Halifax Stadium Discussion

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

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

Sounds good. I'd like to see the stats if you can find them.

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.

Fair enough.

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.

I would argue that additional transit to that area would have a spinoff benefit to the people who already work and shop in the DC/Burnside area.

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.

Agreed. Halifax should have had its buses in order 20 years ago. LRT should be a reality for the near future... but alas, it's not.

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.

As has been discussed elsewhere in this thread, the Halifax CFL team would be seen more as a regional team than a Halifax team, given the relatively small geographical area of the Maritimes. Therefore, I think consideration should be made for those traveling in from other provinces, in addition to the rural areas and small towns of Nova Scotia.

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.

Again, I would argue that this should be viewed as increased density in the city core.

Agreed and agreed.

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.

Additionally, elly63 had some good suggestions as to how to get more use out of the place.

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

Thanks! I'm wondering if this would be an issue in Halifax, though? I'm guessing the traffic in Ottawa is worse than Halifax's?

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.

I wouldn't be surprised if the DC/Burnside area already handles those kind of traffic numbers at rush hours. Games would typically happen after rush hour dies down, so I don't imagine traffic would be that much of an issue. I would say it would be more of an issue trying to get 20K people out of the downtown all at once. Moosehead games and concerts have shown that half that number can tie up traffic and use up available parking quite well as it is.

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).

I concur. I think it will be quite successful if it happens.

[OldDartmouthMark]

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.

It would be great to clear out the Kempt Road area for a stadium, but could you imagine the cost? Remember, these are car dealers who live and die by the negotiation... No cheap deals there... and then the car dealers would end up somewhere else - maybe by mowing down more low-cost residential areas...

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by IanMacDonald

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.

That would be a good location!

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I would argue that additional transit to that area would have a spinoff benefit to the people who already work and shop in the DC/Burnside area.

Although this may be true it would take a considerable number of staff in order to equal out/warrant the amount needed for transit expansion in that area, I would think.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

As has been discussed elsewhere in this thread, the Halifax CFL team would be seen more as a regional team than a Halifax team, given the relatively small geographical area of the Maritimes. Therefore, I think consideration should be made for those traveling in from other provinces, in addition to the rural areas and small towns of Nova Scotia.

Agreed, but there's a balance to be had. If we went completely overboard with a geographic central location the stadium would end up in East Hants or Truro. Despite the potential numbers coming in from rural areas I think the stadium should still be more pointed towards local HRM residents (especially so if HRM is chipping funding in).

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Additionally, elly63 had some good suggestions as to how to get more use out of the place.

Having SMU/DAL utilize the stadium would be easier the closer the stadium is to their campuses.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thanks! I'm wondering if this would be an issue in Halifax, though? I'm guessing the traffic in Ottawa is worse than Halifax's?

Definitely worse but everything is relative. A half hour commute in Ottawa from the suburbs is pretty standard (an hour is a bad day), but out East commute times are expected to be shorter. Depends on how much the local population can handle and how long they're willing to sit in traffic for.

The thing about Halifax is that because of its shape and geography (with the harbour/hills/lakes/etc.) building transportation is more difficult than in Ottawa. In most of sprawling Ontario you can build a straight road on flat ground for however long you'd like; in Halifax something is going to get in your way. What this creates is a sort of funnel affect in some places (i'm thinking Bedford Highway and Bi-Hi), which are really the only two options for going N/S between Halifax and its northern environs. It's not as simple as adding another lane onto a road or building a new one altogether when traffic counts increase.

The thing with suburban stadiums is that they're usually nowhere near where people work on congregate, so it's an additional hassle to reach them. With the Metro Centre you can work Downtown, hang around, and then go to the game. How many people work until 5, go home to wherever, and then make the trek back in to the Peninsula for the game?

In Ottawa, part of the reason why the CTC doesn't work is because traffic on the Queensway heading to Kanata is still relatively dense at 5:45/6PM, meaning that those heading to the game are stuck in that traffic as well. If you live in Kanata but work Downtown is means you have to deal with traffic heading home and then more traffic on the way to the rink. Any time you see a sports team starting at 7:30 local instead of 7 it's likely because the arena is difficult to reach and they're starting later to make sure more people can make the start of the game.

A suburban stadium location means that if you're driving to the game (which you're more likely to be) you're probably not drinking. This cuts into general atmosphere and leisure...and is a big reason why I prefer Habs games to Sens games.

If people are going to a stadium and can't drink (or are drinking less) it would significantly cut into the stadium's concessions revenue stream, which has to be made up via other means (usually parking). I know people in the Maritimes like to complain about anything under the sun but how would they feel about paying for parking at a stadium that may or may not soak up public funding to get built in the first place?

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I wouldn't be surprised if the DC/Burnside area already handles those kind of traffic numbers at rush hours. Games would typically happen after rush hour dies down, so I don't imagine traffic would be that much of an issue. I would say it would be more of an issue trying to get 20K people out of the downtown all at once. Moosehead games and concerts have shown that half that number can tie up traffic and use up available parking quite well as it is.

In terms of handling people out of Peninsula after games, this is where an improved transit system would make a big difference. If people could easily bus to Dartmouth (or, god forbid, train to Bedford) it would make things a lot easier on road traffic. My instinct would be that making transit easier to access would incline more people to use it for games/events at the Metro Centre. We'll have to see how the stadium on the Wanderer Grounds affects traffic when that gets started up.

[Keith P.]

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).

I find this statement absurd. Only a tiny handful of zealots cycle regularly here and it will never be a viable choice for moving a significant number of people in this area due to climate and terrain. It is long past time that we abandon this silly attempt at forcing cycling down people's throats.

And BTW the highway crossing is not a big deal since a bridge already exists. The adjacent lake is probably a much bigger barrier to pedestrians and cyclists.

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.

Nobody bikes to Dartmouth Crossing as far as I can tell. I have never seen a single person on a bike there.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Nobody bikes to Dartmouth Crossing as far as I can tell. I have never seen a single person on a bike there.

Which is unsurprising given that it's a far-flung retail landscape with little connectivity to other areas if you're not driving. It's a big box shopping centre designed for cars.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

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.

This is a report from OSEG highlighting transportation demand for events at Lansdowne Park for 2016.

On Page ii of the Executive Summary you can find a table for REDBLACKS and Minor Events at the Stadium, which I will duplicate here:



To answer your question: Roughly 10% walk or cycle to either major or minor events at Lansdowne. For a REDBLACK's game that's ~2,500 attendees, for 67s & Fury it's between 450 & 800.

Because parking is scarce around the stadium over half of attendees take transit or utilize a park-and-ride system (~13,000), with a quarter still parking near the stadium for REDBLACKs games (roughly ~6,000).

-----------

Here's a report from the 2015 PanAm games highlighting spectator mode of travel to events. Here you can see the disparity in mode of travel between Downtown venues and Suburban venues:



Walking/Cycling made up between 10%-20% of the Downtown venues and that figure was less than half at suburban venues. Tickets to these events granted free transit.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Although this may be true it would take a considerable number of staff in order to equal out/warrant the amount needed for transit expansion in that area, I would think.

Maybe, one would think a transit study would sort that out. One would think that improved transit could increase ridership as well. i.e. more people would go to DC to shop if transit was better? Wouldn't apply if they don't like to walk, though.

Agreed, but there's a balance to be had. If we went completely overboard with a geographic central location the stadium would end up in East Hants or Truro. Despite the potential numbers coming in from rural areas I think the stadium should still be more pointed towards local HRM residents (especially so if HRM is chipping funding in).

No question that they should be seeking balance between benefits of locating in/near the most populated areas and making it accessible to fans from rural areas/other cities/towns.

Having SMU/DAL utilize the stadium would be easier the closer the stadium is to their campuses.

That would be nice, but I don't think proximity to SMU/Dal should be a major deciding point, as they already have facilities to use.

Definitely worse but everything is relative. A half hour commute in Ottawa from the suburbs is pretty standard (an hour is a bad day), but out East commute times are expected to be shorter. Depends on how much the local population can handle and how long they're willing to sit in traffic for.

The thing about Halifax is that because of its shape and geography (with the harbour/hills/lakes/etc.) building transportation is more difficult than in Ottawa. In most of sprawling Ontario you can build a straight road on flat ground for however long you'd like; in Halifax something is going to get in your way. What this creates is a sort of funnel affect in some places (i'm thinking Bedford Highway and Bi-Hi), which are really the only two options for going N/S between Halifax and its northern environs. It's not as simple as adding another lane onto a road or building a new one altogether when traffic counts increase.

Which is why I think it would be better to get people into/out of DC rather than the peninsula. And, like it or not, the vast majority will be driving their cars and will need a place to put them. Parking and then taking a bus is workable, but will take more time and be viewed as inconvenient by many fans, which might influence their decision on how many games to attend.

The thing with suburban stadiums is that they're usually nowhere near where people work on congregate, so it's an additional hassle to reach them. With the Metro Centre you can work Downtown, hang around, and then go to the game. How many people work until 5, go home to wherever, and then make the trek back in to the Peninsula for the game?

What percentage of people in Halifax actually work downtown vs Burnside? If the numbers are close enough, this could be an argument for DC. That is, unless your argument is that we should give preferential treatment to those who work downtown...

In Ottawa, part of the reason why the CTC doesn't work is because traffic on the Queensway heading to Kanata is still relatively dense at 5:45/6PM, meaning that those heading to the game are stuck in that traffic as well. If you live in Kanata but work Downtown is means you have to deal with traffic heading home and then more traffic on the way to the rink. Any time you see a sports team starting at 7:30 local instead of 7 it's likely because the arena is difficult to reach and they're starting later to make sure more people can make the start of the game.

But, there's traffic everywhere, and many people attending games bring their kids as well, so avoiding traffic really isn't an option for most people unless they work and live near the stadium. For somebody who works in downtown Halifax and lives in Dartmouth, they would have to cross the bridge twice to go home, pick up their kids and then hightail it back to Halifax to catch the game.

A suburban stadium location means that if you're driving to the game (which you're more likely to be) you're probably not drinking. This cuts into general atmosphere and leisure...and is a big reason why I prefer Habs games to Sens games.

If people are going to a stadium and can't drink (or are drinking less) it would significantly cut into the stadium's concessions revenue stream, which has to be made up via other means (usually parking). I know people in the Maritimes like to complain about anything under the sun but how would they feel about paying for parking at a stadium that may or may not soak up public funding to get built in the first place?

Do people drink that much at games actually? Is drinking really a major factor in game attendance?

In terms of handling people out of Peninsula after games, this is where an improved transit system would make a big difference. If people could easily bus to Dartmouth (or, god forbid, train to Bedford) it would make things a lot easier on road traffic. My instinct would be that making transit easier to access would incline more people to use it for games/events at the Metro Centre. We'll have to see how the stadium on the Wanderer Grounds affects traffic when that gets started up.

Improved transit could improve attendance for any location, IMHO. Even Bedford (god forbid? yikes!).

Truth be known, though, the really lazy people who don't want to make the effort to attend a game because of traffic, or whatever, would probably opt for the convenience of staying home and watching it on TV or their phone or whatever...

[elly63]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

That would be nice, but I don't think proximity to SMU/Dal should be a major deciding point, as they already have facilities to use.

As I have stated before there are three ways to get federal funding: a P3, facilities for an international multisport event, or educational (university) infrastructure. The owners have come out and said they'd like Dal and SMU to be involved.

If the feds can come up with $400-million for a bilingualism “action plan” I think they can afford to throw a few bones this way.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

This is a report from OSEG highlighting transportation demand for events at Lansdowne Park for 2016.

On Page ii of the Executive Summary you can find a table for REDBLACKS and Minor Events at the Stadium, which I will duplicate here:



To answer your question: Roughly 10% walk or cycle to either major or minor events at Lansdowne. For a REDBLACK's game that's ~2,500 attendees, for 67s & Fury it's between 450 & 800.

Because parking is scarce around the stadium over half of attendees take transit or utilize a park-and-ride system (~13,000), with a quarter still parking near the stadium for REDBLACKs games (roughly ~6,000).

-----------

Here's a report from the 2015 PanAm games highlighting spectator mode of travel to events. Here you can see the disparity in mode of travel between Downtown venues and Suburban venues:



Walking/Cycling made up between 10%-20% of the Downtown venues and that figure was less than half at suburban venues. Tickets to these events granted free transit.

Thanks for the stats. I'm wondering how it would stack up in Halifax's peninsular layout. It does appear that in larger cities that the combination of unavailable parking and horrible traffic will force people to take transit, with the assumption is that the transit system works well in those locations.

On the flip side, the Pan Am Games data makes me wonder which mode people prefer to use - i.e. is the reason that they don't drive to downtown venues just because it's just so darn inconvenient to drive there, or is it that they would actually prefer to walk or take transit? How did attendance compare between the two styles? Did people who walk and bike take transit or just decline to attend?

Truth be known, it wouldn't really matter to me where it's built as long as the appropriate research has been done by people with appropriate qualifications and that they make a decision based on sound reasoning...

In other words, no matter where you put it make sure you design it such that it's not a cluster---- to get there....

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by elly63

As I have stated before there are three ways to get federal funding: a P3, facilities for an international multisport event, or educational (university) infrastructure. The owners have come out and said they'd like Dal and SMU to be involved.

If the feds can come up with $400-million for a bilingualism “action plan” I think they can afford to throw a few bones this way.

Sorry, I had forgotten that point that you made previously... most likely because it's based on politics and not logic (i.e. government), but it is a good point nonetheless as it could result in federal money being filtered this way.

[CPMatt]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Which is unsurprising given that it's a far-flung retail landscape with little connectivity to other areas if you're not driving. It's a big box shopping centre designed for cars.

I know no one uses it, but I actually think there is decent biking / walking connections to Dartmouth Crossing. The path that runs along lake mic mac is well maintained and takes you from Mic Mac Mall to the Cineplex parking lot (about 3km). It's part of the transcanada trail (or great trail as they seem to be calling it now) and connects with downtown Halifax and the dartmouth ferry terminal (see map). I've walked with my kids to/from the cineplex from Crichton Park area, which itself is walking distance from the ferry. People often park by the cineplex to access Shubie Park across the pedestrian bridge.

Now trying to bike once you are actually in the park is another matter!

https://thegreattrail.ca/explore-the-map/

[elly63]

You've got 200 million to spend and 25k seats, which stadium would you like the new Halifax stadium to look like?

[elly63]

For some more idle speculation while we wait for an announcement, here's what they got for their money in Hamilton which might be similar to what happens here.

The big reveal

$145.7-million stadium features private boxes, wider seats and community access

The specs
• North-south orientation
• Permanent seating for 22,500 people (Ivor Wynne seats 30,000)
• Ability to expand to 40,000 for Grey Cup games
• 700 club seats
• 20 VIP suites
• 5.45-hectare footprint
• 180 parking spots (400 spots available at the current venue)
• Six elevators
• General admission seats are 21 inches wide; club seats are 22 inches and VIP seats are 24 inches wide — wider than industry standard
• Concession stands on all levels of the stadium
• Several hundred LED televisions to be installed in the concourses, washrooms and hospitality areas
• Meets international requirements for FIFA soccer and CFL football

The Money
• Overall cost is $145.7 million
• $119.1 to be spent on the stadium construction and design
• $26.6 million to be spent on “soft costs” such as project management, transaction fees and a contingency fund
• City contributing $54.3 million
• Province contributing $22.3 million
• Federal government paying the remaining $69.1 million
• Ticats to pay city $450,000 a year in rental costs

The Deal
• Consortium called Ontario Sports Solutions (comprised of Bouygues Building Canada Inc., Kenaidan Contracting Ltd., and several other companies) won bid over two other pre-qualified competitors
• Deal also includes design and build of Town of Milton’s velodrome and York University stadium
• Price and completion dates fixed and written into the contract

The community
• Stadium to host about 1,400 hours of community use per year, including soccer, football, concerts and other community events
• Features public fitness and change rooms
• Designed to allow maximum sunlight on now-shadowed neighbouring streets
• Designed to minimize noise levels for neighbours
• Designed to meet barrier-free guidelines

The next steps
• A site plan for the new stadium has yet to be filed with the city. That document will outline the exact specifications of the stadium and give the city a chance to review whether it meets its design guidelines.
• Ontario Sports Solutions, the firm in charge of building the new stadium, will take possession of the property on Dec. 1.
• The demolition and construction will begin immediately after the stadium is cleared.
• The estimated completion date is 2014, a year before the Pan Am Games.
• The Ticats have yet to announce where they will play during the stadium construction in 2013.

And..

The Ticats have committed to pay the city $1.2 million per year for 20 years in exchange for use of the stadium, including $450,000 in rent and $750,000 per season in exchange for naming rights as part of a memorandum of understanding signed in February 2011

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thanks for the stats. I'm wondering how it would stack up in Halifax's peninsular layout. It does appear that in larger cities that the combination of unavailable parking and horrible traffic will force people to take transit, with the assumption is that the transit system works well in those locations.

It seems to me that people will drive in for events (Fury/67s) if they can get parking nearby. If not, they'll either drive to shuttles or take transit, or a combination of the two. It would be great if we had some numbers on where attendees were coming in from but that's a bigger pile of research. The willingness to take transit would rely on the belief that transit is reliable and frequent.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

On the flip side, the Pan Am Games data makes me wonder which mode people prefer to use - i.e. is the reason that they don't drive to downtown venues just because it's just so darn inconvenient to drive there, or is it that they would actually prefer to walk or take transit? How did attendance compare between the two styles? Did people who walk and bike take transit or just decline to attend?

Attendance at the suburban locations was notoriously bad. People mostly just declined to attend events in suburban areas (Markham a prime example), and the few that did drove to them.

Originally Posted by National Post

MARKHAM, Ont. – At 8 a.m. on Tuesday, the women’s water polo teams from Puerto Rico and Venezuela met inside a suburban Toronto pool for the first official act of competition at the 2015 Pan American Games, a government-led undertaking that will cost more than $2.5-billion, and that has closed more than 230 kilometres of roadway to regular traffic.

There were 25 people in the stands.

...

Back in Markham, the crowd swelled as the opening game of the water polo tournament built to a crescendo. There were approximately 50 fans in the stands as the Puerto Ricans and Venezuelans fought to an 11-11 tie.

The Canadian women played later, finishing in a 7-7 tie with Brazil. The crowd grew in size for that game: There were more than 100 fans in the stands.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Truth be known, it wouldn't really matter to me where it's built as long as the appropriate research has been done by people with appropriate qualifications and that they make a decision based on sound reasoning...

In other words, no matter where you put it make sure you design it such that it's not a cluster---- to get there....

There's a couple of concerns or notes (for me, anyway):

• That it's in a good location;
• That it's the correct size for the market;
• That it's able to be multi-purpose for different events;
• That public funding is reasonable, and if there is public funding that public usage is attainable; and,
• That transit can be oriented/improved no matter where it is located.

Getting the majority of these right will give the facility some long-term viability. A couple wrong steps and things can go south in a hurry.

[elly63]

More somewhat off topic info we might learn from in fairly recent Canadian dollars that also shows the trend in Canadian stadium building

Lessons for Hamilton from Winnipeg’s new stadium
Drew Edwards thespec.com Aug 30, 2013

WINNIPEG - The most impressive element of the new Investors Group Field in Winnipeg is unquestionably the massive roof, its two sections of ornately-designed, curved steel covering almost eight acres and stretching almost 200 feet over the seats below. It's swooping profile is the iconic image used in much of the branding.

But the roof also added approximately $35 million to the cost and was the central factor in a year-long delay in opening the facility.

The new Hamilton stadium, due to open in time for the 2014 CFL season next July, will have no such roof, one of several important differences between Tim Hortons Field and the Investors Group version in Winnipeg.

One is cost. Tim Hortons Field has a budget of $148 million, while IGF was budgeted at $200 million before the delay and additional, costs which are expected to push the final tally closer to a quarter of a billion dollars. Money in Winnipeg is undeniably tight: for example, the press box is still unfinished — it's currently situated outdoors — and will have to be enclosed before the Bombers can hold a Grey Cup.

In addition to the roof, the Winnipeg stadium also has close to 10,000 more seats than the 22,500 planned in Hamilton. That may sound like a good thing, but where those seats are located is key: while the Hamilton design emphasizes seating between the 20-yard lines, IGF has extensive end zone seating (has been reduced - elly). The Bombers have yet to sell out a game this season — their winless home record likely isn't helping — but the vast majority of the empty seats have been located in the end zone, where visibility for CFL games is poorest.

One of the design features of the new Hamilton facility that has received the most attention is social areas located behind each zone, places where fans are expected to congregate and watch the game in an atmosphere that's been likened to a sports bar. Winnipeg has those areas as well — they were packed Aug. 24 against Ticats — but they are much further from the field, sitting behind row upon row of end zone seats (some seats have been removed)

There's also a major difference on how high end ticket buyers will experience the game. The club seats in Winnipeg — known as the Pinnacle Club — feature both a seating area and a communal gathering spot where fans can eat and socialize. But those two areas are separated by a concourse: there's no way to see the action unless seated. In Hamilton, that gathering spot has been designed to allow for a view of the field of play.

One of the possible explanations for the construction delay and some of the oversights in the Winnipeg facility is the relative inexperience in both the architect and the builder in constructing sports facilities. Both firms were required to be Manitoba-based by the terms set by the provincial government, the primary financial backer (more on that in a minute.)

The Hamilton stadium, meanwhile, is being built by an international consortium that includes by Cannon Design, which was involved in the B.C. Place renovation, the Richmond Olympic Oval and the new Landsdowne Park in Ottawa. The builder is Bouygues Construction, a huge multinational based in France. It has built everything from bridges to soccer stadiums, to the containment shelter for the nuclear reactors in Chernobyl.

The Ticats have also spent the better part of two years touring stadiums across North America in attempt to gather the best fan experiences and incorporate them into Tim Hortons Field. They've also hired a number of consultants to advise them, including Jim Cima, who has been heavily involved in the construction of pro stadiums and arenas in Philadelphia, New Jersey and Minnesota among several others.

There are also significant differences in how the stadiums will be financed. Investors Group Field was built with the help of a $22.5-million provincial grant, a $7.5-million city grant and what amount to $170 in provincial loans. The Bombers plan to use revenue from the football team to repay $95 million of that money, while property taxes from new developments at the former Canad Inns Stadium site are expected cover the balance.

That means the Bombers must prioritize their finances to pay for their new building on an ongoing basis, and hope that the developments at Canad Inns produce as expected (it's a series of big box stores.) Because the Bombers are community-owned with no deep-pocketed owner behind them, the responsibility will fall to the taxpayers should the team fail to meet their commitments.

In Hamilton, the financing is more clear. It is budgeted at $145.7 million with the city is contributing $54.3 million, the province $22.3 million and federal government paying the remaining $69.1 million.

The Ticats have committed to pay the city $1.2 million per year for 20 years in exchange for use of the stadium, including $450,000 in rent and $750,000 per season in exchange for naming rights as part of a memorandum of understanding signed in February 2011. A final agreement is still being worked on.

Last weekend, while the Ticats were busy beating the Bombers on the field, representatives from the football team and the city of Hamilton were touring the Winnipeg stadium and talking to their counterparts about the challenges they had encountered. Winnipeg has a magnificent new facility — with a spectacular roof — but Hamilton may still end up with something both more economically and more sporting for fans.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by JHikka

There's a couple of concerns or notes (for me, anyway):

• That it's in a good location;
• That it's the correct size for the market;
• That it's able to be multi-purpose for different events;
• That public funding is reasonable, and if there is public funding that public usage is attainable; and,
• That transit can be oriented/improved no matter where it is located.

I think the potential ownership group has pretty much stated most of the above and they have been in talks with some advisors who have recent experience with successful stadium builds (Regina, Ottawa)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

It seems to me that people will drive in for events (Fury/67s) if they can get parking nearby. If not, they'll either drive to shuttles or take transit, or a combination of the two. It would be great if we had some numbers on where attendees were coming in from but that's a bigger pile of research. The willingness to take transit would rely on the belief that transit is reliable and frequent.


Attendance at the suburban locations was notoriously bad. People mostly just declined to attend events in suburban areas (Markham a prime example), and the few that did drove to them.





There's a couple of concerns or notes (for me, anyway):

• That it's in a good location;
• That it's the correct size for the market;
• That it's able to be multi-purpose for different events;
• That public funding is reasonable, and if there is public funding that public usage is attainable; and,
• That transit can be oriented/improved no matter where it is located.

Getting the majority of these right will give the facility some long-term viability. A couple wrong steps and things can go south in a hurry.

Good info!

Though regarding the Markham location, I suspect that the sport may have played a part in it as well. I personally don't find water polo particularly exciting as a spectator sport, and perhaps others were similarly unmotivated by both the long drive and the payoff (watching water polo).

Also, in comparison with Halifax, Markham is a 1 hour drive from downtown Toronto, whereas DC is only about 15 minutes from DT Halifax.

Point taken nonetheless.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Though regarding the Markham location, I suspect that the sport may have played a part in it as well. I personally don't find water polo particularly exciting as a spectator sport, and perhaps others were similarly unmotivated by both the long drive and the payoff (watching water polo).

I agree, which is why PanAm numbers should partially be taken with a grain of salt. Some sports are just not overly great to watch in general.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Also, in comparison with Halifax, Markham is a 1 hour drive from downtown Toronto, whereas DC is only about 15 minutes from DT Halifax.

Of course, but everything is relative. Torontonians have a higher tolerance for hour-long commutes to just about anywhere. A long commute in the Maritimes is, what, a half hour? 45 minutes tops?

Even if you say Markham is an hour away from Toronto there are still 300K people that live in Markham, nevermind the fast-growing communities north of it.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by JHikka

I agree, which is why PanAm numbers should partially be taken with a grain of salt. Some sports are just not overly great to watch in general.



Of course, but everything is relative. Torontonians have a higher tolerance for hour-long commutes to just about anywhere. A long commute in the Maritimes is, what, a half hour? 45 minutes tops?

Even if you say Markham is an hour away from Toronto there are still 300K people that live in Markham, nevermind the fast-growing communities north of it.

Good points. It is true regarding commutes and traffic.

Many a time I have grumbled to myself about traffic in Halifax. Then I take a trip to Toronto, after which I think to myself how great Halifax traffic is!