City staff and OSEG have issued a report on re-vitalizing Lansdowne Park [PDF], centred on re-building the north side stands and arena. The report is tentatively scheduled to go to the Finance and Economic Development Committee (FEDCO) on Friday May 6.
Join us for a public discussion on this new proposal and what you’d like to see out of an improved Lansdowne Park.
Unsure as to why we are beholden to OSEG to continue developping Lansdowne. Can we not open it up to tender, come up with multiple options, then vote? In what world does someone just be given one option from one bidder and think that’s fair? Ridiculous that these rich developpers continue to make $$$$$ off City of Ottawa and its taxpayers.
Traffic/transit for this site is already a gong-show. They’re proposing to add 1,200 condos? that’s just insane.
Also 0% of these condos will be affordable.
“affordable housing” can mean 80% of the prevailing retail cost. These will be in one of the most expensive neighbourhoods in the city! it’ll be bachelor apartments for $2000/month.
none of this is in line with the city’s strategic plan.
- For a site of such significance, a single, “take-it-or-leave-it” concept seems hurried, at best. Surely other design options were under consideration; these should be shared between all interested parties, including the public. The first phase of Lansdowne revitalization has been relatively successful; not putting in the work to imagine its true potential in a 2.0 concept (and beyond) would seem very short-sighted.
- The plan’s North-side seating appears to be much steeper than that of the existing grandstand, presumably to accommodate construction of the three new residential towers. This will potentially reduce accessibility for the disabled, seniors, and families. As well, it would seem that there will be no roof or covering of any kind, a change that will further reduce accessibility and seemingly fails to take into account that Ottawa is a “winter city” with a very mixed climate. In addition, it seems the North-side stands will have no field lighting or media facilities, further diminishing the utility of the site for major sporting or other events.
- Finally, shrinking the overall capacity of the stadium and the arena makes little sense, and will render TD Place something akin to a U.S. high school/minor college facility, at best. In fact, Ottawa is a growing city, a world capital, and should be marketable as a premier destination for national and international events. An essential consideration should be to consult with FIFA, IIHF, MLS, and like bodies on minimal requirements for sanctioned competitions.
- While OSEG obviously wishes to fast track Lansdowne 2.0 and thereby maximize revenues through an expanded residential/retail footprint, it is incumbent upon the City to demand a public event space that is both exceptional and visionary. Ottawa has few, if any, alternatives, so getting it right now—even if that entails a phased approach—is vitally important for the future viability of such an important facility.
Let us be clear: this is not about enhancing city amenities. This is about a real estate deal.
There are plenty of grand ideas for Lansdowne, few of which make any economic sense for the city, the residents, the merchants, and yes the developers. It must work reasonably well for all parties. More people living on the site will make all event and retail more successful. Artists and boutiques sound attractive, but Lahe site is no Granville Island. It is a relatively small inner city site with an small aged arena and a new 1/2 stadium.
Perhaps the event centre/arena could be put lower in the ground to make the green space more appealing. This has a cost, but these are 50-75 year decisions. Penny wise, pound foolish!
Selling air rights is one thing, but using “new tax revenue” as the means to repay a loan is unheard. New tax revenue should accrue fully to city revenue as with all property taxes. The city must avoid wide eyed and overly optimistic financing projections where the developer is protected first and the city receives crumbs.
Residential Tower height should be no higher than existing tower.
Parking is not a bad thing. For Lansdowne to be successful, people must visit from across the city, and many will uses private (electric eventually) vehicles. Residents also have vehicles for work, shopping, skiing, etc. Limiting space for them only hurts the people who you desire to shop/dine/ attend events there and who live there.
The plan is a great star, but need not be so rushed, but also need not be unreasonably delayed. More meaningful consultation through the fall, new council to approve by Q1 2023, and start construction immediately thereafter.
The community around Lansdowne struggled to have it more natural and attuned to the neighbourhood. They were overpowered. We now face part two of the developers’ attempt to fill up the space. We don’t need high rise and expensive housing; we don’t need high rise anything. We do need more social housing; we do need more natural space and less chrome, glitz, restaurants and muzak. We need more trees. We don’t need further development of an already over-developed space.
1. Event centre roof should either be walkable or if not, at a minimum should be a wildlife garden (run like Fletcher’s) not just grass that does nothing for anyone. Overall, this is a good plan.
2. Residential should be max 2 towers, no higher than the pre-existing Lansdowne 1.0 tower at w/ side endzone. More importantly, 40% affordable housing. 10% is shamefully low. Also, limit impact to staging area on the greenspace. This is the major greenspace for the residents of the Glebe, some of Old Ottawa South, and some of Old Ottawa East.
3. Parking should be minimum underground for the residential. No need for more for people coming to Lansdowne. Push public transit or our planet will be inhabitable for our children.
4. What would make Lansdowne more of a Granville Island than a Ottawa Trainyards?
- more artists (preferably local or Canadian) booths/storefronts
- more interactive or yearly rotating exhibits in booths or storefronts (ie. museum of nature supports an exhibit one year, next year is science & tech, etc.)
- a reconciliation booth/location (I don’t know what this looks like but this can be a prime location with massive foot traffic to provide impact for understanding and forward movement with reconciliation.
*I would rather my taxes go up than support a decision that is based on providing kick-backs or preferences to big business so that the tax-payer is not impacted financially. Because guess what, it does impact the tax payer as we will end up with a pivotal Ottawa landmark that nobody wants to be at or show off to visitors.
Miles Krauter()Events 2022-04-27 13:09:10 -0400published this page in