Lansdowne Park Redevelopment Phase 1 | Completed

[AuxTown]

Like I have said.

People want Lansdowne to be developed.

Now it is time for a new poll with the two alternatives.

The Conservancy will win majority support.

People are in favor of change for sure, but not at the current price.

Sure, you can organize a poll that has 90% of the population apparently "choosing" your proposal. The poll that seemed to spark this whole debate does not say what you say it does. The question is worded in a way to scare people who aren't fully informed of the issues and basically force them to choose the "delay the project" option and it makes your idea look so great that a significant proportion will choose the conservancy. The problem with this is that people aren't necessarily 100% or even 50% informed on the financial details of the plan or even the fact that this will remain a "meeting place" and a great public venue regardless of who owns it.

What would be better would be if we split the Ottawa region into geographical districts and people in each district would vote for a representattive. This representative would be paid full-time to educate themselves on complex city building plans like Lansdowne Live so that they can make an informed decision about what is best for their constituents and the city as a whole. Sound familiar? I believe this vote already happened. Get on with it already!

[Umpaidh]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I was wondering about the start up timing - does mid-2011 look fairly firm? Has there been anything to indicate how the work will be staged? In particular I have been assuming that the residential component will need to be phased in.

Here is the most current project schedule. From June 17, 2010. looks like they will be starting with the Horticulture building movement and the stadium redevelopment.

In regards to the Art Gallery, I guess I see it as a much more prominent place in the city, and with the square footage to show their collection (which includes A.Y. Jackson, Emily Carr, Jack Shadbolt, Paul-Émile Borduas, Rita Letendre, and Ghitta Caiserman). I'm not saying that it will be drawing tens of thousands of people more than today, but I think it will bring in many more people than currently go to it, mainly because most people don't know it exists, and most of its art isn't on display.

So I guess I'm just happy they are moving the art gallery out of where it is right now, to somewhere it can be seen and show its works, haha!

[danny the dog]

I just find it funny that as Mr. Martin's arguments are systematically destroyed and revealed for being just plain deceptive, he gradually reverts to childish challenges, as if we are in grade 7 and some kids needs to make himself feel big.

Just something that keeps coming to mind whenever we refer to "The Conservancy", it always reminds me of The Covenant from Halo, but that's just a tangent and possibly evidence that I play a bit too many video games.

[jchamoun79]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Bottom line? Why on earth are people fighting to support privatization of public space?

Because most people aren't selfish, obstructionist ideologues?

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Like I said earlier, look up P3.

Time to educate yourself.

In the meantime the challenge is still there for anyone who can accurately describe the developer revenue model.

Public–private partnership (PPP) describes a government service or private business venture which is funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private sector companies. These schemes are sometimes referred to as PPP, P3 or P3.

That is EXACTLY what is going on with the Lansdowne Live project.

The revenue model has been clearly stated from the start of this whole debate; the city leases the land to the developers and the city keeps the profits generated from their property. A Hell of a better deal than what Lansdowne is right now.

Originally Posted by danny the dog

I just find it funny that as Mr. Martin's arguments are systematically destroyed and revealed for being just plain deceptive, he gradually reverts to childish challenges, as if we are in grade 7 and some kids needs to make himself feel big.

He's childish and delusional. I have a feeling he'll be fighting this even after it's completed.

[jemartin]

In the meantime the challenge is still out there for anyone who can accurately
describe the developer financial model with accurate numbers.

New challenge. Can anyone show a final cost to the taxpayer of the developer proposal?

Any takers?

[Admiral Nelson]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Thank God for Superior Court.

Save you all from yourselves!

Not a single one among you can even explain the developer financial model.

Originally Posted by jemartin

Like I said earlier, look up P3.

Time to educate yourself.

In the meantime the challenge is still there for anyone who can accurately describe the developer revenue model.

Originally Posted by jemartin

In the meantime the challenge is still out there for anyone who can accurately
describe the developer financial model with accurate numbers.

New challenge. Can anyone show a final cost to the taxpayer of the developer proposal?

Any takers?

As an observer to this debate, I can't help but notice that you seem to insist that everyone else play by your rules. Although they usually answer your questions, you ignore valid points that you find inconvenient.

[jemartin]

In the meantime the challenge is still out there for anyone who can accurately
describe the developer financial model with accurate numbers.

New challenge. Can anyone show a final cost to the taxpayer of the developer proposal?

Any takers?

[Aylmer]

Does anyone know what happened to Franky?

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by jemartin

In the meantime the challenge is still out there for anyone who can accurately
describe the developer financial model with accurate numbers.

You're priceless, you know that? I answer your question, so now you change it into something that can't be found, just like in your proposal I might add.

New challenge. Can anyone show a final cost to the taxpayer of the developer proposal?

Any takers?

Seriously? Have you not been paying attention and reading? The cost to the taxpayer has been available to the public from the start.

However, since you clearly have no memory, I shall enlighten you:

Step 1. Open Internet Explorer or Firefox.
Step 2. Go to www.google.ca
Step 3. Type "Lansdowne Live, cost to taxpayers".
Step 4. Get the information you requested.

Also, just for some references:

Chiarelli said if council didn't move forward with plans to redevelop Lansdowne, the city would continue to spend $55 million of taxpayers' money over the next 10 years to keep things exactly as they are now: "a pile of rubble with a hole in the south-side stands."

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loca...hub=OttawaHome

[jemartin]

In the meantime the challenge is still out there for anyone who can accurately
describe the developer financial model with accurate numbers.

New challenge. Can anyone show a final cost to the taxpayer of the developer proposal?

Any educated takers?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Does anyone know what happened to Franky?

Funny, I just wondered about that yesterday. I kind of miss his unique perspective. Perhaps off on an extensive world tour?

[Umpaidh]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Order of magnitude is what both bids have presented...

Actually no, it is not. Do some research on estimate classes, you will see the difference.

And please, stop spamming the board with the same childish question over and over again (especially how you answer it in your first copy, where you say it will be difficult to find a final cost, since the project is not complete yet).

You have posted it five times, which to me constitutes spamming/trolling, and if I remember correctly, you have been told before that that type of action is not tolerated.

[K-133]

Originally Posted by jemartin

If you think going to court is somehow not part of a free society then I am not sure what country you live in.

The People's Republic of The Glebe? Let us hold a referendum! Errrr...you're right, why estrange ourselves when we can just make it painful for everyone else in court...

Originally Posted by jemartin

2) The poll shows doubt about the proposal. Not massive opposition, but skepticism and uncertainty.
People are not convinced. They are not in support.

The typical numbers in any change is as follows:

-1- 70% are on the fence or undecided
-2- 20% strongly support the change
-3- 10% strongly oppose the change, and are typically the loudest most prevalent group. i.e. Appearing to be bigger than they really are.

The best practice in change management is actually to ignore the 10%, and for the 20% to promote all that is good about the bid. i.e. Do not engage the group resistant to change.

Therefore, they should move forward.

[ThaLoveDocta]

Originally Posted by K-133

The People's Republic of The Glebe?

Haha! The Glebe way or the Highway?

Originally Posted by jemartin

In the meantime the challenge is still out there for anyone who can accurately
describe the developer financial model with accurate numbers.

New challenge. Can anyone show a final cost to the taxpayer of the developer proposal?

Any educated takers?

Progress costs money...

I would like to hear from the non-Glebites, who plan to regularly use the 'conservancy' park if completed as per your proposal. You have given the impression that theres is a strong contingent of these folks. Are they real?

It's all fine and good for a neighbourhood to want to have a nice park, but Landsdowne is a city asset, not solely a Glebe/Ottawa South park. It will better serve the city at large as a revitalized developed project.

Please also try and remember not everyone who supports developers is a developer...

[davidreevely]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Nik Nanos Poll on Lansdowne
From David Reevely article:

This poll had a sample size of 360 people, which means it's not as precise as a 1,000-person poll. But that might not matter overmuch either, if you get results like this:

77 per cent saying reject or postpone Lansdowne Live,
18 per cent saying go ahead with it,
3 per cent saying leave Lansdowne as it is.

Honestly, if you're opposed to Lansdowne Live, the Nanos poll provides you what you're looking for in a poll. Here's the argument,
buttressed by what Nik Nanos himself told city council:

1) Lansdowne Live is a huge and important move with a unique piece of land. Morally, moving ahead with it demands significant public support.

2) The poll shows doubt about the proposal. Not massive opposition, but skepticism and uncertainty.
People are not convinced. They are not in support.

Therefore

3) We should not move ahead.

This is a profoundly dishonest version of what I wrote. It combines commentary on two polls -- one reliable but inconclusive, one unreliable and indicating opposition to the Lansdowne plan -- as if it were all about one poll.

The post quoted above just pollutes the debate.

[jemartin]

Actually it is copied directly from what you wrote.

Both polls had the same results, 18% in favor of LL.

The main points are the comments from Nik Nanos to Council:

People are not convinced. They are not in support.

Therefore

3) We should not move ahead.

Again quoted directly from your article.

Please feel free to post the entire article.

Someone turning up the heat at the Citizen?

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by ThaLoveDocta

Haha! The Glebe way or the Highway?



Progress costs money...

I would like to hear from the non-Glebites, who plan to regularly use the 'conservancy' park if completed as per your proposal. You have given the impression that theres is a strong contingent of these folks. Are they real?

It's all fine and good for a neighbourhood to want to have a nice park, but Landsdowne is a city asset, not solely a Glebe/Ottawa South park. It will better serve the city at large as a revitalized developed project.

Please also try and remember not everyone who supports developers is a developer...

You are confusing development with developer.

The Conservancy develops the park, adds retail, restuarants, boutiques, but does so in a heritage respectful manner and keeps the park 100% public.

Yes development costs money, only the Conservancy is a cities best friend.

Less money spent, world class stadium by one of the foremost stadium design firms in the world, a $6.4M heritage restoration on the Horticulture building, an outdoor Concert Shell, Olympic size pool with pavilion, water elements for people to enjoy and stay cool in the summer, tree shaded parking, preservation of Sylvia Holden Park and all site revenue back to the taxpayer.

The advantage to the taxpayer is $300M over the 30 year term and continuing afterwards. This does not include the increased tourism by people who will come to a public space restored in this fashion.

In human scale, less traffic with 1/5th the density, the same number of parking spots as the sole source proposal, supporting local business (including a full farmers market not a token market) and not supporting conglomerates.

Thankfully the numbers can be viewed publicly, the Conservancy is open and transparent and working to make Lansdowne a truly unique experience.

[davidreevely]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Actually it is copied directly from what you wrote.

Both polls had the same results, 18% in favor of LL.

The main points are the comments from Nik Nanos to Council:

People are not convinced. They are not in support.

Therefore

3) We should not move ahead.

Again quoted directly from your article.

Please feel free to post the entire article.

Someone turning up the heat at the Citizen?

Nobody's turning up the heat at the Citizen. I just don't like being lied about in public. The polls didn't say the same thing.

Here's a link to the full post: http://communities.canada.com/ottawa...wne-polls.aspx

[jemartin]

Lets get serious. I quoted a story from what you wrote.

Demonstrate to me the quotations to Nik Nanos were inaccurate.

Demonstrate that both polls did not indicate 18% support for LL.

You can't.

All accurate and from your article. This time however I will add your commentary
after the Nik Nanos recommendation to reject the LL proposal:

Honestly, if you're opposed to Lansdowne Live, the Nanos poll provides you what you're looking for in a poll. Here's the argument, buttressed by what Nik Nanos himself told city council:

1) Lansdowne Live is a huge and important move with a unique piece of land. Morally, moving ahead with it demands significant public support.

2) The poll shows doubt about the proposal. Not massive opposition, but skepticism and uncertainty. People are not convinced. They are not in support.

Therefore

3) We should not move ahead.

"You don't need five polls to make that point. One good one's enough". Direct quotation David Reevely.


That it does not jibe with the inner politics at the Citizen is something you
will have to deal with.

Resorting to name calling I thought was beneath you.