.
Here we go, sports fans!
Two articles on the morning that the groups present to council. I'm no expert, but I feel like the wind favours Lansdowne Live.
What’s at stake for taxpayers in stadium debate
[url=http://www.ottawacitizen.com/What+stake+taxpayers+stadium+debate/1467611/story.html]http://www.ottawacitizen.com/What+stake ... story.html[/url]By Patrick Dare, The Ottawa Citizen
April 5, 2009 11:16 PM
[i]Ottawa’s stadium debate is a little bit about sports and a lot about money and development.
The business groups behind the proposed redevelopment of Lansdowne Park and those pushing a soccer stadium in Kanata have each talked sports: the revival of the once mighty CFL football in Ottawa by the Lansdowne Live group; and the excitement in Eugene Melnyk’s Ottawa Senators group over building a stadium for a soccer, a sport that is popular among Ottawa’s youth.
But talk of football versus soccer doesn’t really answer the central question facing city council: Does either one of the projects serve the public interest?
The current stadium debate began in 2007 when interest in the development of Lansdowne Park by a partnership of businessmen surfaced.
Lansdowne, 40 acres in one of Ottawa’s best central neighbourhoods, has a football stadium that is falling apart, too much asphalt and a continuing need for about $2 million in annual subsidies from the city. But it’s also home to key trade shows, the much loved Ottawa 67’s, a thriving new farmers’ market and the city’s end-of-summer annual fair.
In January 2008, city council, led by councillors Clive Doucet and Peter Hume, decided to hold an international design competition to get expert, creative ideas about what could be done with Lansdowne.
Then, the Lansdowne Live group — businessmen John Ruddy, Roger Greenberg, Bill Shenkman and Jeff Hunt — announced that they had been awarded a conditional CFL franchise, at a cost of $7 million, if the tired football stadium is overhauled. And they offered the city a way to pull it off.
The Lansdowne Live proposal is to take over the park and use an infusion of public and private money to redevelop the place. The Live proposal is for the city to borrow money to refurbish the stadium and use the money the city is spending each year on Lansdowne now to service the loan instead. The new stadium would have 25,000 seats, luxury boxes and a restaurant.
The business group would take over management of the entire Lansdowne property.
The business plan includes a shopping centre of 250,000 square feet with underground parking. It would include restaurants, offices and a hotel on land that is leased from the city over 30 years. An aquarium in the Aberdeen Pavilion, featuring transparent tunnels visitors would walk through, is part of the concept. There is greenspace, an amphitheatre, soccer fields and ponds in the plan. At the end of 30 years, the buildings would be handed over to the city, which could sell or lease them, with the Live group given first right of refusal.
A strip of land along Holmwood Avenue would be sold for townhouse development, with the proceeds from the land sales taken by the city.
But the business group’s $120-million investment would only cover its shopping centre, the hotel and parking. The rest of the plan — the amphitheatre, the ponds, the playing fields and the aquarium — would have to be paid for by the city.
When the Lansdowne Live proposal landed, the city administration decided it merited serious consideration. City manager Kent Kirkpatrick stopped the international design competition with a memo, something for which he later apologized to councillors. Normally, managers do not reverse council decisions.
The city began studying the issue and commissioned a report on the state of Lansdowne Park.
Then Eugene Melnyk’s Senators Sports and Entertainment group proposed the soccer stadium at Kanata, beside Scotiabank Place.
The soccer stadium, to cost about $110 million, would be publicly financed, with one-third contributions from the federal, provincial and city governments, including land from the city. Part of the project would be the creation of several soccer practice fields for amateur players. The Senators group would contribute $10 million toward the city’s portion of the project and pay the city $9 million in rent over a long-term lease.
The stadium would be part of a much larger development on 30 hectares Melnyk owns beside his NHL arena. This would include up to 1.5 million square feet of offices, up to 500,000 square feet of retail and entertainment development, up to 450 residential units and two hotels. The idea is to create an “entertainment village? with a mix of activities day and night. The first phase would cost about $120 million, but the total development could reach $500 million.
To make a decision on this, city council must answer several questions.
Does the city need a large outdoor stadium?
Peter Hume, the city councillor who is chairman of the planning committee, says the answer is yes. He says any capital city like Ottawa needs a good stadium to hold major sporting and cultural events such as international soccer meets.
Other councillors are more skeptical about a stadium. Councillor Jan Harder says a new stadium has never been a priority of this city council but that the redevelopment of Lansdowne Park in some form is urgent. Councillor Gord Hunter says that, with the exception of hockey, Ottawans seem more interested in taking part in sports and watching their children in them than paying money to watch pro games.
A COMPAS Inc. poll commissioned by the Citizen last summer found lukewarm support for renovating Frank Clair Stadium at Lansdowne for football. But there was strong support for turning Lansdowne into an urban oasis showing off the Rideau Canal and featuring elements like the Ottawa Farmers’ Market.
City councillors are mindful that they have a state-of-the-art baseball stadium on Coventry Road that is 16 years old and empty, with the departure of the Can-Am league announced at the end of March.
Councillor Steve Desroches says it would be good to have a proper stadium, but he is concerned about “sticker shock? for taxpayers when the final costs are tallied.
“The reality is we’ve got a checkered history with our sports teams,? said Desroches. “We’ve got to be very cautious.?
If council is convinced of the merits of a stadium, which of the two stadium projects could the city support?
This is a difficult one to answer: City officials are increasingly convinced that either one would be big financial commitments for the city that would require help from the federal and provincial governments.
And some at city hall believe that neither proposal is a smart bet because the city’s big stadium should be somewhere else entirely. Councillor Michel Bellemare rules nothing out, but he says the logical place for a stadium is right downtown, where it will be served by public transit.
In fact, a report commissioned by the city concluded that the best place for a stadium would be the city’s own land at Bayview Yards, or at Carleton University. Lansdowne Park ranked sixth and the Senators’ Kanata site ranked seventh.
What happens If council chooses neither the Kanata soccer stadium nor Lansdowne Live?
Council could move to build a new stadium on a site of its own choosing. But one thing is certain: Council must do something about Lansdowne Park.
It’s a large, historic piece of public property in the heart of the city. Hume says the city has been derelict in its management of the place.
“We haven’t fixed the pipes. We haven’t done our job as a landlord,? says Hume. “It’s our own fault.?
He says that the Civic Centre, home of the 67’s, has become “a pretty dismal place? and “a tired, old facility.? It will have to be either renovated or rebuilt.
“It would be a travesty to allow the facility to degrade any further,? says Hume.
“The status quo is not acceptable. It will become a facility that no one will want to go to,? said Hume. “We have to do something.?
Which brings city council back to the competition for ideas that was originally proposed. The city could go back to square one by restarting the design competition for Lansdowne Park.
Clive Doucet, whose ward includes Lansdowne, says the place can be something to rival Vancouver’s Stanley Park or Halifax’s Point Pleasant Park.
“The first step is getting clear public support for a renaissance of the park,? he says.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen[/i]
Mayor, councillors brace for stadium debate
$100M projects may simply be too costly for city
By KENNETH JACKSON, Sun Media
Sun, April 5, 2009
[i]A much-anticipated city report on two rival proposals for a 20,000-seat open-air stadium is set to be released Monday afternoon and shows either would cost taxpayers roughly $100 million.
Because of the price tag, College Coun. Rick Chiarelli believes some of his colleagues will ask for both unsolicited proposals to be trashed, but he thinks the “best case scenario? is for both development teams to go back and come up with a better offer.
Chiarelli said Sunday that both teams presented their offers as if their benefits outweigh the costs.
“It was pretty obvious to us from the start that wasn’t the case,? he said. “I doubt they would ever lead with their final offer.?
One proposal, submitted by four local businessmen including Ottawa 67’s owner Jeff Hunt, calls for the renovation of Frank Clair Stadium for a CFL football franchise as part of a complete redevelopment of the deteriorating Lansdowne Park. The project, dubbed Lansdowne Live, is pegged at more than $90 million in taxpayer money.
The other, submitted by Senators owner Eugene Melnyk, calls for a soccer-specific stadium near Scotiabank Place in Kanata in the hopes of landing a Major League Soccer franchise. It would cost taxpayers more than $110 million.
The city would need federal and provincial funding to build either of the proposals.
Mayor Larry O’Brien said at the end of the day something needs to be done with Lansdowne.
“Lansdowne needs fixing that is much is clear. That should be your title,? said O’Brien in a interview Sunday.
He said the home of the Ottawa 67’s, trade shows, a farmers’ market and the SuperEx draws a total of about 1.5 million visitors each year.
“It’s still serving an important duty for the citizens,? he said.
He said there’s no clear winner and believes his experience as a businessman can really come into play now.
He wants the city have all the facts to determine which proposal provides the most value and is most economically suited for the city.
Capital Coun. Clive Doucet believes neither proposal works for the city. He argued it’s well-known Scotiabank Place is in the wrong place, so why make the same mistake twice by putting another stadium there. The site should be treated as a heritage site not a place for a plan that includes a hotel and shopping mall, he said.
He compared both proposals as two similar bad pitches by suit salesmen that come to your door. One proposal may be better than the other but “do you really need a suit (and) do you really want the suit they’re giving you??
Hunt said today’s unveiling of the report is a “milestone? event because it’s the first time they’ll find out where staff sits on the matter.
He believes his proposal is best because it has the biggest advantage in location and a Kanata stadium doesn’t solve any issues with Lansdowne.
When asked what he thought staff might do Hunt declined to make a guess.
“It’s really going to come to which proposal makes more sense, which location makes more sense,? he said.
Melnyk’s team was not available for comment.
Lansdowne Live has the go-ahead from the CFL for a franchise on the condition it has a stadium. Melnyk doesn’t have the same guarantee from MLS.
Chiarelli said today’s meeting is not about which stadium to pick but about what to do with Lansdowne.
“We may or may not have a decision to make about a stadium,? he said.
A final decision is expected by April 22. [/i]