Pic of possible Reno at Lansdowne Park

Found this on the stadiums and skyscraper page .

Three new towers I take it as condos and new north side of stadium .

No roof now .

This will all need approval of course .

2 Likes

What's wrong with the way it is now? They just built the thing less than 10 years ago.

My understanding is they're removing the arena the north stands.

If so I wonder if OSEG is looking at one of the smaller parcels at Lebreton

My take is .

Money from more pedestrian traffic for the businesses that are there or potential business leases and the arena /stadium together is considered too much up keep . The upper north side had added porta potties and the arena roof leaked among other issues .

Myself I love the existing north side especially with the roof . The arena was the right size for junior hockey .

The roof Kept you dry and it amplified the crowd noise which was good for atmosphere .

If they refurbished the north stands for x millions of dollars just 10 years ago and now they want to knock it down, what kind of bs planning is that? There's nothing wrong with the stadium.

Not spend millions of taxpayer money? No no no, that's not an option. Keep something perfectly functional that was JUST BUILT with taxpayer money? Hell no! Gotta spend more money. Someone's gonna profit and it won't be the average working stiff Joe in Ottawa.

The pic was found on the Trinity Group sight so it does have some legs .

They OSEG I believe have approached the city about air rights which would be the three towers .

No sign of a a junior sized hockey arena on the site which was also good for concerts and other sports .

Might have something to do with high-rise condos looking down on a unsightly roof structure. The right side of this photo is what I mean.

The previous plan for the area immediately north of the stadium was for three-to-four storeys condos over retail podiums. If the market can now support high-rise that is a more desirable density for the area, but those units facing the stadium will be a hard sell with an ugly roof structure blocking the view.

Edit: not sure why that photo won’t size properly, you’ll have to touch the photo to see the entire image…

2 Likes

I'm not sure that an unobstructed view of Redblacks games is such a high priority for prospective condo buyers.

It would be a shame to lose the roof. Not sure I could get my wife back to a game after having to sit through a heavy (heck, even a moderate) rain.

My layman's guess is that the structural support for the roof is quite expensive and leaving it out might be a way to cut costs.

1 Like

But the tall condo towers would house hundreds of people in condos and they pay property tax, so the city would benefit.
The construction would create hundreds of jobs and the developer would be paying a lot of tax. So yes your "average working stiff joe" would profit from it.
The north side with the arena would be knocked down.

Don't believe the hype. The banks and developers always come out ahead. The working stiffs always lose.

1 Like

No, the working stiffs will be employed building the condos and the new north side. How are the working stiffs losing?
Of course the banks and developers will come out ahead that's why we get projects done, would investors and developers put their money into any project if they didn't a return??
We wouldn't have a CFL team in Ottawa if the developers and investors didn't get something out of it.
It sounds like you have been reading Marx's - communist manifesto

Quite the opposite. I read Rothbard.

Just your wife some scuba inspired rain gear for her birthday in lieu of jewelry. Women like that sort of thing.

These two RedBlacks fans came to TD Place Stadium prepared.

1 Like

Leak proof roofs cost triple to 4 x the cost of a regular paste 'n show stadium roof. Winnipeg had the same thing when a rube Premier named Greg Slinger signed an open cheque for nearly 250 million for the current facility near the Univ. of Manitoba. The thing was hastily constructed by an outfit called "Hasty Stadium Construction, Inc.". Guess the name wasn't the tip-off I thought it might be. The Bomber Stadium leaked like a farmer's out-house - another 30 to 45 million had to be ploughed into this no return on investment debacle. The concrete slabs also started going Mount Vesuvius within 4 months of completion - another 10 to 15 million in repairs!

My understanding was... that the firm hired to do the construction was under the gun to finish on time or face performance penalties. One of the mistakes that firm made was underestimating the power of the winds they would face during the installation of the partial roof system. As a result the cranes were undersized and forced to sit idle during those days and weeks when wind speeds were outside their operating limits. Thanks to those stupid performance guarantees, instead of taking their time and making sure that things were done right, other parts of the stadium were rushed. Concrete was hastily poured and poorly cured. It cost us a fortune to fix those defects later on.

Also, NOBODY checked the California design plans to see if they came up to Manitoba Construction Code standards. Sure enough they didn't. None of the windows were triple paned and there was no provision for snow or melt runoff. That cost us still more money to fix after the fact.

Speaking of trucks, someone forgot to ask the designers to include a garage door big enough to allow semi trailers access to the stadium. We're kinda screwed if they need to get in there to set up or break down an event quickly.

Saskatchewan took note of our construction woes and decided to take their time and do the job right the first time when they built their new stadium. It turned out great.

1 Like

No more Roof for the North Side if goes as planned. :laughing:
Article in Ottawa Citizen today

Arena will be under the burm in the east end zone??

lansdowne-2-0-residential-rendering-2_92096034-w

:eyes:
"The green roof on the event centre would roughly follow the highest point of the berm as it exists today. The facility would be inserted into a replaced berm so that, aesthetically, it would appear as an extension of the landscaping feature. (The Moving Spaces art installation on the berm would be retained).

However, the green roof wouldn’t be designed so it was accessible to the public. OSEG has found that additional load-bearing infrastructure would increase the construction price."

:thinking:

So you can't walk on the berm because of "load bearing" !!!

So, what is going to happen when a metre of melting snow is on it?? :scream:

Very good question. Also, open green park space that you can't walk on. Defeats the purpose of park space, no?

This whole project smells. Just a bunch of cahoots to profit for the developers as they walk away with tax money that doesn't need to be spent at all. The stadium is great just the way that it is. They're going to make the stadium WORSE (remove the roof cover on the north side) so that some developer can sell some condos, increasing the density and traffic and raise the real estate prices and property tax of the surrounding neighborhood, forcing out anyone who can't afford it (seniors and working poor).

One would think the city would know from their experience with the LRT :slight_smile:

Still if the arena is going under the berm and it can't support any weight where is the room for temp stands when the host another Grey Cup.

There will surely be one in the near future as an 'incentive' for the city to approve this.

My first thought was extra GC seating as well. I guess the trend is moving away from loads of extra seating, but I'd hope they'd at least be able to bring attendance up to 30,000 for a Cup.