Lansdowne Park Redevelopment Phase 1 | Completed

[lrt's friend]

It seems to me that kind of development being added at Lansdowne is already happening elsewhere along Bank Street. I am talking about the retail/residential/commercial components and is not contrary to the type of development intended for a main street. We should not mix up the stadium in this because the stadium in some form has existed there for over 100 years. The fact that the stadium is not located on rapid transit talks more about the failings of the transit plan than anything else. Remember the stadium predates the transit plan by almost 100 years. Just because it is ideal to place a stadium on rapid transit, should not be an excuse for wasting millions of dollars to accomplish this.

[Dado]

It's been three years since Lansdowne Live! was first presented, and a little more than that since the design competition had been halted. This was done since the CFL franchise was allegedly on a tight timeline - yet three years on there is no indication that we in danger of losing it. So the entire premise for short circuiting the design competition has proved to be faulty.

Around the same time, we as a city approved an enormous waste of resources on building a bus tunnel and trench at Baseline that required modifications to existing plans for Centrepointe. We are now committed to blowing $200M on a last gasp building frenzy for a transit technology that is to be displaced. The current bus system does not need this trench and a light rail system would need it even less. Councillor Rick Chiarelli, who has been one of Lansdowne Live!'s biggest cheerleaders, was also at the forefront of pushing this bus trench.

If anyone wants to know why we don't have the funds for both a proper Lansdowne plan and a stadium at Bayview or Lebreton or Hurdman, here's why:



Heck, we could have put the stadium at Centrepointe and at least got our money's worth out of this trench and maybe promoted some more healthier development at Centrepointe. As a transit terminal it would have the facilities to handle large volumes of riders at once. For the car-loving set, the location is decently served by large arterial roads with multiple access possibilities. Any parking facilities would be of use during the week as a Park & Ride and for college student parking as well as for the nearby municipal offices.

[JFFournier]

Originally Posted by Dado

It's been three years since Lansdowne Live! was first presented, and a little more than that since the design competition had been halted. This was done since the CFL franchise was allegedly on a tight timeline - yet three years on there is no indication that we in danger of losing it. So the entire premise for short circuiting the design competition has proved to be faulty.

Not so. The design competition was suspended when Eugene Melnyk also proposed building a stadium, to compare the two bids. It makes sense because if Melnyk's bid had been accepted, there would have been no need for a stadium at Lansdowne and that is an important details to be aware of.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by JFFournier

Not so. The design competition was suspended when Eugene Melnyk also proposed building a stadium, to compare the two bids. It makes sense because if Melnyk's bid had been accepted, there would have been no need for a stadium at Lansdowne and that is an important details to be aware of.

Design competition was passed in November 2007.

City Manger Kent Kirkpatrick, through deputy City Manager Nancy Schepers, "halted" the competition in May of 2008 contrary to Ottawa Option plan, the document incorporated into the regulation By-Law 50, outlining that unsolicited bids could not be accepted, much less examined, on a project that was underway.

This error has been publicly acknowledged by City Manager Kent Kirkpatrick and the starting point for the legal challenge.

SSE, under Eugene Melnyk, did not participate until late in 2008.

[JFFournier]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Design competition was passed in November 2007.

City Manger Kent Kirkpatrick, through deputy City Manager Nancy Schepers, "halted" the competition in May of 2008 contrary to Ottawa Option plan, the document incorporated into the regulation By-Law 50, outlining that unsolicited bids could not be accepted, much less examined, on a project that was underway.

This error has been publicly acknowledged by City Manager Kent Kirkpatrick and the starting point for the legal challenge.

SSE, under Eugene Melnyk, did not participate until late in 2008.

Ah, right you are! It was a while back now so what I was remembering was when OSEG made THEIR proposal official. You know, the one that they discussed with the mayor prior to the design competition suddenly becoming a necessity...

[lrt's friend]

Whether a mistake was made or not, it is spilt milk. We have a viable proposal on the table that is on the verge of being construction ready. The majority of City Council is in favour as are the majority of citizens of the city.

What are we to do? Press the reset button on this too? We are going nowhere. By doing so, we eliminate the current option entirely. Remember LRT debate and how the construction ready north-south route was simply eliminated probably for the next 20 years. So we build roads and more roads to compensate. A total waste.

As far as the 3 year time used to develop the project. Don't kid yourself. The reason why the proponents are still interested is because they understand the municipal process and they can see continuous progress towards a goal. If we try to restart, they will lose interest. Why? Because a design competition will take a couple of years (what happens we get no viable designs as happened the last time?) and then we have to restart developing the design details and as we have seen it has taken 2 or 3 years. This takes us out to 2017 or 2018 before the shovel is in the ground, instead of the 2011. Of course, if as some suggest, we move the stadium to Bayview, we get two design competitions interacting with each other. How many years will it take to get this all settled? When you start making things this complex, we may end up with another Lebreton Flats situation where nothing gets accomplished for 40 years.

Then I see a citizen group wanting to sue the city. I get very angry about this. This is my tax money. And if they win based on some faulty staff decision, the city as a whole loses. We end up with a derelict facility which has lost most of its major tenants and little momentum to fix the situation.

So the winners end up being the biggest losers. The sea of asphalt will remain in all its glory.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Whether a mistake was made or not, it is spilt milk. We have a viable proposal on the table that is on the verge of being construction ready. The majority of City Council is in favour as are the majority of citizens of the city.

What are we to do? Press the reset button on this too? We are going nowhere. By doing so, we eliminate the current option entirely. Remember LRT debate and how the construction ready north-south route was simply eliminated probably for the next 20 years. So we build roads and more roads to compensate. A total waste.

As far as the 3 year time used to develop the project. Don't kid yourself. The reason why the proponents are still interested is because they understand the municipal process and they can see continuous progress towards a goal. If we try to restart, they will lose interest. Why? Because a design competition will take a couple of years (what happens we get no viable designs as happened the last time?) and then we have to restart developing the design details and as we have seen it has taken 2 or 3 years. This takes us out to 2017 or 2018 before the shovel is in the ground, instead of the 2011. Of course, if as some suggest, we move the stadium to Bayview, we get two design competitions interacting with each other. How many years will it take to get this all settled? When you start making things this complex, we may end up with another Lebreton Flats situation where nothing gets accomplished for 40 years.

Then I see a citizen group wanting to sue the city. I get very angry about this. This is my tax money. And if they win based on some faulty staff decision, the city as a whole loses. We end up with a derelict facility which has lost most of its major tenants and little momentum to fix the situation.

It will never end this citizen group may win then there there could be another group that supports landsdown live that sue's it will be tied up in courts for the next 50 years.I am at the point i give up nothing will ever get done i just don't care any more.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Or if you attended Zoning committee's you would learn that priority is given to rapid transit centered development

Lansdowne is a political anomaly that is not being driven by planning.

We aim to change that.

Well good for you, I have more important things to attend to in life.

Originally Posted by jemartin

You are making progress

Way to take out of context and completely ignore my other valid points and proving of your assumptions irrevocably wrong.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Whether a mistake was made or not, it is spilt milk. We have a viable proposal on the table that is on the verge of being construction ready. The majority of City Council is in favour as are the majority of citizens of the city.

What are we to do? Press the reset button on this too? We are going nowhere. By doing so, we eliminate the current option entirely. Remember LRT debate and how the construction ready north-south route was simply eliminated probably for the next 20 years. So we build roads and more roads to compensate. A total waste.

As far as the 3 year time used to develop the project. Don't kid yourself. The reason why the proponents are still interested is because they understand the municipal process and they can see continuous progress towards a goal. If we try to restart, they will lose interest. Why? Because a design competition will take a couple of years (what happens we get no viable designs as happened the last time?) and then we have to restart developing the design details and as we have seen it has taken 2 or 3 years. This takes us out to 2017 or 2018 before the shovel is in the ground, instead of the 2011. Of course, if as some suggest, we move the stadium to Bayview, we get two design competitions interacting with each other. How many years will it take to get this all settled? When you start making things this complex, we may end up with another Lebreton Flats situation where nothing gets accomplished for 40 years.

Then I see a citizen group wanting to sue the city. I get very angry about this. This is my tax money. And if they win based on some faulty staff decision, the city as a whole loses. We end up with a derelict facility which has lost most of its major tenants and little momentum to fix the situation.

So the winners end up being the biggest losers. The sea of asphalt will remain in all its glory.

Totally disagree.

Bad process gets bad results.

The court action is not a lawsuit it is a Judicial Review by concerned citizens trying to save taxpayers money.

The Conservancy alternative has a 32 month construction timeline with a stadium and an 18 month timeline without the stadium.

This is not about delay on Lansdowne, it is about being responsible to the taxpayer and quality of life.

Option 2 on the Conservancy makes money from day 1 and will return $2.5M to the taxpayer every year, so the hands down winner.

For the developers 7 times the development at Bayview, which is 7 times the tax return for us.

A stadium at Bayview means waiting an extra 6 months, but on a long term investment that is time well spent to do it right and the CFL and MLS aren't going anywhere.

For Lansdowne a profitable alternative is available immediately and will arrive sooner than what the current proponents can offer and has a far superior bottom line.

[lrt's friend]

jemartin: you make it sound so simple but I guarantee it won't be. First of all, why should we override the current bid in favour of a Conservancy bid without opening it up to everybody? This is still bad process. As soon as you do this, you have to have a competition. This delays everything by a couple of years. Even if we accept the conservancy bid without a competition, you have to go through a design process like OSEG has just gone through. This produces a 2 or 3 year delay. Substantial delays are inevitable. And who is going to operate a franchise at Lansdowne or Bayview for that matter, if OSEG walks away? The Conservancy can't run a football or soccer franchise.

If we go to Bayview, how long will it take to get this all going? Not your fairyland estimate that ignores typical municipal process. How many years to design the project? Why do we assume that anybody will be interested in building a stadium there? It is simply your logic. What about concerns from Hintonburg and Mechanicsville residents? Why would they be any different from the Glebe and Ottawa South?

The fact of the matter, any major changes at this point, is going to delay everything by several years. Look at LRT, Marianne Wilkinson said a 1 year delay, Bob Chiarelli said a 3 year delay, and we are now up to a 9 year delay. You say 6 month delay. Why should I believe you? What you say is not credible.

What you are doing is simply obstructing the wishes of the majority.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

jemartin: you make it sound so simple but I guarantee it won't be. First of all, why should we override the current bid in favour of a Conservancy bid without opening it up to everybody? This is still bad process. As soon as you do this, you have to have a competition. This delays everything by a couple of years. Even if we accept the conservancy bid without a competition, you have to go through a design process like OSEG has just gone through. This produces a 2 or 3 year delay. Substantial delays are inevitable. And who is going to operate a franchise at Lansdowne or Bayview for that matter, if OSEG walks away? The Conservancy can't run a football or soccer franchise.

If we go to Bayview, how long will it take to get this all going? Not your fairyland estimate that ignores typical municipal process. How many years to design the project? Why do we assume that anybody will be interested in building a stadium there? It is simply your logic. What about concerns from Hintonburg and Mechanicsville residents? Why would they be any different from the Glebe and Ottawa South?

The fact of the matter, any major changes at this point, is going to delay everything by several years. Look at LRT, Marianne Wilkinson said a 1 year delay, Bob Chiarelli said a 3 year delay, and we are now up to a 9 year delay. You say 6 month delay. Why should I believe you? What you say is not credible.

What you are doing is simply obstructing the wishes of the majority.

I think this is going down a very slippery slope to say oseg is a bad process and it should be canned and there is a court case to stop it because it was sole sourced.Yet at least from my understanding this other group seems to be doing the same thing would it not be sole sourced since there is no open bid process.

[jemartin]

The stadium is not the issue at Lansdowne. Lansdowne Park and what is the most effective manner in which to make it a beautiful, easily accessible, and self sufficient space that is well used is the issue.

Due to the complexity of the North Stands, its obvious great use as a hockey venue and public events it needs to stay.

The new full stadium however is a different matter and it is important to separate Lansdowne Park and Stadium. Can a new stadium be built there, yes of course, but no CFL team in Ottawa's history has ever tied a team to a rights to develop. But having a full stadium there is not necessary, not economically feasible, and logistically not the best location

Stadiums are money losers for public money, that much everyone can agree upon. So if you build a stadium the least amount of public money invested the better. That being said when you have pro sports you want them well supported and a large component to a great experience is the ease of getting to and leaving a stadium. There is no doubt that Bayview is the most central and most easily accessed location and would give any new team a long term "leg up". Next to that stadium you develop, and also on space that needs it, that follows the world model of Transit Oriented Development and provides for greater return to the City and the developer by more develop able space.

To develop in the Bayview area would involve proper dialogue with the community, but you don't need to encroach on parks or public spaces. There is plenty of unused land at the site and at City Centre when the time comes for examining it. That is down the road, we are in no immediate rush to develop there and stadiums can wait.

With respect to the Conservancy bid, it is a competitive bid, it is not replacing one sole source with another. In fact we encourage any other model to challenge its revenue model.

That will be difficult since we are not in it for the money, in fact no board member receives any remuneration, all the spots are volunteer and would include the City of Ottawa, the NCC, Parks Canada, and representation from Sports, The Arts, Agriculture, Heritage, Community and Business. The entire structure will be nonprofit to return all site revenue surplus to the taxpayer.

The current developer proposal with a stadium requires a minimum of $105M of taxpayer money. The Conservancy requires none because all site revenue surplus is turned over to the taxpayer and the cost under this competitive model is about $80M less expensive, professionally costed from a world leading company. It would take 30 years to pay off. All tenders are open for bidding.

What is most impressive is the second option that makes money for the City right away. At a cost of $43M to $45M this would be 1/4 the current proposal price with an annual return to the taxpayer of $2.5M.

Lansdowne Park with just the North Stands, dynamic retail, restaurants, services, Olympic size pool, all landscaping, lower traffic levels, extra space for amateur sport would be able to deliver a .25% reduction in property tax annually. This is calculated at every 1% increase equal to $10M, we return $2.5M to the City annually (scaled upwards over time) and the park becomes beautiful and profitable.

The Conservancy is not about taking it is about giving back.

[waterloowarrior]

Not sure if was already posted, but the Site Plan Application was posted on Ottawa.ca recently

http://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/...appId=__770YH1

[waterloowarrior]

The Request for Expressions of Interest for the office/residential air rights was in yesterday's (new-look) Globe

[Radster]

I am surprised that with all this underground parking at the site, they didn't think of digging up the playing field to build a couple more levels of underground parking underneath the field? This could have added a few hundred more spots easily.

[jemartin]

[jemartin]

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

JEMARTIN, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, KEEP YOUR CRAP IN YOUR OWN THREAD. THIS IS AT LEAST THE THIRD TIME YOU'VE POSTED THE SAME CRAP IN THIS THREAD. STOP SPAMMING THIS THREAD.

[AuxTown]

jemartin, you add nothing to the conversation in this thread. This is a thread for discussing the current redevelopment project and, soon enough, we will be discussing the designs of the retail and residential components. Your plan also does not add anything to Lansdowne. In fact, it sucks the life out of Lansdowne (what little it has left) and leaves us with a Glebite park and a stadium not big enough for any professional sports teams . Oh wait, that was your plan wasn't it?

[jemartin]

Two options are being presented.

One with a stadium and one without.

It should be clear right now that I am for pro sports, but at the best possible location and not on the taxpayers bill for a 5 year franchise commitment.