Lansdowne Park Revitalization | N/A | N/A | Proposed [Archive] - Page 5

c_speed3108

Jun 26, 2009, 12:48 PM

From the sun...

Ravens football could go live at Lansdowne

By Terri Saunders, Sun Media

Last Updated: 26th June 2009, 5:49am

Discussions are underway to revive the Carleton Ravens football team to play in a renovated Frank Clair Stadium.

It’s been nearly 11 years since the gridiron Ravens have taken the field, but those who advocate their return believe there could be a new home for the team at a revitalized Lansdowne Park.

“We are still in the early stages of exploring this possibility, particularly how the team would be funded,” said Jennifer Brenning, Carleton’s director of recreation and athletics. “We must find a home field for the team and the Lansdowne Live stadium presents an exciting possibility for Carleton.”

On Wednesday, officials from the university began working with members of the Lansdowne Live Group to find a home for the resurrected Ravens, while at the same time exploring who to hit up for the cash it will take to bring the team back to life.

“As a Carleton Ravens football alumnus and a Lansdowne Live partner, it’s a privilege to help facilitate the possible return of the Ravens football program,” said John Ruddy, president of Trinity Development Group and a cornerback for the Ravens in the 1970s.

“We’re developing a business model that capitalizes on the synergies of our two organizations to lower start-up and operations costs and that’s what makes it possible.”

Great addition

Ruddy believes a team such as the Ravens would be a great addition to the roster of events that can be held at Lansdowne Park in the years to come.

“The Ravens would utilize our professional training facilities, they’d play in a new, fan-friendly stadium and they’d leverage our marking and operations staff,” said Ruddy. “At the end of the day, I think those elements would benefit recruiting and player development and fast-track success on the field.”

The next step for both groups, along with any other potential donors or partners, is to put together a business model to fully fund a football program through outside sources. Once that model is drafted, the school would have to apply to Canadian Interuniversity Sport for permission to field a team.

The Ravens were a mainstay of Carleton’s athletics program for 53 years from 1945 to 1998. In March 1999, officials at the school sacked the team for budgetary reasons. At the time, university president Dr. Richard Van Loon said “an angel” would have to drop $100,000 or $150,000 from the sky in order to keep the team going.

Radster

Jun 26, 2009, 5:45 PM

I agree, excellent article by Randall!

I also suggest, to those that haven't done so yet, to read the comments to his article. Many people share our views, but there are still many NIMBYs posting their typical comments, and some of them make no sense. Need a laugh? Go read those comments!

Davis137

Jun 27, 2009, 1:02 PM

canadave

Jun 27, 2009, 4:14 PM

Having multiple teams and leagues use the facility makes complete sense...Hamilton might end up doing the same thing with McMaster and the Tigercats...having both play in the same stadium eventually...

Well, the Gee-Gees have already been basically the sole tenants of the field for the past few years, so I would hope that CIS football will remain a part of the stadium.

AuxTown

Jun 27, 2009, 5:11 PM

Bringing back the Ravens football program would be great! Nothing like a bit of crosstown rivalry to pump some life into CIS football in this town.

umbria27

Jul 1, 2009, 11:22 PM

Hey Radster and O-Town,

I've no intention of starting a flame war, but I would like to ask what you found so compelling about Denley's article. I didn't see anything new in there. His argument seems to be that the Lansdowne Live group approached the city with a pitch and the city said, sure we'll listen. That's fine, but we also gave them exclusive rights to negotiate. When the city and OSEG figure out what it is they are proposing, it will be pitched to us plebes, at which point, as Denley points out, we'll get a chance to object or reject.

My problem is that this will be presented to us a choice between doing something or nothing. Any opposition to the deal will be painted as dooming Lansdowne to rot. Who is going to stand in front of that steamroller?

As far as I understand it the old Design Lansdowne process was supposed to result in a request for proposals to develop. OSEG and anybody else would have then been able to pitch, and we'd have a real choice instead of Hobson's Choice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice).

And again, in the interest of full disclosure, I live in the Glebe. I'm also a football fan.

k2p

Jul 2, 2009, 12:53 AM

My problem is that this will be presented to us a choice between doing something or nothing. Any opposition to the deal will be painted as dooming Lansdowne to rot. Who is going to stand in front of that steamroller?

What I liked about Denley's article is that it wasn't written by Hobson. The choice is real, as the rot that is Lansdowne shows. For as long as I can remember, fixing Lansdowne has been on everyone's list. But nothing has been done. Partly, because of money. And partly, because folks like those who elect Clive Doucet will oppose anything that isn't one more empty park.

I am unbothered that Lansdowne Live has exclusive rights to negotiate. Mainly, because the exclusive rights have so far rested with the City of Ottawa and look what that's done. But moreover, nothing stopped the Friends of Lansdowne launching its worldwide design plan years ago. Nothing stopped making the site a mayoral issue like light rail. It is now a bit rich, then, to decry OSEG filling the vacuum that the public happily left empty.

So if people like what they see when a proposal comes out, as Denley says, what's the downside? That might be a steamroller. But the steam that creates the roll would, well, be the public saying yes.

AuxTown

Jul 2, 2009, 12:48 PM

Rotting is a great term to describe Lansdowne, and it's been going on for years (and even decades). Lansdowne Live is an exciting proposal by LOCAL businessmen who really want to make the park into a local destination. Currently, it's an eyesore and nothing else. The major functions that they have to preserve (in my eyes) is the Civic Centre and the farmer's market, both of which will be significantly improved by this proposal. The "Friends" of Lansdowne also seem to be forgetting that they current proposal includes all kinds of parkland on the site; maybe they have some kind of alterior motive, wouldn't that be surprising? How long has this land been stagnant with not a peep from developers, local or otherwise? There has been nothing stopping other groups from submitting proposals, but none of them have. This is a consortium with a genuine interest in our community, tons of money, and ideas that would make Lansdowne into the destination it deserves to be. The city's had their chance to do something and they chose to do nothing. Now let's give the private sector a chance to fix a scar on the face of Ottawa.

Radster

Jul 2, 2009, 2:12 PM

What did I find compelling in his article? The fact that he laid down the actual facts of what is going on, that he explained, in simple and clear terms the entire process since it started, where we stand now, and what will happen in the near future. Something the Friends of Lansdowne had not done. Lansdowne Live is a win-win for the city and the investors (who are local).

Had we gone with the design competition and a solicitation process, the end result would have been a huge question mark (do you really think the City of Ottawa would have been able to come up with decent selection criteria that would have made everyone happy???), it could have also cost more, the investors could have been from outside of the city, the stadium and arena could have been lost, and the entire timeline would have been way longer.

People forget, or don't know that in some cases, it is more beneficial to go sole source, and IMO, this is one of the cases, as the Lansdowne Live proposal would have been hard to beat, proof in that alone is that no one else dared to submit a competing proposal!

waterloowarrior

Jul 2, 2009, 10:11 PM

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2582/3682993628_c01be16212_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3658/3682183283_b27f349904_b.jpg

AuxTown

Jul 3, 2009, 12:17 AM

:previous:

QED

Davis137

Jul 3, 2009, 11:59 AM

So when the heck are decisions going to be made about this place? As much as I would love having pro football here in Ottawa to go and watch, I am growing tired of the whole debacle, with all of these community groups and commitees etc wanting to stick fingers in pies...Let's move on, or ahead.

umbria27

Jul 7, 2009, 9:56 PM

Thanks for the honest replies to my question, now let me see if I can organize the common thread's and rebut. Apoligies if my mastery of bbCode isn't what it should be.

What I liked about Denley's article is that it wasn't written by Hobson. The choice is real, as the rot that is Lansdowne shows.

That's still Hobson's choice - OSEG's way or nothing.

nothing stopped the Friends of Lansdowne launching its worldwide design plan years ago. Nothing stopped making the site a mayoral issue like light rail. It is now a bit rich, then, to decry OSEG filling the vacuum that the public happily left empty.

Now this is delving into ancient history and I stand to be corrected, but wasn't the Design Lansdowne process under way in 2007? That's before OSEG's bid. There was no void to fill.

The circumstances of Design Lansdowne's demise are murky (to me at least). It seems to have stopped doing anything in March 2008. Anybody know how it got axed?

So if people like what they see when a proposal comes out, as Denley says, what's the downside? That might be a steamroller. But the steam that creates the roll would, well, be the public saying yes.

The downside is that we haven't looked for other options. The public can easily be manipulated to say yes. You just have to make the alternative less attractive, which is what this process is doing.

....Lansdowne Live is a win-win for the city and the investors (who are local).

Lansdowne Live is an exciting proposal by LOCAL businessmen who really want to make the park into a local destination.

Surely the "win-win" is not a foregone conclusion. Nobody has seen the results yet. This is wishful thinking.

I've never really understood the automatic benefit of local. I've had raw deals from plenty of local businesses.

....Had we gone with the design competition and a solicitation process, the end result would have been a huge question mark (do you really think the City of Ottawa would have been able to come up with decent selection criteria that would have made everyone happy???)

Landsdowne Live supporters insist (See Denley and k2p above) that this process will also end with a question mark - a go and no go decision. I'd rather have a few more choices.

Surely the competency of the City to set criteria cuts both ways. If they can't be trusted to set out clear criteria of evaluation for solicited proposals, surely they won't be able to properly evaluate an unsolicited one either. If we let this argument stand nothing will get done in this city ever. We have to hold our councillors and the staff to higher standards.

.... the Lansdowne Live proposal would have been hard to beat, proof in that alone is that no one else dared to submit a competing proposal!

There has been nothing stopping other groups from submitting proposals

Competitors can hardly be blamed for not submitting a competitive proposal when the City has actively discouraged it by closing down the competition and negotiating exclusively with OSEG. That's what's stopping other groups from submitting proposals: the City is telling them they won't accept them. If nothing else this is a foolhardy negotiation tactic on the City's part. Nothing motivates a vendor like a little competition.

Now, do I think that the Friends of Lansdowne are right on every count? No, I think some of their pronouncements about corruption are hyperbolic. I think that there are inevitably people there who have kneejerk reactions to any change in the park and I think I'd hate to have to talk to most of them at the office Christmas party, but their main point is valid. This process is uncompetitive and looks like it's being railroaded through.

And while I would like to go back in time and have a proper competition, I think that's unlikely to happen now. In this case, pressure groups like the Friends Of, actually fill the role that a competition would have. Giving the negotiators reason to look over their shoulder and make sure the final proposal is a palatable as possible.

k2p

Jul 8, 2009, 12:40 AM

Let me put it another way, then. I moved to Ottawa in the early 1990s. In all that time, nothing stopped anyone from making a pitch to do something at Lansdowne. I guess that could be written off as ancient history.

But it says something that in 20 years, there is one -- OSEG's -- concrete proposal to reinvigorate the site. That the Design Lansdowne process collapsed, and all the wankfests before it collapsed, is why the choice boils down to OSEG or rot.

Still, my use of Hobson's choice was wrong. I thought it referred to a false choice. But umbria27 is right. At the end of the day, it's take it or leave it. O-Town and Radster are also right, however...

Nothing stopped someone pitching an different, funded and feasible plan to the people of Ottawa. The issue is not what happened *after* OSEG unveiled its pitch. It is what happened *before* OSEG did. Namely, nothing.

Only by sweeping decades of nothing happening can the City be criticized for a "foolhardy negotiation tactic" in speaking with OSEG. If my house is for sale for 20 years and nobody knocks on the door, it's not silly to negotiate with whomever finally trundles up. The City isn't doing OSEG a favour by allowing it to pump some life into Lansdowne. Quite the opposite imho.

lrt's friend

Jul 8, 2009, 3:06 AM

This is a lot more complicated than the Friends of Lansdowne try to lead us to believe. This is not just about the design of Lansdowne Park but also about a major public facility being allowed to rot to the point that it had to be partially demolished. I am talking about the football stadium, which has been used for 3 major events, the Grey Cup, the Francophonie Games and the FIFA under 18 World Cup in the few years prior to its partial demolition as well as regular CFL football. Because of mismanagement and neglect by the city, we have created a crises situation. This has been brewing for decades as one by one, buildings at Lansdowne Park have been demolished. When you reach a crises stage, action needs to be taken, and at this point, we cannot be waiting for a multi-year design competition that may lead nowhere. It is not entirely correct that the current process has not offered alternatives, as we saw with Melnyk's bid out in Kanata. This perfectly demonstrates why the stadium issue has complicated the Lansdowne Park design issue. We had 2 viable bids on replacing the facility that was prompting the redesign of Lansdowne, and one of those bids was going to redirect city money completely away from Lansdowne. The city had to make a decision based on the only two bids available. So, it is incorrect to say that others could not have made a bid, because indeed, we did get a second unsolicited bid but regarding the stadium and not strictly the park itself. We also have to understand that to great degree sports franchises are driving this process because of the money involved and in this respect, credible ownership is critical to future success. This is perfectly illustrated by the failure of the Rough Riders and Renegades that is largely attributed by poor and out of city ownership. This aspect further complicates and limits the choices that the city can logically make. You can create the most wonderful design for Lansdowne and Frank Clair Stadium, but if nobody wants to build it or its not financial viable or nobody credible wants to put a sports franchise back in Frank Clair Stadium, we have got absolutely nowhere, and we have aided the process of letting Lansdowne rot much further and potentially lose many more years. So there you are, this not just about design, but a combination of design, replacing the stadium and providing a sports franchise with a viable ownership group to use the new stadium. This is why the current proposal of Lansdowne Live will be very difficult to beat, as they are offering to satisfy all three requirements, whereas there are major risks that a design competition will not be able to accomplish this.

AuxTown

Jul 8, 2009, 3:14 AM

:previous:

Yeah, what he said!

Dado

Jul 8, 2009, 4:21 AM

Now this is delving into ancient history and I stand to be corrected, but wasn't the Design Lansdowne process under way in 2007? That's before OSEG's bid. There was no void to fill.

I don't know if it was underway in 2007, but it was underway prior to the OSEG proposal. If memory serves, it was just about to get going in earnest. I was at the Lansdowne Live! press conference and it was pretty obvious from the presentation and from the questions and answers that the launch of Lansdowne Live! was orchestrated to circumvent the design competition by putting on the timeline pressure of putting in a bid to get a CFL franchise. The proponents said in response to a question from Doucet that they would not be willing to submit their proposal as one of many to come from the design competition - this was clearly a bullying tactic based on the calculation that a CFL bid would be enough of a carrot.

David Jeanes was there on the part of Heritage Ottawa and asked about their scheme of putting an aquarium in the Aberdeen Pavilion. From the answer it was clear that they had little regard for either an aquarium or the pavilion - it was just eye candy thrown in.

I concluded at the time that the entire thing was a distraction from actually doing something useful with Lansdowne.

The circumstances of Design Lansdowne's demise are murky (to me at least). It seems to have stopped doing anything in March 2008. Anybody know how it got axed?
It stopped for sure in the late summer of 2008 when City Staff heard about Lansdowne Live. It was stopped by City Staff without being directed to do so by Council. City Staff were probably acting outside their mandate when they did so and quite frankly one or more staffers could easily have lost their jobs over it if we had a Council ready to put its foot down. City Staff, again without Council direction, also initiated a study of locations for a stadium. In fairness, this should have been done ages ago before either the design competition was launched and well before considering any unsolicited bids, but we don't do that kind of advanced planning in Ottawa.

Anyway, for a brief moment we (as in the City of Ottawa) were in danger of dipping our toes in the ocean and thinking of possibly doing something great and imaginative and getting lots of people involved in it. Fortunately OSEG and our City officials stepped in at the last moment and ensured that wouldn't happen.

Competitors can hardly be blamed for not submitting a competitive proposal when the City has actively discouraged it by closing down the competition and negotiating exclusively with OSEG. That's what's stopping other groups from submitting proposals: the City is telling them they won't accept them. If nothing else this is a foolhardy negotiation tactic on the City's part. Nothing motivates a vendor like a little competition.

That's basically how I see it. The suspension of the design competition to pander to one group told everyone else that the City wasn't serious about getting the best ideas assembled for Lansdowne.

ottawatraffic

Jul 8, 2009, 1:48 PM

Let me put it another way, then. I moved to Ottawa in the early 1990s. In all that time, nothing stopped anyone from making a pitch to do something at Lansdowne. I guess that could be written off as ancient history.

Not true - as part of the previous go around with Lansdowne, the City had to settle with the developer they awarded the contract - that developer, Canderel, held a right of first refusal for 10 years on the faciltiy. That right expired in 2008.

lrt's friend

Jul 8, 2009, 2:23 PM

We forget that part of the stadium was condemned during this process, which changed the dynamics. Also, the most credible ownership group for a CFL franchise in over a generation also presented itself and they were awarded a conditional franchise. If the city had maintained the stadium properly, then the process of a redesign of the park could have continued on its own schedule and as we have seen, nothing much has really happened for over 30 years since the city took over the management of the park from the CCEA except the renovation of the Aberdeen Pavilion, which we almost lost in the process. It is funny that the 'Friends of Lansdowne Park' only made its appearance when a proposal was made. What real positive contribution have they made? They are coming across just like other groups who have successfully killed the Windmill project, the Botanical Gardens project, the LRT project and probably others.

Yes, public involvement in the redesign. We know where this usually leads, all the NIMBYs under the sun come out of the woodwork, and the vast majority would be linked to the Glebe Community Association or some other vested interest. There will not be broad public representation to provide balance of opinion for what is a city-wide facility. What would be downplayed is that Lansdowne Park has throughout all or most of its history served as the city's fairgrounds and provided the city's largest sports stadium. In my opinion, public involvment must be constrained (not eliminated) and must resolve both the fairgrounds and stadium issue on top of the park redesign. These are not independent items. Even now, we are greatly at risk of ignoring the fairgrounds aspect but thankfully my own city councillor cried out in the wilderness that this issue must be resolved as part of the Lansdowne Live negotiations.

k2p

Jul 8, 2009, 9:48 PM

Not true - as part of the previous go around with Lansdowne, the City had to settle with the developer they awarded the contract - that developer, Canderel, held a right of first refusal for 10 years on the faciltiy. That right expired in 2008.

And how many proposals did Canderel exercise its right of refusal on? The fact is, because of the City, not in spite of it, Lansdowne has sat there, falling apart, for more than 20 years. The pavilion's refurbishment excluded.

Radster

Jul 9, 2009, 1:10 PM

Yes, public involvement in the redesign. We know where this usually leads, all the NIMBYs under the sun come out of the woodwork, and the vast majority would be linked to the Glebe Community Association or some other vested interest. There will not be broad public representation to provide balance of opinion for what is a city-wide facility.

I agree, and here's an idea, when these public consultations are announced and held, a bunch of us on SSP should get together and attend, this will provide that badly needed balance of opinion :notacrook:

canadave

Jul 9, 2009, 1:25 PM

Jamaican-Phoenix

Jul 9, 2009, 1:52 PM

I fully agree with you guys. Let's do it.

AuxTown

Jul 9, 2009, 9:51 PM

I'm in! (as if there was any question)

Davis137

Jul 10, 2009, 11:43 AM

Where's Chuck Norris when you need him?

waterloowarrior

Jul 22, 2009, 2:42 AM

Hunt group spends $1 million
Lansdowne Live! consortium paying architect firm to work on plans for 24,000-seat stadium
By DON BRENNAN, Sun Media
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/Junior/2009/07/16/10167356.html

(Photo courtesy of Lansdowne Live!)

Small potatoes are what is occasionally being sold at the nearby Farmers’ Market as well as what’s currently going on inside the Civic Centre these days.

Meanwhile, preparations are still busily being made for the creation of the big spread after Aug. 26.

That is “D-Day” for 67’s owner Jeff Hunt and his group of local developers, the day city council votes whether to accept their final proposal on Lansdowne Live! and give the capital of the country both a downtown world-class entertainment facility and the CFL team it deserves.

A vote that really should be a slam-dunk yes.

“A black and white day,” Hunt called it yesterday. “We’re either going or we’re dead.”

Hunt was showing reporters the relatively minor renovations being done in his team’s home. Starting next season, the 67’s will be like the rest of the OHL in that both team benches will be on the same side of the rink. The penalty box is now along the north boards while coach Chris Byrne’s squad will sit where the sin bin used to be.

To make room for the owner’s new box, the press box is being moved from centre ice to a couple of luxury suites in the west end. Just in case you’re looking to wave hello.

The price of such work, of course, is nothing compared to the $97 million the city is being asked to fork out for the new Lansdowne Park, which the Hunt group is proposing to run for the next 30 years.

The Hunt, Roger Greenberg, John Ruddy and Bill Shenkman consortium has already shelled out almost $1 million to the Toronto architect firm — Stadium Consultants International Inc. — that has diligently been working on plans to turn Frank Clair Stadium into a reasonable facsimile of Toronto’s BMO Field, home of Toronto FC of the MLS.

Under the proposal, the new stadium will seat 24,000 fans.

“Twenty-four thousand is the sweet spot,” said Hunt. “We’ve talked to other teams and they’ve all been consistent ... 24,000 creates intimacy and demand.”

The rest of the south side stands will be demolished and reconstructed with 10,000 seats, while an “enormous facelift” will also be done on the north side.

About $15 million-$18 million will be poured into the Civic Centre, which has a ceiling that’s been falling down piece by piece for years.

The idea of an aquarium has been canned, unfortunately, and Hunt says it will be up to his group to have a vision of what’s to become of the Aberdeen Pavilion by D-Day.

“The budget is the budget,” said Hunt. “Ninety-seven million is the cap. We’re working to create as nice a building as we can with that money.”

To those who assume that during the summer months one could roll a bowling ball through city hall without it passing a politician, well, Hunt says that’s not necessarily accurate.

“The commitment from city staff is significant,” he said. “They’ve been working hard every day trying to make this work. That’s been positive.

“For us, it’s been really drilling down the stadium design and cost. The architects from Toronto come in once or twice a week. You don’t really appreciate how much detail goes into a project of this magnitude.”

So no, just because you haven’t heard anything lately about the bid to bring a football team back to Ottawa doesn’t mean it’s not as intense as ever.

“We’re working every day,” said Hunt. “We’re down at city hall every day. There’s been no let up. The level of activity has been significant. But we still have a lot of work to do to make it a reality.”

Is he optimistic the plan will still come together?

“Optimistic? I would say it’s more like I’m hopeful something will happen,” said Hunt.

So are the rest of us who are starving for a CFL team and a respectable sports facility in the heart of the city.

AuxTown

Jul 22, 2009, 3:10 AM

:fingerscrossed:
This would be such a positive note after so many failures by city council in the past few years. Now, if they can't get a central library and a shovel in the ground for LRT I might even consider calling this council term not unsuccessful.

Oh, and just a note from a very long time ago in this thread:

I think Lansdowne would be great for a U-shaped stadium like BMO in Toronto:

http://michaelcollins.files.wordpress.com/2006/07/rendering.jpg

The stands would wrap around the West side along Bank street and a couple stores or restaurants could be incorporated into the structure so that they open up onto the street as well as the stadium. On the East side that is left open in TO, I imagine a parking structure similar to the one at the Ottawa Airport:

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/2852/airportparkingzp8.jpg

This would buffer some of the stadium noise from what will surely be residential towers on the East side of Lansdowne along the canal. A big screen could also be affixed to the structure which would be pretty convenient and would make the stadium feel more intimate as opposed to having openings on each end.

Sounds like someone is listening! We'll have to see what the final plans show though.

harls

Jul 22, 2009, 11:19 AM

So they've taken the aquarium idea off the table, eh?

Jamaican-Phoenix

Jul 23, 2009, 4:03 AM

So they've taken the aquarium idea off the table, eh?

Last heard, they certainly took "Aquarium inside Aberdeen Pavillion" off the table. Not sure if they removed the entire idea though.

canadave

Jul 23, 2009, 1:23 PM

Last heard, they certainly took "Aquarium inside Aberdeen Pavillion" off the table. Not sure if they removed the entire idea though.

I won't be surprised at all if it's quitely vanished by the time we see the final proposal. It was one of the most oft-criticized parts of the plan when it was first released, and I think they realized pretty quickly that it wasn't going to fly. Even I kind of went "I don't know about this..." when I first saw it, in spite of how much I was in favour of the plan.

I suspect Aberdeen will be earmarked for convention space or the farmer's market or some such in the final plan.

AuxTown

Jul 23, 2009, 3:05 PM

Aberdeen Pavilion would be such a great building for a farmers market IMO. It has tons of space, huge doors for loading and unloading, and has a long agricultural history in Ottawa with respect to the Central Canada Exhibition. Doesn't this photo (circa 1903) just scream farmer's market?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Aberdeen_Pavilion_1903.jpg

Interior
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/6966/aberdeenpavilioninterio.jpg
(courtesy Wikipedia)

canadave

Jul 23, 2009, 3:19 PM

^ Yeah, I think it'd be fantastic. Especially for days when it's rainy in the summer, or if they want to extend the market's season deeper into the fall or even through the winter.

In all honesty, I can't wait to see the final proposal. I have the feeling it will be fantastic.

phil235

Jul 23, 2009, 5:54 PM

I agree, and here's an idea, when these public consultations are announced and held, a bunch of us on SSP should get together and attend, this will provide that badly needed balance of opinion :notacrook:

As a supporter of the proposal (in the Glebe no less), one thing that worries me a little is that the "Friends of Lansdowne" campaign seems to be resonating a little with the public. Their sound bite - this is a sole-sourced backroom deal with developers - is having some impact. Nobody likes developers and the complaint about the process seems to have legs. It doesn't matter that the position is entirely hypocritical on the part of Doucet. In his world it was wrong to overturn a legitimate council decision on the LRT plan, but in this case it is somehow perfectly acceptable to continue to attack the selection process after it has been was approved by an equally legitimate council decision.

I don't think the city or the proponents of Lansdowne Live have done a very effective job of countering the negative publicity that group is generating. It would be nice to see a consistent and compelling message in support of the project. Something that addresses the concerns and communicates that this is an important and unique opportunity to revitalize an important civic asset.

Hopefully that will come about when a deal is finally reached. Without some positive public comment, I fear that the proponents of ad nauseum debate and civic inertia will succeed in mustering enough vocal opposition to kill the proposal and allow Lansdowne to rot for 20 more years.

umbria27

Aug 10, 2009, 4:00 PM

Aberdeen Pavilion would be such a great building for a farmers market IMO. It has tons of space, huge doors for loading and unloading, and has a long agricultural history in Ottawa with respect to the Central Canada Exhibition. Doesn't this photo (circa 1903) just scream farmer's market?

I agree 100%. I've thought the same thing before. Inside it's just like those great produce markets you see in European cities. To make it lively year round though, you'd have to allow non-local produce.

umbria27

Aug 10, 2009, 4:10 PM

Hunt's right on about the sweet spot of 24,000 for the stadium. That's a great size.

The site layout doesn't seem to have changed much since the original mock ups. There's still a huge retail mall running the length of Holmwood. Too much to give away IMHO.

Since the Stadium is a given, the trade off seems to between Retail - Parking and Other Uses.
Parking seems to be losing in the proposal so far, which may seem like a good thing to those of us who have to look at that asphalt desert every day, but it does seem a little short sighted. I still fear that lack of parking could choke off the attendance lifeblood of any new CFL team. It doesn't seem to me that the architects are taking it seriously. How else do you explain this mockup with 24,000 in the stands and empty spots in the first row of the parking lot?

http://www.lansdownelive.ca/images/gallery/stadiumaerial.jpg

thurmas

Aug 10, 2009, 8:39 PM

hi i am from winnipeg but I am really hopeing you guys get the riders back soon and I have really followed hunt's bid but 24k is a little too small in my view 29,000 seems better to me but with all that endzone space it seems you can still expand to 45-50 k for grey cup time, good luck!

waterloowarrior

Aug 19, 2009, 1:26 AM

Lansdowne Redesign Plan Near Completion
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/bulldog/archive/2009/08/18/lansdowne-redesign-plan-near-completion.aspx
By KENNETH_GRAY 08-18-2009 COMMENTS(5) THE BULLDOG

Filed under: Larry O'Brien, Lansdowne Park, City of Ottawa, Glebe, Clive Doucet, mayor, city council
Negotiations on a redesigned Lansdowne Park are moving ahead rapidly. So quickly in fact that College Councillor Rick Chiarelli expects there will be a motion ready for the Sept. 9 council meeting.

That motion is likely to begin the process of public consultations on a completed plan, Chiarelli said today. Consultant Graham Bird in conjunction with city staff and the principals behind Lansdowne Live! are about to come to an agreement on a new plan; one which Chiarelli says is a more equitable partnership between the private developers and the city government.

Bird was hired because of his technical expertise and political savvy, both of which are necessary to push the plan through council, Chiarelli said.

Chiarelli declined to release the new details or cost of the plan or the pecuniary relationship between Lansdowne Live! and the city.

Chiarelli and Mayor Larry O'Brien are actively lobbying councillors at present to garner support for the new Lansdowne project. He said there is the possibility that rogue motions could be introduced at council in September to quickly approve or kill the project.

waterloowarrior

Aug 19, 2009, 1:31 AM

also Friends of Lansdowne Park have a new website (http://www.friendsoflansdownepark.ca/)

AuxTown

Aug 19, 2009, 4:29 AM

Mille Sabords

Aug 19, 2009, 1:05 PM

canadave

Aug 19, 2009, 1:22 PM

These people are no friends of Lansdowne Park. They're trying to kill the only chance we have of seeing something productive done at Lansdowne in the next decade. Not to mention that they have no interest in having a stadium be part of the plan, showing that this is a group of people (smart people) who disguise their vested interests as something that's good for the city when they really don't care about the city as a whole or its vision.

My "favourite" bit comes from this page (http://www.friendsoflansdownepark.ca/a/friendsoflansdownepark.ca/folp/home/faqs/arefriendsoflansdowneparkagainstacflfootballteamatlansdowne):

The Friends of Lansdowne are not opposed to CFL football at Lansdowne or elsewhere in Ottawa, especially at a site with access to mass transit and parking.

Yeah, sure you're not. The sole sourcing is just a very convenient veneer to rail against a football stadium.

It's also funny how their "possibilities (http://www.friendsoflansdownepark.ca/home/faqs/whatelseispossibleforlansdownepark)" page mentions a year-round Farmer's Market (almost certainly to be included in the plan), cafes, small shops and theatres (different from the LL plan... how?) and suggests that Frank Clair could be "rehabilitated" for $38 million. Just how that's possible, I have no idea.

gjhall

Aug 19, 2009, 9:54 PM

My "favourite" bit comes from this page (http://www.friendsoflansdownepark.ca/a/friendsoflansdownepark.ca/folp/home/faqs/arefriendsoflansdowneparkagainstacflfootballteamatlansdowne):

Yeah, sure you're not. The sole sourcing is just a very convenient veneer to rail against a football stadium.

It's also funny how their "possibilities (http://www.friendsoflansdownepark.ca/home/faqs/whatelseispossibleforlansdownepark)" page mentions a year-round Farmer's Market (almost certainly to be included in the plan), cafes, small shops and theatres (different from the LL plan... how?) and suggests that Frank Clair could be "rehabilitated" for $38 million. Just how that's possible, I have no idea.
I'm no NIMBY or member of Friends of Lansdowne or Glebe resident, but I do wonder if they don't have a point regarding the lack of transit to the site.

What does the city & region gain, I'm interested in knowing, over having the stadium on THIS site over any other... For instance Bayview or another well connected/at all connected site?

waterloowarrior

Aug 19, 2009, 9:54 PM

0fXOxRFlkeE

kwoldtimer

Aug 19, 2009, 10:24 PM

:previous:

So Clive thinks we can do better. Thinks we can. What is his risk if he is wrong? :hell:

Mille Sabords

Aug 20, 2009, 1:22 AM

I'm no NIMBY or member of Friends of Lansdowne or Glebe resident, but I do wonder if they don't have a point regarding the lack of transit to the site.

What does the city & region gain, I'm interested in knowing, over having the stadium on THIS site over any other... For instance Bayview or another well connected/at all connected site?

Because this site is in the Glebe and the Glebe has bars and restaurants steps from the stadium, while Bayview has no bars, no restaurants and actually nothing of interest nearby, and it doesn't even have a stadium. We'd have to build one from scratch there, while at Lansdowne there is a stadium we can refurbish, plus a 100+ year history of going to see games there.

waterloowarrior

Aug 20, 2009, 1:32 AM

Interesting comment on the youtube video "Imagery is everything. Whether he realizes it or not, Mr. Doucet just made a pro-Lansdowne Live video. Works for me, because I support Lansdowne Live, but I can't imagine this is what Mr. Doucet had in mind."

waterloowarrior

Aug 20, 2009, 5:02 AM

Lansdowne Live up against 11th-hour challenge
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/Lansdowne+Live+against+11th+hour+challenge/1910332/story.html
Businessman wants design competition, calls for stadium at Bayview Yards

BY MARIA COOK, THE OTTAWA CITIZENAUGUST 20, 2009 12:02 AM

OTTAWA -- An Ottawa businessman hopes to overturn the Lansdowne Live proposal and re-open an ideas competition for Lansdowne Park with an alternative vision to be presented next week to decision-makers.

John E. Martin invited politicians, government officials, architects, developers and community leaders to a private breakfast meeting next Thursday, Aug. 27, to see architectural drawings, hear expert speakers and perhaps be persuaded.

Martin says a new stadium and library/cultural centre should be constructed at Bayview Yards, while Lansdowne Park should be developed for public enjoyment of parkland and water.

“The concept is about light and space and areas of tranquility and to get there by opening up the imaginations of architects and designers through open competitive bidding,” says Martin, founder of a new advocacy group called Vitally Ottawa — Absolument Ottawa.

A stadium, designed for soccer and football, makes more sense at Bayview than at Lansdowne Park because of traffic and parking, he says.

“To attract the Gatineau population from across the river, clearly it is much easier to just hop over the bridge to the Bayview site than it is to try and push through downtown Ottawa.

“Rapid transit is key to the success of the stadium and will provide the maximum access to the library that the Ottawa Public Library wants for its new location.”

Bayview would also give the library “views and light and quiet.”

At Lansdowne Park, he envisions “renewable energy, music, calm, cooler micro-climate, integration of the canal and opening up the site from the waterway.”

It could have a natural grass amphitheatre, winter tobogganing, a public swimming pool, water taxis, farmer’s market and community sports fields.

Frank Clair Stadium at Lansdowne Park should be demolished, but the other structures upgraded, including the hockey arena and trade space, he says.

The Lansdowne Live proposal, which goes to city council Sept. 2, offers to rehabilitate Frank Clair stadium in exchange for land for residential and commercial development.

Martin talks about the “respectful use” of materials from Frank Clair Stadium, soil rehabilitation at Bayview Yards and use of energy technologies to achieve the highest environmental building standards.

“This is my dream, my goal and that of many others,” says Martin, owner of GlebeOnsite Computer Solutions. He hopes “to demonstrate the practical, affordable and vital initiatives that can take place in a competitive environment.”

John Leys, of Sherwood Engineering, a firm with offices in San Francisco and New York City, will present a case study of turning a brownfield site into a stadium in San Francisco. There will also be discussion of former contaminated rail yards in Montreal being rehabilitated for a hospital.

“The Bayview Yards, a former rail yard, has been maligned as not being a site to develop due to its contamination,” he says.

“Through the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, we have a case study that directly applies.”

A design competition for Lansdowne was shelved last year by council to consider an offer from the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group, headed by Roger Greenberg of Minto, Bill Shenkman of Shenkman Development, John Ruddy of Trinity Development Group and Jeff Hunt, owner of the Ottawa 67’s. The four men are conditional holders of a new CFL franchise.

Martin said the meeting was a private and closed function by invitation-only with no media or recording devices.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

gjhall

Aug 20, 2009, 2:56 PM

Because this site is in the Glebe and the Glebe has bars and restaurants steps from the stadium, while Bayview has no bars, no restaurants and actually nothing of interest nearby, and it doesn't even have a stadium. We'd have to build one from scratch there, while at Lansdowne there is a stadium we can refurbish, plus a 100+ year history of going to see games there.
No doubt there's the history and the facilities of the Glebe, but one thing it lacks is a sensible way for people to get there... the corridor between Tunney's and Downtown with Lebreton Flats, Hintonburg etc will be redeveloped in no time at all relative to the scale of these projects.

The stadium will still require $100 million and probably more to rebuild, and you'll recall when Lansdowne was first set up and even when the stadium was built, it was peripheral area of the city, AND was on the streetcar lines. Today it has neither of these advantages.

I don't think Lansdowne Live is a bad plan, I just don't think it's the best possible plan - by far! It seems like another episode of Ottawa acting like Detroit or Saint John, NB - just happy to get whatever a private sector developer will give them. Where's the vision?

This is an enormous amount of land that could be a phenomenal large scale urban park - something Ottawa simply does not have. Instead, we'll add thousands of new residents, new commercial space and add upgrade a major sporting facility that causes significant traffic problems, all with no proposed solution to moving the 24,000 people who will want to come and go at roughly the same time.

There's no other major city that would be so silly as to 1) stop an international design competition because a local group had a plan that council was impressed with, and 2) build/rebuild a major stadium with no mass-transit solution. We can do so much better, is all.

Deez

Aug 20, 2009, 3:28 PM

The stadium will still require $100 million and probably more to rebuild, and you'll recall when Lansdowne was first set up and even when the stadium was built, it was peripheral area of the city, AND was on the streetcar lines. Today it has neither of these advantages.

Small nit to pick: the streetcar line down Bank was actually built to serve the exposition grounds.

archie-tect

Aug 20, 2009, 4:14 PM

Why does it necessarily have to shopping mall easy to get out of. It's urban, traffic is a given no matter where you put. I mean the SBP has tons of parking is in the middle of nowhere and it still takes 45 minutes just to get out of the parking lot. At least with Lansdowne, there are more opportunities for alternate parking sites, ie Carleton U. Or hey just go to a local establlishment after the game or take a walk along the Canal.

As for the cost I seem to recall the $100M LL number including something in the order of $25M for the Civic Centre refurb. $75M does still seem a bit on the high side, but its amazing how much you can spend, a. when its not your money and b. when you are spending on luxury boxes and other amenities outside access to regular fans.

AuxTown

Aug 20, 2009, 5:58 PM

I guess the people posting here are not from Ottawa or have not lived here in the days when Frank Claire was a fully-functioning stadium? Anyone who's been to an event there can attest to the fact that geting out after a game with 25000 attending was just as easy (if not easier from my experience) than getting out of SBP after a Sens game. Traffic after the games disperses in many directions: North on Bank to 417 or Centretown, South on Bank, East or West on either Colonel By or Queen Elizabeth, out through the Glebe's many side streets, and we can't forget those that walk/run/bike and those that disperse into the many restaurants/bars in the Glebe/Centretown. Bayview would pose the issue that basically everyone would be trying to get out of downtown on Bronson, creating a massive bottleneck. I know you guys will argue this with tansit riders and Gatineau residents, but still the vast majority will need to go home to where 85% of people in Ottawa live. Let's not forget that having the stadium in such a central location will further promote urbanization in the city's core and maybe force people from Kanata/Orleans/Barhaven to further question their decision to move to the far reaches of civilization....this is a forum about big city living and densification after all.

gjhall

Aug 20, 2009, 6:11 PM

Listen, I'm Ottawa born and bred, and I don't think anyone is advocating placing it out in the burbs a la SBP... the issue remains that there is no transit for those who can't take a walk along the canal to get home and who won't park and ride to Carleton because, hey - there's a new parkade being built at city expense on the site.

I'm just trying to be realistic as to what would happen in that location. From my recollection of any major event, traffic in the area was pretty bad.

And yes, while the streetcar was built for the exposition ground, there is no plan on the table from the developer or the city that I'm aware of to upgrade transit to the facility. If there's a solution I'm all for it.

phil235

Aug 20, 2009, 6:27 PM

I would point out that Lansdowne Live includes a plan to run shuttle buses to parking at Carleton and to the transitway. The transit issue is certainly solveable with a little ingenuity.

Any plan to relocate the stadium complex would be far more expensive than refurbishing Lansdowne. To even maintain the same facilities, you would need to reconstruct the arena and trade space from scratch in a new location. If the city is having trouble with putting $125 million into Lansdowne, how will it find the money to clean up Bayview, demolish Lansdowne and rebuild the facilities there.

The other issue that is often forgotten is timing. Lansdowne is literally falling down. Realistically any new facilities at Bayview are 8 to 10 years away. In the mean time, we put money into Lansdowne or we tell all the current users that they are out of luck.

Oh yeah, and there is no team to play at a Bayview stadium.

kwoldtimer

Aug 20, 2009, 9:49 PM

[QUOTE=
BY MARIA COOK, THE OTTAWA CITIZENAUGUST 20, 2009 12:02 AM

OTTAWA -- An Ottawa businessman hopes to overturn the Lansdowne Live proposal and re-open an ideas competition for Lansdowne Park with an alternative vision to be presented next week to decision-makers. .........

“To attract the Gatineau population from across the river, clearly it is much easier to just hop over the bridge to the Bayview site than it is to try and push through downtown Ottawa. ..................

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen[/QUOTE]

I have no idea who Mr. Martin is, but if this is an accurate quote, I have to wonder about him. Whatever the site's potential merits, this is hardly an argument that will carry weight with the Ottawa taxpayers who will be expected to shell out for his "vision".

gjhall

Aug 20, 2009, 10:26 PM

waterloowarrior

Aug 20, 2009, 10:51 PM

Breakfast meeting aims to make Lansdowne Live toast
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/designingottawa/archive/2009/08/19/breakfast-meeting-aims-to-make-lansdowne-live-toast.aspx
By MARIACOOK 08-19-2009 COMMENTS(6) DESIGNING OTTAWA

Readers of Designing Ottawa may recognize the name John E. Martin. He's passionate about Lansdowne Park and the stadium debate and has posted many comments.

http://i575.photobucket.com/albums/ss195/mariacookottawa/LansdowneAerial-Coloured2800x600.jpg
IMAGE: Concept drawing of Lansdowne Park

Now he's going further. Martin has organized a breakfast meeting at the Canal Ritz on Thursday August 27 to propose an alternative vision to Lansdowne Live. See the article HERE.

He's invited Mayor Larry O'Brien and city council as well as federal and provincial representatives, architects, developers and community leaders.

It turns out O'Brien and some councillors in favour of Lansdowne Live have other plans at 7.15 a.m. that day.

It's a private function. If you didn't get an invitation and think you need to be there, you can call Martin at 613.898.1284.

http://i575.photobucket.com/albums/ss195/mariacookottawa/BayviewSitePlan-Coloured800x600.jpg
IMAGE: Concept drawing of Bayview Yards site plan

Here's his pitch:

•Construct a new stadium and library/cultural centre at Bayview Yards

•Remove Frank Clair stadium from Lansdowne Park, re-use the materials, "maximize" remaining structures including hockey arena and trade show space

•No new major construction at Lansdowne, "ecological" development of the park

•Decontaminate soil at Bayview Yards

•Highest environmental construction standards

Open it up to competitive bidding and some pretty interesting stuff could happen, he says.

Among the speakers is John Leys, of Sherwood Engineering, an American firm. He'll talk about how they turned a brownfield site in San Francisco into a stadium.

"We are the nation's capital and could be setting the standard in LEED development and design," says Martin.

Jamaican-Phoenix

Aug 20, 2009, 11:23 PM

I hate that proposal for soooooo many reasons... >_<

kwoldtimer

Aug 21, 2009, 12:06 AM

Well that Landsdowne concept drawing at least makes it clear what the "Friends" are aiming for. I guess the structure on Bank beside the fields (!!!) is supposed to be a hockey arena? The orderly African village thing over on the north side of the Aberdeen Pavillion is interesting, if a bit mysterious.

phil235

Aug 21, 2009, 12:21 AM

1) A shuttle bus isn't mass transit, it's a stop gap measure. It will help those who would take transit anyways, but doesn't draw people out of their cars the way the Transitway/LRT/Trams/Streetcars etc do.

2) If the bid for a CFL franchise is serious it will be flexible enough to locate at a brand new facility if chosen to be built elsewhere. There is no law somewhere saying CFL teams must play in Lansdowne Park.

3) Bayview will be redeveloped at some point, the current stadium will have to be either massively restored or torn down to be rebuilt. It doesn't really matter. The cheapest way to do something isn't always or even often the best way.

If we're going to have vision for out city, we need to think big and think broadly, beyond our immediate situation. I just hope whatever stadium they build will be suitable to be converted to an MLS franchise after yet another CFL team fails so it won't all be for naught.

Granted shuttle buses aren't mass transit, but they would be perfectly workable for big events at the stadium. We don't need to change lifestyles with this plan, we just need to find practical options to get people in and out.

As far as the CFL goes, how long do you think the league and the owners will wait? These type of proposals are time sensitive. By the time we get a Bayview stadium up in 10 years, what are the odds that these guys are still hanging around? Also, their business plan is not based on Bayview, it is based on Lansdowne and involves using the same administration for the 67's and the CFL team to achieve cost efficiencies.

On the cost issue, I just don't think it is realistic to expect the city to come up with what would something like double the $125 million cost of Lansdowne Live. We can't keep rejecting good plans because of a hope or a dream that we'll get something ideal down the road. There is no appetite among citizens for a $250 million stadium project. That is just a recipe for more decay at Lansdowne and no progress whatsoever.

I do agree entirely on the soccer - this stadium has to be built to accommodate soccer.

lrt's friend

Aug 21, 2009, 3:06 AM

It is becoming quite clear that it will be Lansdowne Live or nothing.

The Lansdowne site is critical to making a business case for the CFL to return. The Lansdowne Live proposal creates financial stability which will allow for long-term success, unlike what happened with the previous two teams.

If we move the stadium to Bayview, what will allow the potential CFL owners to create a viable franchise especially considering past failures?

Any solution will have to address the 67s, the trade shows, the Ex and a potential tenant for the stadium, whether the CFL or MLS or both.

I look at the pretty plan which recycles existing buildings, with substantial renovations of the arena and I wonder what the buildings will be used for beyond the arena, and where do people park?

I don't understand all these comments about the lack of rapid transit and even streetcars, which have no more capacity than buses. Lansdowne has handled large crowds for over 100 years without modern rapid transit. Why would this not continue to work as in the past? It is not as if we are expecting crowds of 25,000 at the park every day. Sure, it will be ideal to have the stadium on rapid transit, but at what additional cost? Building a completely new stadium on a brownfield site will almost certainly cost a lot more, if we can convince a viable owner to take a franchise there.

Perfect plans do not exist.

As it stands, the only reason why we are going to move forward with substantial renovation of Lansdowne is because we have a potential new CFL owner.

gjhall

Aug 21, 2009, 11:06 AM

gjhall

Aug 21, 2009, 11:12 AM

It is becoming quite clear that it will be Lansdowne Live or nothing.

As it stands, the only reason why we are going to move forward with substantial renovation of Lansdowne is because we have a potential new CFL owner.

What a preposterous assertion! An ENORMOUS pocket of valuable, publicly owned waterfront land and there's nothing else that can be done than a single proposal?

And while you're right that the only reason we're discussing Lansdowne Live is the CFL proposal, there's nothing stopping us from doing something OTHER than what a particular group of businessmen have suggested... after all, they don't own the land - yet.

canadave

Aug 21, 2009, 12:30 PM

I like the Bayview proposal (no surprise!), but the plan for Lansdowne is weak. There needs to be commercial space along Bank Street and on the site to animate the space, as well as more development along Holmwood, IMO.

You realize we don't know what exactly the plans for Bank and Holmwood are at this point, right? They haven't released the final version of the Lansdowne Live proposal yet, which could look quite different from the original one we saw back in the fall.

phil235

Aug 21, 2009, 2:53 PM

I like the Bayview proposal (no surprise!), but the plan for Lansdowne is weak. There needs to be commercial space along Bank Street and on the site to animate the space, as well as more development along Holmwood, IMO.

However, the actual greenspace looks pretty sensible...with the natural amphitheatre and sports fields it would be space that would actually be used. But more people would use it if there were more reasons to be there...

I agree with you on the commercial space along Bank. With the block-long hole created by the Glebe Centre on the opposite side of the street (a complete disaster), it would be nice to have a link between the Glebe and Ottawa South.

I'm not sure how you are worried about the ability of the project to animate the space. It is about as mixed-use a proposal as you will ever see, with something for all of the vested interests - a revitalized stadium complex with renovated trade show space, a permanent home for the farmers' market (likely with a year-round component), a theatre, some residential, a hotel, playing fields, green space and cafes along the canal. It seems to me that those things will draw a few people to the site.

Also, as was mentioned, we haven't seen the final version of the plan. I am optimistic that with refinements, it will be an even more attractive package.

lrt's friend

Aug 21, 2009, 3:48 PM

What a preposterous assertion! An ENORMOUS pocket of valuable, publicly owned waterfront land and there's nothing else that can be done than a single proposal?

And while you're right that the only reason we're discussing Lansdowne Live is the CFL proposal, there's nothing stopping us from doing something OTHER than what a particular group of businessmen have suggested... after all, they don't own the land - yet.

It isn't waterfront land. The federal government owns the land along the canal. Use of the land along the canal and diversion of the canal into Lansdowne will quickly get complicated.

We have been waiting for decades for somebody to want to invest into renewal of Lansdowne. Now that we have it, and from major local developers, we want to reject it? What is the alternative? Just because we get another plan, doesn't mean it will be built, and especially if it ends up costing the taxpayer a lot more money.

How many more years are we prepared to wait, while a major public facility is no longer useable? How would you respond if the downtown library or city hall or police headquarters were condemned? We have gotten beyond the point where we can wait several years for a lengthy design debate.

I am open to other ideas but unless it is something than can actually be built in a reasonable timeframe at an affordable cost, how can it be reasonably considered?

I am not saying that we should blindly accept Lansdowne Live but lets wait for a refined design before we deem it necessary to seriously consider alternatives and reject Lansdowne Live.

In the meantime, even if the city doesn't want alternative proposals, the public forum is still available, but prepare for the public to express its opinion. Those alternative proposals better be costed as well.

canadave

Aug 21, 2009, 4:04 PM

From Ken Gray:

Lansdowne Live! Wants Professional Soccer in Proposed Stadium

Filed under: Ottawa, Roger Greenberg, Lansdowne Live!, United Soccer Leagues

The Lansdowne Live! group "absolutely" wants to bring professional soccer to its new stadium and has talked to the United Soccer Leagues about the feasibility of putting a franchise in Ottawa.

Roger Greenberg, the chief executive officer of Minto Group and one of four principals behind the bid for a stadium and development at Lansdowne Park in the Glebe, said the stadium is being designed so that it will be fan friendly for Canadian professional football and soccer. One of the reasons the Lansdowne Live! officials are talking to the USL is to discover what its requirements are for field design, Greenberg said.

Lansdowne Live! has secured a conditional Canadian Football League franchise and recently invited Ottawa Senators owner Eugene Melnyk to put a Major League Soccer franchise at the stadium. Melnyk rejected the offer because it did not fit into his business plans. Greenberg said he thought a MLS franchise was too expensive for his operation. His preference was for another party to secure a soccer team for the new stadium but he did not rule out his group owning a club.

Greenberg, one of Ottawa's most successful businessmen, was reluctant to detail the extent of his interest in the USL. He said his group "had been talking to everybody" about uses for the stadium.

Lansdowne Live! would be eager to hold an outdoor Ottawa Senators game in the new park, he said, and the venue would be designed to hold concerts as well. The stadium would also be expandable so that it could hold large events such as a Grey Cup game. The new park is being designed by the same people who built BMO Field, whose primary tenant is Major League Soccer's Toronto FC.

"There are lots and lots of soccer fans" in Ottawa, Greenberg said.

Lansdowne Live! was approached by Canadian track and field officials, Greenberg said, to make the proposed stadium adaptable as a national training centre. The group rejected the proposal because a track would put football and soccer spectators too far away from the field.

Clouding the USL issue is the fact that the league is on the selling block at present, Greenberg said.

The USL is generally perceived to be a step down from Major League Soccer for which Ottawa Senators owner Eugene Melnyk had tried to obtain a franchise for a now-defunct outdoor stadium plan near Scotiabank Place. Nevertheless, some USL teams have defeated MSL clubs in interleague play.

Negotiations between Lansdowne Live! - whose ownership consists of three leading area developers and Jeff Hunt, the owner of the Ottawa 67's junior hockey team - are nearing a conclusion. Consultant Graham Bird has been hired by the city to craft an agreement between the private consortium and the municipality. The Lansdowne deal would need to go through public consultations. Approval for that will be sought at a city council meeting on Sept. 2.

The Lansdowne proposal has divided the community with some people supporting getting something done at the rundown city-owned park while others are concerned about sole-sourcing the project or they favour another use for the site. Many Glebe residents are concerned about traffic in the area from the proposed stadium.

The USL has franchises in Portland, Carolina, Charleston, Montreal, Vancouver, Miami, Austin, Cleveland, Puerto Rico, Rochester and Minnesota.

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/bulldog/archive/2009/08/21/lansdowne-live-wants-professional-soccer-in-proposed-stadium.aspx

gjhall

Aug 21, 2009, 4:58 PM

I agree with you on the commercial space along Bank. With the block-long hole created by the Glebe Centre on the opposite side of the street (a complete disaster), it would be nice to have a link between the Glebe and Ottawa South.

I'm not sure how you are worried about the ability of the project to animate the space. It is about as mixed-use a proposal as you will ever see, with something for all of the vested interests - a revitalized stadium complex with renovated trade show space, a permanent home for the farmers' market (likely with a year-round component), a theatre, some residential, a hotel, playing fields, green space and cafes along the canal. It seems to me that those things will draw a few people to the site.

Also, as was mentioned, we haven't seen the final version of the plan. I am optimistic that with refinements, it will be an even more attractive package.
I was referrring to the Milton plan, not Lansdowne Live in that last post. (Post #459). I agree that L Live would be very animating.

AuxTown

Aug 22, 2009, 12:43 PM

Another article from www.cfra.com

Ottawa Could See Professional Soccer Come To Town
CFRA News Staff
Saturday, August 22, 2009

The final version of the proposed partnership between the city of Ottawa and the Lansdowne Live group will be unveiled early next month.

It's likely to include a stadium that would house 2 sports teams.

Councilor Rick Chiareli says it appears some of the initial plans for Lansdowne continue to be updated; including the stadium to ensure it can host both soccer and football.

Chiareli says the group is in talks to secure a United Soccer Leagues or U-S-L franchise for the city.

The Lansdowne Live proposal will be unveiled at the September 2nd city council meeting.

:banana: :boogy::banana: :boogy::banana: :boogy::banana:

Sign me up for a jersey and a scarf! Feel free to hop on the Lansdowne Live bandwagon soccer fans.

Jamaican-Phoenix

Aug 24, 2009, 12:13 AM

Another article from www.cfra.com

:banana: :boogy::banana: :boogy::banana: :boogy::banana:

Sign me up for a jersey and a scarf! Feel free to hop on the Lansdowne Live bandwagon soccer fans.

But the Noise! And the people! Where will we park?! It will clog my beautiful Glebe!!! These are bad men behind bad corporations!!!

:rolleyes:

osbort

Aug 24, 2009, 8:50 PM

The football that actually involves the feet!!! yay

rakerman

Aug 25, 2009, 11:15 AM

I think making commercial sports a major anchor is a risk, because they ebb and flow depending on the fortunes of the league, the individual team, and the popularity of paying to go see a particular sport. You also need a big upfront investment. This is a classic Big Bang project approach. If you put the focus instead on flexible public use - farmer's markets and small cafes, open sports fields, rinks etc. - then you at least have the potential for the space to be adaptive, to adjust to the patterns of actual use, without having a risky big money stadium centrepiece.

canadave

Aug 25, 2009, 12:08 PM

umbria27

Aug 25, 2009, 5:48 PM

I would point out that Lansdowne Live includes a plan to run shuttle buses to parking at Carleton and to the transitway..

Interestingly, the city's survey of stadium sites lists Carleton U as a possible site and rates it higher than Lansdowne, because of better parking, better road access and O-train access. Why not just build it there and save the shuttle ride?

waterloowarrior

Aug 25, 2009, 11:30 PM

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/bulldog/archive/2009/08/25/lansdowne-live-usl-soccer-negotiations-very-serious-chiarelli-says.aspx

Lansdowne Live!-USL Soccer Negotiations Very Serious, Chiarelli Says

By KENNETH_GRAY 08-25-2009 COMMENTS(0) THE BULLDOG

Filed under: Larry O'Brien, Lansdowne Park, Rick Chiarelli, City of Ottawa, Glebe, football, soccer, mayor, city council, USL
Negotiations between Lansdowne Live! and the United Soccer Leagues to secure a franchise are much more serious than first reported, College Councillor Rick Chiarelli says.

The two parties are not just sounding each other out but discussing specifics such as money and the requirements the league would place on the Ottawa franchise, Chiarelli said. The councillor played a key role in getting initial approval from city council on the municipality entering negotiations with the Lansdowne Live! group. Chiarelli has closely followed the negotiations between the city and Lansdowne Live!

Chiarelli says that for Lansdowne Park to successfully accommodate soccer and a Canadian Football League franchise, the rest of the south stands must be demolished. Part of that structure has already been torn down for safety reasons. As well, the football field will need to be moved away from the north stands because the soccer dimensions are bigger than those for football.

The soccer plan is to try a United Soccer Leagues franchise to gauge public support for the sport, Chiarelli says, and if it is successful, apply for a Major League Soccer team in the future.

The councillor has seen the revised plans for the Lansdowne project and says they are markedly improved over the first version. In fact, he is confident the public will be enthusiastic about the project when the plans are revealed -- at least except some residents in the Glebe who don't want a stadium at Lansdowne at all.

The senior governmental partners who have participated in the planning of the mammoth project have approved the revised plan, Chiarelli says.

Doucet To Reveal Lansdowne Plans

By KENNETH_GRAY 08-25-2009 COMMENTS(0) THE BULLDOG

Filed under: Lansdowne Park, City of Ottawa, Clive Doucet, Lester Johnson
This is a release from the office of Capital Councillor Clive Doucet:

On Thursday, August 27, at 2 p.m., in the Councillors' Lounge at City Hall, architect
Lester Johnson will release a large format series of designs for the renaissance of Lansdowne
Park. The press conference, which will take place from 2:00 to 2:30 p.m., will be followed
by an open house until 4:00 p.m.

"I became interested in the park as a unique heritage landscape and because of the Sullivan Building. Frank Sullivan, the architect of the Horticultural Building was the only Canadian student of Frank Lloyd Wright and although the building is in a rundown condition today, once restored would be larger and more impressive than the Byward Market Building," said Mr. Johnson.

"Mr. Johnson is being extraordinarily generous in releasing his drawings publicly
because he cannot protect his design or cost recovery ideas from appropriation by other
developers, under the current sole source procurement process," said Councillor Doucet.
Councillor Doucet looks forward to the public reaction to Mr. Johnson's design and
costing ideas for the future of the park. Many people are under the impression that there is
no choice but to take or reject the unsolicited Lansdowne Live proposal. Mr. Johnson's
alternative makes it clear that other ideas, other visions are possible for the park if the city
returns to an open, public competition.

kwoldtimer

Aug 26, 2009, 12:00 AM

Gee, I wonder what Mr. Johnson's plans will be for bringing professional sports to Landsdowne Stadium :haha:

If design ideas of the sort now surfacing are not attached to an actual development proposal, do they actually add much to the discussion?

canadave

Aug 26, 2009, 2:22 AM

:previous:

Well, I guess if they're all as bad and illogical as the John Martin plan then they'll at least serve to make Lansdowne Live look really good by comparison! :haha:

canadave

Aug 27, 2009, 11:11 PM

Doucet presents alternative plan for Lansdowne: lots of development

BY PATRICK DARE, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN
AUGUST 27, 2009 6:02 PM

OTTAWA — Here's a twist: Capital Councillor Clive Doucet's alternative plan for Lansdowne Park has a lot of development, including townhouses, shops and underground parking.

Doucet held a well attended unveiling of Ottawa architect Lester Johnson's vision for Lansdowne Park at City Hall Thursday. And Johnson, though inspired by big European parks in his concept — such as Luxembourg Gardens in Paris — said Lansdowne needs more than greenspace.

Johnson said the 40-acre city-owned site needs small businesses and housing to give it some life and help pay for the public space. There would be shops along Bank Street and mixed in with a residential development in the northern part of the site near the Rideau Canal. There would also be a permanent farmer's market, a restored Civic Centre for the Ottawa 67's, a new cultural building near Bank Street, and a restored and enhanced Horticulture Building. The Aberrdeen Pavilion would be connected to the canal with a grande allée.

Greenspace would dominate the southern portion near the canal, with a large open park and playing fields, and an open-air theatre-in-the-park. A reflecting pond would be used as a skating rink in winter. Frank Clair Stadium, the rusting home of Ottawa's former Canadian Football League teams, would be torn down.

Doucet said the new development in the proposal is an acknowledgement that Lansdowne, dominated by asphalt and old buildings, needs work and that it should be a lively place that people want to go to. But he said the mixed-used concept would draw a few thousand people in a day, rather than the 30,000 people who would flood into the neighbourhood for a two-hour event at the football stadium.

Doucet and Johnson presented the idea as an alternative to the Lansdowne Live proposal that has been presented by a partnership of Ottawa businessmen. That proposal, which includes a shopping centre, theatre, hotel and refurbished football stadium and Civic Centre, is being refined and will be presented to city council next week.

Doucet and Johnson said they hope that presenting an alternative idea to Lansdowne Live will restart the design competition that was suspended by the city when the Live proposal arrived.

“I'm just so fed up with seeing one thing on the table,” said Johnson. “It looks like a shopping centre.”

Ian Boyd, owner of Compact Music on Bank Street, said that the Johnson concept is better than the Lansdowne Live concept that's been presented, which he describes as “a big-box complex.” Boyd said the cultural spaces in the Johnson design would create a new venue for performances, including small festivals.

Several city councillors attended the event and urged citizens to contact city councillors to express support for an open competition of designs for Lansdowne. But they said so far, they haven't been able to get the votes on council.

Somerset Councillor Diane Holmes said part of the problem is that some councillors have not seen and appreciated what a great park, like Hyde Park in London, can bring to a city.

Clarence Dungey, a longtime city council watcher, said the Lansdowne project is so important for the future of the city that it should be placed on the ballot for next year's fall municipal election as a plebiscite question.

Bay Councillor Alex Cullen agreed, saying, “None of us were elected to redraw Lansdowne Park.”

Look! It's Lansdowne Live minus the stadium! :sly:

AuxTown

Aug 27, 2009, 11:34 PM

If Doucet manages to derail the Lansdowne Live proposal, this will officially be the most dysfuntional city council ever. Not to mention the fact that schoolyard antics like holding a press conference 1 week before the unveiling of the final plans is an embarassment. One group spends millions of dollars on consultants, planners, and financial analysis only to have one retarded councillor and his pet architect scribble down a bunch of ideas with no financial backing with the goal to mobilize the Glebites and complainers of this city. I really feel bad for Hunt and his men if this child (Doucet) gets his way....a way that undoubtedly will end up with a stagnant Lansdowne for another decade.

http://dogsounds.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/retard-owls.jpg

waterloowarrior

Aug 28, 2009, 2:02 AM

Councillor Doucet/Johnson proposal, click to enlarge
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2560/3863115057_9d5399518e_b.jpg (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2560/3863115057_05420ae7ef_o.jpg)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3501/3863896844_945e4e7de9_m.jpg
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3501/3863896844_945e4e7de9_b.jpg)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2547/3863116441_a235cd2ee5_m.jpg (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2547/3863116441_a235cd2ee5_b.jpg)

waterloowarrior

Aug 28, 2009, 2:19 AM

The breakfast meeting proposal (John Martin)

Proposals presented for Bayview Yards, Lansdowne
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/Proposals+presented+Bayview+Yards+Lansdowne/1936475/story.html

BY MARIA COOK , THE OTTAWA CITIZENAUGUST 27, 2009 6:02 PMCOMMENTS (2)

OTTAWA — Many who attended a breakfast meeting Thursday to learn about a new proposal for Bayview Yards and Lansdowne Park came away intrigued.

“I think it's very creative, innovative,” said Kerry Johnston, a retired public servant. “It reinforces the idea that if you go to a proper design competition you can achieve some pretty amazing things."

John Martin, a Glebe businessman, hosted the meeting to demonstrate alternatives to the Lansdowne Live proposal.

“If you provide an environment for creativity you’re going to get creativity,” he told about 30 invited guests. “It all starts with open competitive bidding.”

Martin’s idea calls for Bayview Yards to be cleaned of contaminants and used for a new stadium and central library built to high ecological standards.

At Lansdowne Park, he envisions the removal of Frank Clair stadium to make way for a green park that includes a natural amphitheatre for concerts, an outdoor swimming pool, permanent farmers market, art exhibits and tobogganing and dog sled rides in winter.

“We’re all stressed out,” he says. “We need tranquility. We need places we can go and relax.”

Ottawa council shelved a design competition for Lansdowne Park last year in order to consider an unsolicited proposal from Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group to renew Lansdowne Park through repair of the football stadium and construction of stores, housing, hotel and theatre.

A report on the deal goes to council Sept. 2.

Marianne Wilkinson was the only councillor to attend the meeting.

“I like to know all the options,” she said. “People have closed minds. They also don’t like coming out early in the morning.”

Although Bayview is “a good site” Wilkinson said nobody has offered to build a stadium there and the city can’t afford to.

As for a library, she said the library board has decided not build west of Bronson Avenue.

Linda Cook, manager of the Ottawa Farmer’s Market, said: “I love the way he's integrated the farmer’s market into this plan. I think he's got some great ideas. I love the green space concept."

Mark Templin, a public servant, added: “It’s nice to see a variety of ideas. As a taxpayer I want to see city funds spent wisely. I want to see football back but I don’t care where it is.”

However, lawyer Matthew Meagher questioned the expense and wisdom of removing the stadium. “We should be looking at adding uses to Lansdowne, not taking them away.”

Ian Lee, Carleton University business professor and former banker, said “there were a lot of innovative ideas. Lansdowne for football is ridiculous. It has failed twice in the last 10 years. It’s not going to succeed a third time. The City of Ottawa will be on the hook for $150-million to build a stadium and parking garage.”

David Cole, an Ottawa architect not involved with the proposal, spoke about its merits.

“I love the idea of bringing more water in from the canal (to Lansdowne.) I really believe all the great features will attract people and complement the canal.”

Cole said he gave up Rough Riders season tickets because “it was a nuisance to get in and out of the stadium. I think the failure of the team is partly because of the stadium.”

Bayview is suitable because of access to transit. He noted that the Museum of Science and Technology is looking for a home and that the tracks at Bayview would be ideal to show locomotives.

John Leys, of Sherwood Engineering, an American firm with experience in developing brownfield sites said it wouldn’t take long to clean contaminated soil.

He pointed to the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal where it took 15 months to remove 700,000 tonnes of soil from a 43-acre site — three times as big as Bayview.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

k2p

Aug 28, 2009, 2:26 AM

I thought Diane Holmes's comments in the article were classic. While it may be true some councillors haven't got out enough to see how great parks can make great cities, there's a corollary.

How can anyone visit New York, Paris, London, Berlin, Sydney, Vancouver etc. and miss that their parks are great because they have thriving, urban, dense places nearby.

Still, let's hope that moron Doucet puts Lansdowne as a Paris park on the ballot. I'd vote for it. As long as we get to put Paris-height buildings on every last square inch of the Glebe, preferably with current inhabitants somewhere in the foundations.

acottawa

Aug 28, 2009, 2:51 AM

lrt's friend

Aug 28, 2009, 4:02 AM

My thoughts.

First, it is always helpful to see alternative ideas, so long as it is not used as a tool to encourage inaction.

This flurry of proposals is coming when it is becoming very clear that a city changing decision is about to be made. It is the last stand to try to prevent Lansdowne Live from happening. If the opponents succeed, nothing will happen for years, well, maybe a lot of talk, but nothing concrete.

If the opponents succeed, the idea of professional football or soccer in Ottawa is dead. A city of over a million will shockingly continue to lack a major stadium for many years unless by some miracle we were able to attact some major event like the Commonwealth Games. Unfortunately, this city has never been able to attract such major events and the lack of a stadium will just make it that much more difficult in the future.

What bothers me the most, is that these new proposals attempt to steal a city-wide facility and convert it into a community park. What surprises me is that the hockey arena is retained. It is not consistent with the rest of it. I guess junior hockey fans are not as objectionable as football fans or those suburanites attending the Home Show or those 'lower class' people going to the Ex.

So, we end up with a Lansdowne Park that esentially ceases to serve any of the purposes that it has for 120 years or so. We move the Ex away from the city, we relocate the stadium to a surprisingly remote site despite its relatively central location that may someday have something around it, we move the central library away from downtown, and we move our trade show facilities to who knows where. Do we not see a pattern here? We don't want to have major people meeting places or events in any of our existing central neighbourhoods. Push them away to the periphery, somewhere that is pedestrian unfriendly, somewhere where you have to pay a fortune for parking, somewhere that will lack nearby places to eat or celebrate. I guess we should not repeat Toronto and Montreal's mistakes. We are much smarter. Instead, we want Lansdowne Park to be a site for retail and a still very part-time farmer's market that will mainly serve those living in the Glebe.

We will limit on-site parking to make sure that those from other parts of the city will not want to come there. We already know that transit will continue to be limited.

kwoldtimer

Aug 28, 2009, 12:17 PM

Landsdowne was probably a good place to put a stadium in 1908 when the site was served by a nearby railway station and the Bank streetcar and canal real estate was worthless but at this point it makes no sense, especially since most of the Landsdown proposals cost as much as a new stadium.

Landsdowne has no access to existing or planned mass transit systems, no access to highways or major roads. Plus it uses valuable waterfront real estate for a concrete block that doesn't face the canal. Bayview seems to make sense (access to the transitway, planned light rail line, o-train, parkway, and several interprovincial bridges). It could also be used for bluesfest and other events in the area. I'm sure there are other good sites for a stadium in central ottawa too (Hurdman?).

I appreciate that you are clear on your views about the stadium. At some point I would like to see the whole Landsdowne "debate" reduced to what is actually about - some (particularly, but not exclusively, those living nearby and elected representatives who are obliged to support them in the interest of their careers) do not want a sports stadium there. Others do. Many, perhaps the majority, don't really care, although they will pay for whatever results. That's it - the rest, and especially all the blather about process and design competitions, is window dressing. This being Ottawa, the endless advocacy arguments are inevitable, but at least let's all be clear about what the discussion is about.

lrt's friend

Aug 28, 2009, 12:47 PM

I appreciate that you are clear on your views about the stadium. At some point I would like to see the whole Landsdowne "debate" reduced to what is actually about - some (particularly, but not exclusively, those living nearby and elected representatives who are obliged to support them in the interest of their careers) do not want a sports stadium there. Others do. Many, perhaps the majority, don't really care, although they will pay for whatever results. That's it - the rest, and especially all the blather about process and design competitions, is window dressing. This being Ottawa, the endless advocacy arguments are inevitable, but at least let's all be clear about what the discussion is about.

I would say that the many people who don't really care about the stadium or pro sports would like to see our tax money used effectively. I don't think most of these people would be too happy if we have multiple options and we decide on a potentially substantially more expensive plan.

I am getting so concerned about how this city is working. We are seeing very little getting accomplished yet the number of very expensive projects is piling up and up. Whether its transit, or sewers or the central library or now Lansdowne Park, the trend is to be seriously looking at more expensive options, and the question becomes, how do we fund all of this or any of this? When the price tags pile up one on another and cost estimates escalate as they always do, this is a recipe for continuing to do nothing.

With the latest proposals, do we actually have any sort of reasonable price estimates? How do they compare with Lansdowne Live? Do these alternative ideas have any reasonable chance of being built?

This whole debate started with the crumbling Frank Clair Stadium. Unless an alternative plan will actually deal with this issue and gets a new stadium built, then the plan should be rejected. A city of this size needs a stadium to hold major events, whether for sports or entertainment. Unless an alternative plan properly deals with other existing uses of Lansdowne Park, it should be rejected. Design is only one criteria for a good plan.

Ottawa is increasingly becoming a laughing stock in this country. We can't get LRT going in any sort of reasonable time frame, and now there is a risk that we can't renovate Frank Clair stadium for a CFL franchise that has already been awarded. We are intent of blowing off opportunities without considering the consequences. The rest of the country is looking.

lrt's friend

Aug 28, 2009, 1:11 PM

To those who think Bayview is an ideal location for a new stadium, let's look at the lack of success of our baseball park and how similar their locations are. Both are fairly central locations. Both are segregated from surrounding neighbourhoods. Both have good transportation access. Neither have good pedestrian access. Neither have good parking. Neither have bars or restaurants nearby. As we have seen with Scotiabank Place over 13 years, a major sports facility does not generate enough business on a daily basis to encourage bars and restaurants to develop in the immediate area. On the contrary, major sports facilities are dead zones when events are not taking place and may have the opposite effect unless it is intimately located within an existing mixed development community. Hmmmm, the latter sounds surprisingly like the location of Lansdowne Park.

This points out that although Bayview may be ideal from a transit point of view, is this enough to make it the best location? The same can be said about Hurdman or Carleton. I can't imagine either of those locations developing a lively restaurant or bar scene when considering existing land use and land availability.

k2p

Aug 28, 2009, 10:36 PM

:previous:
Absolutely.

Making transit the only criterion mistakes a sporting event for a chore or a commute, best done efficiently. As if people say, well, thank God that's over. Heaven forbid they might linger. Have a drink. Meet some friends. Not in the city fun forgot.

canadave

Aug 28, 2009, 11:56 PM

A slightly hyperbolic headline, but...

Details of Lansdowne Live Plan Revealed

By KENNETH_GRAY 08-28-2009 COMMENTS(0) THE BULLDOG

Filed under: Rick Chiarelli, Glebe, Roger Greenberg, NCC, Parks Canada, Lansdowne

The Ottawa Farmers' Market will continue to operate in a new structure at Lansdowne Park but will not occupy the Aberdeen Pavilion, according to a councillor who has monitored negotiations on the Lansdowne Live plan.

Rick Chiarelli, who has played a key role in ushering the Lansdowne Live proposal through municipal government, says the plan by four prominent area businessmen is a marked improvement over their first offering.

"I feel good about the whole thing," the College ward councillor said. "The first version of it was good. The subsequent versions are better."

City council approved a plan in April that ordered municipal officials to enter negotiations with Lansdowne Live to redevelop the park in the Glebe. City planners, the National Capital Commission and Parks Canada (which has jurisdiction over the Rideau Canal) also helped with designing the project, Chiarelli said. The councillor said the new Lansdowne Live plan encompasses the whole property.

"It develops the entire site," Chiarelli said, "not just the Bank Street side."

Chiarelli said there would be large restaurant and food components at Lansdowne under the plan though he refused to confirm they would be located in the Aberdeen Pavilion. He said negotiations were continuing about an outdoor theatre on the site. There will be no big-box stores at Lansdowne, he added.

"It's an ongoing project," Chiarelli said.

The new Lansdowne will also incorporate a number of environmental initiatives. "It will be greener. I didn't mean green paint."

The councillor said the city will be on the hook for $50 million for the project. That's the amount of money the municipality would have had to pay for upkeep of its Lansdowne property. A stream of revenue will come from Lansdowne to city coffers over the years to limit the municipality's liability to $50 million.

The city was negotiating a deal that would cap the city's contribution to $50 million, Chiarelli said. He did not know if that provision was in the final proposal.

"The developers assume the risk," Chiarelli said. "We will certainly protect the taxpayers from any overruns."

Chiarelli did not know the total cost of the project or its completion date.

The entire Lansdowne Live proposal will be presented at Ottawa City Hall on Tuesday.

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/bulldog/archive/2009/08/28/details-of-lansdowne-live-plan-revealed.aspx

umbria27

Aug 29, 2009, 4:54 AM

At some point I would like to see the whole Landsdowne "debate" reduced to what is actually about - some (particularly, but not exclusively, those living nearby and elected representatives who are obliged to support them in the interest of their careers) do not want a sports stadium there. Others do.

I don't agree that the presence of a stadium at Landsdowne is this is the crux of the debate. I think that the Landsdowne Live developers would like to make it the point of the debate. It's an easy rallying point, with easy villains in the form of a stereotypical Glebe dweller.

The real debate should be about what to do with this fantastic piece of public property in the middle of our city. How can we develop it into something useful and beautiful? We know that in today's climate this has to be done with some sort of public/private partnership, so what's the best way to make sure that the public gets the best deal? I don't think that's done by locking yourself in the room with one developer.

I'm 50/50 on whether the stadium should be at Lansdowne. What's more important is what happens to the rest of the site - how much of it will be given over to commercial and residential and what format that takes.
It's interesting that the Doucet plan includes both new housing and new retail. Even that great devil of the Glebe understands that the park can't be redeveloped without some commercial element.

All site elements should be part of the debate. I can't understand the obsession with the farmer's market, for example. (I like another poster's proposal to put a market in the Aberdeen Pavillion, but it would have to be a proper market not limited to local produce and our constrained growing season.) I like the Doucet's plan to bring the canal into the park. I'd love to see a row of restaurants right at waterside. The NCC paths are great, but they do isolate the canal. I like to bike beside the canal but sometimes I'd like to just to sit next to it with a glass of something alcoholic in my hand (sans brown bag).

The trouble is we can't have this debate, because we have one choice and one choice only. Landsdowne Live have manipulated the process so that decision comes down to them or nothing. That's what's made this seem like a stadium debate. That's their pitch - we've got the team, let us build the stadium and develop the park. It makes it easy to demonize anyone who objects as anti development or anti stadium. Even on this forum about urbanism and design, the discussion too frequently strays from design to name calling and ranting. That's unfortunate. I thought that's what the Citizen online comments were for.

kwoldtimer

Aug 29, 2009, 1:40 PM

I don't agree that the presence of a stadium at Landsdowne is this is the crux of the debate. I think that the Landsdowne Live developers would like to make it the point of the debate. It's an easy rallying point, with easy villains in the form of a stereotypical Glebe dweller.

The real debate should be about what to do with this fantastic piece of public property in the middle of our city. How can we develop it into something useful and beautiful? We know that in today's climate this has to be done with some sort of public/private partnership, so what's the best way to make sure that the public gets the best deal? I don't think that's done by locking yourself in the room with one developer.

I'm 50/50 on whether the stadium should be at Lansdowne. What's more important is what happens to the rest of the site - how much of it will be given over to commercial and residential and what format that takes.
It's interesting that the Doucet plan includes both new housing and new retail. Even that great devil of the Glebe understands that the park can't be redeveloped without some commercial element.

All site elements should be part of the debate. I can't understand the obsession with the farmer's market, for example. (I like another poster's proposal to put a market in the Aberdeen Pavillion, but it would have to be a proper market not limited to local produce and our constrained growing season.) I like the Doucet's plan to bring the canal into the park. I'd love to see a row of restaurants right at waterside. The NCC paths are great, but they do isolate the canal. I like to bike beside the canal but sometimes I'd like to just to sit next to it with a glass of something alcoholic in my hand (sans brown bag).

The trouble is we can't have this debate, because we have one choice and one choice only. Landsdowne Live have manipulated the process so that decision comes down to them or nothing. That's what's made this seem like a stadium debate. That's their pitch - we've got the team, let us build the stadium and develop the park. It makes it easy to demonize anyone who objects as anti development or anti stadium. Even on this forum about urbanism and design, the discussion too frequently strays from design to name calling and ranting. That's unfortunate. I thought that's what the Citizen online comments were for.

I'm not sure we actually disagree on fundamentals - I too am 50/50 on a stadium at Landsdowne (or any stadium for Ottawa paid for with public money - sorry, sports fans). Unless I am very naive, any proposal is going to be about more than the stadium and is going to see commercial and (one assumes) residential as part of the redevelopment. Exactly what that consists of is something people will have different views about and public discussion could improve the results. Personally, I enjoy the seasonal market and hope that component can be retained and enhanced. I hope as well that we will see some great design and wonderful public spaces. My point was that, thus far, any alternatives have seemed intended to bring down the stadium and replace it with parkland while being cast in other terms (I will not use the word manipulation ;) ). I would have more patience if they were up front about the intention. If the same sources were to propose an alternative that saw some fabulous, high-rise development for the stadium site, I would have to re-evaluate, but I just don't see it happening. On "Landsdowne Live", I will wait to see what comes out of the ongoing negotiations - if it is not good enough, we can join forces to oppose it! :tup:

eemy

Aug 29, 2009, 2:59 PM

Personally, I'm far more ambivalent about residential or commercial spaces within Lansdowne Park, particularly residential, as that establishes a sense of ownership with the residents, even if it is only a lease arrangement. There is a tonne of private land all around it. It's unusual to have such a large amount of public land next to a great neighbourhood like that, and the land should remain public. We don't need to create a new neighbourhood, there's a perfectly good one there already.

AuxTown

Aug 29, 2009, 2:59 PM

I agree with the above posts that one must take any plan with a healthy dose of skepticism to avoid making a big mistake with public money, but I really do like the Lansdowne Live plan. I think it has a good mix of commercial, recreational, and oh yes STADIUM space. I don't really like the idea of turning the entire thing into a park and I feel that, given the amount of central Ottawa already wasted (probably too harsh a word) with the experimental farm, we can't let this land not be developed. My main problem with Doucet et al's plan is, as mentioned, the timing. He did the same thing with his Carling LRT corridor by releasing it just days before the official council vote. Either these plans are solely for meddling purposes (which I suspect) or he and his staff have a terrible sense of timing.

phil235

Aug 31, 2009, 4:39 PM

I was at the John Martin breakfast meeting last week and can say a couple of things with certainty. First, Clive Doucet has nothing to do with his plan, because it really has no credibility. Martin is just a guy with his own vision and apparently lots of time and energy to push his proposal, however unrealistic it may be. The guy has no expertise in development or sports of any kind. This is just an idea he is floating. Second, most of the 20-odd people at the meeting were the vocal anti-stadium crowd from the Glebe. They prefer a big park, but would get behind any plan that removes the stadium from Lansdowne.

The whole transit argument that is being repeated is a little bit funny. People like Martin keep touting Molson Stadium in Montreal and BMO Field in Toronto as examples we should be emulating, yet neither one of those stadiums is right on rapid transit. Molson Stadium is over a kilometer (up a mountain) from the metro and BMO field is on a couple of regular streetcar lines far from any rapid transit (other than GO trains). Yet both have proven to be extremely successful without rapid transit to the site.

As far as not needing to create a neighbourhood, that may be true, but the stadium complex is a big part of what makes the Glebe unique and vital. If the complex is replaced by a park, in my view that will be a big loss for the neighbourhood and may suck some of the life out of the Glebe.

canadave

Aug 31, 2009, 6:12 PM

^ You wouldn't happen to be the same Phil I keep seeing fighting it out in the comment pages in the Citizen, would you?

phil235

Aug 31, 2009, 7:40 PM

^ You wouldn't happen to be the same Phil I keep seeing fighting it out in the comment pages in the Citizen, would you?

Good guess. I'm the Phil P on the Citizen comment page. I do note that there is also a more right-wing and quite a bit angrier Phil who also writes and complains a lot about whiny Glebe people (hence the "P").

I guess I feel compelled to make it clear that everyone in the neighbourhood doesn't feel the same way about the stadium. Many of us see it as a great asset of the neighbourhood and don't want to see it go. Unfortunately the Glebe Communty Association is taking a strong anti-stadium stance despite what their surveys have told them. And of course they know how to get a lot of press coverage of their cause.

canadave

Aug 31, 2009, 8:58 PM

Good guess. I'm the Phil P on the Citizen comment page. I do note that there is also a more right-wing and quite a bit angrier Phil who also writes and complains a lot about whiny Glebe people (hence the "P").

I guess I feel compelled to make it clear that everyone in the neighbourhood doesn't feel the same way about the stadium. Many of us see it as a great asset of the neighbourhood and don't want to see it go. Unfortunately the Glebe Communty Association is taking a strong anti-stadium stance despite what their surveys have told them. And of course they know how to get a lot of press coverage of their cause.

Ah, yes, that's what I meant... "Phil P", not just "Phil".

I definitely do appreciate seeing your stance popping up. Citizen comments are so infuriatingly... Citizen comments. I really can't think of any better way to describe them. :haha:

AuxTown

Aug 31, 2009, 9:50 PM

Revised Lansdowne Park plan to be unveiledLast Updated: Monday, August 31, 2009 | 11:20 AM ET
CBC News

Coun. Rick Chiarelli, who represents College Ward, said the new version of the Lansdowne Live plan incorporates a lot of suggestions made since the original proposal last October. (Sarah Mayes/CBC)A redevelopment plan for Lansdowne Park has been revised to include more details for the back part of the park, further away from Bank Street, an Ottawa councillor says.

Coun. Rick Chiarelli, who represents College Ward, said the new version of the Lansdowne Live plan, which will be presented to city council Wednesday, incorporates a lot of suggestions made since the original proposal last October by Jeff Hunt, owner of the Ottawa 67's Ontario Hockey League Team, and local developers Roger Greenberg, John Ruddy and Bill Shenkman.

For example, Chiarelli said, the public wanted more eating areas and increased green space.

"This is going to be a really great coming together of sports and entertainment, of eating and dining facilities and green space and use of the waterway and pretty significant modifications of the traffic," Chiarelli said Monday, adding that he absolutely loves the plan.

"It is so much better than something that I thought was good in the first place."

The original plan included an updated football and soccer stadium, a refurbished arena and exhibition hall, an aquarium and a retail and restaurant complex.

Chiarelli said overall, the new plan will boost green space, use of the waterway, reduce the amount of above-ground parking and significantly change the flow of traffic in the area. It will not include big box stores, he added.

He expects council to take a final vote on the project in about two months.

Opposition continues
Meanwhile, a group opposed to the Lansdowne Live project continued lobbying for public support over the weekend.

Will Murray, a volunteer for Friends of Lansdowne Park, visited the Ottawa Farmer's Market at Lansdowne Park Sunday, trying to get shoppers' signatures for a petition calling for a "fair and inclusive process" to determine the fate of the park.

The group is upset that a design competition launched in early 2008 was shut down and that the city isn't considering options other than the Lansdowne Live proposal.

Chiarelli said that's because no other plans pitched at the city have come with money attached, and the city can't afford to redevelop the park without such funds. The Lansdowne Live group is promising $130 million in private financing.

But Murray isn't convinced the project is a done deal and is asking people to contact their councillors.

"The more people that become aware of the issue, the more certain I am that this can't happen," he said.

'Too important a piece of land'

"It's not reasonable what's going on, and we have to make sure that it goes through a proper process. It's too important a piece of land just to let it become another mall essentially."

But Coun. Clive Doucet, who represents the Capital ward, which includes Lansdowne Park, said finding enough votes on council to reject the Lansdowne Live proposal won't be easy.

"Can we get that other four or five? Very difficult. I think the mayor's working very hard, he's having interviews one-on-one with people, he wants his shopping centre proposal through."

Redevelopment of Landsdowne Park has been under discussion for more than a decade. However, a recent push for redevelopment came after cracks were discovered in the lower southside stands of Frank Clair stadium in 2007 and they had to be demolished.

The Landsdowne Live group has been awarded a CFL franchise contingent on a suitable stadium being built and has until Sept. 18 to secure a stadium agreement with city officials.

It is "too important of a piece of land" for us to sit here and talk about theorhetical plans for it. This plan has money, it has people who are from Ottawa and have a vested interest in the city, and it promises to keep Lansdowne as a meeting place for the entire city and not just another neighbourhood park. I am very eagerly awaiting the announcement on Wednesday.