The Official Lansdowne Park Revitalization Thread

[phil235]

Originally Posted by ajldub

Relocation may not be a realistic option for a CFL franchise, but folding outright is. Witness the last two football teams in Ottawa. This is a massive bet on a team that is far from a sure shot.

To call this a "massive bet" on a CFL football team really understates the importance of a stadium to the city for any number of events. Case in point, Ottawa U had 6-7000 people in there for a football game last weekend. That couldn't have happened anywhere else in Ottawa.

The investment being made is for the provision of an outdoor multi-purpose facility, not just a CFL team. And don't forget the arena, which already has a proven tenant. The CFL (and soccer team) are to be other key tenants of the facility, but they will really only account for a fraction of the use that will be made of the stadium.

[jemartin]

The Lansdowne Park Conservancy is pleased to announce its partnership with the International Design Firm NBBJ.

http://www.nbbj.com/#work/market-sectors/sports

[Ottawan]

This merely deminishes any sensible person's opinion of NBBJ without in any way changing their opinion of the ridiculous Lansdowne Conservancy.

[jemartin]

"Today, Tuesday, September 14, 2010 at Ottawa City Council, The Lansdowne Park Conservancy was pleased to announce its partnership with International Stadium and Design Firm NBBJ. This substantial partnership affords the Conservancy the design, professional costing and project management to enable it to complete its competitive bid (Coverage Ottawa Sun, Jon Willing http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa.../15351306.html )

[jemartin]

A link to the Executive Summary conducted for the Conservancy by NBBJ and preliminary costing may be seen at:

http://lpc-cpl.ca/images/pdf/ot-park-sept13.pdf

[ajldub]

Phil: it is a massive bet because without a CFL team Lansdowne Live will cost the city hundreds of millions over the years. Regardless of how many other events may require a stadium of that size, without a football team the whole plan has no chance at profitability. And CFL working in Ottawa is not guaranteed at all, regardless of what the football boosters say.

[jemartin]

Originally Posted by phil235

To call this a "massive bet" on a CFL football team really understates the importance of a stadium to the city for any number of events. Case in point, Ottawa U had 6-7000 people in there for a football game last weekend. That couldn't have happened anywhere else in Ottawa.

The investment being made is for the provision of an outdoor multi-purpose facility, not just a CFL team. And don't forget the arena, which already has a proven tenant. The CFL (and soccer team) are to be other key tenants of the facility, but they will really only account for a fraction of the use that will be made of the stadium.

Gee Gees football is served by the North Stands.

A full stadium is ideally located at Bayview. Develop it now or lose the chance.

Rapid transit is key to any stadium that Lansdowne cannot provide.

Lansdowne is better suited to a renovation of the North stands and arena under option 2 of the Conservancy bid and will cost $45M for the whole park, easily covered and extremely profitable with mixed retail in existing buildings.

As Prime Minister Harper correctly pointed out, sports arena's and stadiums are for private developers, not the taxpayer. With 7 times the development space a development tied stadium at Bayview is not only better fiscally but at the Rapid Transit Hub, strategically superior.

Mayor Larry is clearly not thinking straight.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Gee Gees football is served by the North Stands.

A full stadium is ideally located at Bayview. Develop it now or lose the chance.

Rapid transit is key to any stadium that Lansdowne cannot provide.

Lansdowne is better suited to a renovation of the North stands and arena under option 2 of the Conservancy bid and will cost $45M for the whole park, easily covered and extremely profitable with mixed retail in existing buildings.

As Prime Minister Harper correctly pointed out, sports arena's and stadiums are for private developers, not the taxpayer. With 7 times the development space a development tied stadium at Bayview is not only better fiscally but at the Rapid Transit Hub, strategically superior.

Mayor Larry is clearly not thinking straight.

If sports arenas and stadiums should not be funded by tax payers money then the real question is should any arts and culture.Hockey is a massive part of canadas culture if you say no to that but say yes to funding for a park i think thats going down a very slippery slope.

[jemartin]

The Conservancy plan, either Option 1 or Option 2, pays for itself through substantial site revenues and no cost to the taxpayer.

Intelligent development that is fiscally responsible, sensitive to heritage and environmentally sound.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jemartin

The Conservancy plan, either Option 1 or Option 2, pays for itself through substantial site revenues and no cost to the taxpayer.

Intelligent development that is fiscally responsible, sensitive to heritage and environmentally sound.

But can you understand the issue there are some willing to have tax payers money go to a park but not a new arena.This is the mind set off some residents lets spend $200 million on a new library lets spend $500 million on a new park lets spend $120 million on new concert hall.But oh no not one cents should go to sports.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by reidjr

But can you understand the issue there are some willing to have tax payers money go to a park but not a new arena.This is the mind set off some residents lets spend $200 million on a new library lets spend $500 million on a new park lets spend $120 million on new concert hall.But oh no not one cents should go to sports.

Bingo! I am more of an arts and culture type of guy these days (especially when it comes to buying tickets), but sports fans* are taxpayers too!

*Sports fans are probably a lot more numerous than "arts and culture" types as well...

[Franky]

Originally Posted by reidjr

But can you understand the issue there are some willing to have tax payers money go to a park but not a new arena.This is the mind set off some residents lets spend $200 million on a new library lets spend $500 million on a new park lets spend $120 million on new concert hall.But oh no not one cents should go to sports.

This is a good point, but why not build a new stadium at City Centre (or at Bayview on the East-West rapid transit line - Preston BIA take note) with federal and provincial money instead of giving away our park (yes it's paved) to a sole-sourced developer to cover the missing 2/3 of the $$$?

BTW, greening the park doesn't cost $500 million and I think it should remain exhibition space (i.e. paved or grasscrete type stuff).

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by Franky

This is a good point, but why not build a new stadium at City Centre (or at Bayview on the East-West rapid transit line - Preston BIA take note) with federal and provincial money instead of giving away our park (yes it's paved) to a sole-sourced developer to cover the missing 2/3 of the $$$?

BTW, greening the park doesn't cost $500 million and I think it should remain exhibition space (i.e. paved or grasscrete type stuff).

But thats the thing if some people get there way it will not be a simple greening.There are some that want little shops built much like france there are some that want a huge concert hall as well as a trade centre etc.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Franky

This is a good point, but why not build a new stadium at City Centre (or at Bayview on the East-West rapid transit line - Preston BIA take note) with federal and provincial money instead of giving away our park (yes it's paved) to a sole-sourced developer to cover the missing 2/3 of the $$$?

BTW, greening the park doesn't cost $500 million and I think it should remain exhibition space (i.e. paved or grasscrete type stuff).

Have you not following the debate about the arena in Quebec City? It is a really complicated issue to expect federal and provincial funding for a professional sports facility. In some respects, the federal government would like to give money to Quebec City, but it really opens the flood gates for expectations for similar treatment from many other cities.

I would not expect federal and provincial funding for a Bayview stadium especially if we have an option to build a stadium at a different location without such funding. This kind of scenario tells you that funding is not necessary so why would we get it? The federal government is fully aware that we can build a stadium at Lansdowne Park, so a stadium at Bayview would be considered an unnecessary luxury.

[jemartin]

Missing the point.

For sure the governement wont step in at Bayview.

But you don't build at Lansdowne.

With 7 times the taxation at Bayview and a land-for-stadium deal you direct high intensification at that site. Let private capital fund a development tied stadium there, not the taxpayer.

Miss it now and it is gone forever. If you build at Lansdowne now not only will you have a major traffic headache for the next 30 years, a lost magnificent central recreation area with an over intensified development, at significant taxpayer cost, but the Bayview site will have long been developed.

Stadiums belong on rapid transit and Bayview was chosen the number one site by the City of Ottawa study for that obvious reason.

If DCR Phoenix is in the process of moving ahead with 1,000,000 sq ft on the smallest part of the Bayview Somerset development area then 2,000,000 is available on the substantially larger northern side.

Rapid transit, Transit Oriented Development. Proper urban planning, more strategic and incredibly better return.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jemartin

Missing the point.

For sure the governement wont step in at Bayview.

But you don't build at Lansdowne.

With 7 times the taxation at Bayview and a land-for-stadium deal you direct high intensification at that site. Let private capital fund a development tied stadium there, not the taxpayer.

Miss it now and it is gone forever. If you build at Lansdowne now not only will you have a major traffic headache for the next 30 years, a lost magnificent central recreation area with an over intensified development, at significant taxpayer cost, but the Bayview site will have long been developed.

Stadiums belong on rapid transit and Bayview was chosen the number one site by the City of Ottawa study for that obvious reason.

If DCR Phoenix is in the process of moving ahead with 1,000,000 sq ft on the smallest part of the Bayview Somerset development area then 2,000,000 is available on the substantially larger northern side.

Rapid transit, Transit Oriented Development. Proper urban planning, more strategic and incredibly better return.

As i said before you don't fund sports then arts and culture should not get funded.As for the majopr headache the probleam is some think a park would draw more then a arena and stadium.So if you go by the logic landsdown live would cause major traffic issues you have to apply that to a park as well.

[jemartin]

Surface parking with the use spread out over the day by a few thousand with Lansdowne as a modestly developed space is considerably less traffic than large functions of 24,000 and underground parking with three massive towers (up to 200 feet) box stores and private homes.

Not even comparable.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by ajldub

Phil: it is a massive bet because without a CFL team Lansdowne Live will cost the city hundreds of millions over the years. Regardless of how many other events may require a stadium of that size, without a football team the whole plan has no chance at profitability. And CFL working in Ottawa is not guaranteed at all, regardless of what the football boosters say.

The presence of a CFL team makes a difference of hundreds of millions of dollars? I think you need to take another look at the figures.

In any event, that misses the point. Profitiability is not a key criteria for those of us who believe that a stadium is a facility that is critical for the city, and therefore it is reasonable for the city to make an investment in it. While the other uses of the stadium (other than the 67's) may not be profitable, that is not the same as saying that they don't bring value to the city. Regardless of fanciful claims that a developer will give us the perfect stadium for free, I think the majority of people understand that the city has to be prepared to invest in the facility if it wants to continue to make available to its citizens the variety uses and events that have been listed above. All of those uses make this city a better place to live.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Have you not following the debate about the arena in Quebec City? It is a really complicated issue to expect federal and provincial funding for a professional sports facility. In some respects, the federal government would like to give money to Quebec City, but it really opens the flood gates for expectations for similar treatment from many other cities.

I would not expect federal and provincial funding for a Bayview stadium especially if we have an option to build a stadium at a different location without such funding. This kind of scenario tells you that funding is not necessary so why would we get it? The federal government is fully aware that we can build a stadium at Lansdowne Park, so a stadium at Bayview would be considered an unnecessary luxury.

Not much, but if Quebec gets the money we're good to go? in any case, the decision seems to be discretionary so a new gov't might change the game.

As for the "option", this is using capital to buy a consumable. We are selling part of our home to buy football tickets - it's wrong. And yes, a football stadium is luxury, certainly not a necessity no matter where it is built.

[jemartin]

One thing about the entire OSEG CFL proposal I find particularly troubling.

If it is such a sure thing, why are the OSEG partners only committing to 5 years for the franchise?

Another reason for private investment into stadiums.