Councillor Clive Doucet has been outspoken in his criticism of the Lansdowne Live proposal for redevelopment of Lansdowne Park. His concerns about process have seemed reasonable enough. He has shown less interest in the financial side of this give-away proposal than I would have expected, but he has been consistent in questioning the wisdom of the so-called partnership arrangement.
Now suddenly he has written to the National Capital Commission asking that the NCC buy Lansdowne Park from the City. It is not clear to me why Mr. Doucet thinks selling the park to the NCC is a good idea nor is it obvious why this idea has been sprung on the NCC at this moment.
Whether we like it or not, the City has managed to get the NCC to become a partner (maybe a reluctant partner, but a partner all the same) in the Lansdowne Live implementation exercise. The NCC was represented on the stage when the design panel led by George Dark was introduced in mid-January. The NCC is to be involved in the design competition for the "front lawn".
I consider the Lansdowne Live approach to be wrong-headed. I hope that the NCC will come to the same conclusion as it is more deeply exposed to the arrangement.
But I do not think that the NCC is going to change course instantly. A large organization does not turn on a dime.
Rather than coming out now with the idea of the NCC taking over the Park (an idea I don't particularly support), it would be much better to give the NCC ample time to become disillusioned with the process.
Possibly Councillor Doucet does not really want to have the NCC take over Lansdowne; maybe his letter is just an expression of his frustration with the process up to now. But I think it would have been better to allow public opinion to drive a wedge between the NCC and the promoters of Lansdowne Live at City Hall, and then suggest an NCC takeover.
Showing posts with label Doucet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Doucet. Show all posts
Thursday, February 4, 2010
End of quiescence
The period of dormancy surrounding Lansdowne Park seems to be over. Not much has happened since City Council held its nose and decided to press ahead with the grand Lansdowne Partnership Plan back in November.
On Jan. 14 we had the announcement of the design panel headed by George Dark. Both Dark and Rick Haldenby from the University of Waterloo were quoted in the press with less than complimentary comments about the plans for Lansdowne seen so far.
Then in the debate about the City Budget for 2010, the questionable provision for repairs at Lansdowne were trimmed back. This is no big surprise. Not only has Council been consistent for decades in failing to properly maintain Lansdowne, but the proposal for expenditure in 2010 included fixing up the south side stands - the part of the stadium which is slated to be demolished.
The request for proposals on providing alternative trade fair space has been issued. It was strange that staff had proposed back in November to just ask Shenkman to offer up a proposal and then to invite others to try to match or beat Shenkman. I understand that even officials of Shenkman Corp. thought this was a strange approach.
But this week, we have seen additional indication that the pressure is mounting and attempts are again being made to stampede us all to making hasty decisions. Suddenly a proposal for the needed transportation study is to be discussed by joint Transit & Transportation Committee on Monday Feb. 8. It had been thought that this would wait until Feb. 17 but now we seem to be in a big rush.
We also have had the strange letter from Councillor Doucet to the National Capital Commmission asking the NCC to purchase Lansdowne Park. It is difficult to know what prompted that letter at this time.
On Jan. 14 we had the announcement of the design panel headed by George Dark. Both Dark and Rick Haldenby from the University of Waterloo were quoted in the press with less than complimentary comments about the plans for Lansdowne seen so far.
Then in the debate about the City Budget for 2010, the questionable provision for repairs at Lansdowne were trimmed back. This is no big surprise. Not only has Council been consistent for decades in failing to properly maintain Lansdowne, but the proposal for expenditure in 2010 included fixing up the south side stands - the part of the stadium which is slated to be demolished.
The request for proposals on providing alternative trade fair space has been issued. It was strange that staff had proposed back in November to just ask Shenkman to offer up a proposal and then to invite others to try to match or beat Shenkman. I understand that even officials of Shenkman Corp. thought this was a strange approach.
But this week, we have seen additional indication that the pressure is mounting and attempts are again being made to stampede us all to making hasty decisions. Suddenly a proposal for the needed transportation study is to be discussed by joint Transit & Transportation Committee on Monday Feb. 8. It had been thought that this would wait until Feb. 17 but now we seem to be in a big rush.
We also have had the strange letter from Councillor Doucet to the National Capital Commmission asking the NCC to purchase Lansdowne Park. It is difficult to know what prompted that letter at this time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)