Lansdowne Park Redevelopment Phase 1 | Completed

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Are the condo buildings going to be the City's to sell to the highest bidding developer, or are they part of the OSEG plan (i.e. they'll be Minto condos)???

Originally Posted by jemartin

More bait and switch. They know the retail will fail. This is about condos.

As they fail, convert them.

from the LPP implementation report "Independent residential and office developers will be retained to construct 280 new residential units and a 90,000 square foot office tower[...........] The City will sell land to a residential developer to construct 44 new town homes on Holmwood Avenue, 176 new condominium units on Bank Street and a 60 unit condominium tower on Bank Street. The City will receive proceeds from the sale of air rights for the townhomes and condominium units estimated at almost $10.2M (net of site servicing costs). These revenues will be used to reduce the amount of the debt the City issues to fund the development."

[jemartin]

Holy cow what a pile of yo know what from Kent Kirkpatrick.

$38M of profit from football over 30 years.

$30M in profit from hockey over 30 years.

$3.8M saved per year from not maintaining Lansdowne. Gimme a break. The park is over budget by $650,000.00 in 2009 with $2.5M in compensation.

This is getting criminal the amount of misinformation being put out there.

Take down the stadium.

End of problem.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Holy cow what a pile of yo know what from Kent Kirkpatrick.

$38M of profit from football over 30 years.

$30M in profit from hockey over 30 years.

$3.8M saved per year from not maintaining Lansdowne. Gimme a break. The park is over budget by $650,000.00 in 2009 with $2.5M in compensation.

This is getting criminal the amount of misinformation being put out there.

Take down the stadium.

End of problem.

Some could say there are issues comming from both sides those aginst it and those for it.As for take down the stadium end of probleam no you would cause more probleams.To start taking down the stadium would mean you have to tear down the arena.Meaning your going to have to build a arena and stadium some where.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by reidjr

Some could say there are issues comming from both sides those aginst it and those for it.As for take down the stadium end of probleam no you would cause more probleams.To start taking down the stadium would mean you have to tear down the arena.Meaning your going to have to build a arena and stadium some where.

Keep the arena and convention space. They actually make money.

Structurally you chop off from row 30 and above (roughly arena roof height) and put in cross or vertical supports as needed.

Leaves you also with the first 30 rows, or about 6,000 seats, that are deemed structurally safe and within code. Fine for varsity.

Recoverable steel gets about $350 per ton, roughly 5,000 tons so some offsetting revenue. Maybe a few million to offset.

South stands no big deal, but must be removed by section and then pulverized with metal extracted.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Keep the arena and convention space. They actually make money.

But you can't with out the stadium.If you tear the stadium down you have to tear the arena down.

[blackjagger]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Holy cow what a pile of yo know what from Kent Kirkpatrick.

$38M of profit from football over 30 years.

$30M in profit from hockey over 30 years.

$3.8M saved per year from not maintaining Lansdowne. Gimme a break. The park is over budget by $650,000.00 in 2009 with $2.5M in compensation.

This is getting criminal the amount of misinformation being put out there.

Take down the stadium.

End of problem.

I'm laughing pretty hard at this comment. Strictly because your costing estimates have been out to lunch at every turn. Someone is going to demo the Southside Stands for $300,000.00 right? So to be critical of some random numbers taken out of context shows your intent to criticize with no justification.

Oh and does it say football or 38M from stadium usage or 30M from Hockey or Arena usage. You can do more in an Arena and Stadium then just football and hockey that generates income. Please post accurate information in the future please.

Cheers,
Josh

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by blackjagger

I'm laughing pretty hard at this comment. Strictly because your costing estimates have been out to lunch at every turn. Someone is going to demo the Southside Stands for $300,000.00 right? So to be critical of some random numbers taken out of context shows your intent to criticize with no justification.

Oh and does it say football or 38M from stadium usage or 30M from Hockey or Arena usage. You can do more in an Arena and Stadium then just football and hockey that generates income. Please post accurate information in the future please.

Cheers,
Josh

Straight from Kent Kirkpatrick, City Manager.

CFL contribution, not stadium.

67's Hockey, not concerts.

Read full entry, it would help.

[lrt's friend]

It is so funny that the return of football started all of this process. If it wasn't for it, we would be seeing no significant action in upgrading Lansdowne Park. So what to do we get as a response from some quarters, tear down the stadium. So we have a problem to address, so it is suggested that we address everything but the problem. Go figure.

[blackjagger]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Straight from Kent Kirkpatrick, City Manager.

CFL contribution, not stadium.

67's Hockey, not concerts.

Read full entry, it would help.

Still more plausible then $300,000 to do a $3 million demo job or landscaping an acre of Asphalt for $200,000.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Keep the arena and convention space. They actually make money.

Structurally you chop off from row 30 and above (roughly arena roof height) and put in cross or vertical supports as needed.

Leaves you also with the first 30 rows, or about 6,000 seats, that are deemed structurally safe and within code. Fine for varsity.

Recoverable steel gets about $350 per ton, roughly 5,000 tons so some offsetting revenue. Maybe a few million to offset.

South stands no big deal, but must be removed by section and then pulverized with metal extracted.

What you are suggesting is almost impossible. The raker beams for the grandstand area also supported by the roof beams. You remove the the top of the grandstand the entire structure falls apart. The only means of keeping the remaining portion of the grandstand up would be to either have beams drop down into the middle of the ice rink or keep the large beams up as they go over the structure.

This is also the same issue they ran into with the lower south side stands. It would cost more to fix/replace the raker beams than it would just to start over because you need to remove the horizontal elements under the seating to do and that concrete would probably break apart doing it or it would need to be replaced too.

At a minimum you would be into unprecedented construction work. Why chop off half the grandstand anyway? What is the point? It just needs a bit of minor reinforcing and then you would have a capacity for larger events like a popular concert as needed....and it is almost for free since we already have it.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

What you are suggesting is almost impossible. The raker beams for the grandstand area also supported by the roof beams. You remove the the top of the grandstand the entire structure falls apart. The only means of keeping the remaining portion of the grandstand up would be to either have beams drop down into the middle of the ice rink or keep the large beams up as they go over the structure.

This is also the same issue they ran into with the lower south side stands. It would cost more to fix/replace the raker beams than it would just to start over because you need to remove the horizontal elements under the seating to do and that concrete would probably break apart doing it or it would need to be replaced too.

At a minimum you would be into unprecedented construction work. Why chop off half the grandstand anyway? What is the point? It just needs a bit of minor reinforcing and then you would have a capacity for larger events like a popular concert as needed....and it is almost for free since we already have it.

You reinforce prior to taking down.

Have a walk on the roof level of the arena, you will see what I mean.

Now I am not an engineer, but it seems that if you were to simply brace the side struts against each other at the arena roof level you would be able to take off the top.

Perhaps a civil engineer who knows the structure could contribute here.

Bottom line, stop the stadium expansion talk at Lansdowne, by hanging on to it you end up killing the park. For it is not just the stadium, it is the development tied to it that is the real problem, and the fact such a large structure for public events is no longer valid at the site.

Go back to smaller scale and keep the park 100% public.

[waterloowarrior]

http://ottawa.ca/cgi-bin/pressco.pl?&Elist=16125&lang=en

The design competition was anonymous. With the jury verdict rendered, all five teams can now be formally given credit for their designs. The five teams taking part in the design competition are:

Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates – Cambridge, Massachusetts – Design A
Michael Van Valkenburgh – Principal, Team Leader
Partnered with: Greenberg Consultants, Shim-Sutcliffe Architects, Harboe Architects, MMM Group (Ottawa), Uhlir Consulting, James Carpenter Design Associates, Applied Ecological Services, Golder Associates (Ottawa office)

Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg – Vancouver, British Columbia – Design B
Greg Smallberg – Principal in Charge, Team Leader
Partnered with: Julian Smith & Associates (Ottawa), Stantec Engineers (Ottawa office), Jill Anholt Studio

The SWA Group – Sausalito, California – Design C
Cinda Gilliland – Principal, Team Leader
Partnered with: Corush Sunderland Wright Ltd. (Ottawa), The ARCOP Group, J.L. Richards & Associates (Ottawa), WESA (Ottawa), BuildGreen Solutions, CMS Collaboratie Inc., ETM Associates LLC, PHA Lighting Design, Ned Kahn

Williams, Asselin, Ackaoui & Associates Inc. (WAA) – Montreal, Quebec – Design D
Malaka Ackaoui – Partner, Team Leader
Partnered with: Éclairage Public Inc., Michel Dallaire Design Industriel Inc., Les Architectes FABG, Vinci Consultants, Linda Covit

West 8 Urban Design & Landscape Architecture – Toronto, Ontario – Design E
Adriaan Geuze – Principal, Design Director
Partnered with: Robertson Martin Architects Inc., The Municipal Infrastructure Group (TMIG), Halsall Associates (Ottawa office)

[phil235]

Originally Posted by jemartin

More bait and switch. They know the retail will fail. This is about condos.

As they fail, convert them.

Who knows the retail will fail? The independent firm that conducted a peer review of the initial retail study? It's quite amazing how wide the conspiracy reaches.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by blackjagger

Still more plausible then $300,000 to do a $3 million demo job or landscaping an acre of Asphalt for $200,000.

Don't take my word for it.

Get en estimate, I have, for a non-profit and a willing expert who wishes to support the project. I never said it was market price.

As for removing asphalt? At market price?

One acre is roughly 200 feet by 220 feet.

How much do you think it costs for a backhoe, a dump truck and three or four guys and a cutter, and how long do you think it would take them to cut it, lift it and excavate to 2 feet?

A day, two tops. Figure it out or call around.

Then call around for soil and sod and get a price per yard.

Now add roughly 30 trees. Call around, get a price for say 3" by 8', installed.

It ain't rocket science.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by phil235

Who knows the retail will fail? The independent firm that conducted a peer review of the initial retail study? It's quite amazing how wide the conspiracy reaches.

No conspiracy, but lets be serious, Rideau Shopping Centre, South Keys and Billings all within roughly 5km and all on rapid transit and much easier access.

[waterloowarrior]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/06/09/park-design.html

Lansdowne bid loss angers design firm
Last Updated: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 | 12:01 PM ET Comments6Recommend8
CBC News


One of the design firms that lost its bid to design Lansdowne Park's green space is angry about the way the competition was held, and about the way they found out they had lost.

On Tuesday a design jury announced that the winning entry was submitted by the Vancouver firm, Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg.

However the competing design companies had already got word of the decision the same way the public did, through a leak to a newspaper.

"It's insulting. I'm extremely angry, because you don't do this. Ethically, I think it's unacceptable. I feel the city had no respect for the professionals they asked to compete," said Malaka Ackaoui, of the Montreal company WAA (Williams, Asselin and Ackaoui).

She said it's just another example of what the competition process was like.

"It's not a fair process. In the midst of the competition they called us to go and have a meeting, [and they had] a plan that changed some of the rules of the game," she said.

The chair of the design jury confirmed that the city did change the specifications during the competition.

George Dark said it was to better incorporate the green space with the updated commercial component.

In a design competition, Dark said, change is the name of the game.

"It's very hard to lose. Everyone had the same amount of information. Everyone was allowed to ask the same questions," he said.

The city is paying the losing companies $75,000 for their work but that doesn't satisfy Ackaoui.

"I probably will never do another competition with the City of Ottawa," she said.

The final design will have to be approved by city council, the National Capital Commission and Parks Canada.

City councillors are expected to vote on both the urban park design and Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group's proposal for the new stadium and commercial complex at the end of June.

[c_speed3108]

The next to come back is regarding traffic study peer review the city ordered up:

Core can handle increased most increased Lansdowne traffic: study

By Neco Cockburn, The Ottawa Citizen June 9, 2010 12:03 PM B


OTTAWA — The city's transportation systems can handle regular traffic to a redeveloped Lansdowne Park but rush hours and Saturdays could be a problem, according to a study released Wednesday.

The study found that access from the site to Queen Elizabeth Drive is desirable. The city has negotiated an agreement with the National Capital Commission for a special event shuttle pilot project that would allow limited use of the Queen Elizabeth Driveway, according to a presentation that's to be made to council.

The city has also secured off-site parking agreements.

The study found that existing transit service could accommodate the proposed development and that there's enough on-site parking space to support the planned commercial and residential development.

The study suggests four vehicle access points to the site in order to make on-site parking possible: two each from Bank Street and Queen Elizabeth Drive.

Pedestrian and bicycle connections, secure bike parking and support for bike rentals are also suggested, as well as enough pedestrian gathering areas along Bank Street where pedestrians can safely enter and leave the site.

The study calls for 1,100 underground and 135 surface parking spaces for the day-to-day activities at the site, which is what the plans have long called for.

It also suggests additional self-contained parking for residential development.

McCormick Rankin Corporation carried out the transportation impact and assessment study and transportation demand management plan.

Fehr and Peers Transportation Consultants from San Diego, California and DKS Associates from Tampa, Florida, were retained for a peer review of both transportation study findings.

The transportation study found that the impact of special events would depend on the events' size.

With 10,000 people, most intersections would operate fine, parking would be accommodated on-site and on nearby streets, and there would need to be increased frequency on regular bus routes in order to meet demand, the study found.

With events involving 25,000 people (estimated to take place 10 to 15 times per year), transit would operate on special direct routes from park-and-ride lots and there would need to be increased frequency on regular routes, the study suggests.

Off-site parking with frequent shuttles from the Carleton University and Confederation Heights areas, along with parking restrictions meant to improve Bank Street intersections, are also recommended.

The consultants say that with infrequent events involving 40,000 people, almost all people arriving by car would reach Lansdowne by shuttle from off-site parking. There would be no on-site parking and only on-street parking available. Bank Street and Queen Elizabeth Drive would be closed around Lansdowne, and traffic police officers would help direct vehicles at key intersections.

With those infrequent large events, about 100 to 120 vehicles per hour in each direction would be expected on Bank Street, which works out to two new vehicles per minute, according to the presentation.

Queen Elizabeth Drive would see 20 to 25 vehicles in each direction, which works out to one new vehicle every two to three minutes.

Transit and cycling should be encouraged, the study found. So would be including the cost of transit fares in event ticket prices.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Co...c+study/3131719/story.html#ixzz0qNC4hZdI

[K-133]

"I probably will never do another competition with the City of Ottawa," she said.

Its playoff season, and as they say - if you're not a poor loser, then you're just a loser.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Holy cow what a pile of yo know what from Kent Kirkpatrick.

$38M of profit from football over 30 years.

$30M in profit from hockey over 30 years.

$3.8M saved per year from not maintaining Lansdowne. Gimme a break. The park is over budget by $650,000.00 in 2009 with $2.5M in compensation.

This is getting criminal the amount of misinformation being put out there.

Take down the stadium.

End of problem.

So let me get this straight. You are complaining about misinformation, but in the same post suggest that Lansdowne makes money without including the capital costs? Or do you also doubt the study that said the capital budget at Lansdowne has been too low and major capital upgrades are required to keep it viable?

I only wish I had the ability to so easily dismiss any expert report that doesn't align with my personal views. Life would be much simpler that way.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by jemartin

No conspiracy, but lets be serious, Rideau Shopping Centre, South Keys and Billings all within roughly 5km and all on rapid transit and much easier access.

I'll stick with the independent experts' views, thanks.