HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Downtown & Urban Ottawa


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1541  
Old Posted May 8, 2016, 11:40 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,200
Going all in on LeBreton: Anatomy of a successful bid

Don Butler, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: May 8, 2016 | Last Updated: May 8, 2016 2:45 PM EDT


On a pleasant September day in 2014, Ottawa Senators owner Eugene Melnyk, his adviser, Ken Villazor, and Cyril Leeder, president of Senators Sports & Entertainment, had a conversation with momentous implications.

Earlier that day, the National Capital Commission had invited private sector groups to submit plans to redevelop LeBreton Flats, which the federal government had expropriated and cleared 50 years earlier.

The announcement wasn’t a surprise. NCC chief executive Mark Kristmanson had signalled his intentions a few weeks before during a breakfast speech. Melnyk’s executives had been hearing persistent buzz that something was imminent.

But the NCC announcement meant it was decision time. Did Melnyk want to pursue the opportunity or not?

“We’d been through a rather tumultuous journey in trying to find some solution to our challenges with the marketplace in Ottawa,” Villazor said last week, before an NCC-ordered gag on public comment was re-imposed.

Melnyk badly needed something that would add strength to his wobbly balance sheet. Earlier efforts to locate a casino at the Canadian Tire Centre and to make the property a hub for major league soccer had crashed and burned.

“We had the conversation with Eugene to say, ‘This is a pretty significant project in terms of effort and pursuit costs. If we’re in, we’re all in,”’ Villazor recalled. “And he made the decision reasonably quickly at that point to say, ‘We’re all in. Let’s take this as far as we can.'”

That decision triggered 14 months of frantic work by a team that grew to include more than 200 people, who produced a 2,000-page submission.

The effort paid off when the NCC announced April 28 that an evaluation committee had ranked the proposal from Melnyk’s team, called RendezVous LeBreton, clearly ahead of a competing bid by the Devcore Canderel DLS Group.

As a result, RendezVous will have the opportunity to negotiate an agreement with the NCC to develop 21.6 hectares of the last large piece of undeveloped real estate in Ottawa’s core.

This newspaper spoke to key members of the RendezVous team to find out how its successful bid came together. It’s a tale of relationships and local connections, near super-human effort and critical choices.


It was obvious that Melnyk’s company would need a lot of help to tackle such an immense project. “We knew we would have to assemble a pretty broad team,” Villazor said.

The first member was Matt Rossetti, a Detroit architect who, with his father, had designed the Senators’ current arena more than two decades ago.

The Senators decided they wanted, as much as possible, to build the team around Ottawa-based members, Villazor said. “We knew it was going to be a long project if we did win it, and you want people who have got skin in the game in the community.”

Melnyk recruited Trinity Development’s John Ruddy — who has a box at Senators games — as the project’s master planner and builder.

Born and bred in Ottawa, Ruddy was a partner in the consortium that revitalized Lansdowne Park. Since then, said Trinity president and CEO Fred Waks, he’s become “the poster boy for how to redevelop downtown real estate and make it vibrant.”

Trinity brought retail expertise. But it also tapped into a formidable trio of deep-pocketed real estate investors to help finance the $3.5-billion development: the Canadian Real Estate Investment Trust, the Ontario Pension Trust and Brookfield, a global company with hundreds of billions of dollars in assets.

Another key early recruit was consultant Graham Bird, who Leeder approached to serve as project manager. One of the most plugged-in figures in the city, Bird has steered several high-profile projects in recent years, including Lansdowne Park, the new Shaw Centre and the Royal Ottawa Hospital.

Bird, in turn, enlisted top-dog architect Barry Hobin, who has an unparalleled understanding of Ottawa and its history. “Barry was obviously very key for us,” said Villazor. “Everybody knows his stature in Ottawa and his familiarity with the city.”

Bit by bit, the team expanded. Ken Hoppner of development firm Morley Hoppner, who’d worked on Sensplex projects, was an early recruit. Renée Daoust, a Montreal urbanist who has great credibility with the NCC, was brought in to design the project’s landscaping.

Perkins + Will, an American architecture and design firm that had helped out with NCC approvals for Windmill’s neighbouring Zibi project, added its expertise in transit-oriented design. Gatineau-based builder Brigil was approached because RendezVous wanted representation from the Quebec side of the Ottawa River.

Hobin lined up the non-profit Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corp. to develop 25 per cent of the residential units as affordable housing. The CCOC had been eyeing LeBreton for affordable housing for more than two decades, and jumped at the opportunity.

“We respect a lot of the partners, so we knew it would be a well-put together project,” said executive director Ray Sullivan. Bird’s involvement gave him comfort, as well. “He’s somebody who’s passionate about city building and civic engagement.”

Villazor approached another important partner, Abilities Centre Ottawa, a small volunteer group that formed two years ago to create Canada’s second Abilities Centre (the first opened in Whitby in 2012).

The involvement of the Abilities Centre – a recreation and social complex open to all – helped spread accessibility and inclusiveness ideas to RendezVous’ entire plan, said board chair Emily Glossop. “So many people are seeing our community through a new lens – a lens that sees everybody.”

RendezVous’ team was largely complete by Feb. 18, 2015, when the NCC announced that it and three other teams were being invited to develop detailed proposals for LeBreton Flats.

The real work was just beginning.


Given the immensity of the project, the time allotted to RendezVous and the other teams to develop their proposals was relatively short. Meeting the Dec. 15, 2015 deadline meant a lot of seven-day work weeks. Indeed, aside from Thanksgiving Day, Bird’s office never closed last year.

“There were lots of times when there were five or six design teams going in different directions,” said Hobin, adding that his firm was “kind of the glue that pulled all that together.”

The team figured out early on that it needed to develop the entire LeBreton property, including an optional 12.3-hectare parcel west of the main development site, to make the project work.

There was some debate about where to put the proposed “major event centre,” which would be the Senators’ future home. In the first renditions, it was positioned near Booth and Wellington.

But after further consideration, it was moved to its present location further west, allowing patrons streaming out after events to walk to the planned Pimisi or Bayview light rail stations and spread out through the retail and restaurant district.

Figuring out how to deal with the future LRT tracks, which will bisect LeBreton, was a major planning headache.

“We just kept pounding away at it,” Bird recalled. “We’ve got to get this thing to go away. It cannot be part of a future city.”

It was Bird who first conceived the idea of covering the tracks by extending a proposed parking structure over the LRT. The decision gave RendezVous an important advantage over DCDLS when the two projects were evaluated.

The NCC also liked the fact that RendezVous rediscovered and adopted the original street grid in LeBreton Flats. Going back to that grid, Hobin said, divided the property into parcels. “As the parcels develop, you can develop a block-by-block strategy for development, and therefore you can build in variety.”

RendezVous got another boost in December, when the Building and Construction Trades Council agreed to provide a letter of support.

The letter from the council, which estimates RendezVous’ project will create 22,000 construction and support jobs, described its role in supplying skilled labour and recruiting and training aboriginal apprentices. (DCDLS didn’t approach the council for a similar letter.)

Tradesmen in Ottawa and Gatineau are “super excited” about the redevelopment, said council president Mike Reid, who was seven when his family was displaced from LeBreton Flats by the 1960s demolitions. They had to move to Kemptville to find housing they could afford, Reid said. “It was as if I went to another planet.”

He’s thrilled that LeBreton is finally coming back to life. “What they want to do with this is absolutely phenomenal. It’s just going to revitalize the entire downtown core.”


There was a last-minute scramble after RendezVous and DCDLS submitted their proposals in December. For the first time, the NCC told the two teams they were expected to provide 3D models of their proposals for the public consultation session.

That and other late NCC requests “probably added $200,000 or $300,000 worth of expenditures at the last minute,” Hobin said. “We were just running around like a chicken with its head cut off, trying to pull all this stuff together.”

The two bids were unveiled at an open house in January. DCDLS presented its flashy plan filled with museums and attractions first, followed by Hobin and the RendezVous proposal.

“That was really tough,” Hobin said. “You’re kind of overwhelmed — wow, all of this eye candy. It took a while to unpack it and go, ‘Just a second now, how much of this is real?'”

Nerves tightened as decision day approached. Both teams had invested enormous effort and time and considerable money in developing their plans. The stakes were high.

The NCC had managed to keep its choice secret. Until planning chief Steve Willis announced that RendezVous’ bid was the highest rated, “we had no idea one way or the other,” Villazor said.

Though Melnyk permitted himself a small smile when the decision was announced, the reaction in the room by the Senators’ group was muted. There were no high-fives, no triumphant whoops.

There was a reason for that, Villazor said. At that point, the choice of RendezVous was just a staff recommendation, subject to approval by the board. “We wanted to be careful not to overreact until the board had formally decided.

“Cyril made a very good analogy afterwards,” said Villazor. “He said, ‘It’s like winning the first round of the playoffs. There’s still a long way to go.'” That didn’t stop RendezVous members from gathering at the restaurant Beckta for a modest celebration, however.

Going forward, many things remain to be resolved. According to Waks, the partners are still negotiating “all facets” of the financial structure. While Trinity will be the master planner and builder, he said, “it would be premature to say who’s responsible for what.”

Nor has RendezVous yet figured out who will be on its negotiating team, though Waks said Trinity will be the lead negotiator.

The coming months and years will doubtless test the cohesion and commitment of some of the partners, not least because of Melnyk’s notorious impatience. “It’s one thing to win,” said Hobin. “It’s another thing to actually build something we’re proud of.”

Bird is optimistic. “We really had the best of the best on public realm, the best world knowledge on master planning and one of the best world knowledge on entertainment. They all got along well. Bit by bit, they made a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.”

[email protected]
twitter.com/ButlerDon

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...successful-bid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1542  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 12:50 AM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
1965 plan for LeBreton Flats, with new national Defence Headquarters (3 tallest towers).


http://www.urbform.com/brief/lebreton-flats-district

Worth checking the link for more pictures of this proposal and post and full history of the Flats from 1700s to 2015.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1543  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 1:24 AM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
That's another big issue I had with DCDLS' public letter. It's one thing calling foul on the process or questioning the merits of RV's proposal based on public anchor uses, saying covering the Confederation Line tracks isn't viable because they (DCDLS) couldn't figure it out is asinine.

It is entirely possible that even if they couldn't figure it out (if they even actually tried), someone else might have. Back in January, an article was published showing RV's confidence in that part of their bid.

This isn't a new concept. It has been done time and time again all over the world over trenched, surface and elevated lines.

Sure a lot of you have seen this one in Calgary, quite similar to our situation; surface rail heading down in a trench to a tunnel.

Video Link


Easier still at LB since the line is straight and we have more space to work with around the line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1544  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 2:05 AM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
waterloowarrior, is it possible for moderators to add a poll to an existing thread? If so, would you be able to add one for our preferred proposal, RV or DCDLS?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1545  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 2:50 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,252
There was a separate thread created with a poll
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=220789
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1546  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 3:31 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
There was a separate thread created with a poll
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=220789
Right, forgot about that one...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1547  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 8:06 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,836
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighwayStar View Post
+1...
An observatorium! I wants a telescope!
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1548  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 9:42 PM
TMA-1's Avatar
TMA-1 TMA-1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 298
Lebreton as of 7 May 2016

Spot the O'Train.

What's going on in the fenced area north of the Parkway?

The only successful "green" roof in Ottawa (that I've seen (and I've seen a lot of them)) is the Museum roof.





_D827096
by Chuck Clark, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1549  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 9:55 PM
m0nkyman m0nkyman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMA-1 View Post
Spot the O'Train.

What's going on in the fenced area north of the Parkway?



http://holocaustmonument.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1550  
Old Posted May 9, 2016, 11:04 PM
TMA-1's Avatar
TMA-1 TMA-1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 298
Shoulda known, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m0nkyman View Post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1551  
Old Posted May 10, 2016, 1:31 PM
McKellarDweller's Avatar
McKellarDweller McKellarDweller is offline
inner city
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Posts: 487
A bit off topic, but does anyone know what the tents in front of the war museum (shown in TMA-1's pic) are for? The seem to have been there for at least a week presently.
EDIT: Thanks, McC.

Last edited by McKellarDweller; May 10, 2016 at 2:22 PM. Reason: thanks
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1552  
Old Posted May 10, 2016, 1:44 PM
McC's Avatar
McC McC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,057
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1553  
Old Posted May 12, 2016, 5:00 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,200
Nowhere to go but up at LeBreton, says Firestone

Bruce Firestone, OBJ
Published on May 11, 2016


With the National Capital Commission recently choosing the bid backed by Senators owner Eugene Melnyk as its preferred plan for LeBreton Flats, here is a key question: how can the Sens pay for a new arena at the site without public funding?

Most major league sports owners in the United States ask their municipalities or states for some type of contribution towards the cost of building new stadia or arenas, whether it be tax breaks, public capital contributions, proceeds from new sales taxes or other incentives.

But I recently asked myself, “How can the Ottawa Senators pay for a new arena at LeBreton Flats without public money?”

As a refresher, here is the original plan we launched to bring back the Senators:

Buy 600 acres of land for $7.2 million ($12,000 per acre);

Put an NHL-calibre arena (the Palladium, now called Canadian Tire Centre) and an expansion team in the middle of it (on 100 acres);

Drive up the value of the balance of the property to $112,000 per acre (today, it actually trades for around $450,000 per acre), yielding a profit of $50 million ($100,000 per acre x 500 acres);

Put that dough in armoured trucks, drive it down to Manhattan and give it to the National Hockey League.

How well did this plan work? Well, it ran into a few hiccups, which I deal with in my book, Don’t Back Down: The Real Story behind the Founding of the NHL’s Ottawa Senators.

The major hurdles the team faced then were imposed by the provincial government of the time. The Sens were forced to build additional public infrastructure (the $30-million Palladium highway interchange, still the only such structure built and paid for by the private sector in Ontario’s history). In addition, the province refused to allow rezoning of the additional 500 acres of land.

Consequently, Terrace Investments, the original parent company of the Sens, took an $80-million writedown and eventually went bankrupt. It didn’t help that the team’s payroll rose from $6.5 million Cdn in the first year of operation in 1992-93 to $85 million 10 years later.

But now that Sens owner Eugene Melnyk and president Cyril Leeder are leading the winning proposal to build an NHL arena at LeBreton Flats and move the team downtown, could a variation of the founders’ original plan be updated and be made to work this time?

The answer is “Yes.” I think.

LeBreton Flats includes 21.4 hectares of development land (52.9 acres). The key question is: how much would you have to increase the allowable floor space index to generate enough extra money to pay for a new building?

FSI is the ratio of a building’s total floor area to the size of the piece of land upon which it is built. Since there is really no surplus land to sell off at LeBreton Flats, Mr. Melnyk would need to rely on increasing the density on the site to generate the necessary income from other development to pay for the arena.

Let’s say for a moment the NCC was to continue developing the lands as it has been so far, with a few condo towers plus an occasional monumental building such as the Canadian War Museum. My observations suggest the current FSI is about 4 – the equivalent of the entire site being covered with a single building four stories high. This means that the total buildable envelope would be four x 52.9 acres x 43,650 square feet per acre, or about 9.2 million square feet.

Of course, that’s ridiculous. So let’s say instead that roadways, parkland, public squares and other amenities took up about a third of the site. You’d end up with an FSI of 6, a much more reasonable proposition.

In Ottawa, top developers will pay about $20 per square foot of buildable area, so I think the lands at LeBreton are worth about $184.2 million today. This works out to $3,485,000 per acre or $80 per square foot at the site’s current level of density.

By comparison, two adjacent downtown Ottawa sites (890 and 900 Bank St.) were purchased by Canderel in 2013 for a total of $7,640,000 or $219 per square foot for redevelopment as a mixed-use project, so $80 per square foot of land for LeBreton Flats does not appear unreasonable to me.

Now I don’t for a moment expect the Sens to pay the NCC anywhere near this much for their property; this is just what the site is worth if the NCC ever decided to break it up and parcel it out to big and small developers to do, say, a Vancouver-style Granville Island, only with a ton of residential uses thrown in.

But what level of FSI would the Senators have to achieve in order to generate an extra $675 million free and clear to build a new arena? That is my estimate of what a new building would cost today.

The calculations are somewhat complicated, but the results are easy to understand. The Senators would have to increase the site’s FSI from its current level of 4 to a whopping 27 to generate this kind of additional cash, based on the going rate developers are paying today.

What if Mr. Melnyk and Mr. Leeder got team sponsors to cover, say, half the cost of the new building? That would help – it would reduce the required FSI to a more reasonable 16.

What if they also got the NCC to throw in the land for free? The FSI would fall further – to 12. But since you can’t cover the entire Flats with buildings 12 stories high, more realistically you would likely need to construct a lot of 24-storey buildings to get an equivalent return.

I don’t think the Senators’ bid envisions this level of intensity or density of use, so other people smarter than me will have to come up with some more ideas on how to pay for everything.

Anyway, it’s some food for thought.

Bruce M. Firestone is founder of the Ottawa Senators and a broker at Century 21 Explorer Realty. Follow him on Twitter @ProfBruce.

http://www.obj.ca/Opinion/Bruce-Fire...ys-Firestone/1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1554  
Old Posted May 12, 2016, 5:46 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 12,377
I know this is controversial but I think the NCC should give the land for free in exchange for legally binding commitments to policy objectives, like urban design standards, space available for small businesses, etc. Basically make the Sens pay social rent instead if monetary rent. The NCC is not in the business of making money, it's in the business of making a better capital.
__________________
"It is only because the control of the means of production is divided among many people acting independently that nobody has complete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what to do with ourselves." - Friedrich Hayek
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1555  
Old Posted May 13, 2016, 12:06 AM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
I know this is controversial but I think the NCC should give the land for free in exchange for legally binding commitments to policy objectives, like urban design standards, space available for small businesses, etc. Basically make the Sens pay social rent instead if monetary rent. The NCC is not in the business of making money, it's in the business of making a better capital.
I read somewhere that the NCC is legally obliged to sell for market value. Now because of the contamination, that might be less than Firestone's estimate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1556  
Old Posted May 13, 2016, 1:30 AM
phil235's Avatar
phil235 phil235 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
I read somewhere that the NCC is legally obliged to sell for market value. Now because of the contamination, that might be less than Firestone's estimate.
He also doesn't mention the proceeds from the sale or redevelopment of the CTC and its lands. Presumably that is intended to be a major source of funding.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1557  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 2:39 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,200
I recently learned about Cheonggyecheon, a linear park that features a reclaimed stream in the middle of Seoul, South Korea, and thought about how much it resembles RendezVous Lebreton's proposal for the aqueduct.

http://inhabitat.com/how-the-cheongg...eart-of-seoul/









Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1558  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 3:08 AM
Harley613's Avatar
Harley613 Harley613 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aylmer, QC
Posts: 6,869
The Aquaduct is more like an Aquatrickle right now, I assume it will be wider when the plan is complete?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1559  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 12:14 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 2,445
I think that we might find that the aqueduct is historic and can not be substantially altered. It, from what I heard at the Open house, will be 'restored'; probably meaning just rebuilding the stone banks.

Also, the historic stone bridges over the aqueduct are too low for anyone to pass under them - say, while skating or riding in a Gondola.

I might be wrong, however, and maybe it is possible to enlarge the aqueduct between the bridges. I think both groups talked about modifying 'the Basin'.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1560  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 1:58 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 25,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
I know this is controversial but I think the NCC should give the land for free in exchange for legally binding commitments to policy objectives, like urban design standards, space available for small businesses, etc. Basically make the Sens pay social rent instead if monetary rent. The NCC is not in the business of making money, it's in the business of making a better capital.
No, the land must be sold at fair market value. The NCC is not in the business of giving our public land away.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Downtown & Urban Ottawa
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:52 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.