This is a Single Point link, or quick commentary on the article or page linked above. (Follow the title link above to the source for full background on the commentary below).
Published on May 30, 2010 1:11 PM by dbo.
If there was one person granted decision making authority on the design, maybe there would be a chance it could at least meet their approval. As it is, architectural decisions have to meet the aesthetics of the designer’s vision (modern aspects to stadium and new development), provide necessary revenue streams and adhere to other restrictions. Widening the sight lines to the Aberdeen Pavilion and leaving the Horticulture Building where it is for the sake of history all have ramifications to the project. I think this says it best:
It all goes back to money. This being Ottawa, we want a new stadium and Civic Centre but we don’t want to lay out the cash.
If I was the developers, I would take the $125 million scheduled for the project, construct the new stadium design and leave the rest of the site asphalt and let the city design and pay for it as well as the ongoing operating costs. The rent for the football team, Ottawa ‘67’s (and any USL team) could then be $0 for the next 50 years. That would please those who don’t want any commercial development on Lansdowne Park space. The city would seed it all to grass with a few shrubs for $5 million and there still wouldn’t be any use for the Aberdeen Pavilion or Horticulture Building. Figure it out and see which is the better deal.
Comments are closed.