universities would end up using the stadium more than the CFL franchise.

Aside from this, I agree that the neighbours would never agree to the stadium in their backyard. I also agree with you that (universities aside), a football stadium will tend to sit empty 90% of the time and as such would tend to be a dead space in the core (a stadium is considerably different in this regard than an arena is). A stadium can be easily located in a suburban location. I think Dartmouth Crossing would be fine for this.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Hey, something I agree with Keith on. I have no problem with dropping medium-rise buildings or well-designed, properly located high-rises into these neighbourhoods. The locals' objections to modest infill like the Gorsebrook condo building come off as totally hysterical to me.

But a stadium? It would dramatically shift the character of the area from a residential area tom basically, a stadium district. I don't think you'd find any comparable stadiums wedged into residential neighbourhoods anywhere in Canada. (Before anyone tries to say "Lansdowne Park", that's at the edge of the neighbourhood, not the centre. It also only borders residential buildings on one side, and it completely dominates that district of the city, which is not what we'd want in the South End.)

It would create a permanent traffic clusterfuck as thousands of people try to get in and out of the neighbourhood along a few narrow streets every single time there's an event. And it would require the destruction of the park, which isn't some empty site begging for a building; it's a neighbourhood park.

I'm surprised anybody would think Gorsebrook is a good location, and even more surprised people would dismiss the inevitable opposition as mere NIMBYism. It will never happen, ever, in a million years, nor will it ever be considered in any serious way, so it's pointless even to float the idea.

As for walkability, I'm all for walkability and urbanism--I think the de-concentration of public services facilities from the city core is incredibly dumb. But a stadium is one thing for which walkability is not a major concern. It will draw from the entire metro area, and the entire province, for that matter. Even in Toronto, how many people are walking to Rogers Centre? Very few.

This is a pretty good assessment, IMHO.

And I'm actually finding myself agreeing with Keith more these days. Either Keith is mellowing out or I'm... ???

(ha ha, just kidding, Keith!)

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by beyeas

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Snide remarks taking knocks at the income of a child's family only act to demean the point you are making. I am disappointed in you. Usually you can be counted on sticking to facts and backing up your arguments with facts rather than making generalizations, and have always appreciated you doing so. If you had argued that this school's future should be examined because the 2015 report indicated only 50% with a slight decline over the coming decade, and therefore this site should be examined as a potential site, I would have disagreed but would have respected the debate. This is the only english program elementary school program servicing this area, and to knock it down would require each and every 5 year in the south end to be bused/driven to Tupper, something that should be frankly a non-starter in an urban environment. Nor should it be that we decide to spend money building a new school on a separate site. That is why I feel it would be wrong to knock down this school. Not because the kids are from the south end.

Regardless, I have said it before and will say it again... the cheap shot generalizations about "those people" demean the healthy debate on this forum.

Fair comment.
I have been through school closure battles 3 times for my local primary school. Been to too many meetings, read too many misleading reports from board staff - especially structural and utilities reports. I think we all know how such arguments end up.
Poor kids, poor parents,poor neighbourhoods almost always lose. Double income areas rarely lose a school. I don't forsee any school closures in the south end of the peninsula, parents are articulate,poltically savvy and no politician/group of politicians will ever risk the inevitable political fallout.
I don't think the school should close, it has good open recreational space and as the population profile changes there will always be a need for the school and possibly an expansion.
St. Mary's should be the first one to close, last time it was under consideration the majority of students were from out of the boundary and some as far away as Bedford and Dartmouth.
I bumped into Zac Churchill 2 weeks ago and he introduced himself. I took the opportunity to urge him to commit political suicide by closing primary school boundaries, ending out of boundary transfers, ending primary French Immersion and moving the programme to grade 5/6 and then finished off telling him that there is no peer reviewed study to show early French immersion leads to better outcomes than late immersion. We should probably be teaching kids Chinese !

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I'm surprised anybody would think Gorsebrook is a good location, and even more surprised people would dismiss the inevitable opposition as mere NIMBYism. It will never happen, ever, in a million years, nor will it ever be considered in any serious way, so it's pointless even to float the idea.

I wouldn't be surprised if Gorsebrook was considered--not the park, but rather the parking lots and 5940 South Street (that low-rise building that hosts the Compass program). Why? Because it's already owned by the Province and they tend to take a lowest-effort/cheapest approach to land acquisition.

But yeah, Gorsebrook would be a terrible location. After going to a Mooseheads game last weekend and watching how much of a mess the traffic was, I can't imagine what it would be like if you put such a facility deeper into the Peninsula.

Honestly, I think Dartmouth Crossing is a pretty good choice. When you look at it objectively, it's not actually that far from the core, and it has very good accessibility to all potential markets. Of course, transit would need to be closely tied to the location.

I'm not actually a fan of downtown facilities. They're great on game day, but they create a huge dead zone the other 75% of the time. The Metro Centre is a dead block. The Skydome is a huge dead block. Lucas Oil Stadium (home of the Indianapolis Colts) was a huge party on game day, but was multiple blocks of dead zone the next day.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Colin May

Fair comment.
I bumped into Zac Churchill 2 weeks ago and he introduced himself. I took the opportunity to urge him to commit political suicide by closing primary school boundaries, ending out of boundary transfers, ending primary French Immersion and moving the programme to grade 5/6 and then finished off telling him that there is no peer reviewed study to show early French immersion leads to better outcomes than late immersion. We should probably be teaching kids Chinese !

While off-topic for this discussion, I could not agree more!

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I wouldn't be surprised if Gorsebrook was considered--not the park, but rather the parking lots and 5940 South Street (that low-rise building that hosts the Compass program). Why? Because it's already owned by the Province and they tend to take a lowest-effort/cheapest approach to land acquisition.

But yeah, Gorsebrook would be a terrible location. After going to a Mooseheads game last weekend and watching how much of a mess the traffic was, I can't imagine what it would be like if you put such a facility deeper into the Peninsula.

Honestly, I think Dartmouth Crossing is a pretty good choice. When you look at it objectively, it's not actually that far from the core, and it has very good accessibility to all potential markets. Of course, transit would need to be closely tied to the location.

I'm not actually a fan of downtown facilities. They're great on game day, but they create a huge dead zone the other 75% of the time. The Metro Centre is a dead block. The Skydome is a huge dead block. Lucas Oil Stadium (home of the Indianapolis Colts) was a huge party on game day, but was multiple blocks of dead zone the next day.

Many good points here.

I find that many people on this forum seem to think that Dartmouth Crossing is in the middle of nowhere, but actually it's located within easy reach of most of the populated areas of the city... and definitely more accessible to people from out of town than the peninsula would be. Not to mention that there are more hotels sprouting up in that area all the time, which would be good to house those visiting from away. Building a stadium there would likely result in more entertainment-related businesses starting up in the area as well... not a bad thing IMHO.

I agree with adding density to the peninsula, but we don't have to have everything on the peninsula...

Link to Google Maps satellite view of the area.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Many good points here.

I find that many people on this forum seem to think that Dartmouth Crossing is in the middle of nowhere, but actually it's located within easy reach of most of the populated areas of the city... and definitely more accessible to people from out of town than the peninsula would be.

The only people within walking distance are those living in an industrial park. The nearby neighbourhood has to cross a highway to reach Dartmouth Crossing easily. Driving =/= easy to reach, especially if you're getting 20K people together at once. Easy reach of the most populated areas of the city means walking, transit, cycling...the more cars you need the more traffic there is. The more someone has to drive to get somewhere the less likely they are to go (depending on the person, of course).

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Not to mention that there are more hotels sprouting up in that area all the time, which would be good to house those visiting from away. Building a stadium there would likely result in more entertainment-related businesses starting up in the area as well... not a bad thing IMHO.

Or, the stadium could be built on the peninsula, where there are already hotels and entertainment options and which would only densify and centralize further developments in the future, limiting the expense on the municipality for new services in the future. I'm guessing you're advocating for the further sprawl of the HRM and its services by implying this, which is exactly what a stadium in this location would do.

If you were suggesting the stadium be built somewhere in Downtown Dartmouth to further intensify hotel and entertainment development in that core I might be more willing to agree.

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I'm not actually a fan of downtown facilities. They're great on game day, but they create a huge dead zone the other 75% of the time. The Metro Centre is a dead block. The Skydome is a huge dead block. Lucas Oil Stadium (home of the Indianapolis Colts) was a huge party on game day, but was multiple blocks of dead zone the next day.

Which is why you build a Lansdowne-esque development, with attached retail and residential. Lansdowne has a grocery store, movie theatre, multiple restaurants, a liquor store, sporting goods store, etc...This development in particular doesn't have to be just a sports stadium.

If you build a facility that people have to drive to it's going to be a deadzone 100% of the time it's not being used. If people aren't living near it, aren't able to use it every day, and don't have easy access to it every day, then of course it's going to be dead when nothing is going on. This is the major difference between Lansdowne and CTC in Ottawa, and why the Sens are escaping ASAP (and why an NHL team in Canada has difficult filling 85% of seats under a forced-reduced capacity, and why seats can be bought for as little as $12). It's why OHL teams fail in Brampton and Mississauga - because their rinks are built on highways and need people to drive to them.

It's a sidenote, but I was at a game at the Hershey Centre in Mississauga recently and it was probably the most dreadful hockey-viewing experience i've ever had, and that's mostly because nobody goes to the games, partly due to its location. Teams with the best atmospheres? Kingston, London, Victoriaville....you're welcome to guess what they have in common with each other.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

The only people within walking distance are those living in an industrial park. The nearby neighbourhood has to cross a highway to reach Dartmouth Crossing easily. Driving =/= easy to reach, especially if you're getting 20K people together at once. Easy reach of the most populated areas of the city means walking, transit, cycling...the more cars you need the more traffic there is. The more someone has to drive to get somewhere the less likely they are to go (depending on the person, of course).

TRANSIT!!

Just curious... how many people actually walk (from their homes) or cycle to major sporting events in those urban stadiums? This is an actual question, and supporting data would be appreciated.

I don't have data, but anecdotally I attended a Blue Jays game at Rogers Centre last summer and did not see rows upon rows of bicycles parked outside. There were lots of people walking, but many of them appeared to be coming from the subway (transit!) as were we. I'm sure some lived in condos nearby, but what percentage??

As far as I'm concerned, DC would be a great place to bolster transit. Increased bus routes would be a good start, but one thing about the 'sprawl' of DC is that there would be lots of room to install light rail transit if Halifax ever gets it.

How about out-of-town fans? From most people I have spoken to who live out-of-town (which typically means smaller towns/cities), having to battle traffic on the peninsula would likely dissuade them from attending games - most that I've talked to absolutely hate driving in downtown Halifax - then where would they park? Or, are you suggesting that we should make things as difficult as we can for out-of-town fans??

Or, the stadium could be built on the peninsula, where there are already hotels and entertainment options and which would only densify and centralize further developments in the future, limiting the expense on the municipality for new services in the future. I'm guessing you're advocating for the further sprawl of the HRM and its services by implying this, which is exactly what a stadium in this location would do.

The peninsula is densifying quite alright on its own, without a stadium, actually. They are already building more hotels there, without a stadium.

Do you really think that those undeveloped areas in the city are going to remain undeveloped forever? I'm having a hard time classifying that as sprawl as it's actually located within the main city - not in Sackville, Porter's Lake, Hammonds Plains, etc etc. Is this really what is considered sprawl?

If you were suggesting the stadium be built somewhere in Downtown Dartmouth to further intensify hotel and entertainment development in that core I might be more willing to agree.

IMHO, DT Dartmouth development would be better suited as an extension of the DT Halifax business/residential/entertainment district moving forward in the next 30-40 years or so. But if a good proposal was suggested for that then why not? However, DT Dartmouth doesn't even seem to be on the radar with those guys for some reason...

I also still think Shannon Park would be a good location as well, BTW...

Which is why you build a Lansdowne-esque development, with attached retail and residential. Lansdowne has a grocery store, movie theatre, multiple restaurants, a liquor store, sporting goods store, etc...This development in particular doesn't have to be just a sports stadium.

If you build a facility that people have to drive to it's going to be a deadzone 100% of the time it's not being used. If people aren't living near it, aren't able to use it every day, and don't have easy access to it every day, then of course it's going to be dead when nothing is going on.

Given, what you are saying about DC... is it a problem that it's a dead zone when it's not being used? A dead zone on the peninsula is a bigger problem, IMHO.

This is the major difference between Lansdowne and CTC in Ottawa, and why the Sens are escaping ASAP (and why an NHL team in Canada has difficult filling 85% of seats under a forced-reduced capacity, and why seats can be bought for as little as $12). It's why OHL teams fail in Brampton and Mississauga - because their rinks are built on highways and need people to drive to them.

Are those the actual reasons? Source?

It's a sidenote, but I was at a game at the Hershey Centre in Mississauga recently and it was probably the most dreadful hockey-viewing experience i've ever had, and that's mostly because nobody goes to the games, partly due to its location. Teams with the best atmospheres? Kingston, London, Victoriaville....you're welcome to guess what they have in common with each other.

Thing is, a CFL team would be a big thing for Halifax and thus motivation would be much greater for fans to attend.

It would be a much bigger deal than a minor league hockey team would be in Mississauga. And... perhaps there are other factors involved, such as the Steelheads being tied for 7th place out of 10 teams in the Eastern Conference of the OHL?? If a minor league hockey team sucks, you are probably not going to get a lot of fan support!

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

The nearby neighbourhood has to cross a highway to reach Dartmouth Crossing easily.

BTW, just a technicality, as I'm sure not many would actually use it to attend a football game, but a little research turns up the following:

Walking path overpass to Shubie Park

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Just curious... how many people actually walk (from their homes) or cycle to major sporting events in those urban stadiums? This is an actual question, and supporting data would be appreciated.

Let me fish around and see if I can find anything on this.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I don't have data, but anecdotally I attended a Blue Jays game at Rogers Centre last summer and did not see rows upon rows of bicycles parked outside. There were lots of people walking, but many of them appeared to be coming from the subway (transit!) as were we. I'm sure some lived in condos nearby, but what percentage??

Not a lot of people bike to games but a lot bike for the other amenities surrounding the buildings, if indeed it is built with additional retail. The biking comment was more-so about making the stadium district relevant on non-game days.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

As far as I'm concerned, DC would be a great place to bolster transit. Increased bus routes would be a good start, but one thing about the 'sprawl' of DC is that there would be lots of room to install light rail transit if Halifax ever gets it.

This is all additional spending that wouldn't necessarily be needed (perhaps as much) as a more centrally-located facility. If you build a stadium on the outskirts the municipal servicing costs increases...and this includes transit as well as water, electric, roads, etc.

Halifax should worry about getting its buses in order before even thinking about LRT beyond the potential for some commuter trains to Bedford and Lower Sackville.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

How about out-of-town fans? From most people I have spoken to who live out-of-town (which typically means smaller towns/cities), having to battle traffic on the peninsula would likely dissuade them from attending games - most that I've talked to absolutely hate driving in downtown Halifax - then where would they park? Or, are you suggesting that we should make things as difficult as we can for out-of-town fans??

This seems to be such a weird conversation. Some people think this team can survive with Halifax-only support, some see it as a mix, and the potential owners said that he expects 30%-50% of supporters will have to come in from outside of Halifax for the team to be successful [From a recent article in the T-J]. I would hate to see Halifax build a stadium so that people coming in from Moncton have somewhere to park. A stadium in Halifax should primarily be easy to reach for Halifax residents. If you begin to rely on fans from three hours away I immediately begin to worry about whatever metrics you're using for the viability of your sports franchise.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Do you really think that those undeveloped areas in the city are going to remain undeveloped forever? I'm having a hard time classifying that as sprawl as it's actually located within the main city - not in Sackville, Porter's Lake, Hammonds Plains, etc etc. Is this really what is considered sprawl?

It would be a potential trigger for sprawl, yes. Anything that potentially pushes the boundaries of built-up areas would be considered sprawl. Anything that directly increases the used land area for municipal servicing is sprawl. Building a marquee venue on the outskirts of town is the definition of sprawl.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

IMHO, DT Dartmouth development would be better suited as an extension of the DT Halifax business/residential/entertainment district moving forward in the next 30-40 years or so. But if a good proposal was suggested for that then why not? However, DT Dartmouth doesn't even seem to be on the radar with those guys for some reason...

I also still think Shannon Park would be a good location as well, BTW...

Agreed and agreed.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Given, what you are saying about DC... is it a problem that it's a dead zone when it's not being used? A dead zone on the peninsula is a bigger problem, IMHO.

A dead zone on the peninsula is probably less likely given the adjecency of nearby residents. This is the same sort of discussion people have when talking about dead downtowns: If a Downtown is dead after 5 it means everyone who works there has left to go home, usually in some suburban area. A vibrant downtown works well because it has people living in and near it, and the same works for a stadium. Obviously, outdoor stadiums are entirely unusable for six months of the year, so there is that point. At least with an arena you can have a year-round stream of events, from sports tenants to concerts to shows.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Are those the actual reasons? Source?

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...lenging-market

Originally Posted by Scanlan

Location, location

An oldie, but still true. Kanata is a bridge too far. The Senators themselves finally admitted this while bidding successfully to move to LeBreton Flats, ultimately. As an NHL insider points out, smaller market teams, especially, need a central location. Those that don’t — Florida, Phoenix, the New York Islanders (lost souls from suburban Long Island now in the borough of Brooklyn) — have struggled. Ticket sales have generally thrived in other smaller markets with downtown arenas, such as Buffalo, Columbus, Nashville and Minnesota.

When the LeBreton project is up and running, several years down the road, the Senators arena will be at the centre of the action, near a major transit hub and within walking distance of downtown. “Fan experience” has become a major focus at sporting events (witness the success of the CFL Ottawa Redblacks with their party atmosphere) and that experience will be heightened at LeBreton Flats. Nevertheless, the Senators need to sell tickets now and for the foreseeable future in their suburban rink.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thing is, a CFL team would be a big thing for Halifax and thus motivation would be much greater for fans to attend.

It would be a much bigger deal than a minor league hockey team would be in Mississauga. And... perhaps there are other factors involved, such as the Steelheads being tied for 7th place out of 10 teams in the Eastern Conference of the OHL?? If a minor league hockey team sucks, you are probably not going to get a lot of fan support!

Again, it's another aside, but it doesn't really matter all of the time if the team is good or not, really, especially in junior hockey. Mississauga has a number of future NHLers (McLeod, Tippett, Hague) and still can't get anyone to games. It's been a franchise-long difficulty, and part of the reason why the IceDogs left, as well (and the Battalion in Brampton). Mississauga is a city with 700K residents and they can barely crack 3K for hockey. Brampton was in a worse boat than them. Their arenas are in no-man's land unless you're willing to sit on a highway in traffic. Senators games lack attendance because people aren't willing to sit on a highway in traffic. What would Dartmouth Crossing look like if you had to get 20K people there by highway? The thing with a Peninsular stadium is that transit is already oriented (or could be more easily oriented) to deal with increased capacity for games. The routes and buses for commuters are already there to get people to the central location.

The argument about having the team be a bigger deal is a fair one, and i've no doubt people in Halifax will turn out for the CFL (perhaps not 25K every other weekend like some suggest/expect, but 20K or somewhere around there).

[Drybrain]

At this point, is putting something in Dartmouth Crossing facilitating sprawl? It's well within the metro area, and already built-up.

For most of the reasons expressed here, I think an off-peninsula site still reasonably central to the overall metro works best. Besides, I really can't think of anywhere on the peninsula that will. Gorsebrook is just not going to happen, so let's forget it. Neither are the Wanderers Grounds.

Where else? Someone123 suggested the Seaport. I can see that, maybe. And the extremely crappy Kempt Road area. That's all, though.

[IanMacDonald]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

At this point, is putting something in Dartmouth Crossing facilitating sprawl? It's well within the metro area, and already built-up.

For most of the reasons expressed here, I think an off-peninsula site still reasonably central to the overall metro works best. Besides, I really can't think of anywhere on the peninsula that will. Gorsebrook is just not going to happen, so let's forget it. Neither are the Wanderers Grounds.

Where else? Someone123 suggested the Seaport. I can see that, maybe. And the extremely crappy Kempt Road area. That's all, though.

I've always been partial to the idea of redeveloping the Canada post facility on Almon street. I think that lot, plus maybe the former Piercey's, current unpaved parking lot, would be a great central location.

I recall reading that Canada Post's facility was already over capacity and due to be replaced but I'll admit that it's half-remembered hearsay.