Lansdowne 2.0 (Northside Stands/Arena Redevelopment) | Proposed

[UrbOttawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

What's the issue?

I'm sure if it was built as shown it would be just fine, but personally I find it very boring and uninspiring for such a significant project in the city. Aside from a couple extra flourishes, its not offering much more than the typical RLA/hobin special.

Other cities seem to take pride in making the architecture interesting with major city building projects like this, the recent Quayside project in Toronto comes to mind:

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by UrbOttawa

I'm sure if it was built as shown it would be just fine, but personally I find it very boring and uninspiring for such a significant project in the city. Aside from a couple extra flourishes, its not offering much more than the typical RLA/hobin special.

Other cities seem to take pride in making the architecture interesting with major city building projects like this, the recent Quayside project in Toronto comes to mind:

I'm with you. If this is more than a preliminary massing type render, then what I see is a charcoal brick Ottawa Special™ where the windows will end up half the size as the render and the glazing and balconies will be bought from the cheapest bidder. It has a roof flourish on the podium that is reminiscent of Claridge Moon, and a skybridge that will never get built because Ottawa. Such wow....

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by UrbOttawa

Other cities seem to take pride in making the architecture interesting with major city building projects like this, the recent Quayside project in Toronto comes to mind:

Meh, it's gimmicky to me, but chacun à son égoût.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

"Presumably "? Got some inside information there Phil?

Ha, sadly no more than basically every other person in this city who has heard the scoop from a friend of a friend about what is going to happen with the Sens sale.

[J.OT13]

I'd be fine with that mixed-use building design, but no doubt it will end up looking completely different. This is just a placeholder until they award the site to a developer.

[Tesladom]

So if I understand the Lansdowne financing model, in simple terms is as follows:
Builder get to build a public venue using money the city borrows against future taxes that the 1200 new condos will generate over the next x years.

If this is the case, why didn't the city get into a similar deal to build and finance the LRT, divert the development premiums and property taxes from all new developments adjacent to LRT station to finance the construction.
Using this model we could go bonkers and build more LRT/subway inside the Greenbelt (where it belongs) and have it financed... or maybe I'm just crazy

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

So if I understand the Lansdowne financing model, in simple terms is as follows:
Builder get to build a public venue using money the city borrows against future taxes that the 1200 new condos will generate over the next x years.

If this is the case, why didn't the city get into a similar deal to build and finance the LRT, divert the development premiums and property taxes from all new developments adjacent to LRT station to finance the construction.
Using this model we could go bonkers and build more LRT/subway inside the Greenbelt (where it belongs) and have it financed... or maybe I'm just crazy

Honestly, you are right. Poor planning I would say. Especially because they aren't even designing the stations to be full fledged hot spots. Many successful train stations around the world have retail like cafes/mini convenience stores/small retail to create livelier areas. Developers would kill to be able to have developments built right into the stations.

Who knows though, maybe there wasn't enough developer traction at the time.

[rocketphish]

Glebe residents say 'slow the train down' on proposed Lansdowne 2.0

CBC News
Posted: May 03, 2022 10:29 AM ET | Last Updated: 7 hours ago

Some residents who live near Lansdowne Park say the proposal for further redevelopment, termed Lansdowne 2.0, is moving too fast and they want more time to review the plan.

Capital ward Coun. Shawn Menard held a public meeting on Monday evening about the plans unveiled last week by the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG). The city has yet to hold a public consultation on the recently-announced plans, but Menard wanted to hear from his constituents.

"We need to press the pause button on the Lansdowne 2.0 proposal," said Alexandra Gruca-Macaulay, who attended Monday's meeting.

"So that all of Ottawa residents who didn't have a chance over the weekend to read the proposal can understand and assess the impact that the proposal would generate on them."

The proposed park makeover would include a new arena and newly constructed north-side stands, plus 1,200 living units — and cost an estimated $330 million.

Councillors will discuss the plan at the city's finance and economic development committee on Friday, where they will be asked to approve $8 million in funding to come up with a fine-grained plan and to consult broadly on the proposal. It would also enable staff to seek bids for air rights.

If carried, the new Lansdowne proposal will go to full city council at the end of May, although the final decision on the project won't be made until the next term of council.

"I do hope that one of the councillors at [the committee] will move a motion to just slow the train down," said Anthony Carricato, a member of the Glebe Community Association, who is also a citizen transit commissioner.

"Again, you've had nine months. We've had less than nine days."

Ten per cent of the 1,200 new residential units will be affordable housing, OSEG has stated. According to city officials, affordable is defined — in this context — as 80 per cent of the city-wide market rate.

Menard has made it clear he believes council should hold off on any major decisions until after the fall municipal election.

While the councillor likes some aspects of the proposal, he sees problems with how these buildings are supposed to be "tax neutral," calling it an incorrect narrative. OSEG CEO Mark Goudie has called the proposal "self-financing proposition and proposal."

Similarly, Menard would like to see a transportation plan attached to the proposal and has concerns about the commitment of private partners.

"We're setting ourselves up for commitments here that I think should wait until we've had that robust public consultation," the councillor said.

With files from CBC Radio's All in a Day

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...erns-1.6439142

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Glebe residents say 'slow the train down' on proposed Lansdowne 2.0

CBC News
Posted: May 03, 2022 10:29 AM ET | Last Updated: 7 hours ago

Some residents who live near Lansdowne Park say the proposal for further redevelopment, termed Lansdowne 2.0, is moving too fast and they want more time to review the plan.

Capital ward Coun. Shawn Menard held a public meeting on Monday evening about the plans unveiled last week by the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG). The city has yet to hold a public consultation on the recently-announced plans, but Menard wanted to hear from his constituents.

"We need to press the pause button on the Lansdowne 2.0 proposal," said Alexandra Gruca-Macaulay, who attended Monday's meeting.

"So that all of Ottawa residents who didn't have a chance over the weekend to read the proposal can understand and assess the impact that the proposal would generate on them."

The proposed park makeover would include a new arena and newly constructed north-side stands, plus 1,200 living units — and cost an estimated $330 million.

Councillors will discuss the plan at the city's finance and economic development committee on Friday, where they will be asked to approve $8 million in funding to come up with a fine-grained plan and to consult broadly on the proposal. It would also enable staff to seek bids for air rights.

If carried, the new Lansdowne proposal will go to full city council at the end of May, although the final decision on the project won't be made until the next term of council.

"I do hope that one of the councillors at [the committee] will move a motion to just slow the train down," said Anthony Carricato, a member of the Glebe Community Association, who is also a citizen transit commissioner.

"Again, you've had nine months. We've had less than nine days."

Ten per cent of the 1,200 new residential units will be affordable housing, OSEG has stated. According to city officials, affordable is defined — in this context — as 80 per cent of the city-wide market rate.

Menard has made it clear he believes council should hold off on any major decisions until after the fall municipal election.

While the councillor likes some aspects of the proposal, he sees problems with how these buildings are supposed to be "tax neutral," calling it an incorrect narrative. OSEG CEO Mark Goudie has called the proposal "self-financing proposition and proposal."

Similarly, Menard would like to see a transportation plan attached to the proposal and has concerns about the commitment of private partners.

"We're setting ourselves up for commitments here that I think should wait until we've had that robust public consultation," the councillor said.

With files from CBC Radio's All in a Day

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...erns-1.6439142

Moving too fast? These people are ridiculous lol. The area needs revitalization, it needs to become more dense so it can be what it was actually envisioned to be.... NIMBYs are a joke.

[rocketphish]

A vibrant, revamped Lansdowne Park will benefit Ottawa
We've learned many lessons in seven-plus years of Lansdowne operations and two years of a punishing pandemic.

Patrick Burke
May 02, 2022 • 1 day ago • 3 minute read

In the coming weeks, Ottawa Council has a decision to make about the future of Lansdowne Park. I hope it will support a vibrant future for a stadium, park and neighbourhood that have more than 150 years of history behind them.

There are a few key reasons to support the proposal for a revamped Lansdowne; the first is Lansdowne itself. Sitting on the bend of the Rideau Canal, Lansdowne has public green spaces, playgrounds, art displays, shows, restaurants and live sports events. It’s a place for people from all walks of life to meet and be together.

As a premier sports venue, Lansdowne has hosted the Grey Cup, the FIFA Women’s World Cup, the Briers and Canada’s National Skating Championships. Even the Aberdeen Pavilion — which stands today thanks to the efforts of community organizers and our current mayor — is rich in history, having hosted the Stanley Cup Championship in 1904.

Today, Aberdeen welcomes visitors to the Ottawa Farmers’ Market and is a beautiful backdrop for the Ottawa Christmas Market, which drew more than 100,000 visitors in 2019. When combined with the Glebe’s green spaces, canal and traditional main street, Lansdowne Park provides a quintessential national capital experience in the heart of the city.

Nevertheless, the time has come for a much-needed update. In 2010, the city of Ottawa, the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG) and federal partners laid out a vision to make Lansdowne Park a year-round destination. In 2014, that vision was brought to life while safeguarding both the Aberdeen Pavilion and the Horticulture Building. A public park was added, which now includes a basketball court, skate park and outdoor skating rink. Retail, restaurants, homes and a grocery store replaced a huge, paved parking lot.

The city and OSEG have learned many lessons in seven-plus years of operations and two years of a punishing pandemic. One is that the stands on the north side of the field and the Civic Centre below them, at 54 years old, do not work as modern entertainment venues.

OSEG is proposing to rebuild the old stands and arena to a higher standard, while adding housing on site to help pay for it. This is the right move. It will create a world-class facility and add several improvements to public spaces around the park.

New housing will be a welcome relief to the many people looking for a home here. Ottawa is growing quickly, and we need to decide how and where we will make space for people to live. We should say yes to new neighbours in the heart of the city and reap the economic and lifestyle benefits that will result.

I’m lucky to live in the Glebe; nearly everything I need is less than a 15-minute walk away. That’s the model for a successful city, and we should be letting more people in on it. It will also support the case for better public transit in the Glebe, which is something we need.

The revitalization will be good for the economy, too. The amazing local and independent businesses that we represent in the Glebe will benefit as new residents stroll down Bank Street to shop and eat. The new event centre and stands will be a bigger draw for tourists and talent alike. And OSEG, a valued partner and local employer, will be better able to offer job opportunities, primarily to young people who are paying for college or saving for travel.

The current proposal, if approved, will lead to at least two more rounds of public consultations. We will all benefit from genuine discussions on how to build a successful future for Lansdowne.

My hope is that people will say yes to a plan that allows Lansdowne to be what it has been for more than 150 years: a place where we can come together and root for the home team.

Patrick Burke is the Executive Director of the Glebe BIA and a Glebe resident.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/bu...benefit-ottawa

[rocketphish]

Latest Lansdowne pitch the only one that makes sense for Ottawa
The improvement of Lansdowne is a good news story for the city, but that won’t guarantee enthusiasm from the neighbours.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
May 03, 2022 • 7 hours ago • 3 minute read

After the usual fussing and delays, Ottawa city councillors will approve the new proposal to revamp Lansdowne Park, as they should. After all, it’s exactly what councillors asked for last July.

Councillors told senior staff to work with Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group, the city’s private sector partner, to develop a plan to upgrade Lansdowne and make it more economically sustainable. It was about time. The original plan, approved a decade ago, was a half-job, but even that took a lot of persuasion to get past the timid city council of the day. Now it’s time to finish the job.

Today’s Lansdowne is vastly superior to the asphalt wasteland that it replaced, but it still has a long way to go. The original redevelopment plan left the aging north-side stands and the Civic Centre rink in place, even though the 1967 structure was already outmoded. With significant limits on housing and retail development, the plan failed to create enough cash flow to keep the project viable. OSEG has had to contribute $160 million to cover deficits, $100 million more than was projected.

The new city-OSEG proposal aims to remedy those deficiencies by tearing down and replacing the old half of the football stadium and the hockey rink. It will also add more retail and 1,200 housing units in three towers.

The city will pay for its part of the $332.6-million Lansdowne upgrade through ticket surcharges, selling the right to develop the towers, and using the additional property taxes from the new development.

It’s always possible that the financial part of the deal will not turn out as neatly as city staff imagine, but the football stadium and the arena are important civic assets that need to be replaced regardless of what happens to the rest of Lansdowne.

The plan, as analyzed by city staff, ought to please councillors, especially those on the left. What councillor, concerned with a housing emergency, could possibly oppose adding 1,200 housing units, entirely through intensification? Ten per cent of those new units will be affordable, although within the current meaning of affordable, which is average rent, more or less, not subsidized housing.

The housing expansion is a chance for new residents to live in a walkable neighbourhood without owning a car, just the kind of development the city’s new Official Plan prescribes. The retail expansion will not only give Glebe residents more businesses within walking distance, the redevelopment will provide more customers for existing Glebe businesses.

In addition, the new buildings will be significantly more energy-efficient than the antiques they replace. That’s what councillors battling their self-declared climate emergency want. Why, just the other day, councillors voted to add to the cost of new homes by demanding higher efficiency standards.

The improvement of Lansdowne is a good news story in a city that could use one, but that won’t guarantee an enthusiastic response from some of the neighbours. Already, the Glebe Community Association has raised concerns about residential density, transportation and the supposed speed with which this is all advancing.

If all goes smoothly, construction could begin in summer of next year. Perhaps that is light-speed, by city standards. The city isn’t showing as much urgency when it comes to repairing the leaking roof of the Aberdeen Pavilion, a project that will take years — not for the work, but just to get started. The city does have plans to improve the urban park and public spaces, but little money has been set aside for it.

Naturally, there will be a period of public consultation. People will rightly ask what the options are. In fact, there are three. The city can do nothing, and let important public buildings crumble; it can pay for the whole thing itself; or it can work with OSEG on the plan as presented.

Only one of those alternatives makes sense.

Randall Denley is an Ottawa political commentator and author. Contact him at randalldenley1@gmail.com

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/de...nse-for-ottawa

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

So if I understand the Lansdowne financing model, in simple terms is as follows:
Builder get to build a public venue using money the city borrows against future taxes that the 1200 new condos will generate over the next x years.

If this is the case, why didn't the city get into a similar deal to build and finance the LRT, divert the development premiums and property taxes from all new developments adjacent to LRT station to finance the construction.
Using this model we could go bonkers and build more LRT/subway inside the Greenbelt (where it belongs) and have it financed... or maybe I'm just crazy

You are right but we can't be seen to be giving money to build a stadium which is what we are doing indirectly when we let them build residential and commercial land. Claiming the project is revenue neutral because they will pay property taxes is disingenuous at best. I was in favour of a mixed use project and think it has added value to the neighborhood. I guess the problem is now we are stuck. The homes are built and if the team and stadium combo isn't viable they can walk away and we end up with nothing. I hope we learn our lesson with hockey, but of course we won't, and just be straightforward about our contribution.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

You are right but we can't be seen to be giving money to build a stadium which is what we are doing indirectly when we let them build residential and commercial land. Claiming the project is revenue neutral because they will pay property taxes is disingenuous at best. I was in favour of a mixed use project and think it has added value to the neighborhood. I guess the problem is now we are stuck. The homes are built and if the team and stadium combo isn't viable they can walk away and we end up with nothing. I hope we learn our lesson with hockey, but of course we won't, and just be straightforward about our contribution.

I don’t think this really has anything to do with the viability of the teams. It’s more a question of the North Side/arena being in worse shape than believed and needing replacement a decade earlier than anticipated. A factor in that is the lack of capital investment by the city over the years, so it is partly responsible for the deterioration of a public asset. Either way, I doubt that OSEG would walk away from all of their teams, as that doesn’t make much sense for them.

OSEG asked for additional housing from the outset, and I think that is a key component of making the site busy 24/7. Agreed that the financing gymnastics are part of selling it to the public. I’d rather see something more straightforward like a ticket surcharge plus some charge on the market rent units that goes to the costs of the facility.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by originalmuffins

Moving too fast? These people are ridiculous lol. The area needs revitalization, it needs to become more dense so it can be what it was actually envisioned to be.... NIMBYs are a joke.

While I’m no fan NYMBY behaviour, I’m not quite sure why you feel delaying the project by a couple months to give people time to review the plan is such an unreasonable request. Given the lack of transit infrastructure around Landsdowne and the traffic on the existing roads, a significant increase in population in the area without any transportation plan could be problematic.

I know it is controversial on this forum, but maybe this project should include a some form of higher order transit as part of the plan.

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by roger1818

While I’m no fan NYMBY behaviour, I’m not quite sure why you feel delaying the project by a couple months to give people time to review the plan is such an unreasonable request. Given the lack of transit infrastructure around Landsdowne and the traffic on the existing roads, a significant increase in population in the area without any transportation plan could be problematic.

I know it is controversial on this forum, but maybe this project should include a some form of higher order transit as part of the plan.

I think most of us agree that we need better transit options for Lansdowne, I just think there were disagreements what it should be (street car network vs underground metro tunnel).

My reaction to their intentions to "review" were because it very much looks like delaying the inevitable. Partially because NIMBY intentions tend to be the same or to just outright reject. They don't really care to really review it, just stop bigger and more intensification efforts in an area that truly needed it during 1.0 phase. Just listening to the open house on the 60 story proposal was hilarious saying that height is too big for the area even though it's right beside a very well placed transit station.

[OTSkyline]

It's funny when you come on here and read several articles posted in different threads and how they play off each other.

Article#1
"Ottawa has not been building enough new housing to cope with demand and population growth. City needs to remove red tape in process to allow for better/quicker densification"

Article#2
"Residents of Glebe aren't a fan of adding more residential at Lansdowne. City councilor hopes to have the process delayed and defer decision until several more months in the fall."

[RuralCitizen]

To allow for the major increase in density, they should implement a tram that would run on Carling, turn onto the Queen Elizabeth Dr., and continue on Elgin.

You would have stations at least at DowsLake/CivicHospital, Bronson, Bank/Lansdowne, and downtown.

We already close the parkways for bikes. I think we can live with removing cars and converting one of the canal parkways for tram. We could enhance the MUPs as part of this project.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by RuralCitizen

To allow for the major increase in density, they should implement a tram that would run on Carling, turn onto the Queen Elizabeth Dr., and continue on Elgin.

You would have stations at least at DowsLake/CivicHospital, Bronson, Bank/Lansdowne, and downtown.

We already close the parkways for bikes. I think we can live with removing cars and converting one of the canal parkways for tram. We could enhance the MUPs as part of this project.

100% this. That would be such a game changer for this city and would really help make Lansdowne even more attractive.

[AR-OTT]

Originally Posted by RuralCitizen

To allow for the major increase in density, they should implement a tram that would run on Carling, turn onto the Queen Elizabeth Dr., and continue on Elgin.

You would have stations at least at DowsLake/CivicHospital, Bronson, Bank/Lansdowne, and downtown.

We already close the parkways for bikes. I think we can live with removing cars and converting one of the canal parkways for tram. We could enhance the MUPs as part of this project.

Ideally cars would be removed from both sides of the canal. The greenspace surrounding the canal would feel 3 times as big if they removed Queen Elizabeth and Colonel By. Maybe they could add more pedestrian crossings over the canal as well.

[Beatrix]

Originally Posted by UrbOttawa

I'm sure if it was built as shown it would be just fine, but personally I find it very boring and uninspiring for such a significant project in the city. Aside from a couple extra flourishes, its not offering much more than the typical RLA/hobin special.

Other cities seem to take pride in making the architecture interesting with major city building projects like this, the recent Quayside project in Toronto comes to mind:

I agree. Would be nice if they could incorporate a similar aesthetic as the wooden veil on the south side stands.