LeBreton Flats 2.0 (RendezVous LeBreton) | Cancelled

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

And ANOTHER thing:

Hockey is only a portion of Melnyk's revenue stream. Arguably the large concert and events are a huge draw to the Canadian Tire Centre (a.k.a. revenue).

If the DCDLS bid wins, here's what will go down:
1. The arena will be built at Lebreton, at a loss for Devcore
2. The new arena will draw the concert acts from Kanata to downtown.
3. The Canadian Tire Centre, already operating just barely profitable, will no longer be profitable with only hockey.
4. Melnyk will be forced to come to a deal with DCDLS, one way or another.

So there's that.

If Melnyk stays in Kanata, DCDLS won't build arena till 2030, if ever.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

And ANOTHER thing:

Hockey is only a portion of Melnyk's revenue stream. Arguably the large concert and events are a huge draw to the Canadian Tire Centre (a.k.a. revenue).

If the DCDLS bid wins, here's what will go down:
1. The arena will be built at Lebreton, at a loss for Devcore
2. The new arena will draw the concert acts from Kanata to downtown.
3. The Canadian Tire Centre, already operating just barely profitable, will no longer be profitable with only hockey.
4. Melnyk will be forced to come to a deal with DCDLS, one way or another.

So there's that.

So they're going to spend hundreds of millions to build an arena that will try to pick up a few concerts?

Melnyk has no particular incentive to deal. He owns a geographically protected franchise, he owns an arena outright and gets a whole bunch of ancillary revenue. He would be better off cutting a deal with loto Quebec and move the team to lac lemay.

[FFX-ME]

For those worrying about how Devcore can pay for the project and if public funds will be used, this is the answer from their website.

"Under the terms and conditions of the NCC’s Request for Proposal, we are not allowed to provide financial information at this time. Suffice to say the equity partners involved with this project not only possess the necessary creativity, experience and expertise to develop LeBreton Flats but also the financial capacity to see the project through.

That said, the current intention is that any support from the City or other levels of government be limited to existing programs for things such as environmental clean-up, the re-direction of development charges into improvement of public spaces in the site, and other federal programs for which the site might be eligible."

Stop complaining for the sake of complaining people.

[daud]

similar point of view to many expressed here. Worth a read...

http://senschirp.ca/news/final-thoug...utm_medium=rss

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by daud

similar point of view to many expressed here. Worth a read...

http://senschirp.ca/news/final-thoug...utm_medium=rss

Exactly what I was thinking! Why the hell would I go to Lebreton in Rendez-vous wins. It would just end up like Claridge's attempt.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by daud

Also, a brewseum would totally work there. This city is fanatical for beer;

True. But Molson barely qualifies as beer

[m3i6]

To clarify two items mentioned above by others:

The NHL has the final decision on if a team can move to another City, NOT THE OWNER, and currently there is no reason for the NHL to do so.

2030 was mentioned outright by Devcore that this was their approximate build date for the arena UNLESS the need arises for the arena to be required sooner.

Also, somebody had mentioned that you don't see gimmicks in Rome to attract tourist. I guess they've never seen the Vatican City.

---

I like the Devcore proposal and the more gimmicky the attraction the better. It's somewhat inline with Internet "Click Bait".

[FFX-ME]

These attractions are far less gimmicky than Clifton Hill. Not a fair comparison. By those standards the Louvre and Eiffel tower in Paris is a gimmick, but you know what, it attracts people.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Exactly what I was thinking! Why the hell would I go to Lebreton in Rendez-vous wins. It would just end up like Claridge's attempt.

Would you go there more than once if Devcore bid wins?
How many times have you been to War museum since it was built?

[ars]

Don't think you can compare ancient cities like Paris and Rome to a modern city like Ottawa.

Ottawa will never directly compete with Paris and Rome for tourists because we don't have a thousand years' worth of culture.

A better comparison for Ottawa would be modern North American cities(even there we're at a disadvantage because of how young Ottawa is). Ottawa needs to offer something that other North American cities don't offer, otherwise there's no real reason for tourists to stick around or even visit in the first place. The Parliament buildings are a start, but there's not much else other than that.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by m3i6

To clarify two items mentioned above by others:

The NHL has the final decision on if a team can move to another City, NOT THE OWNER, and currently there is no reason for the NHL to do so.

.

NHL almost always approves local moves (as they did with the Islanders moved from Nassau County to Brooklyn). Approval would also be necessary to move downtown. Changes of ownership also require league approval.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Exactly what I was thinking! Why the hell would I go to Lebreton in Rendez-vous wins. It would just end up like Claridge's attempt.

Hockey (and not the imagination hockey devcore is promising), concerts, restaurants, bars, possibly to work or live. Things that get people coming back over again, not a one-off visit to some boring retro-1950s attraction.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

NHL almost always approves local moves (as they did with the Islanders moved from Nassau County to Brooklyn). Approval would also be necessary to move downtown. Changes of ownership also require league approval.

Would it be? It would remain in the same municipality.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Hockey (and not the imagination hockey devcore is promising), concerts, restaurants, bars, possibly to work or live. Things that get people coming back over again, not a one-off visit to some boring retro-1950s attraction.

+1.

People keep saying it could be "another Lansdowne". I see no problem with this. Lansdowne is good.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

+1.

People keep saying it could be "another Lansdowne". I see no problem with this. Lansdowne is good.

It'll be Lansdowne with better transit service.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Would it be? It would remain in the same municipality.

NHL constitution is on page 11 of this document
http://v1.theglobeandmail.com/v5/con...oyotesDaly.pdf

Municipal boundaries changed after the CTC was built, if the Sens paperwork says "Kanata" the NHL might consider "Ottawa" another "city or borough"

[Radster]

Originally Posted by ars

Don't think you can compare ancient cities like Paris and Rome to a modern city like Ottawa.

Ottawa will never directly compete with Paris and Rome for tourists because we don't have a thousand years' worth of culture.

A better comparison for Ottawa would be modern North American cities(even there we're at a disadvantage because of how young Ottawa is). Ottawa needs to offer something that other North American cities don't offer, otherwise there's no real reason for tourists to stick around or even visit in the first place. The Parliament buildings are a start, but there's not much else other than that.

ahhhh, finally someone with some sense on here. Lets compare apples to apples.

[waterloowarrior]

Molson Coors asks developer to stop using its name in LeBreton pitch
http://www.cfra.com/news/2016/01/29/...lebreton-pitch
Posted on 1/29/2016 3:36:00 PM by CFRA News Staff

Molson Coors is asking Devcore Canderel DLS Group to stop using the brewer's name in its bid to redevelop LeBreton Flats.

In its "LeBreton Re-Imagined" pitch on the NCC website, a DCDLS rendering shows a 'Brewseum' with the word "Molson's" on the facade.

DCDLS says the Molson name written on the building was a mistake.

It says the name was removed from every other publication but cannot be changed in the online concept art, which is now in the hands of the NCC.

Molson Coors says the concept art does not need to be removed but says it does not want its name used in the future without an agreement.

Canderel Senior Vice-President Daniel Peritz told CFRA's Evan Solomon on Thursday there had only been informal talks about a partnership.

The group is also investigating agreements with other breweries.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I find the exact opposite: condos and shopping - i.e., a mixed-use neighbourhood - is a better starting point than a modern version of the 1935 World's Fair.

If there is to be a mélange of the two proposals, the Senators' proposal has much better starting bones.

I'm not exactly totally enamoured with Devcore's proposal either, but if I were to boil down the approach of both plans it would be in what they truly offer to the public.

Melnyk's plan hinges mainly on people going to paid events — Sens games and concerts at the arena, buying at the shops and restaurants, and I would imagine even use of the "Abilities Centre" would be limited by your ability to pay a user fee. Just hanging out by the Aqueduct is OK, but if one has less of a purpose if they're not there to eat or shop, one gets reduced to being a lurker.

Devcore's plan on the other hand is centred on its "Canadensis Walk" which is basically free botanical/ornamental gardens that people would visit without needing any other purpose. Even having a permanent bandshell is such a boon to more spontaneous events to this city, where it takes a good week of set-up and take down in the so-called event parks and months of logistics. It would be awesome to have a place where you can literally flick a switch and the sound and lighting systems are already in place. It's chockfull of interesting spaces from the beach to the museums and the amusements that cater to different moods, whether quiet and passive or noisy and active. In this sense of engaging the public I think it's a better starting point, it might just need some of its bones readjusted

[Temperance]

Originally Posted by Arcologist

daud, I couldn't agree with you more.

The RendezVous proposal is just a larger Lansdowne, nothing more, with very little programming for the site, and nothing to draw outside tourists. The Devcore proposal would definitely put Ottawa on the map, internationally, with far more attractions and better programming.

A few things I like about each proposal:

RendezVous:
+ they covered the LRT line, which imo helps keep the site intact (whereas the Devcore proposal gets split in half because of the LRT trench)
+ their use of the aqueduct
+ green roof experience on the arena
- too many condos
- feels like just another Lansdowne
- no museums or big-ticket attractions
+ they have an NHL team

Devcore:
+ lots of unique, big-ticket attractions (skate park, skyzone, Brewseum, etc.)
- who's going to fund these big-ticket items? (I could see the Brewseum, skyzone and skate park doing well as businesses, but museums tend to rely heavily on public funding, donations, etc.)
+ love the Canadensis Walk
+ LOVE their library design!
- don't like that they left the LRT trench exposed. It cuts the site in half.
- they don't have an NHL team (but hope they can work with Melnyk on this)
+ great site programming (RendezVous has none)

Also like that both are looking to be green / netzero developments.

IMO, the NCC would do best to take a hybrid approach, and integrate elements of both proposals while having both teams work together on this. After all, that's what nation building is about, isn't it!?!

Yup - I agree with this as well. I would like to see a bit more mixed use/housing with Devcore but overall that proposal is far more interesting.