LeBreton Flats 2.0 (RendezVous LeBreton) | Cancelled

[acottawa]

I think a serious flaw with both proposals (and I don't think it is necessarily the fault of the applicants but the process the NCC set up) is we have no idea the triggers that would be involved for the attractions to actually get built.

Does the French School Board have funding in place to build a school? Are they hoping to apply to the province for funding? Are they going to sit on the land until more francophones move downtown?

Does the Y have funding in place to build a Y? (Ys are closing at a fairly rapid pace, I wonder if they have the money to build a big new one. Is this a relocation of the centretown Y?

Are the Sens going to build the practice rink/abilities centre or is this supposed to be a municipal project?

What are the triggers that would lead to the Devcore attractions being built? The architect told Paul Wells "The big stuff—the arena, the bandshell—would come later." Will the moon crater stay until "later"?

We know that even a successful condo project in Ottawa only builds a tower every few years. What will the flats look like 5, 10 years from now. Are they going to clean up the site and put up temporary landscaping, or will there be a fenced off toxic site for decades?

I think the reason I am strongly in favour of the Sens proposal is they seem most ready to put a shovel into the ground. One could reasonably expect that in 10 years there will be an arena there. I'm not sure what we can expect from devcore in 10 years.

[YOWflier]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think the reason I am strongly in favour of the Sens proposal is they seem most ready to put a shovel into the ground. One could reasonably expect that in 10 years there will be an arena there. I'm not sure what we can expect from devcore in 10 years.

I'm pretty sure I read a Rendezvous statement saying "1st game in 2021". I don't know how reasonable that might be though.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by McC

I wonder if a downtown Sensplex (either here or at the Tom Brown site) would lead the City (and School Board?) to redevelop-repurpose the well-under-regulation size McNabb?

This is one of the worries that I have. I think there is something to be said for the smaller, community rinks that are, you know, right in the community. I have a soft spot for McNabb, as it is our closest rink and I've played there for years. There is no reason to redevelop it (or Brewer, which is identical, for that matter), as it serves its purpose perfectly well and, like Brewer, a good percentage of the users walk.

I've heard that the school board wants to hold onto that property, as they foresee the potential need for another downtown school in the future. Not sure about the City, but I can't imagine there would be any immediate pressure to redevelop, given that it is integrated into the community centre and the nearby skate park.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by phil235

As has been mentioned a few times, there is absolutely no need for the arena to have connected practice ice. In fact, almost no NHL arenas do. Most practice facilities are in the suburbs, near where the players live.

There is no nefarious reason for the inclusion of a Sensplex, other than it is a needed facility for the community and generally a good idea.

I don’t recall saying that the Sensplex was added for nefarious reason; I was simply echoing what I had been told by a representative of the RV plan at the open house. I asked if they had thought about teaming with the City to redevelop the Tom Brown Arena into a 4-ice-sheet Sensplex, and I was told the following: (paraphrased)

Rep: Then they would have to bus to their practices.
Me: Right now the Sens practice at the Sensplex on Maplegrove.
Rep: They hate that – they just hate it. They really wanted the practice ice to be attached to the main arena.
Me: And so the addition of a central Sensplex?
Rep: Ya, since we won’t be using the ice all the time, it might as well be available to the public.

So, there is nothing nefarious about having the practice ice attached to the main arena, it is just WAY more convenient for the team. Their locker room, with all the player’s stuff, is not a bus trip away. They could, for example, use the main ice (if available) if that is better for some purpose, but they break into smaller groups to practice. Logistically, having the practice ice right there simplifies things. I think it is a benefit for an NHL team. And, as the Rep said, they are building their practice ice there, but since they won’t be using it all the time, it might as well be rented out (for some revenue) when they don’t need it.

As for the practice ice being “near where the players live”; I think that you might find that a lot of the players will take condos in the LeBreton area. I think that the reason that some of the Senator’s players live in Kanata now is because that is where the arena and practice ice are.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by little italian

Well said! I really hope the NCC hears this last part!

They won't. In NCC-land, no one lives in Ottawa; they just visit from all over Canada to marvel at the shrubs and the arrangements of 15 clustered flagpoles.

[J.OT13]

Having your practice rink adjacent to your main facility is the new standard in the NHL. All four NHL arenas under construction or proposed (Edmonton, Detroit, Calgary and now Ottawa) all include at least one practice ice sheet incorporated in or adjacent to their NHL rink.

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Having your practice rink adjacent to your main facility is the new standard in the NHL. All four NHL arenas under construction or proposed (Edmonton, Detroit, Calgary and now Ottawa) all include at least one practice ice sheet incorporated in or adjacent to their NHL rink.

It makes sense that they would want that---not only do the players have all their gear close at hand in the lockers in the main arena, but the team's medical and trainers' facilities are there. I mean the team's medical supplies and the ice baths, the jacuzzis, and heat lamps, the massage tables, stationary bikes--the kind of things that a player coming off the practice ice might want to use to attend to muscles pulls and strains,nicks and cuts.

Ps-tonight the rivalry b-ball games between uOttawa and Carleton attracted 10,105 fans out to the CTC . Might do even better if the arena was downtown.

[Admiral Nelson]

Originally Posted by mykl

First of all, if I sound like I'm bludgeoning, it is due to the fact that I am angered by the lunacy that people supporting devcore are spewing.

You're out of line. Take a deep breath before you post, everyone else here has a filter.

I'll eat some ice cream before continuing.

You accuse me of ridiculing while in the same breath calling me peculiar

Your tastes are peculiar, as are mine. I asked you to consider the interests of others, because the crux of your three contributions below was that Devcore's attractions were invalid because you were personally disinterested in them:

Originally Posted by mykl

ridiculous attractions that I will literally never need to go to more than once. I've already been to the Ripley's aquarium in Toronto, so I'm good for like 10 years

Originally Posted by mykl

As a citizen of downtown, I truly wouldn't benefit from the long list of attractions Devcore has proposed.

Originally Posted by mykl

I only care about beer enough to drink it […] so I'm going to choose the war museum that is steeped in important history for Canada and the world.

Most recently you complain that each time you post what you call a "passionate view" of your thoughts, no one answers.

First, it's hard to find much substance amid your ridicule of everything (everything!) Devcore, including those who worked on it, and those who see value in it:

• "When the guy presenting the plan is bored out of his mind, there's a problem. Also, their slideshow was absolutely terrible."
• "If you can't put together an attractive and polished slideshow or show a little enthusiasm for your own bid, I fear how you might handle the details of the actual project."
• "They start right off the bat by fully admitting they were in way over their heads and didn't realize the scope of the project. WTF!? This is not encouraging."
• "The silent crowd gave this presentation little applause."
• "Lebreton Flats could put Niagara Falls out of business" ... "ridiculous attractions"
• "How much will admission be to this amusement park? I'll start saving now"
• "lunacy that people supporting devcore are spewing.”

Only Donald Trump would see substantive arguments there.

Other critiques are incoherent. You argue that whenever a Devcore attraction fails (for that is inevitable in your universe), “a cheap new condo gets its wings”. But when Rendezvous proposes 7,000 new condo units, they are nobly “returning the area to the people.”

Reaching a rare argument, you suggest that because Wonderland is “In the middle of fucking nowhere” and “people will gladly go wherever the fuck they have to in order to do the tourist things they want to do,” Devcore’s attractions could equally go to the CTC. It’s an absurdly simplistic take on tourism. Wonderland succeeded because of the economics of cheap land and a massive investment that drew people from across a populous region. Devcore’s smaller attractions, by contrast, would succeed precisely because they are in walking distance from Ottawa’s downtown, convenient to visitors. Proposing they go to CTC instead is not a conversation worth having.

Elsewhere you argue that “Ottawa is literally overflowing with tourism options.” Yes, we have many attractions, but many are outside the downtown area, cater largely to local residents, are minor in scope and function as insignificant tourism generators. I see scant evidence that Ottawa’s attractiveness to visitors has reached its full potential: though we have many tourists coming through, they stay only briefly.

I’m not a die-hard in this debate. There are certainly elements of Rendezvous’ proposal I like more—they’re just not enough to persuade me. However, unlike you, I don’t have a crystal ball. I can’t say definitively that either proposal is sure to be executed better – but on balance I prefer the array of attractions proposed by Devcore, and I’m not convinced Rendezvous’ proposal will increase tourism as markedly or amount to the urbanists’ paradise and citywide attraction you foresee.

[acottawa]

I'm not sure an attraction can be both a draw (that will attract visitors to Ottawa or encourage them to stay longer) and need to be convenient for visitors. Despite the many f-bombs, mykl is basically right, if an attraction is a draw people will find a way to get there. Many of ottawa's top rated attractions are not particularly easy to get to. If what Devcore is pushing is convenience type attractions then that's fine, but then they're not really a draw for tourists.

[EdFromOttawa]

Originally Posted by Admiral Nelson

You're out of line. Take a deep breath before you post, everyone else here has a filter.

I'll eat some ice cream before continuing.



Your tastes are peculiar, as are mine. I asked you to consider the interests of others, because the crux of your three contributions below was that Devcore's attractions were invalid because you were personally disinterested in them:








Most recently you complain that each time you post what you call a "passionate view" of your thoughts, no one answers.

First, it's hard to find much substance amid your ridicule of everything (everything!) Devcore, including those who worked on it, and those who see value in it:

• "When the guy presenting the plan is bored out of his mind, there's a problem. Also, their slideshow was absolutely terrible."
• "If you can't put together an attractive and polished slideshow or show a little enthusiasm for your own bid, I fear how you might handle the details of the actual project."
• "They start right off the bat by fully admitting they were in way over their heads and didn't realize the scope of the project. WTF!? This is not encouraging."
• "The silent crowd gave this presentation little applause."
• "Lebreton Flats could put Niagara Falls out of business" ... "ridiculous attractions"
• "How much will admission be to this amusement park? I'll start saving now"
• "lunacy that people supporting devcore are spewing.”

Only Donald Trump would see substantive arguments there.

Other critiques are incoherent. You argue that whenever a Devcore attraction fails (for that is inevitable in your universe), “a cheap new condo gets its wings”. But when Rendezvous proposes 7,000 new condo units, they are nobly “returning the area to the people.”

Reaching a rare argument, you suggest that because Wonderland is “In the middle of fucking nowhere” and “people will gladly go wherever the fuck they have to in order to do the tourist things they want to do,” Devcore’s attractions could equally go to the CTC. It’s an absurdly simplistic take on tourism. Wonderland succeeded because of the economics of cheap land and a massive investment that drew people from across a populous region. Devcore’s smaller attractions, by contrast, would succeed precisely because they are in walking distance from Ottawa’s downtown, convenient to visitors. Proposing they go to CTC instead is not a conversation worth having.

Elsewhere you argue that “Ottawa is literally overflowing with tourism options.” Yes, we have many attractions, but many are outside the downtown area, cater largely to local residents, are minor in scope and function as insignificant tourism generators. I see scant evidence that Ottawa’s attractiveness to visitors has reached its full potential: though we have many tourists coming through, they stay only briefly.

I’m not a die-hard in this debate. There are certainly elements of Rendezvous’ proposal I like more—they’re just not enough to persuade me. However, unlike you, I don’t have a crystal ball. I can’t say definitively that either proposal is sure to be executed better – but on balance I prefer the array of attractions proposed by Devcore, and I’m not convinced Rendezvous’ proposal will increase tourism as markedly or amount to the urbanists’ paradise and citywide attraction you foresee.

What this guy said. Also I was at the live presentations too and I found the RV presenter significantly less professional and prepared than Devcore's. At one point he introduced a major investor who couldn't even be bothered to show up to the public consultation!! That was brutal!

Also I found the crowd reaction to Devcore's was stronger and more interested... Different war museums?

[rocketphish]

LeBreton Flats housing: A look inside the two competing plans

Don Butler, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 5, 2016 | Last Updated: February 5, 2016 12:50 PM EST

When the National Capital Commission set out its vision for LeBreton Flats in 2014, it said it wanted to see the vacant lands developed “for primarily non-residential animating uses, such as museums, galleries, special attractions hospitality and office space.”

Even so, residential uses are significant in the two proposals submitted by the Devcore Canderel DLS Group and the RendezVous LeBreton Group. The latter’s plan calls for nearly 4,400 housing units, while DCDLS envisions at least 2,500 units and possibly as many as 4,000.

Here’s a closer look at the residential components of each of the plans.

Unit mix

Nearly three-quarters of the 4,400 units in the RendezVous plan would be in highrise buildings. Another 959 would be in mid-rise buildings and 205 would be townhouses.

About 10 per cent would be very high-end — “some of the nicest penthouses in the city,” says Jeff Westeinde, whose Windmill Developments is one of the RendezVous partners. The other 90 per cent would include small rental units, mid-range quality homes for rent or purchase, and pricier condos.

DCDLS’s plan calls for 2,500 units, “based on how we see the market right now,” says Daniel Peritz, a senior vice-president at Canderel. “Depending on how receptive the market is locally to transit-oriented design, we think that number could grow to as much as 4,000 units.”

All but 200 of the 1,100 units planned for DCDLS’s first phase would be rental. That’s largely because there’s a glut of condos in Ottawa at present, Peritz says. “If the condo market comes back, it’s certainly something we would consider.”

Phasing

The RendezVous plan calls for about 1,400 units in its first phase, through 2026, all of them mid- or highrise. Just over 1,000 more would be added between 2026 and 2036, and a further 1,929 in the third and final phase.

Through those phases, an average of about 200 new residential units would be added each year, a “very conservative” number that the market should be able to absorb, Westeinde says.

DCDLS has firm commitments from three builders for 1,100 units in the project’s initial phase and aims to built the rest by 2029.

Affordability

About 25 per cent of the RendezVous residential component — approximately 1,100 units, sprinkled throughout five proposed neighbourhoods — would be devoted to affordable housing, says Ray Sullivan, executive director of the non-profit Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corp., one of the RendezVous partners.

About half of those would pay “modest market rents,” Sullivan says, with the rest getting rent subsidies, including a significant number of rent-geared-to-income units. There would likely be some modestly priced units available for sale, as well.

The 42-year-old CCOC, which has 1,595 units in its portfolio, would finance, build and operate RendezVous’s affordable rental housing component. “We’ve had our eye on LeBreton Flats as an affordable housing opportunity since the mid-1970s,” Sullivan says.

DCDLS also promises a mix that includes affording housing units, but can’t say at this point how many there would be. Peritz says the NCC process made it impossible to “reach out to stakeholders” to determine their social and affordable housing needs. “As soon as we’re allowed to do that, we will be reaching out to those groups to understand what those needs are.”

While DCDLS has no partner equivalent to the RendezVous group’s Centretown Corp., the YMCA — which is interested in building a new facility as part of the Devcore plan — provides low-cost housing at some of its centres. “They’re certainly someone we would be talking to,” Peritz says.

Seniors

Both plans call for housing for seniors. DCDLS’s plan is much more advanced: its first phase calls for 400,000-square-feet of seniors housing in two buildings connected by a bridge over Preston Street, providing 350 to 400 assisted and unassisted units.

The developer, Le Group Maurice from Quebec City, told DCDLS it wanted its senior residents to have indoor access to amenities such as grocery and drug stores, says Ritchard Brisbin, DCDLS’s principal architect. As a result, he says, “We worked with Farm Boy and others to get the whole ground floor animated with retail.” That’s when Le Group Maurice signed on.

Barry Hobin, the RendezVous master architect, says his group hasn’t talked a lot yet about how much senior housing there would be, but its flexible plan would potentially allow for more seniors developments than the DCDLS plan.

Student housing

Both plans include proposals for student residences, taking advantage of the site’s transit links to the city’s two universities and community college.

[email protected]
twitter.com/ButlerDon

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...-the-two-plans

[rocketphish]

Senators plug two-for-one development boon if they win LeBreton rights

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 5, 2016 | Last Updated: February 5, 2016 6:50 PM EST

The city would rack up two big development victories if the Ottawa Senators win the battle for LeBreton Flats, the club’s owner says.

Eugene Melnyk said the Senators have a plan to repurpose the Canadian Tire Centre and build more on the 76 acres he owns around the Kanata arena. Melnyk is still coy about the details, waiting instead to crunch the final numbers before going public, but he envisions an “entertainment-driven” transformation.

“We have the plans all ready. We’re just finishing up the costing of it and I think it’s going to be a spectacular site even post-Sens,” Melnyk told Postmedia’s editorial board Friday.

Melnyk said he hopes to make the plan public within the next 30 days.

The Senators, the force behind the RendezVous LeBreton bid for LeBreton Flats, are plugging their development scheme as a two-for-one shot, or as club president Cyril Leeder said, “another big win” for the city if the Senators move downtown.

The CTC won’t remain as a hockey arena if the Senators win the development rights at LeBreton, Leeder said.

“The market isn’t big enough to support two full-scale arenas long-term,” Leeder said, emphasizing the importance of having “one really strong one.”

Slot machines and table games aren’t in the cards, either. The club was hot after a casino in 2013 until city council decided all gaming should be kept at the Rideau Carleton Raceway.

Leeder said the club could consider converting the CTC into a smaller venue and hosting other ice sports, like curling.

Even if the Senators don’t win the development rights at LeBreton Flats, the club seems interested in revamping around the CTC.

“We certainly have the ability to design something really neat on the outside,” Melnyk said.

Melnyk lamented not having LRT in Kanata. While the city is investigating how soon it can extend LRT to the suburb, the council-approved transit blueprint takes rail only as far west as Bayshore Shopping Centre by 2023.

“None of this would be necessary if they had the LRT line going to Kanata,” Melnyk said.

Melnyk was clear the club needs more revenue beyond hockey, merchandise, sponsorships and food and beverage. That’s why building a downtown arena and complementing it with a mixed-use community is important for the Senators.

The club faces a tough battle for LeBreton Flats with the rival bidder, Devcore Canderel DLS, also proposing an NHL arena for the Senators, plus several tourist attractions.

Melnyk has been trying to expand his business interests in Ottawa. He’s keeping score.

“This is my third shot, you know,” Melnyk said, pointing out his failed attempts at fielding a professional soccer team and building a casino.

“That’s two strikes, now we’ve got this one.”

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...ebreton-rights

[rocketphish]

Secrecy the only way to move forward on LeBreton bids

Mark Sutcliffe, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 4, 2016 | Last Updated: February 4, 2016 10:15 AM EST

I’m beginning to see the logic of the National Capital Commission’s media ban around LeBreton Flats.

After a week of public posturing by the two applicants and rampant media speculation over hypothetical questions, who isn’t ready for the cone of silence to descend upon the process again on Monday? Maybe then we can start figuring out which proposal is best for the city and stop asking Eugene Melnyk whether the Senators are for sale, will be for sale, could be for sale or just might possibly be for sale one day, maybe in a, you know, what-if scenario?

During this public phase, we’ve gotten a little off topic. Rather than focus on the merits and feasibility of the many components of the two proposals, the discourse has devolved into questions about the future ownership of the Senators and theoretical scenarios about where they might play depending on who wins the competition.

You can imagine Melnyk’s frustration about being asked almost every day to respond to what the other bid is saying about his team. First they were going to let the Senators become their tenant, then they said they might allow the team to own the arena or become a partner in the development, then they said they would buy the team from Melnyk.

At this point in the process, what else could Melnyk be expected to say other than no? It’s probably the most honest answer, but even if he was more open-minded to a sale or partnership, why would he agree in the middle of a competition to cooperate with his main opponent after it’s over, effectively neutralizing one of his own bid’s advantages?

Even if Melnyk dreamed of selling the team, it still would be in his best interests to say no for the time being. He might as well see if he can increase the value of the team by securing the rights to LeBreton Flats. And if the Senators are unsuccessful in their bid, he can still play hard to get if the other group approaches him with an offer. So there’s no other possible answer to the question that everyone continues to ask.

Everything is for sale for the right price and perhaps Devcore, Canderel and DLS would make Melnyk an offer he can’t refuse if its bid is chosen by the federal government. But that doesn’t mean their proposal isn’t hugely speculative. Imagine if a group asked for approval for a large development in Kanata, saying their plan was to include a theme park featuring Disney characters.

Have you talked to Disney? No. Do you know whether they would work with you? If we get approval, we’ll make them an offer. What if they say no? Then maybe we’ll just buy the company.

The evolving message about the hockey team suggests DCDLS is worried it’s losing the public relations battle. But it’s not even clear how much that matters to the NCC. Public consultation is an important hurdle in any development of this scope, but ultimately the selection committee will evaluate the bids based on its own criteria.

Since members of the public aren’t privy to the financial details, it’s impossible to give much weight to their final opinions. This process has been a means of engaging the community and making sure there are no deal-breakers in the public’s eyes.

Unfortunately, the discussion hasn’t been as productive as it could have been. Speculating about how the two sides might work together after the competition is over isn’t just premature, it’s inappropriate. This is a competition, not a dating service. The objective here is to choose the better bid, not to figure out how to incorporate the other proposal into it.

Once the gavel falls on the public debate, we can finally get on with determining which bid will proceed, instead of chasing red herrings and stimulating unhealthy speculation.

Twitter.com/_MarkSutcliffe

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/col...-lebreton-bids

[YOWflier]

Originally Posted by EdFromOttawa

At one point he introduced a major investor who couldn't even be bothered to show up to the public consultation!! That was brutal!

Isn't it true that Devcore's star backers (Laliberte and Desmarais) haven't appeared at any presentations either? I may be mistaken, but if so that's equally bad.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

I don’t recall saying that the Sensplex was added for nefarious reason; I was simply echoing what I had been told by a representative of the RV plan at the open house. I asked if they had thought about teaming with the City to redevelop the Tom Brown Arena into a 4-ice-sheet Sensplex, and I was told the following: (paraphrased)

Rep: Then they would have to bus to their practices.
Me: Right now the Sens practice at the Sensplex on Maplegrove.
Rep: They hate that – they just hate it. They really wanted the practice ice to be attached to the main arena.
Me: And so the addition of a central Sensplex?
Rep: Ya, since we won’t be using the ice all the time, it might as well be available to the public.

So, there is nothing nefarious about having the practice ice attached to the main arena, it is just WAY more convenient for the team. Their locker room, with all the player’s stuff, is not a bus trip away. They could, for example, use the main ice (if available) if that is better for some purpose, but they break into smaller groups to practice. Logistically, having the practice ice right there simplifies things. I think it is a benefit for an NHL team. And, as the Rep said, they are building their practice ice there, but since they won’t be using it all the time, it might as well be rented out (for some revenue) when they don’t need it.

As for the practice ice being “near where the players live”; I think that you might find that a lot of the players will take condos in the LeBreton area. I think that the reason that some of the Senator’s players live in Kanata now is because that is where the arena and practice ice are.

I don't buy for a second that the public availability is an afterthought that "might as well" be included. For one, the Sens would only use one of the two ice surfaces, so the second one is entirely for the public. Secondly, these facilities offer hundreds of hours of ice time each month. The Sens would use a very small fraction of that. Public access is by far the largest use of the facility, so that quote sounds just wrong.

Sure it's possible that some players will move downtown (and some already live in central areas), but the vast majority of NHL players live in the suburbs, and I doubt that will change anytime soon.

[rocketphish]

Why LeBreton Flats might get a car museum

David Reevely, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 7, 2016 | Last Updated: February 7, 2016 4:57 PM EST



A car museum proposed by one of the bidders for LeBreton Flats would be built around a private auto collection with a troubling history and sponsored by car companies eager for a presence near Parliament Hill.

The World Auto Experience, part of the LeBreton proposal from the group that includes Gatineau developer Devcore and Montreal billionaires André Desmarais and Guy Laliberté, is one of the oddest ideas for the Flats. Canada has had a generations-long love affair with the automobile, but Ottawa has never been a car town, particularly. We have an auto show, and QNX in Kanata makes software for cars. But we don’t have a manufacturing plant or big races or anything.

Turns out Jean-Pierre Poulin, the boss at Devcore and a leading figure in the DCDLS bid, is friends with the Demers family of Thetford Mines, the unlikely owners of one of the world’s largest car collections.

“One of my friends, he’s in Quebec City, in Thetford Mines, and his grandfather started collecting cars 75 years ago. He has one of the most — he has the largest car collection in North America. He’s got over 500 cars and it’s sitting in Thetford Mines in four warehouses and you have to see it. It’s unbelievable,” Poulin said in a visit to the Citizen to promote the DCDLS bid.

The Demers brothers, three of them, have this collection that includes pristine Bugattis, the very first Lamborghini ever built, and oddities like a Vector (an abortive American attempt at an Italian-style sports car) that belonged to Michael Jackson. The list of treasures is immense.

The claims about the Demers collection are so extraordinary that La Presse, the Montreal newspaper, examined them extensively in 2014 and found many of them impossible to verify, to put it generously.

The Vector, for instance, was traced to a California man who told La Presse it had definitely never been Michael Jackson’s; it was a prototype his father bought from the manufacturer (only a handful of Vectors were ever made). The Lamborghini is the wrong model to be the first. An Aston Martin purportedly driven by Sean Connery in the movie Goldfinger is the right model and colour, but one used in the movie was stolen in 1997 and the other is on display in a collection in Ohio. A custom roadster that had purportedly once belonged to Jean Harlow is a modern copy, according to the previous owner, because nobody’s seen the legendary original since 1933. And so on.

The Demers family stood by all their claims about the cars.

They’ve been trying for a decade to start a museum. Thetford Mines declined to participate. In 2014, after getting as far as identifying a possible site, Quebec City abruptly slammed the door on the idea. Mayor Régis Labeaume wouldn’t say why, except to warn public officials to “look twice” at any proposal.

The Demers collection is impressive no matter what, but let’s say there’s a lot of curatorial research needed to get it into museum-ready shape.

Assume that can be done, though, and a 40-year deal to display the cars comes to fruition.

Poulin said his group next approached the Museum of Science and Technology about displaying cars it owns but doesn’t have room to show, and the museum is keen. It has 100 actual vehicles, plus a multitude of parts and memorabilia. Fine.

They could also display some sort of powered coach used by Queen Victoria when she visited Canada in 1860, Poulin said. Queen Victoria never visited Canada (to be fair, her son the future Edward VII did).

Then they talked to automakers, who are very, very eager to have a place to display their products in the capital.

“Wouldn’t it be cool if the manufacturers could come in and build a pavilion and tell their history?” Poulin asked. GM, Mercedes, others — they could have space to show off their histories and their futures. And a little more.

“Interesting enough, it was the fact that they would give back to the public, and (be) close to Parliament Hill — because the bill that was passed last year, it affected the manufacturers, and the fact that they would have been involved here, and being close to Ottawa would have been a benefit to all the Canadian industry,” Poulin said.

Indeed: what better place to lobby lawmakers than at a shrine to your business in sight of the Peace Tower?

Poulin was unable to say which bill he meant, though it had to do with Asian parts, he said. Probably the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the trade deal that would make importing cars manufactured in Asia easier.

The DCDLS people are being squired around town by Chris Froggatt, now a lobbyist with National Public Relations and formerly John Baird’s chief of staff when Baird was a minister responsible for, among other things, the National Capital Commission and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

I asked Froggatt which bill Poulin had been talking about, to make sure I got it right. Could it have been the TPP?

“I honestly don’t know,” Froggatt replied in an email. “I’m guessing he meant TPP, like you. I didn’t really understand the point he was making and didn’t discuss it with him afterwards. I think it was just an off-the-cuff remark.

“He is very passionate about building a car museum.

“I don’t really wish to pursue this.”

No, no, I suppose not.

[email protected]
twitter.com/davidreevely

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...t-a-car-museum

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by phil235

I don't buy for a second that the public availability is an afterthought that "might as well" be included. For one, the Sens would only use one of the two ice surfaces, so the second one is entirely for the public. Secondly, these facilities offer hundreds of hours of ice time each month. The Sens would use a very small fraction of that. Public access is by far the largest use of the facility, so that quote sounds just wrong.
.
.
.

Interesting how you “don't buy for a second that the public availability is an afterthought that "might as well" be included.”
Here is an imagined scenario that might have happened:

Big-wig # 1: And there needs to be practice ice connected to the arena. Busing everywhere is a pain in the a**.
Designer: OK, but that’s going to take up a lot of space for something that is only used once a day.
Big-wig # 1: Well then make it public, we can rent out the ice when we aren’t using it.
Designer: Like creating a central Sensplex. They are pretty efficient with their 4 ice sheets.
Big-wig # 1: I like it. Only don’t take too much room. Just make it a 2-sheet facility.
Designer: Anything else being added? Any other training equipment?
Big-wig # 1: Only the usual weight training, hot tub, and necessities.
Designer: So, a workout area. Can the public use that as well?
Big-wig # 1: When we’re not using it, fine.
Designer: There’s an ‘Ability’ group that is always looking for physical training facilities. They add stuff that makes it accessible to all abilities. What about having them in on the public portion?
Big-wig # 1: Great idea. What’s their name? I’ll have my people talk to them.
Designer: So, to recap, you need practice ice and workout facilities and these should be a 2-sheet Sensplex with accessible facilities from the ‘Ability’ group, right?
Big-wig # 1: Right. Get started on that right away; the deadline is coming fast.

Of course it could have also happened the way you imagine it:

Big-wig # 1: And an arena, and a 2-sheet Sensplex for the public, and an ‘Ability’ workout area. There’s a group I know that I want to give space to.
Designer: Great, do you still need the bus bay if you have your practice ice right beside the arena?
Big-wig # 1: Hey, you know, I hadn’t thought of that. I guess having the Sensplex there also benefits the team. Good thinking. Well, get started designing those public facilities right away; the deadline is coming fast.

These are just two imagined scenarios. The first has the practice ice being the primary goal and the public access to it as the afterthought. The second has the public facilities coming first and the Senators use of them coming as an afterthought. Either way, there is a primary thought, and then successive thoughts after; building on the primary idea.

Anyway, I’m not sure what it is that makes it impossible for you to ‘buy’ one idea and not the other.

[Kitchissippi]

I'm beginning to see the reasons of leaving the LRT exposed — LeBreton could actually end up being the most interesting section of the Confederation Line's route, especially considering that it will be a contrasting break between a dark downtown tunnel and a monotonous stretch of rock-cut trench westward. In the case of the Devcore proposal, it actually places the site in the daily visual consciousness of tens of thousands of commuters. Advertising is all about exposure, and having the landscaped gardens and attractions in view every day improves the perception of accessibility, which could entice people to impulsively pause their commute if they see something exciting happening or if it's nice day.

The movement of the trains would also contribute to the dynamic motion and animation within the site, as well as help improve security through the constant stream of witnesses. However, there should be more ways to cross the track.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

[B]Why LeBreton Flats might get a car museum

The claims about the Demers collection are so extraordinary that La Presse, the Montreal newspaper, examined them extensively in 2014 and found many of them impossible to verify, to put it generously.

The Vector, for instance, was traced to a California man who told La Presse it had definitely never been Michael Jackson’s; it was a prototype his father bought from the manufacturer (only a handful of Vectors were ever made). The Lamborghini is the wrong model to be the first. An Aston Martin purportedly driven by Sean Connery in the movie Goldfinger is the right model and colour, but one used in the movie was stolen in 1997 and the other is on display in a collection in Ohio. A custom roadster that had purportedly once belonged to Jean Harlow is a modern copy, according to the previous owner, because nobody’s seen the legendary original since 1933. And so on.

This is such a gong show. There is no mention of these people in the Devcore proposal, no mention of them as a partner (the automotive partners are mostly in the business of selling and/or fixing cars) and these clowns are going around town touting some fake car collection as an attraction.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Interesting how you “don't buy for a second that the public availability is an afterthought that "might as well" be included.”
Here is an imagined scenario that might have happened:

Big-wig # 1: And there needs to be practice ice connected to the arena. Busing everywhere is a pain in the a**.
Designer: OK, but that’s going to take up a lot of space for something that is only used once a day.
Big-wig # 1: Well then make it public, we can rent out the ice when we aren’t using it.
Designer: Like creating a central Sensplex. They are pretty efficient with their 4 ice sheets.
Big-wig # 1: I like it. Only don’t take too much room. Just make it a 2-sheet facility.
Designer: Anything else being added? Any other training equipment?
Big-wig # 1: Only the usual weight training, hot tub, and necessities.
Designer: So, a workout area. Can the public use that as well?
Big-wig # 1: When we’re not using it, fine.
Designer: There’s an ‘Ability’ group that is always looking for physical training facilities. They add stuff that makes it accessible to all abilities. What about having them in on the public portion?
Big-wig # 1: Great idea. What’s their name? I’ll have my people talk to them.
Designer: So, to recap, you need practice ice and workout facilities and these should be a 2-sheet Sensplex with accessible facilities from the ‘Ability’ group, right?
Big-wig # 1: Right. Get started on that right away; the deadline is coming fast.

Of course it could have also happened the way you imagine it:

Big-wig # 1: And an arena, and a 2-sheet Sensplex for the public, and an ‘Ability’ workout area. There’s a group I know that I want to give space to.
Designer: Great, do you still need the bus bay if you have your practice ice right beside the arena?
Big-wig # 1: Hey, you know, I hadn’t thought of that. I guess having the Sensplex there also benefits the team. Good thinking. Well, get started designing those public facilities right away; the deadline is coming fast.

These are just two imagined scenarios. The first has the practice ice being the primary goal and the public access to it as the afterthought. The second has the public facilities coming first and the Senators use of them coming as an afterthought. Either way, there is a primary thought, and then successive thoughts after; building on the primary idea.

Anyway, I’m not sure what it is that makes it impossible for you to ‘buy’ one idea and not the other.

I'm not saying that it is impossible for me to buy the other scenario. What I don't buy is your assertion that the "real" reason the Sensplex is included is so the Sens can have a practice facility next to the arena. That may be a reason, but it doesn't follow that the community purposes are an afterthought.

The Sens have a long track record of building these facilities for reasons that have nothing to do with use by the team. Two Sensplexes were built entirely for community use (with a fourth on the way), and the Kanata Sensplex is likely more than 95% community used.

Sure there is a benefit for the team to have an attached practice rink, but based on the Sens track record, and the fact that they are including a second rink that has nothing to do with team use, I don't think the cynicism is warranted.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt with respect to their stated reason for including the Sensplex - it is actually to be a community facility.