Expansion from the fans point of view

The wanderers ground site only became a possible site when the Wanderers started looking there in 2017.

On the surface this seems like great news. However, earlier in the thread you noted that some of the councilors were not seeking re-election. I’d like to know more about who is using the stadium issue as a platform for re-election going forward. I’d also like to know about stadium capacity before I pop open the champagne.

2 Likes

Will be interesting to see it play out. The City said they will come back with a list of options for that site this year.

1 Like

A part of me is also wondering if the guy who has expressed interest in owning a team in Halifax has greased the wheels a bit in City Hall.

1 Like

I genuinely hope that something comes to fruition. At least they are discussing it.

1 Like

Well said.

Politicians of all stripes, and levels of government, are almost universally inflicted with an incurable form of myopia. Add self-preservation into the mix, and the resulting brew is suffocating. A new venue need not cost the taxpayer anything. With planning and foresight, the enormous cost should not be calculated or confined to the premise of a few home football games per year. The “facility” should encompass hotels, restaurants, luxury condos, multiple businesses, family amusement, theatres, perhaps even a big-box tenant. All of this commercial activity, and rental revenue, would be profitable for the developer. What Atlantic Canada needs is an entity like Irving Oil to step up, show some foresight, and reap the benefits. Just think of the economic activity such a venue would produce.

2 Likes

What stadium has ever been built without public funds?

Even in a development you describe above the developers get the land at a reduced rate, pay little to no property tax or any other abatement. The cost to the taxpayer is on the back end.

2 Likes

That is an example of myopic views. Such a development would bring in tax dollars in multiples of any perceived “cost to the taxpayer.”
This would be multiplied again if the land use is currently under-developed, or not developed.

I think the SSE proposal was going to be paid in part in that manner which is why they were looking at a larger plot of land so there can be an auxiliary development.

Taxes generated would have gone back to the stadium cost. Of course the argument against that is not having a stadium there would mean they can still develop and the city reaps more of not all of the tax revenue.

But if they’re looking at the Wanderers ground, I don’t see how it’s big enough for that model

2 Likes

It’s not. There is room for one tenant not two
(BIG READ: An inside look at the journey to build a permanent stadium in Halifax | OS CREATOR SPOTLIGHT).

It’s going to be a fun offseason.

3 Likes

I mentioned years ago on this site about involving Irving Oil. You also have a lot of rich breweries on the east coast, as well as Sobeys, McCain’s + a few more Atlantic based billionaires. Unfortunately none have expressed interest in this venture.

2 Likes

Stadiums don’t host enough events for that model to work. It’s more suited for arenas.

Maybe it’s easier for pro-stadium councillors to push the stadium through before they leave office, leaving the bill for the next council. Without provincial involvement, it’s doubtful this will proceed.

2 Likes

Yes, it will make for an interesting offseason…and possibly season. That stadium site will be made bigger in my opinion. They will be building for the future. Time will tell.

Why can’t they just put in an upper bowl if they are already at it? I think there will be delays to the process as they do want to appease Martin as the primary tenant, but they know they are on the cusp of getting a CFL franchise if they do the thing right. There’s also been complaints from Martin about gridiron football not being a suitable co-tenant due to the way it rips up the grass surface; whereas other sports don’t do as much damage.

That was before the actual stadium proposal was made. Originally they wanted a grass surface but realized that was not going to work for a multi-purpose facility.

1 Like

I read that in an article as well. I think he mentioned he was okay with sharing the facility with amateur sporting events

3 Likes

Let’s nip that myth in the bud. Soccer damages turf (grass) more than football.

Tony Stones, Head Groundsman, Wembley Stadium

"We find most damage is caused by football (soccer) players digging in, turning quick, whereas an NFL game it’s all solid, it’s crunching together, Desso likes that, holds together well, it’s when they’re doing quick turns, your Rugby Union you get a bit of quick turning in that as well and a bit of scrummaging so you get a bit of mess from that but I’d say most damage comes from football (soccer)

It’s warmups, football (soccer) warmups that are the worst thing, that’s where we get the most damage from, especially the goalkeepers that will not use his portable goal, they insist on using his main goal that creates us some serious trouble"

John Torres, the head groundskeeper at Philadelphia’s PPL Park hosted a seminar called “Playing Surface Management” This was by an expert talking to other experts in the field with no discernible financial stake.

PPL Park is also interesting in that it hosts Football, Lacrosse, Rugby and other random events.

Torres says that, though it surprises some people, soccer does the most damage to a playing field of the sports he’s worked with.

4 Likes

The key to a good turf (grass) surface is time.

It needs time to “bed in” when originally installed and time to “heal” between events, (a week at the least)

3 Likes