Halifax Stadium Discussion

[OldDartmouthMark]

That's one of the better, if not the best, one(s) that I've seen. Here in Halifax, almost every attempt at recreating a historic facade (example: the Roy) or making a new building fit in with older buildings (several attempts) has been a fail.

In my mind, the concept is a fail for the Halifax Forum because it is already an arena, and (speaking for myself) the charm is in the structure itself. Walking inside, you are immediately greeted with an old-style ticket area, you look up and you can see the outline of the bleacher area in concrete, with all the individual plank patterns from the way they built concrete forms almost 100 years ago. Inside it just has the feel of an old arena, with columns supporting the roof (often considered a negative in an arena, but adds to the charm in this case), natural light coming in at the top of the bleachers through old structural glass blocks, etc etc. Outside, the brickwork has the look and pattern that's hard to recreate, although some of the original arched windows that had been covered over would be nice to open up again.

So yes, you can build a facade to resemble it on the outside, but IMHO you would still lose most of the character.

But... that's just me. Most people like new shiny stuff, and that's alright too. I don't live in a bubble, I understand the benefits of new construction from a functionality point of view (and some people prefer the appearance of new buildings vs old as well).

For me it would be a loss of an iconic (I hate that word but IMHO it fits) building in Halifax, and the loss of some personal memories for me (I can picture the very seats where we used to watch NS Voyageurs games when I was a kid, for example). But... no matter what happens it will be a win for some and a loss for others, so whatever happens, happens. I'll try to focus on the positive.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Nobody would care about a stadium's storied history, as nobody cares about the storied history of anything around here. I think you know that based on how your framed the Forum initially... KP to chime in to confirm momentarily.

Not sure what you're getting at here.

I like the Forum and would like to see it properly refurbished. It is certainly preferable to tearing it down an erecting another ugly airplane hanger 4-pad box as HRM is wont to do.

I would like to see several things done to it however as part of any such redevelopment. The posts may have "charm" but they are its biggest drawback as an arena. A new truss roof system would eliminate the posts, allow better sightlines, insulation and roof height, and is badly needed. It also should have better subsidiary components such as dressing rooms, concessions, washrooms, meeting/exhibit spaces, etc than it currently has. Like you I believe the exterior features should be restored/reinstated and featured. We should not pay homage to the gods of amateur hockey at the expense of other things.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Not sure what you're getting at here.

I like the Forum and would like to see it properly refurbished. It is certainly preferable to tearing it down an erecting another ugly airplane hanger 4-pad box as HRM is wont to do.

I would like to see several things done to it however as part of any such redevelopment. The posts may have "charm" but they are its biggest drawback as an arena. A new truss roof system would eliminate the posts, allow better sightlines, insulation and roof height, and is badly needed. It also should have better subsidiary components such as dressing rooms, concessions, washrooms, meeting/exhibit spaces, etc than it currently has. Like you I believe the exterior features should be restored/reinstated and featured. We should not pay homage to the gods of amateur hockey at the expense of other things.

My mistake, Keith! I wholly expected you to go for financial practicality over sentimentality, but I misjudged!

I like your ideas, actually, and would be happy to see it go in that direction. The 4pad direction would be a massive fail IMHO. Fine for Burnside and Hammonds Plains, I suppose, but not for this site.

[Colin May]

http://newstartns.ca/2019/11/there-i...8IDpVGAZ9h0gM4
Feel free to tear his argument to shreds.....

[IanWatson]

I would actually be totally okay with building a stadium with public money if it was made as a public project from the start. With the current proposal it's backwards; it's a stadium being built to benefit one man, with significant expense and risk going to the public.

If we were to say, "Halifax is building a stadium", the intention from the start would be to benefit the public. It's a minor distinction, but I think it flips the narrative a little bit.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I would actually be totally okay with building a stadium with public money if it was made as a public project from the start. With the current proposal it's backwards; it's a stadium being built to benefit one man, with significant expense and risk going to the public.

If we were to say, "Halifax is building a stadium", the intention from the start would be to benefit the public. It's a minor distinction, but I think it flips the narrative a little bit.

I think that would be better but how likely is a stadium to happen that way? HRM council has a hard time seeing any major project through to completion. I wonder how many millions they've spent over the years planning different stadiums that were never built (CWG, FIFA Women's Cup). Maybe people in Halifax should just accept that progress in the city often needs to be privately led.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by someone123

I wonder how many millions they've spent over the years planning different stadiums that were never built (CWG, FIFA Women's Cup).

I guess I'm feeling like that's part of the problem. To-date, the stadium has always been tied to something. I get that it's helpful to have a specific event or team to drive the "need" for a stadium, but that also makes any discussion about a stadium not just about the stadium itself, but about the greater context driving that stadium. Opposition to the stadium ends up not being on the merits of the stadium, but on the merits of the CWG/FIFA/rich guy making out like a bandit/whatever is the next scheme to come along. To look at it more globally, this problem is coming up so much with the Olympics. Sure, they're the driving force behind infrastructure investments for many cities, but people are becoming extremely wary of this approach; no one wants to host the Olympics anymore because it's seen as extreme public investment to enrich fatcat Olympic committees. Tying infrastructure to events or individuals just feels corrupt (even if it's not).

We need to flip that and think about it this way: a stadium is a public facility that can be used for a whole bunch of things in a city of this size. Let's build one--as a public good--and in doing so think about how it can be best used to accommodate major events and teams.

The Forum got discussed earlier on here, and I think it's a really good example of what I'm talking about. I don't personally see or hear a whole lot of opposition to sinking a ton of public money into restoring/rebuilding it, because people see it as a public facility and public good. The Forum is getting done because it needs to get done, not because an individual or group stands to benefit at the public's expense.

[Djeffery]

But is saying "Let's spend well over a hundred million dollars for a stadium because we as a city deserve it, even though there won't really be much use for 25,000 seats for community use" going to cause people to feel better or more likely to want to spend that money than "we have a chance at a CFL team, but we need to build a stadium for it?". And I think the use for the stadium plays an important role in how you design it. A CWG stadium would have been vastly different than what this bare bones CFL stadium looks like it might be.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

But is saying "Let's spend well over a hundred million dollars for a stadium because we as a city deserve it, even though there won't really be much use for 25,000 seats for community use" going to cause people to feel better or more likely to want to spend that money than "we have a chance at a CFL team, but we need to build a stadium for it?".

That's a fair point. The highly scientific Rick Howe Twitter poll only asked if residents wanted a stadium; not if they wanted a CFL team.

Like i've said previously this entire venture would make more sense if led by HRM with design capabilities to potentially include a CFL tenant in the future. As it stands the process is going in the opposite direction than it should be going in. Build a stadium that HRM needs regardless of whether or not there's a full-time tenant and work from there. The economics don't make sense for a CFL-led project because CFL groups cannot fund their own stadiums without significant risk to public financing.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

We need to flip that and think about it this way: a stadium is a public facility that can be used for a whole bunch of things in a city of this size. Let's build one--as a public good--and in doing so think about how it can be best used to accommodate major events and teams.

This would be preferable, I agree, but is it likely to happen? What's the biggest capital project the municipality has led during the past decade?

Kitchener-Waterloo recently completed a $850M light rail system. Halifax is hoping to one day implement a $130M BRT system. I'm not saying either of these projects are good or bad but it puts HRM's level of ambition into context.

Sometimes you need to look at the realpolitik angle and accept an imperfect project over a better one that is much less likely to be implemented.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by someone123

This would be preferable, I agree, but is it likely to happen? What's the biggest capital project the municipality has led during the past decade?

Kitchener-Waterloo recently completed a $850M light rail system. Halifax is hoping to one day implement a $130M BRT system. I'm not saying either of these projects are good or bad but it puts HRM's level of ambition into context.

Sometimes you need to look at the realpolitik angle and accept an imperfect project over a better one that is much less likely to be implemented.

The Kitchener project received federal and provincial funding. A stadium is not eligible for federal funding and the province is non-committal.
" Capital costs are $818 million. These costs are funded entirely by three levels of government: the Government of Ontario ($300 million), the Government of Canada ($265 million) and the Region of Waterloo ($253 million). " https://rapidtransit.regionofwaterlo...dquestions.asp

The facts are important in this discussion.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Colin May

A stadium is not eligible for federal funding

Where did you come up with that?

Tim Hortons Field
It is budgeted at $145.7 million. The city is contributing $54.3 million, the province $22.3 million and federal government paying the remaining $69.1 million.

BMO Field
With a total costs of $62.9 million to build the stadium ($72.8 million including the land), financial contributions came from multiple sources. The Canadian Federal Government contributed $27 million, the Government of Ontario added an additional $8 million, and the City of Toronto paid $9.8 million and contributed the land for the project (valued at $10 million),

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by elly63

Where did you come up with that?

Tim Hortons Field
It is budgeted at $145.7 million. The city is contributing $54.3 million, the province $22.3 million and federal government paying the remaining $69.1 million.

Wasn't this part of the Pan Am Games funding?

The feds are more than happy to contribute to amateur sports. This is how the Moncton Stadium was built (World Junior Track & Field Championship).

When the city of Moncton went to the feds for funding of the Avenir Centre however, the answer was no, because the tenants of the building were not considered to be amateur. The city had to be incredibly creative in it's proposals to get what little federal funding they could (somewhere around 20 million dollars I believe - only about 1/6th the ultimate cost of the building).

[Colin May]

The CFL is professional and the feds won't fund stadia/arenas for professional sports.
Justin has said so.
Harper was open to the idea : https://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...rticle1213468/
but there was significant negative reaction.
He was trying to but Quebec votes at the time (2010)

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by JHikka

That's a fair point. The highly scientific Rick Howe Twitter poll only asked if residents wanted a stadium; not if they wanted a CFL team.

Like i've said previously this entire venture would make more sense if led by HRM with design capabilities to potentially include a CFL tenant in the future. As it stands the process is going in the opposite direction than it should be going in. Build a stadium that HRM needs regardless of whether or not there's a full-time tenant and work from there. The economics don't make sense for a CFL-led project because CFL groups cannot fund their own stadiums without significant risk to public financing.

The economics make even less sense without a CFL team. What other reason does a city that size need for a stadium? I'm in London, a city of similar size, and we don't have a stadium like that. Neither does Kitchener or Windsor. If you had even the 12k seating capacity stadium without a CFL team, what would go there? Would the Huskies play there, and if they did, would they draw any more than the thousand or so fans that might go to the current field? Are the Wanderers going to move over there, when they seem to have a pretty good thing going in their current neighbourhood? Maybe a concert or 2? Certainly not a Heritage Classic as was mentioned up thread.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The CFL is professional and the feds won't fund stadia/arenas for professional sports.
Justin has said so.
Harper was open to the idea : https://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...rticle1213468/
but there was significant negative reaction.
He was trying to but Quebec votes at the time (2010)

But we are talking about a hypothetical HRM-led stadium that would not be tied to the CFL. They would be free to try to market it to other levels of government however. Many sports facilities in Canada have received federal funding, and stadium projects in Halifax have more or less qualified in the past (CWGs). They have never been successfully completed. My point is that even with federal funding if HRM is left to lead the project it may never happen, so it does not necessarily make sense to measure real private proposals against that hypothetical alternative.

The options available to HRM are probably CFL promoter led stadium or nothing, not the CFL proposal or a public proposal.

[elly63]

Stadiums can receive funding if they are part of a multi event games or as part of educational infrastructure or more remotely a P3 project. At one point I thought I read the universities were involved and we know Sport Nova Scotia is involved.

Anyone who is moronic enough to believe this is a CFL stadium with 10 or so games a year has their head up their petoot. We can probably blame the proposed ownership group for not communicating who the other stakeholders are effectively enough.

Of course no stadium should be funded for a professional franchise but was anyone under any illusions that THF would not be the new home for the Ti-Cats and that the soccer only PanAM games was not much of a reason to have the stadium be built.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by elly63

was anyone under any illusions that THF would not be the new home for the Ti-Cats and that the soccer only PanAM games was not much of a reason to have the stadium be built.

No, but the Pan AM Games proponents were quite successful at maintaining the fiction that this stadium was being built as a necessary prerequisite to hold the games, and, if the Ti-Cats just happened to use the stadium after it was built, well, then this was nothing more than an unintended bonus for the project.

[OldDartmouthMark]

This just in...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...osal-1.5359880

The group that wants to build a CFL stadium in Halifax has updated its proposal, which it says reduces risk to the municipality and is the best deal for any stadium jurisdiction in North America.

Besides building a stadium in Shannon Park, Schooner Sports and Entertainment (SSE) is hoping to attract a CFL team that would serve as an anchor tenant.

The original proposal was submitted in August 2019 and details were made public at the end of September.

Last month, council held a vote based on a motion from Dartmouth Coun. Sam Austin to end talks regarding the stadium. Austin's motion was voted down 9-8. Council then voted in favour of having staff analyze the proposal and have them return with a report in December.

In a news release, one of SSE's founding partners said the company has been listening to public reaction of its original submission.

"Our revised proposal takes this feedback into consideration and provides HRM with a community stadium proposal that is the best deal for HRM and in fact better than any stadium jurisdiction in North America," said Anthony LeBlanc.

According to the news release, under the revised proposal SSE will now:

• Contribute tens of millions of dollars for stadium construction.
• Fund all ongoing capital expenses.
• Be responsible for all operational expenses, regardless of ownership structure.
• Repay HRM's full annual contribution.
• Share the excess surcharge profit with the city.

The stadium would be a 24,000-seat facility with an inflatable winter sports dome that could be used for professional football and community sports. SSE said the stadium could host one to two major concerts a year and a minimum of one Grey Cup every 10 years.

SSE's original proposal contained various ways the municipality could fund the stadium and community sports complex.

That included an upfront cash payment of 15-20 per cent of the cost and annual payments of $2 million with the expectation of getting money back through ticket sales.

"I just looked at what they're asking of us in terms of the municipal financial contribution and where I feel the stadium ranks in terms of municipal priorities and I just can't square the two," Austin said in October.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

No, but the Pan AM Games proponents were quite successful at maintaining the fiction that this stadium was being built as a necessary prerequisite to hold the games, and, if the Ti-Cats just happened to use the stadium after it was built, well, then this was nothing more than an unintended bonus for the project.

There was never any illusion that the Ti-Cats weren't going to play there, especially since the old stadium was demolished and this one built on that site. Hamilton just happened to use the fact the Pan Am games were coming to piggyback the project on that. Maybe Halifax should have decided to pursue the Commonwealth Games, and they might have had a better stadium at fewer local dollars than what this is going to end up being. BMO was also built as part of the World Cup junior tournament (whatever the official name of it is), which would explain federal funding coming there.