Lansdowne Park Redevelopment Phase 1 | Completed

[kevinbottawa]

Originally Posted by JFFournier

I'd love to see this happen. I enjoy basketball, but not to the point that I'd got to Kanata to see it. At Lansdowne after work some time, or on weekends? No problem.

My wife and I were courtside for the last game at CTC. They came back after being down by 12. It was very entertaining and the crowd was into it. Even my wife who doesn't really watch basketball was yelling. I had more fun than I thought I would. It would be nice to have them at Lansdowne. I'll definitely go back.

[BlueJay]

I propose Jean Martin Way!

[JackBauer24]

Not Alec's Dad's Blvd? I think it has a nice ring to it.

Originally Posted by BlueJay

I propose Jean Martin Way!

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Based on the site plan there is also Aberdeen Way and Lansdowne Way (the two main entrance roads from Bank)... So Exhibition and Marché may be some of the new short interior lanes?

I suspect these might be the new names for these streets.

There already is an Aberdeen St. off Preston, and a Lansdowne Rd. in Rockcliffe, so they may have decided to go for new names instead.

[alecz_dad]

I'm sure he'd be pleased... But I rather doubt OSEG will go for it. I don't think I'm on their party list.

Originally Posted by JackBauer24

Not Alec's Dad's Blvd? I think it has a nice ring to it.

[alecz_dad]

I'm guessing that "Billionaires' Folly Avenue" and "Banal to Canal Alley" won't garner many votes.
...Hard to translate too.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Why not name them for Ottawa sports figures; Frank Clair maybe . Think one of the streets should be named for the Aberdeen Pavilion. Something to commemorate our 1902 win of the Stanley Cup in the AP?

Exhibition and Marché (a botched attempt to make the French population happy?) are terrible names.

[alecz_dad]

More than the names themselves, I'm more curious about the characterization on the City's website of the streets at Lansdowne as being "private roadways."

I know, I know, it's presumably because they're inside of the Lansdowne site. But it does make me wonder about the "publicness" of the Lansdowne "urban village." Wasn't the proponents' chatter that this was opening Lansdowne back up to the public, and creating a public gathering place?

Yet, clearly it will be a carefully-controlled sort of publicness. No doubt the public will be welcome as long as they come with money in their pockets, are not young people or panhandlers hanging around spooking the lovely suburban folks enticed in for a game, or charity street campaigners or Buy Nothing Day marchers reminding shoppers of the outside world.

But really, this is yet another indication that despite the proponents' protestations that Lansdowne won't be a mall, it will much more in common with a shopping centre than a genuine shopping district like the Market or Bank Street high-street.

Also, it's still not clear what governance model will be used at Lansdowne. Early on we heard that the public interest in the private management of the Lansdowne would be overseen by a Municipal Services Corporation, which would have members of Council (maybe even the great unwashed public).
But the last I can recall it sounded as though the MSC was quietly being shelved, and it's unclear what public oversight there will be.

I'm not sure that the other recent example of a PPP in Ottawa, the Ernst & Young Centre, bodes well as far as private developers' respect for their responsibility to the public good. The last that I can recall the EYC -- which by utter coincidence was built by Shenkman Corp to replace the trade show space lost at Lansdowne -- still had not installed drinking fountains in its facility, requiring patrons to choose between tepid tap water and bottled water.
This despite the City's push to eliminate bottled water use from its facilities, and the fact that you certainly couldn't build a new arena or library without public drinking fountains.

Just saying.

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Lansdowne interior street names proposed: Exhibition Way and Marché Way. Comments due March 18th.

http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/accountability-and-transparency/public-meetings-and-notices/notices

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

More than the names themselves, I'm more curious about the characterization on the City's website of the streets at Lansdowne as being "private roadways."

I know, I know, it's presumably because they're inside of the Lansdowne site. But it does make me wonder about the "publicness" of the Lansdowne "urban village." Wasn't the proponents' chatter that this was opening Lansdowne back up to the public, and creating a public gathering place?

Yet, clearly it will be a carefully-controlled sort of publicness. No doubt the public will be welcome as long as they come with money in their pockets, are not young people or panhandlers hanging around spooking the lovely suburban folks enticed in for a game, or charity street campaigners or Buy Nothing Day marchers reminding shoppers of the outside world.

.

It makes sense that you would have a private lane for an interior street like this since the legal framework around streets is pretty complex and a private lane gives you more flexibility for various activities around the stadium. Typically a private road would be named "Exhibition Private" instead of "Exhibition Lane" so to me the names indicate public access.

It's a good question though about whether there will be restrictions on public access... e.g. what if there was protest against one of the new restaurants for serving foie gras or having illegal working practices...Would the protesters be kicked out of the development and potentially be banned from the premises?

[phil235]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

It's a good question though about whether there will be restrictions on public access... e.g. what if there was protest against one of the new restaurants for serving foie gras or having illegal working practices...Would the protesters be kicked out of the development and potentially be banned from the premises?

I find it highly unlikely that there is any intent to ban or exclude people from these areas. I don't suspect that there is anything of substance to support that suggestion.

Even if there were the intent, I don't think that it is possible from a legal perspective. Courts have generally recognized the right of individuals to protest (at least in the union context) even in quasi-public spaces like malls. I don't think that there is any doubt that the Lansdowne streets would be accorded similar treatment, so this concern doesn't strike me as particularly legitimate.

In any event, the whole design is intended to facilitate the flow of people through the site. Unless anyone has an actual basis for worrying about people being barred from entry, this seems like a pretty academic argument.

[EdFromOttawa]

City just uploaded a metric ton of new pictures to their lansdowne park photostream thing.

On a related note I f****ng hate Flickr and hate how I can no longer tell when each picture was taken (they seem to be totally out of order, no matter when they were updated)....No idea why they ditched the old (better) system of posting pictures by date in favour of this....

[McC]

I'm a little confused about what a private road on city property would be, how is there such a thing? doesn't a Private have to be on private property, by definition? Are they part of the lease?

[kevinbottawa]

Originally Posted by edfromottawa

city just uploaded a metric ton of new pictures to their lansdowne park photostream thing.

On a related note i f****ng hate flickr and hate how i can no longer tell when each picture was taken (they seem to be totally out of order, no matter when they were updated)....no idea why they ditched the old (better) system of posting pictures by date in favour of this....

+1

[kwoldtimer]

Questions can be directed to the individual noted below. The application is for 1015 Bank Street. This may relate only to the naming of the private streets, not to their legal status, I don't know.

Paul Blanchett
Project Coordinator/Building Code Services
City of Ottawa
101 Centrepointe Drive, 3rd floor
Nepean ON K2G 5K7
613-580-2424, ext. 41421
Fax: 613-580-2688
E-mail: [email protected]

[c_speed3108]

I suspect they are private roads since OSEG has to pay for the maintenance on them. Also there is parking garages below.

If it was a public road city taxes would have to directly pay for all this rather than OSEG which has a lease on the site and therefore should.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by phil235

I find it highly unlikely that there is any intent to ban or exclude people from these areas. I don't suspect that there is anything of substance to support that suggestion.

Even if there were the intent, I don't think that it is possible from a legal perspective. Courts have generally recognized the right of individuals to protest (at least in the union context) even in quasi-public spaces like malls. I don't think that there is any doubt that the Lansdowne streets would be accorded similar treatment, so this concern doesn't strike me as particularly legitimate.

In any event, the whole design is intended to facilitate the flow of people through the site. Unless anyone has an actual basis for worrying about people being barred from entry, this seems like a pretty academic argument.

But I believe during those CANSEC protests at Lansdowne protesters were barred from City property and kept out by gates/security. I don't think there is anything nefarious about having a private street... it makes sense for the site. I think it will just be interesting to see if the same attitude toward loitering/panhandling/pamphleteers at malls will be applied to the streets of Lansdowne.

[McC]

I get the "why" (and I think you have it right about that c_speed), it's more the "how" that's odd to me; but I guess they must be included in the lease, along with the development land, which would make them "private" for the duration of the lease, at which point they would revert to being public rights of way... Presumably the lease would have to be quite explicit about the easement on these "privates" including whether the lessor has the right to restrict access, e.g., to protestors, as mentioned above. (this is not an idle point, or concern trolling, e.g., I think of how the Rideau Centre's de facto role as a right of way connecting MacKenzie King /Transitway to Rideau Street is frequently disrupted by Mall Security's interventions, whereas there's no such thing as loitering on a public street, and the standard for what constitutes an unwanted public disturbance that would warrant police intervention is much higher than on private property). Liability would also be another issue that would have to be explicitly treated... Billable hours of fun for lawyers!

[phil235]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

But I believe during those CANSEC protests at Lansdowne protesters were barred from City property and kept out by gates/security. I don't think there is anything nefarious about having a private street... it makes sense for the site. I think it will just be interesting to see if the same attitude toward loitering/panhandling/pamphleteers at malls will be applied to the streets of Lansdowne.

I wasn't really thinking of the CANSEC protests. That would be a slightly different case though, as arguably the security concerns would outweigh the public rights of assembly and expression. Generally speaking, the same concerns wouldn't apply to pamphleteers or panhandlers, so I don't think they could be barred unless there was a specific security issue.

I don't have a problem with a private street for the purpose of allocating maintenance costs, but I would have a problem if it entailed the right to control access to the site. However, I've never seen anything to indicate that is contemplated.

[waterloowarrior]

There are a variety of reasons why you'd want to keep the internal driveways as "private roads" instead of public. There is a variety of legislation and standards that apply to official "public roads" that don't apply to private roads. For example, there are minimum maintenance standards under which the municipality could get sued for snow clearing etc if there is an accident. A public road would split the property into multiple parcels while a private road would not. Tweaking the speed limit and other modifications can be done without having to have a by-law passed by Council.

Making the internal roadways an official private street (instead of just driveways like the current situation) also allows for the creation of new addresses on the street, which is better for businesses and emergency services. Instead of 1015 Bank Unit 250, your business address is 250 Exhibition Way.

Another Ottawa example would be Tunney's Pasture... owned by the government, but all the roads are private. With multiple buildings, internal roads, and offices it makes sense to have official names and addresses, and the longer the "driveway" the more appropriate that it is named for navigation purposes. The internal streets of UofO and Carleton, the airport, and military bases are all "private roads."

[phil235]

Originally Posted by McC

I get the "why" (and I think you have it right about that c_speed), it's more the "how" that's odd to me; but I guess they must be included in the lease, along with the development land, which would make them "private" for the duration of the lease, at which point they would revert to being public rights of way... Presumably the lease would have to be quite explicit about the easement on these "privates" including whether the lessor has the right to restrict access, e.g., to protestors, as mentioned above. (this is not an idle point, or concern trolling, e.g., I think of how the Rideau Centre's de facto role as a right of way connecting MacKenzie King /Transitway to Rideau Street is frequently disrupted by Mall Security's interventions, whereas there's no such thing as loitering on a public street, and the standard for what constitutes an unwanted public disturbance that would warrant police intervention is much higher than on private property). Liability would also be another issue that would have to be explicitly treated... Billable hours of fun for lawyers!

I would have thought all of the legal agreements are finalized by now. Looking quickly, I couldn't see anything specific about the streets beyond design standards, a cost-sharing agreement for maintenance and some references to them being "public realm". If they are part of the retail lease, as it appears they are, then there would need to be some sort of explicit agreement regarding their use to ensure public access. I didn't see that anywhere.

In the case of the Rideau Centre, my understanding is that there is a formal easement ensuring public access between Rideau and the Mackenzie King bridge.

[rocketphish]

Glebe residents want parking restrictions near Lansdowne; city promises more monitoring

By Michael Woods, OTTAWA CITIZEN March 5, 2014 7:22 PM

OTTAWA — Glebe residents are worried that without new parking restrictions in place near Lansdowne Park, their streets will become a congestion nightmare when the revitalized former fairground reopens this summer.

Brian Mitchell of the Glebe Community Association told a transportation committee meeting on Wednesday that the city’s plans to continue monitoring traffic patterns aren’t enough; there need to be proactive measures taken before Lansdowne opens so surrounding streets don’t become parking lots.

“It doesn’t take monitoring to know that there already is a problem,” said Mitchell. “Adding more cars into the mix is going to cause a real problem for us.”

The already-busy area surrounding Lansdowne will soon see thousands more people per day flocking to the more than 400,000 square feet of retail space.

In a presentation, Mitchell asked that residents living two to three blocks from Lansdowne be allowed to use the city’s guest parking permit system, and that on-street parking be reduced from three hours to one. He said residents are worried that people heading to the movies or shopping will search nearby streets to park for free in the evenings instead of parking in the 1,300-space underground garage.

“Anyone living on a narrow residential road that suddenly has a 10-screen Cineplex placed near their street, together with destination grocery and sporting goods stores, is going to be concerned about the traffic impact,” he said.

He also asked that access to Holmwood Avenue, which runs along the north side of Lansdowne, be closed from Bank Street to discourage cut-through and parking-seeking traffic. He said those streets are already at 85 per cent parking capacity based on the city’s own study. And for big events at Lansdowne, people are prepared to park further away — six to eight blocks, he said.

However, the city is still focused on doing more monitoring in the area. City staff also pointed out that the council-approved transportation strategy for Lansdowne is based on an available parking supply in the Glebe, especially for special events such as Redblacks football games.

“If we start reducing that parking supply and introduce parking restrictions ... it is in fact undermining the approvals that council already gave,” John Smit, city manager of urban development review, told the committee.

City traffic manager Phil Landry said there’s no problem with changing the parking regulations from Monday to Friday, 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., because the traffic plan assumes all day-to-day traffic can be accommodated on site.

But evenings and weekends are a different story.

“Because (guest parking passes) can be used 24 hours a day, it potentially impacts the parking that’s been approved by council that’s required for the site,” he said. “For anything in the evenings or on weekends, we can’t do anything at this point. We have to monitor to see what the usage is and what the impacts are.”

He said the city already has parking data and is collecting more. As time goes on, city staff will be able to see what parking impact the new Lansdowne is having on the surrounding neighbourhood.

“It’s come out that we should be more proactive than reactive, but we’ve had experiences in the past where we’ve done proactive things and then we’ve been asked to pull those things back,” he said. Taking measures such as restricting access to Holmwood “have a big impact,” he said.

The city is hoping that people who might decide to drive to Lansdowne initially will later opt to take public transit or, for big events, planned shuttles from park-and-rides.

A newly-formed committee made up of city staff, community representatives and others will oversee the continued monitoring of transportation issues, including how effectively the city is encouraging use of sustainable transportation options.

[email protected]
twitter.com/michaelrwoods

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ottawa...ctions+near+Lansdowne/9583396/story.html