Lansdowne Park Redevelopment Phase 1 | Completed

[jay2018]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

And all some wanted was NOTHING but sports.

How do we balance those constituencies? Short answer is: We didn't.

We saw this before with the baseball stadium. And now it's a mighty big white elephant. Glad to see Council decided against the $40-million plan to get a double-A team in.

But the thing never should have been built on the public dime in the first place. Another example of a well-connected businessman --Howard Darwin -- convincing the City to put up taxpayers' money to build a sports facility for the benefit of his private sports business, which he either didn't have the capital or the confidence to pay for himself.

I wonder what building the City will rename after Roger Greenberg dies? If Lansdowne turns out to be a turkey, he might end up having some minor arena (or worse) renamed after him, as Darwin did, much to the chagrin of some.

I think there is a balance yes there is sports but there is retail/parkland/outdoor rink etc there is lots for everyone.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

Yes, I understand it is a strong word and I believe it represents how I feel about buildings that are used merely as billboards and do nothing to relate or better define the places they are built. It is a form or sculpture that has horrible interaction with the street (admittedly I have not been there but from what I have seen through images and in reading about it). That is not to say that the buildings currently planned for Lansdowne are noteworthy because in my opinion, they are not (minus the south side stands which I believe will be very nice). I just don't think using the Selfridges Building in Birmingham as an example of the kind of 'distinctive architecture' we should be building in Ottawa is a good choice. Crazy looking architecture doesn't equal good architecture. I guess some of this extends over to the 'Architecture for Ottawa' thread so that might be a better place to discuss this.

Fair enough. I haven't been to see it either. And it is certainly over the top. Nonetheless, as a tourist draw - which is purportedly one of the Lansdowne scheme's objectives - it's hard to deny.

If I must have the 6-8 storey-high corpse of a mega-cinema lying at the bottom of the street, that will overpower the street and blot out the sun anyway, let it at least be interesting.

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

Here is a link to some information about a beautiful redevelopment project in Leiden, Netherlands of a former industrial site by architect Peter Zumthor. The redevelopment includes a hotel, apartments, student housing, restaurants and cafes. It offers distinctive architecture that is also part of the fabric of the city and respectful of the heritage elements on site.

http://afasiaarq.blogspot.com/2010/0...umthor_22.html

Goodness! All that exposed, bare concrete. Are they condos, or prison cells?



Apparently the nearby residents of Eastern Downtown Leiden aren't too keen on that proposed project either.

[JFFournier]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

And all some wanted was NOTHING but sports.

How do we balance those constituencies? Short answer is: We didn't.

That is nonsense. The closest to the truth you could come with that statement is that some didn't care what else was done so long as the stadium was refurbished. But to suggest that anyone wanted nothing but sports for the entire park is ludicrous, as is your statement that there is no balance when the park are being built is larger than the stadium.

What do you think you gain by doing that? I would have thought that it at least entertains you but it doesn't seem to even accomplish that much.

[S-Man]

Wow, Phil 235's succinct observations perfectly match my observations and feelings about the type of reaction/tactics expressed by the people who decided to speak on behalf of the community, mandate or not.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by jay2018

alecz_dad

You don't think 50-60% is a high level of support?

Which survey is that? I don't recall there ever being that high a level of clear support. I think that like the willingness of people far-removed from Lansdowne to go along with the notion that "it's better than nothing" as was peddled, there were many others who probably thought it might not be the best idea, but were too busy and too far away to really think much beyond that.

Certainly, when my wife and I talk to friends and co-workers who live away from the immediate area, or they visit us and see the height and intensity of the construction on the site, many who were soft-boosters, start to become sort-doubters.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by JFFournier

That is nonsense. The closest to the truth you could come with that statement is that some didn't care what else was done so long as the stadium was refurbished. But to suggest that anyone wanted nothing but sports for the entire park is ludicrous, as is your statement that there is no balance when the park are being built is larger than the stadium.

What do you think you gain by doing that? I would have thought that it at least entertains you but it doesn't seem to even accomplish that much.

Saying it's "nothing but sports," is of course my rhetorical rejoinder to those who say it was "anything but sports." Neither is completely true, nor could they be.

But, I do beleive that as much as those who were detemined that the stadium should go at all costs, there were those who were equally determined to hear nothing else, but, "the stadium will go here for the new football team," once OSMUG played the CFL card.

As for the area of the park, it still is the minority of the site, when the stadium, shopping centre and associated areas are taken into account.

I also wonder about the governance of the site. It is technically still, public, but to be operated by OSMUG. There was talk of a Municipal Services Corporation to be an overseer above that, to ensure the public interest, but it seems that has fallen by the wayside.

I think a germane question to ask, now that the opening date is about a half a year away is, how will this public area be administered? Will the park be a park like any other City park, open to all; and will the "streets" through the "urban village" onsite be public streets like any others, with the same rights of all members of the public to use and pass along them for whatever purpose? Or will they become defacto privatived spaces, controlled by OSMUG?
Discuss. Talk amongst yourselves.

In any event, you're right. I gain little from this. Indeed, it is detrimental, certainly to my time, to waste it on such a vainglorious effort. But I do it nonetheless. I suppose by some definitions I am a troll. Is this discussion now intended to be nothing but a Lansdowne-hugger wankfest?

However, the fact that people do continue to make efforts, greater and lesser, to contest my assertions. And that some agree with aspects of my arguments, suggests to me that there is still value in my participation in the discussion. As I do, in some small way, represent the point of view of a significant number of people who have opposed, and continue to be ill-at-ease with OSMUG's Lansdowne scheme.

[S-Man]

I really think our friendly troll here needs to pack up and move to a place where the streets are leafy, unemployment is high, stimulation is low, and nothing ever changes.

Yes, my friend, London, Ontario awaits.

[bartlebooth]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Fair enough. I haven't been to see it either. And it is certainly over the top. Nonetheless, as a tourist draw - which is purportedly one of the Lansdowne scheme's objectives - it's hard to deny.

If I must have the 6-8 storey-high corpse of a mega-cinema lying at the bottom of the street, that will overpower the street and blot out the sun anyway, let it at least be interesting.

Goodness! All that exposed, bare concrete. Are they condos, or prison cells?

Apparently the nearby residents of Eastern Downtown Leiden aren't too keen on that proposed project either.

Well, I think it would likely be impossible for us to come to any sort of agreement on what constitutes interesting architecture. A whacky cinema that has some kitschy features is no more interesting to me then what is being proposed.

I can comment on Zumthor's work having been to many of his buildings personally, they are the furthest thing from prison cell's I have seen. I trust that this project, if executed to his standards, will be stunning. Bare concrete can be very beautiful if detailed and crafted properly and he has done some incredible concrete work. Different tastes I guess. I would live in a concrete Zumthor 'prison cell' over a drywall Minto condo every time.

I am aware that there is dissension to Meelfabriek. As we have seen in this thread and in every development ever built by human beings, there is never 100% complete agreement. I just used it as an example of what I believed to be excellent work that doesn't rely on crazy sculptural architecture to create something meaningful. Just because there is dissension on a project by the locals, it doesn't always mean the locals are right (and the opposite holds true).

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by JFFournier

I never saw any sign that those opposed to the proposal were capable of expressing their concerns in a calm, rational manner that might have afforded them some credibility. Did you?

Were there ever any real opportunities for their concerns to be seriously heard? No.

When the idea was first floated, it was presented as pretty much a fait accompli. How would you react?
It's easy for developers to be calm, cool and collected when you have the money, the Mayor and the local media in your pocket. (Though they did bitch and moan a bit about how the vexatious legal process had put them off their schedule.)

There was some quite accomodationism that took place between the BIA/GCA and the City/OSMUG. But only after the community groups had threatened to take the whole thing to the OMB.

They would have lost. But it would have tied things up longer. So, they both made rational decisions. OSMUG snipping a bit here and there, but not fundamentally changing their plan, and the BIA/GCA trying to have some little bit of influence where they could on what had long ago been a predetermined outcome.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

(sic) "2-storey shopping centre," I think you meant.

As for being in scale with the existing neighbourhood, I would disagree. Come look at the back of the (who knows what brand) megaplex cinema along Holmwood, and tell me that's in scale. Consider that this one scheme will be doubling the commercial density in the Glebe in one fell swoop, and tell me in that's in scale.

Once again, the Lansdowne-huggers' ultimate retort when all else fails: that those who object to this scheme "just wanted to keep Lansdowne as empty buildings and bare parking lot."

Maybe we need a variation on Godwin's Law, that stated:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches. [That] given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis...

...The law is sometimes invoked, as a rule, to mark the end of a discussion when a Nazi analogy is made, with the writer who made the analogy being considered to have lost the argument.

A modified version for this discussion thread would stipulate that whenever somebody uses that line, by way of a fundamental explanation or justification why OSMUG's Lansdowne scheme was the right way to proceed, they lose the argument by default.

If you want a prime example of how PR was masterfully employed in this scheme, it is this. That whenever there were difficult questions raised about the proposed scheme, that the proponents couldn't, or didn't want to, answer, they (or their acolytes) eventually fell back on the old "anything is better than the sea of asphalt there now." It was a good line, and it stuck. I bet Bruce Firestone wishes he'd thought of it.

If this is a shopping centre, then Bank Street is a shopping centre, and the ByWard Market is a shopping centre. Stores! The horror! On new streets! In your neighbourhood! YOURS! YOU!

[JFFournier]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

I'm not sure how there would have been a clearer mandate established. Like most democratic institutions, the Community Association has a process by which its members are elected, and, like formal politicians, they get to a point where they make what they think are the best decision.

As the city did, well within their rights. Why can you accept the GCA's doing so but not the city?

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Presumably to have gone into respresentations saying "many residents and business-owners in our community are opposed to this proposed scheme, BUT, there are others that are not so opposed, so really, we can't say anything with any authority," might, as a tactical consideration, have undermined their case.

It might also have them seemed reasonable and balanced.

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

I certainly didn't see the developers or City officials displaying any doubt, or saying "hey, I've been getting a lot of calls from people who really don't see how the financials on this will work, or they really think that this has been an abusive process, so maybe we should slow down and look at more options." No, it was "ready I ready, Captain, full-speed ahead!" So, SAUCE@GOOSE = SAUCE@GANDER.

Aside from the several months they took to evaluate Eugene Melnyk's proposal.

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

But let's also be clear that the OSMUG partners are not just a bunch of good ol', local boys made good who wanted to bring back football. Rather, they are a cadre of billionaire and mere millionaire property developers who do nothing unless it serves their private commercial interests.

And that if they want to build condos and a shopping centre at Lansdowne, it's not because they "wuv football," but because they know they can make bags of cash getting the City to foot most of the upfront costs, and leasing the land for $1 a year. However, that always seemed to get lost in the static.

Hardly. I think you're just the only one for whom this was ever a revelation.

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Of course I don't have any "evidence" of OSMUG getting a PR agency to vilify their opponents. They wouldn't really be a very good PR agency then, would they?.

There are spies in the trees in front of my house. I've never seen them, but then if I did, they wouldn't be very good spies, would they? So there must be spies in the trees in front of my house.

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Perhaps it wasn't orchestrated. But there were certainly times where certain phrases and tactics seemed to be repeated far too frequently for them simply to have drifted out spontaneously.

Right, like those who repeated FoL newsletter almost word for word.

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

And FoL should have raised money to stage an effective PR offense, rather than mistakenly believing in a legal remedy.

FoL, and all opponents, should have tried using facts instead of fear-mongering.

When someone (like you're doing) constantly predicts doom and failure, the message gets worn out and loses credibility. When Clive Doucet expresses concern that the canal will lose its UNESCO world heritage site status, without a shred of evidence to back it up, he looks like a fool. When one Glebe group (I forget which) expresses "concern" that the food served in a stadium environment might harm the health of children, they look like clowns. When the FoL Twitter account hints that Watson might want to move the casino to Lansdowne, they look ridiculous.

You don't need a lot of money for good "PR". You need to be convincing. "Everything will be terrible" is not convincing.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

I wonder what building the City will rename after Roger Greenberg dies? If Lansdowne turns out to be a turkey, he might end up having some minor arena (or worse) renamed after him, as Darwin did, much to the chagrin of some.

I don't care about Roger Greenberg, but I found a City asset we could name after you:

[jay2018]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Which survey is that? I don't recall there ever being that high a level of clear support. I think that like the willingness of people far-removed from Lansdowne to go along with the notion that "it's better than nothing" as was peddled, there were many others who probably thought it might not be the best idea, but were too busy and too far away to really think much beyond that.

Certainly, when my wife and I talk to friends and co-workers who live away from the immediate area, or they visit us and see the height and intensity of the construction on the site, many who were soft-boosters, start to become sort-doubters.

Yes there has been a high level of support for it now did some vote because something neeeded to be done but the bottom line is there has been good support for it.

[JFFournier]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Saying it's "nothing but sports," is of course my rhetorical rejoinder to those who say it was "anything but sports." Neither is completely true, nor could they be.

But, I do beleive that as much as those who were detemined that the stadium should go at all costs, there were those who were equally determined to hear nothing else, but, "the stadium will go here for the new football team," once OSMUG played the CFL card.

As for the area of the park, it still is the minority of the site, when the stadium, shopping centre and associated areas are taken into account.

Yet it is a vast improvement, but you seem reluctant to even acknowledge that much.

The difference with the all-stadium and all-park crowds is that the all-stadium crowd does not try to dictate the other elements. In other words, give me my stadium and do whatever the hell you want with the rest. If you want the rest to be a park, whatever.

The all-park crowd is at the detriment of the stadium. And on top of that, they have other options! There are other parks around, hell I used to walk through the arboretum to get to the stadium along the bike path! But that's not good enough; too bad for the stadium-lover, I want the city's 900th park.

As far as your participation goes, believe it or not, I personally welcome it! Just quit being such an extremist. You refer to the thread as a wankfest just a few hours after you pointed out that other people share your misgivings. It can't be both.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

JFF, the Coliseum was a nice old building, and could very likely have been adaptively reused, just as the Horticulture Bldg is, as a link to the past of the site that OSMUG claims it wishes to evoke. And utterly obliterating it, not even maintaining the facade, was, to my mind, vandalism.

Yes, let's reuse a building that was deemed to have "little historic value", has been plagued with problems, renovations and repairs throughout its life, and thanks to a lack of progress on anything Lansdowne in the past 20 years, eventually had to be condemned due to safety and health hazards. Yes, that's so criminal.

And let's not kid ourselves, though, OSMUG/City would never have gone to all the trouble they have of digging up and moving the Horticulture Bldg, if its heritage designation hadn't (literally) gotten in the way of their construction plans. Without that designation, it would have been "bye bye" to it too. As was nearly the case for the Aberdeen Pavilion 20-odd years ago.

Your proof for this is where, exactly?

Additionally, wanna know why the Aberdeen Pavilion nearly came down 20 years ago? Because nothing was being done with the site, so repairs were continuously put off, at the behest and outcry of Glebe residents because evidently Glebites have sensitive hearing and noise causes them pain equivalent to giving birth.

The new buildings are simply, banal. Unworthy of such a high-profile site. The claim was always "trust us, we're going to make Lansdowne something special." But all I see, and all I have ever expected, is Trinity Developments-style mediocrity, but with inadequate parking.

Yes, how dare they keep it in the same tone and scale of other Glebe buildings. I wasn't aware Fifth Avenue Court was an architectural marvel, nor the Michelin heritage, nor Booster Juice an icon. And the Mac's and Pizza Hut are just such local architectural treasures. Oh, and heaven forbid I forget to mention that the architecture of The Works, Birdman, Glebe Pet Hospital, and Pet Valu is simply fantastic. And who can't help but marvel at the LCBO, Kunstadt, and Rogers? I suppose it would also be remiss of me to fail to mention the paragons of architecture that are H&R Block, Shoppers Drugmart, RBC, Bank St. Framing, Naji's, Feleena's, Flight Centre, McKeen Metro, Third Avenue Spa, and Davidsons.

Oh! How careless of me. I also forgot to mention the modern marvels that are Nicastro, Arbour, East Wind, Wine Rack, and Magpie. And who can forget Fourth Avenue's Scotiabank? Oh, that Scotiabank! I weep at its beauty.


Get a fucking grip on reality, dude.

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Were there ever any real opportunities for their concerns to be seriously heard? No.

How about every day? There's this thing called social media, and I believe you can still mail actual letters to people, like, everywhere.

Also, there were countless public hearings and media coverage. That's why we went from condos in the park, parkades, and the Aberdeen Pavilion being a Pottery Barn to the current plan which is far superior.

When the idea was first floated, it was presented as pretty much a fait accompli.

Because it was, because no other developers came forward chomping at the bit to really try and redevelop Lansdowne.

[S-Man]

There are spies in the trees in front of my house. I've never seen them, but then if I did, they wouldn't be very good spies, would they? So there must be spies in the trees in front of my house.

It's hard to not be paranoid when everyone's plotting against you!

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by gjhall

I don't care about Roger Greenberg, but I found a City asset we could name after you:

Finally, my little bit of immortality!

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by S-Man

I really think our friendly troll here needs to pack up and move to a place where the streets are leafy, unemployment is high, stimulation is low, and nothing ever changes.

Yes, my friend, London, Ontario awaits.

What? And leave all this! Never.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by S-Man

It's hard to not be paranoid when everyone's plotting against you!

Indeed. Just as OSMUG-huggers were adamant that FoE was really just a big sleeper-cell funded by some other developer.

If they were trying to derail Lansdowne for their own nefarious purposes, I don't think they got their money's worth

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

Indeed. Just as OSMUG-huggers were adamant that FoE was really just a big sleeper-cell funded by some other developer.

When has anyone ever said that? Also, what's FoE?