Lansdowne Park Redevelopment Phase 1 | Completed

[J.OT13]

http://www.trinity-group.com/propert...redevelopment/

New site plan (Scroll threw the pics at the bottom.); not much of a difference. No it's not perfect but we can't wait for 100% approval because it's not going to happen.

As for the sightlines, I like the Aberdeen pavilion better framed amongst decent looking buildings as opposed to alone in a big ass parking lot.

Besides, more people will see it on a day to day basis when Lansdowne opens than now.

[JFFournier]

If we differ in opinion with ConcernedOttawa, we lack basic understanding of numbers obtained from the city manager. "Sound" like John Martin to anyone?

[JFFournier]

"One only has to ask can the park be made useful, including fixing up the stadium ( roughly $100M ) for less than $300M ?"

Dang it, if only there were an alternative proposal that promised that very thing...

[jaydog0212]

Originally Posted by concernedottawa

One only needs a basic understanding of house mortgage financing, the numbers provided by the City Manager and the City of Ottawa to confirm the costs. A god tool for calculating mortgage amounts can be found at Brett Whistle online amortization schedulehttp://bretwhissel.net/amortization/
or click here Most banks also have loan calculators online. The City Manager is on the record as stating the cost of the project will be $179M. The City Manager ( see City of Ottawa report )however left out a $2.8M social housing contribution that taxpayers are stuck with for the developers condos. Normally developers pay that fee but taxpayers aka council have taken that expense away as well. The new financing amount becomes $181.8M. The City Manager is also on the record as stating the new financing amount will be a 40 year debenture ( mortgage ) at 4.63%. Plug in the numbers and you can verify for yourself.

The hidden annual maintenance charge ( see City of Ottawa report )may be seen in City Manager report here Look towards the bottom of the report for the balance sheet.

It is not rocket science and taking the word of your city officials while possibly noble is not realistic. Each of them have to rely on reports made by segments from within the same organization. Arguing with political masters is a sure fire way to have a short lived government or municipal career. Dig a little. Figure out the total cost financed, including maintenance, and subtract the amount of cash being given to taxpayers. To calculate developer profits use a liberal figure of $290 cost per sqft of development space on roughly 650,000 sqft, lease it out at roughly $35 per sqft per year of combined tower and retail. Then sell 400,000 sqft of condos at $570 per sqft and subtract a liberal $380 per sqft construction cost. Worked out that is a quick $76M just for the condo sales ( now calculate the ROI for the developer for three years of work - hint 50% on investment ). Annual lease returns are $23M on an initial investment of $188.5M. Short term loans or even use of cash decreases the recovery time, but safe to say they are making money by year 7. Now you have 23 years at 2.5% annual growth on $23M per year. Any developer worth their salt will as demonstrated reinvest the cash in another project at 50% ROI.

As mentioned try and find the upside for the taxpayer. I agree it takes a bit of math but that beats being spoon fed.

The amount OSEG pays back can be seen at City of Ottawa report

So if we are saying that taxpayers are being shafted out of valuable public space then let us look at the alternative of the taxpayer keeping the park and paying for it by open tender. Currently the loss is well over $300M with the developers, and that includes giving away highly valuable public land for private use. One only has to ask can the park be made useful, including fixing up the stadium ( roughly $100M ) for less than $300M ?

Pretty safe to say that for $200M the park could be done by taxpayers alone and the City renting out lease space, or for that matter a different P3 allowing a better private firm to manage the public facility. Keeping the space public and returning rent to the taxpayer is a much better deal for Ottawa and small business and tourism.

The thing is there are people in Ottawa that are anti sports almost every sports project people protest even things such as the Bell Sensplex.

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

:JF Fournier asked

If we differ in opinion with ConcernedOttawa, we lack basic understanding of numbers obtained from the city manager. "Sound" like John Martin to anyone?

It occurred to me--or maybe it just is his doppelganger.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

That is a complete fabrication and you should feel bad for posting that.

You're right, it is a fabrication. But, gee, was my half-assed Photoshopping that compelling that you actually felt compelled to rebut it?

Since the developers have not seen fit to release any clear views looking south showing what the back of the Empire mega-plex will look like, I have taken artistic liberties.

There are some views I have been able to glean, that do not give me faith:

From the promo video, looking west:

...it appears the Empire mega-plex will be as tall as the top of the main roof of the Aberdeen Pavilion.

This view, looking east:

...shows that the mega-plex will be the tallest new building (excluding the transparent, someday maybe office buildings) on the site

Or this one from the Stage 2 site plan:


BTW, what happened to distinctive architecture and green roofs and such that were going to contribute to their LEED certification? One of them looks greenish, but mostly just a lot of bland, square blocks, with barren roofs. Typical Trinity Developments design.

[concernedottawa]

Originally Posted by jaydog0212

The thing is there are people in Ottawa that are anti sports almost every sports project people protest even things such as the Bell Sensplex.

There are anti elements everywhere, but a stadium at the site is a given and will work nicely. There are however other development firms interested in the project who are very willing to offer the City much better arrangements than currently proposed. Intensification is a non argument, developing the space more affordably is the key and having it ready for the Womens World Cup in 2015. This fall the final costing and design plans for the LPP has to be released. At that time everything will be on the table and at that time it will be clear that kicking the tires from another car dealer will be necessary.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

http://www.trinity-group.com/propert...redevelopment/

According to the video, there should be a real future for itinerant balloon-sellers at the "new Lansdowne."

[alecz_dad]

One of the stated purposes of the Lansdowne redevelopment scheme is to promote tourism. Too bad the architecture will be so banal.


Tourists want inspirational, provocative architecture.

Strata Centre at MIT


Frank Ghery-designed Selfridges department store in Birmingham, UK


Another Gehry, in Prague, the "Fred & Ginger dancing" building

[lrt's friend]

Those designs will be highly controversial. Some would love them, some would hate them. Also, will they scale into Lansdowne? It seems to me, that height is a concern. Furthermore, isn't the Aberdeen Pavilion to be the focal point of Lansdowne?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

One of the stated purposes of the Lansdowne redevelopment scheme is to promote tourism. Too bad the architecture will be so banal.


Tourists want inspirational, provocative architecture.

Strata Centre at MIT


Frank Ghery-designed Selfridges department store in Birmingham, UK


Another Gehry, in Prague, the "Fred & Ginger dancing" building

I like the timeless simple design. These things are fine on their own, but built next the Abedeen Pavillion, it would look odd and out of place

[McC]

The Bank street frontage, esp. Whole Foods, isn't half bad,a ctually. And the thing about some of the most egregious "Big Box"-type tenants that are attracting a lot of negative attention (I'm looking at you Jack Astor's); I see it this way: I won't be going there (the best selection of ON craft taps in town at the Arrow and Loon or Irene's are my Glebe preferences); will you be going there? will your neighbours? will anyone? if they don't make money, they'll close, and somebody, perhaps more interesting, will take their place. If I was a small restauranteur, there's now way I could afford to (a) wait for an uncertain construction schedule, and (b) pay the premium for a brand new high-end space; but if someone else has already absorbed the price of that "new car smell", maybe another indy establishment would be interested in the newly-vacant space. You don't get an organic mixture of businesses overnight, but things find an equilibrium. I can't imagine all of those big box retailers will last.

[jaydog0212]

Originally Posted by concernedottawa

There are anti elements everywhere, but a stadium at the site is a given and will work nicely. There are however other development firms interested in the project who are very willing to offer the City much better arrangements than currently proposed. Intensification is a non argument, developing the space more affordably is the key and having it ready for the Womens World Cup in 2015. This fall the final costing and design plans for the LPP has to be released. At that time everything will be on the table and at that time it will be clear that kicking the tires from another car dealer will be necessary.

While i think everyone would like the best deal but when you have people crying because they want a park i don't think these that want a park will ever be happy unless they get a park that what maybe 50 people want.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

You're right, it is a fabrication. But, gee, was my half-assed Photoshopping that compelling that you actually felt compelled to rebut it?

No, it just angers me when insufferable peons such as yourself attempt to pass off such things as "legitimate" and cringe as though the sky is about to fall, without taking all the factors and information into consideration. Basically, what I'm saying is that I greatly dislike rabid sheeple who post msileading information in a place designed to promote accurate and correct information.

[AuxTown]

Originally Posted by concernedottawa

I can assure you the image posted above is not current. The current plan has changed substantially. My suggestion to those arguing about site lines would be to actually wait until final perspectives are submitted. I can say safely say however that site lines to the Aberdeen will be significantly altered both from the North, East and West.

Well it's a good thing that maintaining the sight lines for glebe residents is not one of our main priorities. Things are going to change, the majority for the better, and the vast majority of the city is behind it. The Aberdeen pavilion remains the jewel of Lansdowne in any of the plans and renderings I have seen and adequate sight lines will be maintained at the main entrances to the sight.

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I like the timeless simple design. These things are fine on their own, but built next the Abedeen Pavillion, it would look odd and out of place

If there had actually been an architectural competition for something inspiring, but appropriate to the site, we might not be faced with just more of the same blah mall architecture, that the sole-sourced, right-to-develop agreement with OSEG will inevitably generate.

BTW, who are the architects for the mall now? Yet another of the selling points for this turkey earlier on was the participation of Ottawa architect Barry Hobin. But I seem to recall he's out of the picture, right?

[alecz_dad]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

No, it just angers me when insufferable peons such as yourself attempt to pass off such things as "legitimate" and cringe as though the sky is about to fall, without taking all the factors and information into consideration. Basically, what I'm saying is that I greatly dislike rabid sheeple who post msileading information in a place designed to promote accurate and correct information.

I doubt anybody would have thought my little representation is "legitimate" JamPhoe. Now who is the sheeple?

What are the factors that are not being taken into consideration? What accurate and correct information would you like to include?

Do you have access to a street-level view of the back of the movie theatre? Thought not. So, in the absence of such, and given my animosity towards said mega-cinema, I will produce such representations as I see fit.

Frankly much of what OSEG has provided by way of visuals all along have been misleading. First there's an amateur soccer field, and then there isn't. Then there's a public square west of the Aberdeen Pavilion, and then "poof" there isn't.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

I doubt anybody would have thought my little representation is "legitimate" JamPhoe. Now who is the sheeple?

That's a naive (and probably dishonest) claim. Have you ever been on the Internet? Even with Lansdowne Live, the prevalence of claims that this is a big box development goes to show that people readily lap up horse shit with little critical thinking.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by alecz_dad

If there had actually been an architectural competition for something inspiring, but appropriate to the site, we might not be faced with just more of the same blah mall architecture, that the sole-sourced, right-to-develop agreement with OSEG will inevitably generate.

BTW, who are the architects for the mall now? Yet another of the selling points for this turkey earlier on was the participation of Ottawa architect Barry Hobin. But I seem to recall he's out of the picture, right?

John Clifford from Perkins Eastman is the architect for the residential/retail part of the project.

And I'm sure a lot of people agree with me that it does not look like a mall; it's more of a seamless addition to the Glebe's urban fabric. And that was the point, not an extravagant design that would take away from the Aberdeen Pavilion.

[matty14]

Originally Posted by concernedottawa

There are however other development firms interested in the project who are very willing to offer the City much better arrangements than currently proposed.

Oh yeah where were these firms like 5 years ago when we got the ball rolling on this thing? Sorry but these "other development firms" missed the ball and the LPP is the plan that we are going with much to the chagrin of self-important glebeites. It sounds like a case of "other development firms" wanting to play with a toy simply because somebody else is playing with it.