HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > SSP: Local Ottawa-Gatineau > Suburbs

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2008, 4:53 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 7,110
Algonquin College Centrepointe | Proposed

http://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/...appId=__7IP964

Proposed Development

The City of Ottawa has offered the subject lands to Algonguin College as part of a transaction agreement that would allow the College to expand over Woodroffe with a Centre for Construction Trades and Building Sciences (CCTBS) facility. The facility will be built to a LEED Platinum standard by incorporating specific energy, atmosphere, water, indoor environmental quality, land-use and environmentally friendly materials objectives. Once constructed, the facility will be used to teach such building techniques to College students.

The CCTBS building will consist of three or four floors above ground and have an area of approximately 14,864 m2 (160,000 ft2). One storey (approx. 5,481 m2) of the proposed building will accommodate high bay shops that will be visible from Woodroffe, while the remaining storeys (approx. 3,112.15 m2) will be occupied by classrooms. Although the Site Plan submitted in support of this application shows additional buildings, this application is only for the Algonquin CCTBS Building component. No new parking is being proposed as a result of this development. The proposed development will rely heavily on the existing transit station and existing parking available at designated areas throughout the campus.

As part this development, the CCTBS will be integrated with a realigned and grade separated (buried) transit station that will accommodate buses and light rail. The redevelopment of the transit station supports the Official Plan vision as well as recently prepared mixed-use development concept for the Centrepointe area. The Site Plan will also accommodate the extension of Navaho Drive and College Avenue as signalized intersections crossing Woodroffe Avenue to the north and south of the site plan area. A glass pedestrian bridge is envisioned above Woodroffe Avenue connecting the existing buildings east of Woodroffe to the CCTBS building and transitway. Each of these associated but independent municipal projects are subject to various studies and processes that will be considered as part of any approval of the CCTBS site plan.






Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2008, 9:20 PM
Jamaican-Phoenix's Avatar
Jamaican-Phoenix Jamaican-Phoenix is offline
R2-D2's army of death
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Downtown Ottawa
Posts: 3,204
Not bad, but the underground station worries me...It feels like St. Laurent all over again...
__________________
Franky: Ajldub, name calling is what they do when good arguments can't be found - don't sink to their level. Claiming the thread is "boring" is also a way to try to discredit a thread that doesn't match their particular bias.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2008, 10:04 PM
Kitchissippi Kitchissippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,075
It doesn't look like a hub befitting a light rail terminus. I can't see this as a place where people transfer between trains and buses. Maybe they're planning another terminal farther down with more space to do this properly? There isn't even a way for a bus to turn around.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2008, 10:22 PM
Deez's Avatar
Deez Deez is offline
you know my steez
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Toronto/Ottawa
Posts: 1,397
I'm pretty sure buses continue all the way to LF. But I agree with both of you...not too keen on another bus tunnel.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 12:50 PM
c_speed3108 c_speed3108 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,425
I love the underground station idea. Keeps you out of the rain and snow better than the others do.

As for the rail/ bus thing, I imagine it will be a while before that becomes an issue and I also suspect by that point you might see right through to Barrhaven all at once.

If not, they can simply put the buses further down...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 5:50 PM
Kitchissippi Kitchissippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,075
I can see the underground station if it was a purely LRT station, but not as a shared bus/train station. The rendering just doesn't make sense.

If this were to be an LRT terminus as per the plan, there has to be room for the train to switch tracks, or configure some sort of centre platform separate from the bus platforms.

Also, if Baseline Road is supposed to become a transit priority route as indicated in the plan (which looks like it uses Navaho Drive to dip down to the station) there needs to be some sort of correspondence between the two routes and a way for buses to go from one to another.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 10:03 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi View Post
I can see the underground station if it was a purely LRT station, but not as a shared bus/train station. The rendering just doesn't make sense.

If this were to be an LRT terminus as per the plan, there has to be room for the train to switch tracks, or configure some sort of centre platform separate from the bus platforms.

Also, if Baseline Road is supposed to become a transit priority route as indicated in the plan (which looks like it uses Navaho Drive to dip down to the station) there needs to be some sort of correspondence between the two routes and a way for buses to go from one to another...
I agree. It doesn't look as if the design of the proposed station has taken into account the new rapid transit plan. If we look at the future transit plan, we see



Note that the baseline BRT jogs south to Baseline Station. This is not accounted for in the proposal. The new proposal shows no transit crossing the bus/LRT line.

The current bus flow through Baseline Station is shown by the yellow (Transitway), blue and red lines in the following picture. I have separated the east of Baseline Station (red) and the west of Baseline Station (blue) routes for clarity (I hope).



Notice that the buses from/to Baseline, east of the station travel on Navaho. To the west, buses use Woodroffe to get to Baseline Road. From the future transit plans already presented, it appears as if that arrangement will continue.

Then, just to muddy the waters (and add more colours ), I added a green line to represent the new station and route. I would like to see this built only for rail.

Since there is only an accepted plan to build the Building Sciences (BS) building, then there would still be room on the surface to have the equivalent of the current Station above the train station. This would allow for transfers between the two systems. The buses could mostly follow the new roads (black lines).

However, I have also added a fushia line. This represents where I would like to see the blue line accessing Baseline Road to the west. This would give better access to the new buildings and the folks of Centre Point. It would also make use of an existing intersection and off-load the transit from the Woodroffe/Baseline intersection.

Note that I have also continued the green line south of the station. In my mind, this is the train route. I am not keen on building it to be a separated bus route and then later paying to convert it to rail. It should just be built as rail from the start. While that is happening, the buses can continue to use Woodroffe and the new ground level bus station (powder blue line).

I did find the proposed site plan interesting though.



I expect that the future development area of the ‘old’ campus will be for a large building. With the main labs (machine shop, wood working, etc.) out of the old ‘A’ building, it could be torn down and the space added to the future development area.

Personaly, with all of the parking lots and empty space on the old campus, I don't think that the college should have been given the land, but that is water under the bridge.

Speaking of bridges, is that bridge really going to be an almost 50 metre span?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 10:13 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
I don't think that the new Algonquin Station is well thought out in its present presentation.

Last edited by Richard Eade; Oct 24, 2008 at 10:15 PM. Reason: Double post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 10:29 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 7,110
As part this development, the CCTBS will be integrated with a realigned and grade separated (buried) transit station that will accommodate buses and light rail. The redevelopment of the transit station supports the Official Plan vision as well as recently prepared mixed-use development concept for the Centrepointe area. The Site Plan will also accommodate the extension of Navaho Drive and College Avenue as signalized intersections crossing Woodroffe Avenue to the north and south of the site plan area. A glass pedestrian bridge is envisioned above Woodroffe Avenue connecting the existing buildings east of Woodroffe to the CCTBS building and transitway. Each of these associated but independent municipal projects are subject to various studies and processes that will be considered as part of any approval of the CCTBS site plan.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 8:12 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
As part this development, the CCTBS will be integrated with a realigned and grade separated (buried) transit station that will accommodate buses and light rail. The redevelopment of the transit station supports the Official Plan vision as well as recently prepared mixed-use development concept for the Centrepointe area. The Site Plan will also accommodate the extension of Navaho Drive and College Avenue as signalized intersections crossing Woodroffe Avenue to the north and south of the site plan area. A glass pedestrian bridge is envisioned above Woodroffe Avenue connecting the existing buildings east of Woodroffe to the CCTBS building and transitway. Each of these associated but independent municipal projects are subject to various studies and processes that will be considered as part of any approval of the CCTBS site plan.
Yes, it is early in the design process and many things need to be studied. However, is it ever too early to start thinking of the requirements?

The presented information is, I would guess, more of a 'block diagram'. It basically shows that a buried Transitway station would be included and it's general position.

What I am suggesting is part of a future step: Taking into account the transit system which must be accommodated by the station. I am suggesting that in order to get two bus lines crossing (the west-east BRT and the south-west Transitway) as well as including a terminus for the LRT line (which I hope will be extended south), there could be a need to have two levels. One for trains and one for buses.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 8:20 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
......
Notice all the underground parking right next to the transit station. The zoning includes an exception from the restriction that there should be no parking lots within 600m of a transit station. If the City will not stick to its guidelines, it is going to wind up with a traffic mess. Woodroffe and Baseline are already crowded during the rush hours.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2008, 5:39 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 7,110
staff report on the Algonquin College Transitway station

it explains some of the phasing and cost info
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2008, 5:43 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 7,110
ALGONQUIN COLLEGE EXPANSION - CENTREPOINTE October 28th, 2008

Overview of Phasing and Timelines
Note: to be read in conjunction with corresponding phasing diagrams

PHASE 1 (Temporary Transit plan) - Scheduled for Completion by August 2011

Stage 1A – October 2008-March 2009 (5 months)
Existing Baseline station


Stage 1B – April 2009 - September 2009 (6 months)
  • Build new temporary transit station to the west of the existing station with 3 access routes to Woodroffe (Navaho Dr., College Ave. & new access point south of College Ave.)
  • Existing platform and bus lanes to west of platform together with the provision of a temporary passenger area to west of bus lanes can be used as an interim temporary station to free up the area between existing platform and Woodroffe for CCTBS construction start (e.g. piling operations) by as early as June 2009 while temporary station is still under construction.
  • City to modify its parking lots prior to construction of temporary station.
  • When temporary station is complete, buses cease using existing Baseline station and are relocated to new temporary station to free up the entire CCTBS site and future BRT/LRT tunnel site for construction.
  • 2 of the 3 road connection points at Woodroffe must be maintained at all times for bus transit (i.e. Navaho Dr. & College Ave. cannot be closed at same time).



Stage 1C – August 2009 -August 2011 (24 months)
  • Construct new CCTBS building and pedestrian bridge. [note: if an interim temporary station is used, the portion of the CCTBS site between existing station platform & Woodroffe would be clear to allow construction to start in that area by as early as June 2009].
  • Relocate watermain on Navaho and construct storm sewers from Pinecrest Creek to south of Tallwood below future BRT/LRT.
  • Build College Ave. overpass (road bridge) for future grade separation.
  • Construct transit tunnel structure from south edge of Navaho Dr. to south edge of College Ave. Tunnel to be covered as much as possible depending on funds available from City (minimum 100’ wide covered area to allow for pedestrians to access CCTBS building from transit station).
  • Build Tallwood overpass (road bridge) and Transitway from north side of Tallwood to Norice.
  • CCTBS operational August 2011. Vehicular access to be provided on College Ave. for drop-offs and servicing in dedicated lane. Limited on site parking is to be determined.
  • Temporary transit station still in use. Pedestrian traffic from buses to be directed over covered tunnel through CCTBS building and pedestrian bridge to get to east side of Woodroffe.



PHASE 2 (Interim Transit plan) - Scheduled for Completion between 2013-2015

Stage 2A – August 2011-2013
  • Cover tunnel completely (if not already done in Stage 1C) and add central platform.
  • Build Navaho overpass (road bridge) and grade separate Transitway from Baseline to south edge of Navaho.
  • Grade separate Transitway from south edge of College Ave. to north edge of Tallwood & build new transit station south of College Ave with above-grade pedestrian link to CCTBS building and 2 new ramps from grade separated Transitway up to new station. Transit station to be integrated within building, with escalators leading from below grade transit level to above grade pedestrian link(s).
  • Potential to build an Algonquin College facility south of College Ave. [potential to start construction in 2010 when new station and ramps are being built in that location].
  • Build new bus link (to be used by local bus routes only - primarily Route 118). from new station at College to Constellation (potential to use existing parking lot access road at 100 Constellation).
  • Transitway buses cease to use the temporary transit station and are relocated to the grade separated Transitway and use new station at College.
  • Buses go through tunnel adjacent to CCTBS, but do not use this area as a transfer point.
  • Area for Algonquin College Phase 2 buildings west of transit tunnel is now available for construction.



Stage 2B - August 2013-2015
  • Construct new Algonquin College Phase 2 buildings west of the new Transitway, including service courts and parking. Potentially new underground parking below new Algonquin College buildings.
  • Potential to coordinate development of City’s Main Street concept with retail and mixed use buildings (CTC areas west of Algonquin College Phase 2 buildings) as a joint City/College initiative
  • Algonquin College Phase 2 buildings west of Transitway are operational.
  • New buildings are linked to CCTBS with pedestrian bridges.
  • Access to all vehicles on College Ave. is to be determined.
  • Extend Ben Franklin access road including bridge across Transitway. Potential to build shared use parking structure linked to Ben Franklin extension [potential to build during the construction of the transit station building in 2A].



PHASE 3 (Longterm Transit plan) 2016 onwards

Stage 3 - 2016 onwards
  • LRT tracks are built into the Transitway.
  • LRT is operational. Centre platform is in the tunnel, and has escalators leading to main courtyard level.
  • Build City’s Main Street concept with retail and mixed use buildings if not initiated as part of Stage 2B.
  • Potential areas identified for future expansion for both City and/or Algonquin College.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2008, 1:40 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
staff report on the Algonquin College Transitway station

it explains some of the phasing and cost info
In that report, the numbers don't add up for me. I looked through costing tables 1 through 4 and they seem to have many repeated steps. I assume that once the Navaho watermain is moved, for example, it doesn't need to be moved again. Also, there seems to be a $98.5M BRT cost that might be the $68.5M cost that is supposed to be included (maybe transcription error). And, ofcourse, the $65.5M would already have the contingency and engineering added so it couldn't just be inserted.

Any way, if I add up the unique items, the cost is 'only' about $134M - not the $185M.

Could some one else take a look and let me know if I'm reading it wrong?

Last edited by Richard Eade; Nov 15, 2008 at 3:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 3:59 AM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Eade View Post
In that report, the numbers don't add up for me. I looked through costing tables 1 through 4 and they seem to have many repeated steps. I assume that once the Navaho watermain is moved, for example, it doesn't need to be moved again. Also, there seems to be a $98.5M BRT cost that might be the $68.5M cost that is supposed to be included (maybe transcription error). And, ofcourse, the $65.5M would already have the contingency and engineering added so it couldn't just be inserted.

Any way, if I add up the unique items, the cost is 'only' about $134M - not the $185M.

Could some one else take a look and let me know if I'm reading it wrong?
I think you're right... there's a transcription error and then engineering/contingency added on top of engineering/contingency. Note also that the contingency is only 10% this time around and it is applied only against the subtotal, whereas the TMP draft from April had a 30% contingency applied on top of the 15% engineering.

That would be a nice contract to get... $50M extra from adding errors.


Great design too - students will have to climb/ascend the equivalent of 3 storeys to get to the pedestrian overpass from the depths of the tunnel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 1:52 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
I think you're right... there's a transcription error and then engineering/contingency added on top of engineering/contingency. Note also that the contingency is only 10% this time around and it is applied only against the subtotal, whereas the TMP draft from April had a 30% contingency applied on top of the 15% engineering.

That would be a nice contract to get... $50M extra from adding errors.


Great design too - students will have to climb/ascend the equivalent of 3 storeys to get to the pedestrian overpass from the depths of the tunnel.
Thanks. I thought that I must be going crazy. I just found it incredible that Staff could put forward such errors. I'm glan to hear it is not just me.

At the Joint meeting of the Transportation and Transit Committees, at about 00:10 (after 14.5 hours of meeting), the committees passed the plan so they will be recommending Council accept it as is. That's $185M to move the station 30m and put a few hundred metres of the Transitway under ground.

I think that the Councillors just don't understand anything technical so they rely on Staff to guide them. Unfortunately, Staff are not as consciencious as required at times.

In this case, Staff had been told that the numbers made no sense, so they re-formatted the tables to make it 'look simpler', but it does not look as if they actually reviewed the numbers. In the new tables, the numbers still didn't add up but after midnight the Councillors didn't notice. (Although, I doubt that Councillors would add up columns of numbers at any other time either. They just assume that the addition is correct.)

It would be nice to get ahold of the presentation that staff gave to the Councillors that evening.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 1:59 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
...Great design too - students will have to climb/ascend the equivalent of 3 storeys to get to the pedestrian overpass from the depths of the tunnel.
Yes, I think the design will be problematic in the future. It doesn't seem to account for the buses AND trains going through the tunnel and the transfer station appears to be much too small for 10,000p/h movements.

Notice also that it does not appear to take into consideration of the proposed Baseline BRT which will be entering from Navaho.

I don't know if the height of the bridge will be that much of a problem. Since the transfer station is under College Ave., it is likely that most students will continue to cross Woodroffe at the intersection. It is a much shorter route.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 2:00 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,294
Why are we spending so much to accomplish so little? To support intensification around the station? I fail to understand the merits of letting intensification cost the taxpayer so much money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 5:47 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
Why are we spending so much to accomplish so little? To support intensification around the station? I fail to understand the merits of letting intensification cost the taxpayer so much money.
The short answer is: Because Staff has gone wild.

There was a Concept plan for the Centrepointe Town Centre (CTC) developed in 2006-7 through a series of 5 public workshops. The resulting plan was approved by Council Nov. 14, 2007.

Also at that time, Council voted to give some land to Algonquin College for their Construction and Building Sciences Building (BSB). Also, Council voted to give $5M (gross) toward a pedestrian bridge across Woodroffe, between the new BSB and the old ‘C’ Building. Council, in principle, agreed that the new BSB should be tightly integrated with the Baseline Transit Station.

Then Staff went wild:

Quote:
“City staff, College staff and consultants have worked collaboratively to advance the Concept Plans for the CTC and Algonquin Projects”
Without further public consultation. The result is an “Updated CTC – 2008”.



Notice the differences: the transit station is not on the surface; a building has been removed to create a new "public Focal Point" instead of the one which was on the Main Street; the park has shrunk.

But don’t worry:

Quote:
"Subject to Council approval of the recommendations in this report, it is the intention to coordinate with the Ward Councillor to hold a public meeting early in 2009 that will deal with all planned CTC initiatives including the site plans for the Archives and Algonquin Projects and the EA for the rapid transit system.”
Once everything is approved and construction is underway, there might be a public meeting.

Any way, Algonquin got the land under the current station so we need to move by spring 2009. So we are building a temporary station – which will be built to permanent standards, according to staff when questioned by Wilkinson about the cost, because it will be there until 2013. This will be a $6.35M temporary surface station.

Things get worse from there. The temporary station will need to be removed by 2013 because it will be built on land which Staff has also deemed as Algonquin’s. This is so that there can be Algonquin buildings on both sides of the final station, thus ‘integrating’ it. Algonquin expects that they will need to build their Health Sciences Building starting in 2013. We need to have our new tunnel and station by then to vacate their land.

Oh, and Algonquin didn’t like having the surface transit station, as depicted in the approved plan, so it must be buried. Algonquin was given the surface and air rights above the tunnel so they could have a courtyard. This courtyard will replace the “Public Focal Point” of the approved plan. (Also, since this is a larger area and park-like, the public park has been shrunk.)

An extra cost for burying the Transitway is that the Pinecrest Creek (SWM) must be buried under the new tunnel. I have to assume that it will still be high enough to flow.

At the Meeting on Wednesday, Councillor Chiarelli brought in a couple of people from the Community Association who stated that they were in favour of burying the busway.

In fact, that is what is getting buried – the busway. The four lanes of bus Transitway will run through the tunnel adjacent to the new BSB, but will not stop there: The transfer stop is planned to be at, and under, College Avenue. This will be a station similar to what exists at Westboro Station with local buses on the bridge and the Transitway below.

As far as integrating the station and buildings: There will be no more direct access from the buildings to the station than there is at Billings Bridge. Although the buildings will have doors on the courtyard side of the building.

All for the low, low price of $185M!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 7:37 PM
highdensitysprawl's Avatar
highdensitysprawl highdensitysprawl is offline
Highrise
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Eade View Post
I think that the Councillors just don't understand anything technical so they rely on Staff to guide them. Unfortunately, Staff are not as consciencious as required at times.
In this case, Staff had been told that the numbers made no sense, so they re-formatted the tables to make it 'look simpler', but it does not look as if they actually reviewed the numbers.
I have found this to the case in numerous years of dealing with Staff. The way the City is structured these days is that the tech/math savvy staff members don't liase much with outside applicants/consultants/members of the public. This is often left to the Planning Dep't staff, many of whom are mere gatekeepers of the information and are passing on the information. I have questioned or corrected data numerous times and City Staff often don't have answers.

This, to their credit, could be put down to the fact that they end up spending a lot of time on councillors requests for information or other related info.

My advice is to try and verify and cross reference information provided in many cases by City Staff. In almost all cases they are not willingly passing on providing false information.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > SSP: Local Ottawa-Gatineau > Suburbs
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:25 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.