Lansdowne 2.0 (Northside Stands/Arena Redevelopment) | Proposed

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by FrostyMug

Just bulldoze the entire thing and move the stadium to Lebreton along with the hockey rink. If Detroit can have the NFL, MLB, NHL and NBA all within walking distance of each other (and it's amazing) then why can't we have our major sports all together as well and located along rapid transit as opposed to out in the relative boonies of the Glebe with limited accessibility.

You're not serious obviously. Even pre renovation that is a bold statement but now it's ridiculous.

[Djeffery]

That site in Philly has worked out well for them in being able to have enough space to keep replacing a facility with another new one and moving the parking around. Off the top of my head, there have been 4 stadiums and 2 arenas on that site within the last 35 years. When the time comes in a few years that the Eagles want a new stadium, they can just go back across the road to where the Vet used to be and build there again lol.

It might have been a cool idea to have a new football stadium near the Sens arena and build a district around it, but not after the money has been spent on TD Place now.

[rocketphish]

Once again, City of Ottawa shows its lack of imagination on Lansdowne
The idea of seeking the best ideas and designs possible to create the very best Lansdowne we can seems alien to city leaders.

Mohammed Adam, Ottawa Citizen
Published Apr 11, 2024 • Last updated 10 hours ago • 3 minute read

It did not come as a surprise that the City of Ottawa’s finance committee voted last week to reject a competitive design process for the $419 million Lansdowne redevelopment, and instead sole-sourced the contract to the architect hired by OSEG to do the job. Council is expected to rubber-stamp the committee decision, and barring an improbable Ontario Land Tribunal decision against the project, Lansdowne 2.0 is now a go.

For some inexplicable reason, the city has developed an aversion to design competitions that most cities routinely undertake to attract the best and brightest in order to bring new and innovative ideas to major projects. And it is not just the current city government. Whoever the mayor — Larry O’Brien, Jim Watson or Mark Sutcliffe — and whatever the makeup of council, the city has consistently shown a lack of ambition, invention and imagination when it comes to Lansdowne. More often than not, it takes the easy path: just sole-source the project and get it over with.

The idea that the city would go out there and seek the best ideas and designs in the hope of creating something infinitely better is alien to them. That’s how an international design competition for an urban park at Lansdowne was halted back in 2010, and the redevelopment sole-sourced to the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group. And it fits perfectly with the city’s plan now to once again sole-source the project design contract to OSEG’s preferred architect, Brisbin Brook and Beynon (BBB).

This is not to say BBB would not do a good job. It might well. But it is to say that we’ve denied ourselves the chance to see and measure what other architects are capable of, and then decide if BBB is indeed the best for the job. We’ve seen the model of the new Lansdowne, but who is to say there aren’t better ideas out there? If the city and OSEG have such confidence in BBB, why are they reluctant to pit it against the competition? BBB could easily come on top, and no one would be able to complain. But now, there would be questions about what might have been.

City staff say launching a competitive process that’s open to all would delay the project and increase the costs. But that’s typical Ottawa. There is always a reason the city can’t aim higher. It sets up a process that leaves no room for manoeuvre, and when it is called out, dangles the spectre of higher costs. And who wants higher costs?

But this is really not about higher costs; it’s a rush to push the project through before a new Ontario building code goes into effect. The city needs to submit its design by early next year, or risk having to comply with a potentially more stringent code. June Creeman of the Glebe Community Association summed it up best: “Racing to avoid complying with the new building code is unwise. Would you buy a new computer if it had an operating system that’s about to expire?” No, I would not, and you wouldn’t either. But apparently, our city government aims to do so.

Then there is the small matter of the Glebe Community Association’s appeal against the project’s rezoning application, to the Ontario Land Commission. If you are a betting man or woman, you will be wise to bet against the appeal succeeding. The OLC is just not in the business of blowing up major land development projects, and no one should have their hopes high in this situation. So, on we go.

Let’s be clear that no one in the city wants Lansdowne to fail. Residents want the best for the city, but what some are saying is that this iteration of Lansdowne is not the best we could have done. And they are right. Yet there is no turning back now that the project is a done deal. So, let’s just hope it succeeds, because we all have a vested interest in it.

Mohammed Adam is an Ottawa journalist and commentator. Reach him at nylamiles48@gmail.com

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/ad...n-on-lansdowne

[J.OT13]

I agree in many ways, but tbf, the competition for an urban park did go ahead and they chose a design from that competition. Problem is they value-engineered the design to death.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I agree in many ways, but tbf, the competition for an urban park did go ahead and they chose a design from that competition. Problem is they value-engineered the design to death.

Yeah, it is unfortunate that opinions like this get printed with factual errors. As you say, the park was the result of a design competition, but a design competition is no guarantee that the design won't get scaled back before construction.

I find a lot of these comment pieces are very non-specific about the design competition that they are calling for. What is he suggesting that we compete - the design of the project, or something more fundamental like the actual composition of the project. If the latter, it is more of a theoretical exercise, as a design competition could produce a proposal that includes concert halls and arcades and aquariums, but unless there is someone to run those businesses, they are never going to happen.

My complaint is more with the City, as they could have been more directive in terms of requiring a concert hall etc. This would of course require them to provide financial support or tie tax breaks to the provision of that facility, which they seem to be afraid to do. Mostly it's a case of the city cheaping out and not getting what it could, which has nothing to do with a design competition.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Couple images of the NHL Winter Classic in 2017. Most new seating was along the East end zone. Don't know the reason why they went with that over the West end zone, but I hope it wasn't due to some limitations.

The temp stands in the west are limited by the view of the screen at that end of the field. Even the short ones in 2017 caused issues, they had to remove tents originally planned for the top of the northmost ones. The view from the west end of the south stands is the limiting factor.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Catenary

The temp stands in the west are limited by the view of the screen at that end of the field. Even the short ones in 2017 caused issues, they had to remove tents originally planned for the top of the northmost ones. The view from the west end of the south stands is the limiting factor.

That's a good point. I wonder if adding a second screen to the arena wall might mitigate some of that (though I don't believe that's part of the plan).

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Proposed housing legislation could derail appeal of Lansdowne 2.0 decision
Appeals without a hearing date by April 10 would be dismissed

Nicole Williams · CBC News · Posted: Apr 13, 2024 4:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: 5 hours ago

New proposed legislation by the Ford government aimed at building homes faster in the province could also severely limit third-party appeals, including the one filed against Lansdowne 2.0.

Ontario's housing minister tabled the "Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act" on Wednesday. It proposes a number of changes including giving municipalities the ability to address stalled developments.

It also includes changes to the provincial Planning Act that would limit third-party appeals against municipal zoning decisions and official plan amendments. Any appeal that has not been scheduled with the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) before April 10 would be dismissed.

It's bad news for the Glebe Community Association, which appealed city council's zoning approval and official plan amendments for the $419-million redevelopment of Lansdowne Park earlier this year.

The association had yet to receive a hearing date.

"I really feel that this is an unintended consequence of the proposed legislation, and I certainly hope that there will be a rethink," said Carolyn Mackenzie, the association's planning chair.

New building powers for universities unveiled in proposed Ontario housing legislation
Glebe community group appeals Lansdowne 2.0 decisions
The appeal focuses on matters that have been central to the debate over Lansdowne 2.0, namely how construction of a new event centre will take away green space and the consequences of adding two highrise residential towers to the urban park.

Under the approved plan, the event centre for sports and concerts will remove green space from Lansdowne's Great Lawn, including an artificial berm overlooking the stadium.

Dismissing appeal would secure Lansdowne 2.0 timeline
Losing the right to appeal such a project "would be very, very unfortunate," Mackenzie said.

"If all we do is build housing and remove all rules, all restrictions, all considerations for what makes livable space and a livable, vibrant city, I really think those are putting short-term interests in ahead of long-term interests for residents and taxpayers," she said.

A community association leader poses in a park in summer.
Carolyn Mackenzie is the Glebe Community Association's planning chair. (Kate Porter/CBC)
City officials did not have much to say about the matter, but confirmed in an emailed statement to CBC on Friday that "should the legislation be adopted as introduced, the appeals would be deemed to be dismissed."

Staff had previously noted that the appeal of Lansdowne 2.0 with the OLT could put the timelines at risk.

The city and its partner hope to begin construction on the new event centre this fall so it can be ready for the Ottawa 67's 2026-27 season.

[DTcrawler]

Fingers crossed.

Maybe if their appeal gets trashed they can spend some time reflecting on what type of housing really detracts from the Glebe's "livability and vibrancy".

[rocketphish]

Ottawa council approves Lansdowne 2.0 procurement model

Blair Crawford, Ottawa Citizen
Published Apr 17, 2024 • Last updated 30 minutes ago • 1 minute read

City Council has given the green light for the next stage of Lansdowne 2.0, voting 19-6 to approve the format of the contract to design and build a new event centre and north-side stands.

With the approval of the “design bid build” (DBB) procurement model with its partner Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group and OSEG’s architect, Brisbin Brook Beynon, work can now move forward on the demolishing the old north side stands and replacing it with a new 11,200-seat grandstand, and building a new 5,500 seat event centre to replace the aging TD Place arena.

Council also approved extending a $20-million line of credit to its partner, OSEG.

Ultimately, the $419-million Lansdowne 2.0 project will include two residential towers of 40 and 25 storeys atop a retail podium, and new underground parking.

Meanwhile, the Glebe Community Association has appealed the Lansdowne 2.0 rezoning application to the Ontario Land Tribunal. That appeal has yet to be heard, but the DBB procurement model allows for the city and OSEG to continue moving forward. The issue was debated and approved earlier this month at the city’s finance and corporate services committee.

Wednesday’s decision disappointed Capital Ward Coun. Shawn Menard, one of the six councillors who voted against the issue and whose ward includes Lansdowne. The DBB model doesn’t allow for a competitive bidding process, he said.

“Disappointing is the word, but maybe that’s too charitable,” Menard said. “This report comes without any consultation with the public who are the ones paying for it … When it comes to Lansdowne Park, when we listen to the public, good things happen,” Menard said.

A final go/no go decision on Lansdowne 2.0 is expected some time in 2025.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...curement-model

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer

It's bad news for the Glebe Community Association, which appealed city council's zoning approval and official plan amendments for the $419-million redevelopment of Lansdowne Park earlier this year.

The Glebe Community Association represents fewer and fewer residents of Old Glebe every year. Two of the three census tracts in the Glebe have declining population, and the only one with an increasing population is the one that added the TOWERS OF DEATH and ROWHOUSES OF DESTROYED COMMUNITY to Lansdowne.

[rocketphish]

Cut the bureaucratic busy work and get the Lansdowne project done
The City of Ottawa is proceeding as it should, replacing obsolete, publicly owned sports facilities with up-to-date structures. But it's working at a crawl.

Randall Denley
Published Apr 16, 2024 • 3 minute read

Critics of the latest phase of Lansdowne Park redevelopment would have you believe that the city’s in a rush to replace crumbling football stands and the dilapidated Civic Centre.

If this is a rush, then a sloth is hyperactive. In 2021, the city asked its Lansdowne partner, Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG), to develop a plan for the rink and stands. The very next year, OSEG rushed back with a plan for new stands, new rink, new commercial and a couple of apartment towers to help pay for it. Last fall, council approved the concept, with some amendments. This week, it is expected to approve the method of procurement.

All that has taken not quite three years, and there is still no detailed plan for the new buildings, much less a contract to do the work. Final approval from city council won’t take place until the plans and the price are firm. That could come as “early” as the end of next year, if all goes well.

The new hockey rink, or event centre as they like to call it, isn’t scheduled to open until 2027. The new football stands won’t be ready until mid-2029. The apartment towers will be built in the early 2030s. Some rush.

That leisurely pace could have been even worse were it not for some new legislation promised by the provincial government. It will limit third parties’ right to appeal development decisions to the Ontario Land Tribunal. That seems certain to end an appeal by the Glebe Community Association, which is concerned with the loss of green space that will result from replacing the hockey rink with a standalone building. Now, the Civic Centre is tucked under the north-side stands, something that must have seemed like a good idea when the rink was built in 1967.

The community association appeal had little chance of succeeding, but it could have added years of delay to an already slow process.

Colleague Mohammed Adam argued in a recent column that the city has always lacked imagination and ambition when it comes to Lansdowne. OK, but that ship sailed 15 years ago when the city approved the redevelopment that occupies the Lansdowne site today.

It’s a little late to talk about the merits of an international design competition. The opportunity to design half a football stadium and a small hockey rink wouldn’t attract the world’s best architectural minds. The city is lucky to have Brisbin Brook Beynon, an experienced and competent local firm that will design the two buildings.

The city is proceeding as it should, replacing obsolete, publicly owned sports facilities with up-to-date structures. Anyone who thinks they are racing to get it done should have a look at the staff report that supports this week’s council decision.

The densely constructed document gives the impression of a city bureaucracy moving at a pace that only city bureaucrats would consider brisk. A good deal of time was spent contemplating various procurement models, with the help of external consultants, of course. In the end, staff are recommending that the buildings be designed by OSEG’s chosen architect, followed by bids from construction companies. Staff prefer this approach because they are most familiar with it, the report says. That statement makes the process seem like a waste of time.

However, lack of familiarity has not stopped staff from spending time on a “social procurement framework.” Despite admitting that neither they nor the construction industry know much about it, the intent is to make the Lansdowne rebuild a social development pilot project. As such, it will require assessment of such highly relevant elements as gender and race equity, inclusion and Indigenous relations.

The people working on this should be transferred to something useful right away, perhaps filling potholes.

When it comes to Lansdowne, all that’s really required is an acceptable design and a price that’s within the city’s budget. Let’s drop all the bureaucratic busy work and get it done.

Randall Denley is an Ottawa journalist and author. Contact him at randalldenley1@gmail.com

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/de...e-project-done