Multiplex

[Lydia]

I have just attended two meetings one with the Advisory Committee and One with the Steering Committee regarding the Multiplex. I would enjoy learning what people think of when you say the word Multiplex.

When I think of a Multiplex i think of more than one or two sports. To me it means including at least 6 to 7 different activities. To me it should be a place where everyone from the childhoold to Adulthood have a place to enjoy coming.

The mandate given to the Advisory Committee is very confusing even for councilors and they have indicatated differences in opinion. Both of their views could be considered correct.( Which is strange but still correct) Let's help them out.

If we are only talking about having a facility with 4 ice pads and maybe one or two activities that are sports related, should they call that a mulitiplex. Or should they call that a Sports Arena? To be fair to the Advisory Group, this group has actually discussed what I call a Multiplex which has many uses including ice pads.

:confused: :confused:

[Lydia]

Here is what I understood of what the councilors thought about the following:
COMPOSITION OF THE MULTIPLEX COMMUNITY CENTRE PROJECT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
COMMUNITY ADVISORY GROUP

Priority 1:( What must be included in the initial phase of development)

Indoors:
> 4 ice pads Total (Steering Committee agreed with this)
> 50 M Pool (George Stoparczyk didn't want this to included or discussed as part of the plan at this point)
> Multi-purpose Room (Programmable Space) (Agreed upon by everyone
> Designated Community Space ( George Stoparczyk Thinks that even Strip Joints could qualify to use this )
> Community Kitchen ( Members of the Advisory believe that community groups could set up a small kitchen to help them with meetings and maybe even chili dinners to support causes, (for example) At first half of the councilors were not really in favour of this. I wonder if they ever thought that if they had a community Kitchen, that they could have small wedding banquets at the multiplex and get much needed finance coming into them. Lets face it folks, Weddings, Showers, Birthdays etc could raise alot of money if there was a place.
> Licensed Restaurant ( Agreed upon) Concern that if there was a Kitchen it might interfere with the idea of Restaurant. I don't understand why that would be the case. A restaurant is something that is there everyday. Kitchen would not sell to the public at large.
> Meeting Rooms (Agreed upon)
> Storage Space for Community Users (Agreed upon)
> Office Space for Community User Groups (Agreed upon)
> Day Care (Councilors were concerned about that phrase) Committee explained that the multiplex could be used more often by young families who have young children if there was a place where kids could be supervised while the adults participated in other activities. This isn't a place where they just drop off Kids all day or even allow the parents to leave the facilities without their children. The phrase Family Service Area is best to describe this kind of service.
> Fitness Centre (Exercise) (Dance Design Need- Mirrors) I think this would be great. George Stoparczyk seemed to scared of the mirror affect.)

Outdoor
> Accommodation of Future Activities Captured in Green Space (Agreed upon)
> 20 - 30 Acres of Recreational Green Space ( Councilors are concerned about available locations, They realize that the amount of property and zoning should be considered in the final plan and they preferred not to decided on the amount of property they need at this point. (They are however very aware that a Hugh property will be required)
> Skateboard/Playground (youth) Mr. Stoparczyk does not want this attached to the complex. Would consider it away from the building but not against it completely. I hope they understand the insurance policies that will be required should anyone have any disasters at the location of the ramps that are required.

Priority #2 (What should be considered for future phases of development)

Indoor
> Indoor Soccer Pitch > Running Track
> Injury Management Centre (Councilors agreed that this was required. They believe this should be part of Priority #2

Priority #3
> Racquet Sports

Potential Opportunities
> Royal Kingston Curling Club - Potential Relocation to the MCCP
> Recreational Ice
> Repurpose one/more Existing Arena - Indoor Soccer, Lacrosse
> Partnership opportunities

There was a suggestion that both committees get in touch with groups that would be interested in development of this multiplex. As you can see the Curling Club could be a good partner.

Location/ Site Considerations
> Site to be zoned properly
> Accessible to Bus Routes ( Councilors agreed this should be an easy task)
> Located on a arterial or main road
> Located in an area of growth
( Leonore did point out that just because most of the growth so far has been in the West, it does not mean the site should be there. As she indicated that Center of the City should be the best for everyone because the younger families are in the north and eastern parts of the city. She has a point)
> 30 Acres ( Councilors indicated that the city has to be serviced)
> Need adequate parking spaces (doh)
> Avoid grid lock
> Central Location


Okay Folks, I think that the presentation by the Friends of the Memorial Centre Presentation of Vision Statement to the Multiplex Committee should be of interest to our Kingstonelectors members. I have a copy of that as well. They did a very good presentation and it is worth discussing with the public at large.

[Emerald]

I thought I had commented on this yesterday but obviously forgot to hit
'submit'.
What is the relationship between the Advisory Committee and the Council Committee.? Do they trust each other? Or does the Council committee think they can ignore the Advisory Committe recommendations?

Does the need for 30 acres rule out the Memorial Centre Property as a site?

Queen's feels that a 50 metre pool raises the $ ante far too much so it will be difficult for the city to accept. At one of their(Queen's) public meetings it was mentioned that if you were providing a 50 metre pool to attract Olympic swimmers you would also need an adjacent pool. (why?)

Why do we need FOUR ice pads? Does this mean that Centre 70 will not be doubled? Would all four go ahead at the same time?

[Lydia]

Hi Emerald,
Okay, I only have my understanding on the issues you mentioned. So here goes.

What is the relationship between the Advisory Committee and the Council Committee.? Do they trust each other? Or does the Council committee think they can ignore the Advisory Committe recommendations?

There are two committees, One is called Steering Committee made up of councilors. The Other one (Advisory Committee) is made up out of elected people who volunteered to sit in on the committee. They are made up by interested groups and also 2 members of the public at large.

I see these two actually working together as well as can be expected. I do not think that councilors are ignoring the Advisory Comittee at all. They might disagree with them but do not ignore them. To give praise to the councilors (which i hate doing) lol i do think they are at least listening to the Advisory Committee. Only Time will tell.

Does the need for 30 acres rule out the Memorial Centre Property as a site?

Acres for the multiplex is going to be discussed because at this time it is too early to know how much will be required. The Advisory Committee is actually doing the greatest of work with looking at the best uses for the Multiplex. Acres to be used will be determined once the Steering Committee come to agreement with what The Advisory Committee recommends.

Queen's feels that a 50 metre pool raises the $ ante far too much so it will be difficult for the city to accept. At one of their(Queen's) public meetings it was mentioned that if you were providing a 50 metre pool to attract Olympic swimmers you would also need an adjacent pool. (why?)

A 50 Metre Pool is a requested opinion. It would be a good thing if Queen's representatives would sit down with the Steering or Advisory Committee and maybe partner up with them to make this posible. I never learned about about an adjacent pool yet.

Why do we need FOUR ice pads? Does this mean that Centre 70 will not be doubled? Would all four go ahead at the same time?

The steering committeee says they would want FOUR ice pads. The advisory committee are in discussions with this concept. I do not know anything about Centre 70 at all. I am just getting to learn more about the Multiplex. For myself, I am going to attend the Televised LVEC Meeting Monday April 25, at 7: to 9:30 p.m. at City Hall in the Memorial Hall. From reading their informantion they also indicated that they want an Ice Pad for the OHL. If they have 4 ice pads at the Multiplex and One at the LVEC, do you not thinking something is strange?? I for one think that if we are going to have TWO CENTRES OF INTEREST that they should keep all ICE PADS in one location. They can build each pad according to what they wish to have them used for. But what do i know? lol

[Emerald]

There is an interesting article on P3 partnerships on this site under Articles. The theme there is that they often don't work. What is missing,from this analysis I think is that the P3 partnership ( and outside management as suggested for the LVEC) is an attempt to lay off risk to the municipality. This seems to be a laudable goal. Also missing is the concept of 'scope creep'. We are all guilty of this. Projects always are bigger than they originally seem. To come in 'on time and on budget' requires NO changes to the original plan. Almost impossible, so don't always blame the private partner.

So to get to the point. I assume that the Multiplex proposal will be a partnershp?

[Lydia]

Multiplex Steering Committee – Notes of May 2 meeting

Presentation by Peter Lynch (CAG member, Adult Hockey)
Ken Ohtake erroneously on agenda as giving presentation


Mention of going back to Council to expand mandate once all community needs were identified.

CAG will be beginning its survey of facilities - what they are/ what we need, a fairly large task. Will be working with Cultural Services Department.

Committee amended and approved Request for Proposal as attached to agenda distributed earlier. (for all intents and purposes, same thing as Expressions of Interest)
At this point, RFP is cast in broad terms, next stage to detail type (i.e. of pool) and cost.

Amendment related to wording so as to allow construction "no later than 1st quarter of 2006" rather than construction to begin 1st quarter so as to provide some flexibility in moving the date forward if possible.

Councilor Stoparczyk wondered if there should be a request to CAG to make recommendations to the Committee re the issue of the Memorial Centre. He said there was disagreement between what FOM want as presented and what Multiplex and CAG has chose. FOM would like to keep 1 rink open with perhaps 1 more rink whereas Multiplex wants 4 pads in 1 location. Should there be some negotiation, discussion between CAG and FOM - before comes to Multiplex (and take political heat off)

Comm. Thurston indicated this was an important issue, can't lose track of addressing this as part of larger discussion on repurposing/recommissioning. But not to get too far ahead at this point or could become confusing.

Proposed process for consulting by June, with Committee consultation in September, after summer holidays. Fits in with time-line of Multiplex, and can consider info received in response to RFI.

Councillor Foster stated that as the Memorial Centre has been removed from the LVEC business plan, as there are other ways to keep the LVEC cost off the tax base, to consider Memorial Centre as icepad is shortsighted, not good use because of cost. Ways could be changed, i.e. indoor soccer field.

Councilor Patter: suggested site be discussed after RFI on table.


Next CAG meeting: May 11, Portsmouth Olympic Harbour
next Multiplex S.C. meeting tentative date May 30

[Emerald]

This is a very complex issue - keep going - maybe we will understand it in the future.

[Lydia]

Are you Kidding??

Understanding anything that council will do or won't is never an option. lol lol

Yes I agree, This is going to be a very very interesting state of development.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[Valley]

The whole multiplex proposal seems to simply be a way of rationalizing the closure of our more accessible existing neighbourhood arenas. A centralized facility also seems to run counter to current transportation planning which looks to reduce and not encourage the use of motor vehicles within the city. With the current state of public transportation, a new mutiplex will simply bring more vehicles into the city.

[Lydia]

I understand complete your concern. The problem occurs because these facilities were allowed to deteriate despite concerns from the residents in the communities where these arenas are.

I firmely believe that is would be *****er to maintain the ice pads if they were all under one roof. However, would it be *****er when you take into consideration how these communities will be affected in the long run??? Will it be *****er for the children who will have no where to go to let off steam?

I think we need one State of the Art Building for competitions if we are to have any respect as a city that loves hockey. ( I don't, however that is another story) If Napanee has a brighter and modern forum, then we have to ask ourselves why ours are not up-to-date.

The transporation issue will also have to be addressed and that is also a cost factor. Will people choose to get even and say I won't use this Multiplex?? Only time will tell.

I believe that these community centers will remain open however their ice pads are GONE. However, that is my personal belief and i do not have any power over the issue at all. The centers have too much going on in them other than hockey and that is the reason i think they will remain open. At least that is my hope.

Will these kids who have no way of getting to the Multiplex and who will lose their community center get even with the city by vanalization? Another cost.

Isn't it funny that on the one day that we were all suppose to use Transit for the day, the councilors who made this possible all took cars because THEY WERE TOO BUSY????? Interesting.

As far as hockey is concerned, we all know that this is an expensive sport. The families who have their children in these teams travel all over the country. They also take them by car.

[Lydia]

A Narrative Discussion
Issues to: Backgrounder Report, Pool Users
Introduction
Since the beginning of the Multiplex Community Centre Project (MCCP) the
acceptance of the need for improved aquatic facilities has been a challenging task.
Fellow Community Advisory Group (CAG) members have been discerning, but after
weighing the information they recognised the needs of the community and endorsed
the position that a 50 m pool be included in the Mutliplex Community Centre project.
This was intended to meet community need by applying it through the concept of the
multi-purpose recreational sport centre.
Some steering Committee Members and City Councillors have questioned the merits
of proceeding with an aquatic centre under the proposal. In a matter of days the
wording of the RFP (Request for Proposal) will be approved by Council and with this
the design phase of the new Community Centre will become ingrained in the process
as the project proceeds. For the sake of the CAG’s efforts and community interest, it
is important that the benefits of a pool be recognised and any doubts about the need
and appropriateness of an aquatic facility be removed before proceeding further with
the Centre’s design.
Over the past few months there have been recurring myths (comments or issues) that
have challenged the acceptance of an aquatic facility within the context of the MCCP.
The following provides clarification on matters where there are differences of opinion
and either incorrect information or a lack of factual data. To ensure decisions are
based on fact, the outstanding issues and comments are discussed with a review of the
relevant information.
The following issue identification and discussion represents the views of the author based on
limited research from various sources and communications. It is intended to stimulate further
dialogue with CAG and Steering Committee members in the hope that decisions will be
informed and based on the best information at hand.
Alex P. Palilionis
Pool Advisor

No. 1 The MCCP is intended to address the Arena Capacity Study and
replace ice with ice, nothing more.
The Arena Capacity Study (ACS) prepared by dMA Consultants is the report
that concluded 3 ice arenas within the city need to be replaced based on
maintenance and operational deficiencies with one additional arena to follow
at a later date. It suggested that the expenditures through maintenance and
operational costs of these ice pads can be reduced by multiplexing, by having
two or more ice pads in operation at a single site. This effectively reduces the
operational expenditures so that a new multiplex facility has a net revenue (if
all things remain equal between maintenance and hours of ice rental).
The ACS recommended decommissioning or repurposing 4 targeted ice
arenas, 3 initially and 1 to follow later. One of those arenas is the Memorial
Centre site which includes an outdoor pool.
The ACS recommended that before proceeding, a full assessment of the
community’s recreational needs be undertaken through a Cultural Services
Master Plan then integrated with the proposed multiplex design and/or
through re-purposing of existing arenas.
The report was ‘approved in principle’ by City Council, meaning that
recommendations of the report only needed to be considered, as opposed to
be followed.
In the absence of the Cultural Services Master Plan the Steering Committee
selected representatives of user groups as members of the MCC Community
Advisory Group (CAG). This included a Pool User Advisor, in keeping with
the possible outcome of the Memorial Centre site and the need for a full
‘Cultural Services’ perspective. Thus, while ice was initially the primary
interest, the initiation of the project considered and attempted to address all
existing and future recreational uses/needs under the Multiplex Center’s
Project outline. Thus, the issue of meeting the community’s needs respecting
aquatic recreation, literally rose to the surface and the need for aquatic
facilities was recognised by the Advisory Group and to a certain degree by
the Steering Committee.
The proposed multiplex centre does address additional ice surfaces consistent
with the terms and needs identified under the Arena Capacity Study. The
further consideration of other community recreational needs, including a 50m
pool, is also consistent with the ACS in that the Cultural Services assessment
was conducted through the Community Advisory Group during the planning
study. While the outcome of the community needs assessment may be
unexpected, it is consistent with the report’s recommendation that an
assessment of recreational needs be undertaken. As will be discussed later,

most community recreational centres built today across Ontario and North
America are multi-purpose facilities, including pools, gymnasiums, indoor
fields and ice arenas as the best means to meet community recreational needs
and to maximise cost efficiencies, including operating costs and maintenance
of capital infrastructure.
No. 2 Aquatic centres operate at a deficit and require substantial
subsidies to operate
There has been a general impression that aquatic centre’s have huge
operating deficits of over a million dollars a year. Reference is often made to
Queen’s University which dismissed the option of including a 50m pool in
their new Queen’s Centre design because of the anticipated operating
deficiency.
Pools do have high operational costs, not just for utilities but for the staffing
and administration as well. During a swimming event, whether public or
otherwise, Health and Safety regulations require minimum staffing for life
guards on duty. Thus, the hourly cost of an operation can be significant with
the requirement for a substantial number of facility staff to be ‘on deck’. A
hockey arena can operate with only one or two staff on the premises.
Therefore, in order to operate an aquatic facility on a break even basis an
efficient aquatics program must be in operation to maximise revenue to offset
expenditures. Having a couple of persons swimming in the pool does not
justify having four life guards on duty.
The Queen’s facility is not a community based operation and does not rely on
community support to reduce their operating expenses. The aquatic centre
only services a student population of about 16,500 plus faculty. With such a
limited client base, it is difficult to accept the operational costs of an aquatic
centre, let alone a 50 meter pool. During the final stages of the Centre’s
design the increased cost associated with the larger 50m pool was not fiscally
acceptable and its consideration was no longer pursued.
A decision by the City to proceed with a 50m pool would result in two pools
in one. With a 50 meter pool divided into two by a bulkhead, the City will
meet the pool service level for communities of this size by having the
equivalent of three 25m pools (as long as Artillery Park remains operational).
This will extend service to the same horizon year as the Arena Capacity
Study (2026) did for ice pads. With a divided 50m pool there is the
opportunity to run 2 programs simultaneously in both ends of the pool;
doubling the revenues. There are further opportunities to host sanctioned
swim meets that will not only add revenue to the operation but will also be a
stimulus to the local business and tourism economy during fall, winter and
spring. An aquatic centre in the multiplex centre means that the facility will

be used year round as opposed to on a seasonal basis. Competition events can
draw up to 2,000 participants and spectators over a period of 8 days (see
Appendix A; Letters from Swim Ontario and Swim Canada).
No .3 Architecturally, aquatic facilities conflict with ice operations
and can cause structural damage resulting in high maintenance
costs
In the 1970’s engineering and building designs for both ice arenas and
aquatic facilities were not as advanced as today’s. At the same time, the first
sportplexes with arenas and pools together in the same facilities were just
beginning to be built. Shortly thereafter, problems with these designs started
to appear.
Just as ice arenas had problems with condensation and high humidity when
they started extending the ice season into late spring, so too did multipurpose
community centres when water and ice were in proximity to each
other. With the advent of dehumidifiers, and heat/air exchangers that were
not even prevalent in the 70’s and 80’s, these problems are now resolved with
energy efficiency and 100% effectiveness. Designs in aquatic centres now
incorporate ‘air curtains’ and negative pressure systems to provide
exceptional air quality through multiplexed facilities so that the operation of
a pool does not have an effect on the adjacent operation of an ice arena and
visa versa. The advent of epoxy coated structural steel and new thermal
barrier materials solve many of the problems originally encountered. If you
visited the Nepean Sportsplex, some of these problems would have been
evident, however this does not represent today’s current technological
advancements.
No. 4 There is no one who can design and build both an aquatic
centre and an ice plex under one roof
Today, it is more common to have multi-purpose facilities including
everything from ice arenas, to pools, to libraries, to fire halls, to commercial
plazas than to have a single purpose facility. There is an economic advantage
to aggregate physical and recreational activity along with commercial and
entertainment venues, so that patrons develop and maintain their physical
well-being with positive habit patterns, rather than having to break their
practice of going one place for one activity and then having to go to another
location for another, particularly at different times of year. The multi-purpose
recreational facility is a one-stop leisure mall. The principle of these facilities
is to “… emphasize opportunities for family participation ensuring multigenerational
leisure opportunities that can be accessed spontaneously”.

Engineering and design firms today have formed consortiums to deliver
every aspect of meeting community recreational needs. They are
knowledgeable, proficient, have proven designs and already have the
experience of building multi-purpose leisure/health centres throughout
Ontario and Canada. Appendix B contains a number of the designs and
undertakings that Ontario and Canadian firms have accomplished to date.
No. 5 After all four ice pads are built there will be no budget for a
pool.
On May 11th, in response to the motion made by Community Advisor Cathy
Cleary, the members of MCCP CAG agreed to the following motion:
“that there be a request to the MCCP Steering Committee that MCCP CAG
have theopportunity to look at recommendations for site locations,
background and affordability in order that MCCP CAG’s recommendations,
on behalf of the community, are knowledgeable before the MCCP Steering
Committee makes a decision”
In effect, the CAG recognizes the need of neighborhoods in relation to their
current ice pad facilities (Wally Elmer, Harold Harvey, the Memorial Centre
and Cooke Brothers) and that their review of re-purposing options do not
preclude the continuation of existing ice pad facilities. A thorough process of
community consultation and input on the refurbishing and renovation of these
neighborhood facilities is expected.
No one yet knows how the operation of new ice pads in a multiplex will be
integrated with existing rental ice contracts at existing municipal facilities
facing possible decommissioning. Turning one operation on and the other off
will not be instantaneous. When the new ice pads go into operation it will
likely be during a period of years afterwards that the existing ice pads will be
re-purposed or decommissioned. There is certainly the likelihood that one if
not two existing arenas will remain open for several years after.
With the recent expenditure of $2.5M of Ontario SuperBuild funds,
washroom facilities and other arena structural conditions have been improved
for all the existing arenas. As stated in the Arena Capacity Study, the Wally
Elmer rink could remain open for a period of possibly 10 years and it is
uncertain if others could remain open as well. One or two could for any
number of years. If this is the case, it is likely that when the new Centre with
its 4 ice pads opens, there will be duplicity in service with existing ice pads
for one or more years. There could be up to 9 ice pads in operation. Parties
holding ice rental agreements may waiver their interest on the new facility
based on increased rental costs and arena location. While a new facility will

be attractive to some users, the operation of the multiplex and its net
operating expenditures may take several years before optimum performance
can be realized.
The Arena Capacity Study did not develop a business case for re-purposing
existing arenas. While these facilities presently run at varying deficits, there
was no business model given to show what type of re-purposing could match
revenues of $200K per rink from ice rentals, to ensure no increase in the
annual loss of net operating expenditures. While the removal of the ice plant
will eliminate the utility and maintenance costs associated with these, the
revenues from ice rentals will also be lost. Therefore it will be extremely
challenging to re-purpose and expect that net operating expenditures will be
more attractive without ice.
The Harold Harvey Arena generates over a quarter million dollars in revenue
from ice rentals. Maintenance, utility costs, and staffing expenditures would
remain to a certain degree under a re-purposing scheme (or perhaps increase
because of a year round re-purposing model which will require building
renovations and a conversion to heating). It is questionable if repurposing to
an indoor field, lacrosse arena, gymnasium and/or tennis courts would
generate enough revenue to offset the expenditures. With further building
renovations and heating /air conditioning costs needed to repurpose these
facilities, the operation of these facilities as ice arenas, even at an annual loss
may be the most economical recreational use as a community facility.
With the potential for at least one if not two of these rinks remaining open
for a period of years after the 4 pad centre opens, it raises question as to the
immediate need for 4 pads to be constructed and operational all at the same
time, or whether the facility should be staged: two now and two later, to
alleviate the transition to the new centre. The Arena Capacity Study
indicates that as long as there are twin pads in place there will be reductions
in operational costs resulting in positive net operating expenditures.
Therefore two pads is the minimum. Subsequent ice pad additions should
improve these values.
Therefore, it may be prudent for the RFP to reflect a design that involves 2
ice pads with the option for 2 additional ice pads, now or in future. This
allows the re-purposing plan for the arenas to be discussed without limitation
or constraint and a gradual phasing in of the operation to its full scale. This
supports an opportunity for an aquatic centre to be more fully developed in
the Community Centre design within this RFP framework.

No. 6 We can build the 4 pads now and then build the pool later, at a
different location.
There would be a higher cost to build separate facilities at separate times.
First off, there is a cost built in for any contractor to mobilize that will be
reflected in their construction quote. This could be as much as 1 % of the
construction project value.
Second, the longer you wait the more inflation comes into play. For example,
in Alberta cost increases (mainly due to steel) are rising at a rate of 1.5% per
month on construction. This means that on a $7M project there is a monthly
inflation rate of around $105,000. In summary, on a $7M dollar project there
will be an additional cost of waiting that could be in the order of $1.1M if
you wait for only one year. In 5 years time you are almost paying twice the
amount for the same pool. For a project value of $30M a one year deferral of
the project could translate into about 5 million dollars (the Queen’s Centre
had to recently build in $30M to account for inflation). Because an aquatic
centre will likely cost more than an ice pads, consideration to advance the
construction of a pool facility would be more economical.
There are also costs associated with start up operations and possible overlap
in management by building separately. As has been already mentioned, this is
the window of opportunity, the time is now and will never be better. The
RFP should include an aquatic facility and be worded such that the architects
and engineers provide the details of the most prudent means to meet the
concept of a new multi-purposed community centre for the City of Kingston.

Appendix A
Letters from Governing Bodies of Aquatic Sports


Appendix B
Multi-Purpose Community Centre Designs

Thursday, June 23, 2005
Search
AURORA COMMUNITY CENTRE
Aurora, ON
NORR
GROSS AREA:
105,000 sq.ft
COMPLETION DATE:
Fall 2005
COST:
$19,100,000
SERVICES PROVIDED:
Architectural, Mechanical
Structural & Electrical
Engineering
NORR Limited, in association with MacLennan Jaunkalns Miller,
Architects, were selected through a formal RFP process, to design the
new Aurora Recreation Centre.
The main components of the project include two NHL ice surfaces,
each with seating for 250 spectators, combined with an aquatic centre
consisting of an eight-lane, 25 m pool, a learning pool and slide and
leisure pool. Two children's program rooms for tots and preschoolers
are also included.
The scheme organizes these activities on either side of a Central
Street Lobby, which provides viewing into the two arenas and the pool
area and contains the administrative and receptions areas, a pro shop
and concession area with café seating, overlooking the rinks.
The building is located adjacent to a natural waterway and
conservation area with pathways and a larger site to the north to be
developed into playing fields.
News
NORR are providing architecture, interior
design, structural, mechanical, and electrical
engineering for the Canad... >> more
Aviation Facilities
Biotech
Commercial
Education
Government Services
Justice
Sports & Recreation
Atlantis
Aurora Community Centre
Etobicoke Ice Sports
Famous Players Colossus
Great Blue Heron
Guelph West End
Guelph Downtown
Toronto Zoo
Twin Rinks
SkyDome
© 2005 Ingenium Group | Site Map | News | Clients | Disclaimer

Friday, June 24, 2005
Search
GUELPH WEST END RECREATION CENTRE
Guelph ON
NORR
GROSS AREA:
134,500 sq.ft
COMPLETION DATE:
Phase 1: Autumn 2000
Phase 2: Spring 2001
COST:
$21,000,000
SERVICES PROVIDED:
Site planning, full
architectural services
The Guelph West End Recreation Centre is a 134,500 sq.ft multi-use
complex including twin NHL size ice pads, restaurant/lounge facilities,
a 21,520 sq.ft aquatic centre with a 25 m lap pool and leisure pool, a
fitness centre, gymnasium, community multi-purpose rooms, branch
library and fire hall. The project also serves as an anchor for future
commercial development to the south.
Program elements are organized along a glazed interior street, which
overlooks a central landscaped plaza and parking area. The plaza can
be cordoned off for special outdoor events. Uses are arranged to
minimize disruption of day-to-day activities while special event or
tournaments are in progress in the arenas.
*Reflects Experience of Albert Paquette, Dave McCulloch at PBK
Architects Inc.
This project was executed under the direction of Albert Paquette while
principal at PBK Architects Inc. Also associated with this project were
MacLennon Jaunkalns Miller Architects Ltd. and Rieder Hymmen
Lobban Inc. Architects.
News
NORR are providing architecture, interior
design, structural, mechanical, and electrical
engineering for the Canad... >> more
Aviation Facilities
Biotech
Commercial
Education
Government Services
Justice
Sports & Recreation
Atlantis
Aurora Community Centre
Etobicoke Ice Sports
Famous Players Colossus
Great Blue Heron
Guelph West End
Guelph Downtown
Toronto Zoo
Twin Rinks
SkyDome
© 2005 Ingenium Group | Site Map | News | Clients | Disclaimer

Orangeville Recreation Complex
Orangeville, Ontario
The Orangeville Recreation Complex is a major
community facility comprised of an aquatic
centre, twin arena and gymnastics centre. The
public recreation spaces are grouped around a
central atrium lobby which incorporates views
to both the aquatic centre and arena. A central
administration and small snack bar are located
directly off this lobby. A second level includes a
Family Resource Centre, Party Rooms,
multiprogrammable community space, and a
walking track.
Size of Facility: 13,890 s.m.
Final Construction Cost: $13,500,000
home / firm profile / portfolio / awards
services / affiliates / contacts / terms of use
Sports, Recreation and Spectator Facilities
Community Facilities
l Ice Sports North Shore
l Westside Recreation Complex
l Burnaby 8 Rinks
l Tim Hortons 4-Ice Centre de Glace
l Surrey Ice Centre
l Wichita Sports Center
l Albert McCormick Community Centre
l Bowmanville Recreation Centre
l Oakville Ice Sports Centre
l University of Ottawa Sports Complex
l Guelph West End Recreation Centre
l Orangeville Recreation Complex
l Prince George Aquatic Centre
download the complete recreation and sports
facilities project list
Spectator Facilities
l Everett Regional Special Events Center
l Budweiser Events Center
l Mile One Stadium
l Dodge Arena
l Sovereign Center
l Guelph Sports and Entertainment Centre
l Coquitlam Town Centre
l Youngstown Convocation Center
l Cedar Park Multi Purpose Event Center
l Prince George Multiplex
l BC Place Stadium
l Cranbrook Recplex
l General Motors Place
l Air Canada Centre
l Sarnia Sports and Entertainment Centre
l Fukuoka Retractable Roof Stadium
return to portfolio index

Guelph West End Recreation Centre
Guelph, Ontario
The City of Guelph selected PBK Architects Inc.
to prepare a schematic design for a multi-use
complex incorporating twin NHL-size ice pads,
restaurant/lounge facilities, 22,000 s.f. aquatic
centre with 25 m lap pool and a leisure pool,
fitness centre, gymnasium, community multipurpose
rooms, branch library and fire hall.
Size of Facility: 22,000 s.f.
Final Construction Cost: $21.0 Million
home / firm profile / portfolio / awards
services / affiliates / contacts / terms of use
Sports, Recreation and Spectator Facilities
Community Facilities
l Ice Sports North Shore
l Westside Recreation Complex
l Burnaby 8 Rinks
l Tim Hortons 4-Ice Centre de Glace
l Surrey Ice Centre
l Wichita Sports Center
l Albert McCormick Community Centre
l Bowmanville Recreation Centre
l Oakville Ice Sports Centre
l University of Ottawa Sports Complex
l Guelph West End Recreation Centre
l Orangeville Recreation Complex
l Prince George Aquatic Centre
download the complete recreation and sports
facilities project list
Spectator Facilities
l Everett Regional Special Events Center
l Budweiser Events Center
l Mile One Stadium
l Dodge Arena
l Sovereign Center
l Guelph Sports and Entertainment Centre
l Coquitlam Town Centre
l Youngstown Convocation Center
l Cedar Park Multi Purpose Event Center
l Prince George Multiplex
l BC Place Stadium
l Cranbrook Recplex
l General Motors Place
l Air Canada Centre
l Sarnia Sports and Entertainment Centre
l Fukuoka Retractable Roof Stadium
return to portfolio index

Millennium Place Recreational Centre, Strathcona County,
Alberta
"We're very pleased with the way this project has
come together"… "it was a tight schedule from day
one and we demanded a lot from the team - and
they delivered," said Dick Polowaniuk, Project
Manager for Strathcona County. This project was
constructed on time and on budget, being
completed in only 17 months with a construction
cost of only $103 per square foot.
This facility has most of the major amenities required to make a municipal swimming pool a
success; wave generation, an elaborate interactive water play feature, sauna, steam room, and
much more.
The pool area décor reproduces scenes from Cooking Lake using giant murals of sailboats,
trains, and ungulates (mammals with hooves). Fixtures in the pool are both visually pleasing
and functional. The floatplane with its 18-foot wingspan has working lights that signal the start
of the wave generation. The water feature has been custom designed to resemble a tractor and
includes interactive play features. The clouds suspended over the pool hall are actually acoustic
panels.
Careful consideration to design
detail and user needs has
ensured that Millennium Place
Recreation Centre is indeed a
recreation facility with
something for everyone and will
remain a much used and much
loved facility well into the new
millennium.

Details:
Special Features:
l Wave machine
l Zero beach
l Play lagoon
l Family change rooms
l Viewing terrace
l Waterslide
l Spa pool
l Sauna
l Steam room
l Lazy river
l Vortex / bubble pit
l Pool side viewing terrace
l Multipurpose rooms
l Childminding room
l Commercial lease space
l Gymnasium
l Aerobics room
Completion Date: January 2001
Construction Cost: $23 million
Free form leisure pool
Twin ice arenas
Leisure ice surface
Twin indoor soccer surfaces
Indoor track
Philosophy | Services | People | Accolades | Projects | Publications | Press Room | Consulting

Guelph Sports and Entertainment
Centre
Guelph, Ontario
PBK Architects Inc. were selected by the City of
Guelph to design a downtown sports and
entertainment centre with a seating capacity of
5,000 persons. As part of its mandate, PBK
Architects analyzed different downtown sites
and finally proposed to build the new facility
within the present downtown mall to replace
the closing Eatons Store.
The multi-purpose centre is fully integrated
with the two levels of the mall. The second
floor of the mall flows into the concourse level
of the arena and the existing food court
provides the concessions and food service on
this level. An additional club lounge and
restaurant services the club seats section
located behind the players' benches. An upper
tier of seating accommodates private suites
and specialty V.I.P. club seating with private
bar and lounge.
This facility is the home of the Ontario Hockey
League's Guelph Storm.
Cost: $21.0 Million
Size of Facility: 130,000 s.f.
Number of Seats: 5,000
home / firm profile / portfolio / awards
services / affiliates / contacts / terms of use
Sports, Recreation and Spectator Facilities

Community Facilities
l Ice Sports North Shore
l Westside Recreation Complex
l Burnaby 8 Rinks
l Tim Hortons 4-Ice Centre de Glace
l Surrey Ice Centre
l Wichita Sports Center
l Albert McCormick Community Centre
l Bowmanville Recreation Centre
l Oakville Ice Sports Centre
l University of Ottawa Sports Complex
l Guelph West End Recreation Centre
l Orangeville Recreation Complex
l Prince George Aquatic Centre
download the complete recreation and sports
facilities project list
Spectator Facilities
l Everett Regional Special Events Center
l Budweiser Events Center
l Mile One Stadium
l Dodge Arena
l Sovereign Center
l Guelph Sports and Entertainment Centre
l Coquitlam Town Centre
l Youngstown Convocation Center
l Cedar Park Multi Purpose Event Center
l Prince George Multiplex
l BC Place Stadium
l Cranbrook Recplex
l General Motors Place
l Air Canada Centre
l Sarnia Sports and Entertainment Centre
l Fukuoka Retractable Roof Stadium
return to portfolio index

[Lydia]

This is a part of a letter that was sent to me asking for help of the public to attend this meeting July 26, 2005 at 5:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE A 50 METER POOL BE JUST AS IMPORTANT AS ICE PADS ARE, THEN COME OUT AND SUPPORT THIS COMMUNITY ADVISOR'S REQUEST.

I BELIEVE THAT SINCE THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THIS MULTIPLEX THEN AT LEAST HAVE THE BEST POSSIBLE COMBINATION OF SPORTS IN IT.

Letter sent to my attention:

During the past couple of months I have done everything possible to carry forward the idea that an Aquatic facility with 50m pool is needed in the new multi-plex community centre. With support from my fellow advisory group members and members of the public, the idea has survived thus far.



The draft RFP, which is the document that consulting firms will use as their blue print for bidding, must include the aquatic facility if a pool is to be carried forward. On the 26th the wording of the RFP will be reviewed and approved by the Committee.



The next meeting of the Steering Committee has been confirmed for Tuesday July 26th 5 PM at City Hall Council Chambers. The intentions are to have the RFP released by August 5th, that would mean a special meeting of Council will also have to be called sometime shortly after the meeting of the 26th. We will also need strong attendance at that session.



The draft RFP presently has the wording that would carry the concept of an aquatic centre with a 50m pool forward. To be carried, the wording for the facility in the RFP must remain, but that is the Steering Committee’s and Council’s decision. This is a huge step and I cannot diminish the importance of these next two meetings!



I hope you can become a part of this effort by showing your interest and commitment to this matter by simply attending.



For those of you I have not met, if you do attend, please try and catch my attention. I’d like to personally thank you for attending. I will distinguish myself for you by wearing a white shirt for the session.

[Lydia]

The presentation below as given to the Steering Committee on July 26. 2005. It was very interesting to know that our NEW CAO could and did actually agree with points made. At this meeting however, the Steering Committee have chosen NOT TO SHARE INFORMATION REGARDING THE RPF with the Community Advisory Group that THE COUNCILORS VOTED TO HELP THEM MAKE DECISIONS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, thank you all for the time you have dedicated to this issue and to myself, personally. The emails you have read, replied to, and the hours of telephone conversations offering me advice and encouragement are truly appreciated.

Most importantly, today, thank you for allowing me to speak to the topic of the 50 M Pool aquatic facility remaining as a prominent element of the RFP for our Multiplex – and let stop calling it a Multiplex. It sounds too cold and steel and concrete…. It needs to be referred to as our Community Sports and Recreation Centre – or more simply: Our Community Centre. You will hear me use that word a lot … Community.

I am a native Kingstonian, as are both of my parents. Born and raised, educated and working… always in Kingston. My parents were raised with very little money, but they worked hard, prospered, and provided a comfortable life for my brothers and myself. Why do I mention this to you? Because no matter what walk of life a person came from in Kingston, we always had our “Community Centre”. Yes, I knew, as did everyone, that it was a Memorial to our Veterans, but we always called it the “Community Centre”. “Let’s go for a skate at the Community Centre”, “Time for a swim at the Community Centre”, “The home show is on at the Community Centre”. Even though, growing up, we lived in the former Kingston Township in the Reddendale area, we always knew our “Community Centre” was there for us. Rich, poor, old, young, able, disabled – it was for ALL.

This is why, as a parent and a concerned member of our Community, it is so important to me that this RFP clearly include a 50 M pool aquatic facility from the get go. Offering water in both it’s frozen form and liquid, offers more options to a larger percentage of our population. A Community Centre which includes ice, pool, gathering spaces and outdoor facilities will enhance our entire Community and will give a greater number of people more options and variety for fitness and just plain fun! For instance, while “mom” is at the play ground with “Sally”, “Tommy” can be swimming, “dad” can be skating, “Jane” may be playing hockey, “grandma” is doing aquafit and “grandpa” is walking around the track. How many times have you heard parents complain: “All my kid wants to do is hang out at the Mall! There’s nothing else for them to do!” I have heard it many times because I have said it myself! The cost of FINDING something for our children to do can really add up however, the cost of not keeping them occupied is something we will all pay for in the long run. Our Community Centre can be a safe and healthy place for these kids to hang out: swim, play water polo, skate, kick a ball, throw a ball, maybe it will even have a teen drop in centre as well as a senior drop in centre. The options are endless – it is the options that are needed!

Yes, the aquatic facility, as you know, is near and dear to my heart, mainly because I have seen my own three children flourish upon discovering that swimming IS a sport too! We tried hockey, soccer, baseball - you name it – but once they found the water there was no stopping them! In the fall, my oldest is going to Ottawa U where she will swim for their team, my 14 year old son has just returned from Club Nationals in Winnipeg, and my youngest is eager for August 22nd to arrive when she can be in the pool again – and keep in mind, swimming only ended the beginning of July! By the time our Community Centre is built, my children may be ready to move on but I know that swimming will remain an integral part of their lives for health and fitness which they will surely pass on to their own children.

Water sports, especially swimming, can begin at the earliest of ages – I have never seen a 6 month old infant on skates or running on a soccer field, but I have seen them in the water! Swimming can easily continue well into our senior years. Yes, a senior citizen may be able to go watch a hockey game, but they are less likely to play the game and far more likely to swim, float, or take an aquafit class. An overweight person can definitely find safe fitness in the water on the road to improved health. Disabled individuals can participate in swimming more so than other sports. Vicky Keith was also at Club Nationals with 3 of her swimmers from the Kingston Y Penguins who did very well! Swimming is one of the few sports – and to be honest I don’t know of ANY others – where both able bodied and disabled athletes compete in the same events. While a boy in lane 4 is swimming his 50 Free in 27 seconds, a boy with Duchense Muscular Dystrophy is in lane 1 swimming the same stroke but in 5:00 Minutes. To witness this, to hear the applause… for our children to empathize with those children, is truly a miracle-a miracle that swimming provides.

So what are the facts:
§ FACT - ice and water do mix. These facilities are built daily around the world
§ FACT- it is economically more beneficial to build ice and pool at the same time – separately the costs soar and the structure itself is less efficient and therefore more costly to operate.
§ FACT- architects have stated they “dream” of projects like this.
§ FACT - it can be designed to maintain the integrity of the location where it is built and not just be a structure of steel, concrete and glass.
§ FACT - our Community is in dire need of a facility that offers a variety of sports and recreation all year round.
§ FACT - an aquatic facility would boost our City’s economy
§ FINAL FACT - it is simply the logical thing to do: build a Community Centre for the ENTIRE Community – it just makes sense!

I believe passionately that our Community Centre must include the 50 Metre pool now, or it will never happen. There may not be another group of dedicated Community Advisory Group Members like you have now, men and women who put politics, egos, and personal feelings aside to work together towards this common goal for our Community. You may not have people like myself and many others, who have devoted hours of time to research, promote and lobby for this facility and who have taken a sincere and genuine interest in what our Community truly needs. Your decision to keep the 50M pool as a priority as recommended by the Community Advisory Group and even as far back as the Report to Council on October 26th of last year, will change the future of our Community only for the better.

City Council and members of our Community are waiting for YOUR decision. Before the RFP is released, PLEASE accept the advice of your Community Advisory Group, recognize the need for a 50 meter pool aquatic facility and include it as a primary objective, not just a complimentary use.

PLAN for the future, don’t just reach for today. Your time is NOW.

Thank you.

[Lydia]

The following letter has been sent to the Councilors, Mayor, and CAO. Members of the public and members of the CAG group actually share the feeling expressed in this letter. Here Goes:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, July 28, 2005

Mr. Kevin George, Chair, Multiplex Steering Committee

Cc: Members of the Steering Committee, City Councillor’s, Mayor Rosen, Glen Laubenstein

Since Tuesday evening’s meeting I have spent much time reflecting on the best way to write this letter. How best to convey my thoughts in a polite and proper manner. How best to express my frustrations and concerns delicately and inoffensively. No matter how diligently I have focused my efforts, it is to no avail. I must be direct, and to the point.

Shame on you! Shame on you for turning a blind eye and ear to the needs of our entire Community. Shame on you for ignoring that which you do not want to hear. Shame on you for shutting out dedicated individuals and members of the public.

On video tape of a Council Meeting, I see Council approving the role of the Community Advisory Group throughout the entire Request for Proposal process. These are not just “your” advisors, these are OUR representatives. They speak for us, the Kingstonians who voted for you. They must be involved as the process continues. To hear their Chair, Councillor Patterson, agree to the decision NOT to include the CAG at Tuesday nights meeting was appalling. How dare he speak on their behalf! Having spoken to some of the members they DO want to see this project through to the end. They need to know that their hours of dedication on our behalf were not in vain.

In Report to Council # 04-404, "Multiplex Community Centre Implementation Strategy", it clearly states that the Olympic size ice pad would accommodate 5000 seats. When Councillor Garrison pointed that out on Tuesday night, you shut him down. He was correct. You are wrong. That ice pad, built at the Community Centre IS the LVEC. I believe you owe an apology to Councillor Garrison.

Why would the Steering Committee not take a stand and propose that the Multiplex and LVEC be one facility, saving millions of dollars, built on property already owned by the City and SERVING the ENTIRE Community?

This is your opportunity to make a difference in the future of our City. Your constituents would respect you if you went out on a limb and actually put this original idea forth to benefit all of them and our City. Again, when Councillor Garrison raised this idea on Tuesday night and in the past at other meetings, he has been shut down. His microphone turned off. Ignored for trying to save money and serve the Community. Another apology is due him!

It is frustrating, disappointing, and upsetting, that you choose politics over people and expense over savings. When I spoke the other night, few of you looked me in the eye, and when you did, averted your eyes again quickly. I believe that there are some of you who want to do the right thing, what is best for our Community. Please, swallow your pride, stand up and do so before it is too late.

Patti Arnold

[Patti Arnold]

First, thank you Lydia for keeping the Kingston Community informed and up to date. I only wish more people would take the interest you have.

I noticed a post regarding the cost of building and maintaining a 50M pool. We have sent numerous examples to City Hall of facilities built across our Country with ice pads and pool and out door facilities as well. The costs have ranged from 19M to 24M. Each example is supported by the documentation that to build ice and pool together is the least costly venture. To add a pool at a later date will be cost prohibitive.

Also, the fact that the Olympic sized ice pad, as proposed by the CAG, to seat 5000, would, in point of fact, BE the LVEC. The LVEC/Multiplex could be ONE facility, saving taxpayers millions of dollars.

As far as pool revenue's go, a letter from Swim Ontario was sent as early as April 3 of this year indicating their support for this facility AND showed that only ONE swim meet would produce in the range of $220,000 revenue. An email I just recv'd today from Jim O'Malley of the Nepean Sportsplex suggests that amount could go as high as $250,000 - and again, that is JUST ONE WEEKEND MEET. That does not include the other 3 swim clubs in our area, or syncrho, diving or water polo.

City Hall does not seem to care that this facility, built as one with the LVEC, is the intelligent, reasonable, and logical thing to do. They seem ambivalent to the boost it could provide for our economy.

Again, thank you, and see you tonight at City Hall!

Patti Arnold

[Emerald]

regretably LVEC has momentum, multiplex does not. Count the votes. LVEC now rests with Beth Pater. Will she or won't she vote for it? What happens to the Multiplex if/when the LVEC vote is for the LVEC? My bet is that it is indefinitely deferred.

[Lydia]

Sorry Emerald
My money is on the fact that the Councilors PLAN on building the Multiplex wayyyyyyyyy before the LVEC is every going to happen.

I am still waiting for articles to be placed on our website that Alex Palilial agreed to be placed on the article section and Article from Patti Arnold.
Just wondering when and if it will appear there?

It is really too bad that the City Councilors ASK for citizens to participate in Community Advisory groups only to NOT LISTEN to them.

In a recent article in a local newspaper, Kevin George stated that we all know that the Ice Pads were the main concerns. That is nice but get a life. Surely council members are not that narrow minded that they can't figure out that a 50 meter pool would and is necessary just because orginally they only had enough brain power to only think ice!

It truly is a sad state of affairs. I have just come out of the KGH Hospital and while i was there it occured to me to ask the question of the councilors.
"What is the REAL reason you can't support having a 50 meter pool?" It can't be financial concern otherwise they would be having ONE COMPLEX which would contain all the ICE Pads and Entertainment combined.

[Florence]

Surely the reason has SOMETHING to do with the LVEC. Competing costs?

[Patti Arnold]

If enough people would demand City Hall to build only one facility which would serve the entire community's needs - recreational and commercial - there would be no competing costs. We have all heard the LVEC is needed for "our kids" and will be a "gathering place for friends and familys". This is misinformation. The LVEC is a commercial entertainment facility. Not a recreational one. The Multiplex Community Centre is recreational, and if designed properly could also house the commercial entertainment venue. This type of facility has been built for as little as $24M - two ice, aquatic facility, outdoor facilities. Instead, our City seems to have a bottomless pit of money where we can build only 4 ice pads for that amount of money PLUS the LVEC for a still undertermined amount - but probably in the range of $60M - that for a facility where only those who can afford the price of a ticket may attend. The City has made their deal with Randy Sexton for 4 ice pads. The CAG worked together, came up with a plan, and were shut down. The fact that a pool could bring million's of dollars to our City all year round carries no weight with City Hall. Their deal is done. Patti Arnold

[Lydia]

Surely the reason has SOMETHING to do with the LVEC. Competing costs?

I fully agree Florence that the reason must be something to do with the LVEC however, having said that, The Whig published the amount of money that the City IS going to spend on BOTH of these complexes. Therefore, I firmly believe that the councilors have EVERY intention of building both.

This is really sad because on one hand they tell us they don't have money for necessary services like infrastructure, more garbage collection that would be useful etc.

It stand to reason if you buy ONE 30 to 50 acre of land that would house both Entertainment and Community services in an area around the 401 WHICH one of the people interested in building the ice pads wanted then it would be MUCH MUCH *****er to build one building.

After all Developers have been doing this already in other parts of the world, why not here??

[Lydia]

Thank God for people like Patti Arnold who is a voice of reason.

While I have been in the hospital resently I have been thinking of "Why would these councilors Not want to building these together" Only reason I can think of is that The Ottawa Senators (Randy Saxton) has TOLD the steering committee that he will ONLY build the ice pads.

I WANT RANDY TO ONLY BUILD THE ICE PAD SECTION. I AM VERY GRATEFUL FOR HIM WANTING THIS TASK. I don't want him tell me that I can not have a 50 Meter Pool attached or close to the ice pads. I can remember him telling people that He would consider working with other developers SHOULD the city INSIST on having both.

So, there must be another reason that the councilors are so head strong in not fully agreeing to the other sporting activities to be part of the Multiplex.

[Patti Arnold]

I have already heard from architects who are keen on builiding both pool and ice. It will be interesting to see if the City "shares" this information with us, or if another "behind closed doors" decision will be made.

[Lydia]

I just want to thank Emerald and Moderator for making it possible to have a Link in the Editorial Section of our Website regarding the Multiplex. We have always been able to discuss the multiplex issues but it is because of them that we have a link on the editorial section.

If it were not for them, we wouldn't have a venue like this. It is much appreciated. These people have given us the tools to express what we really want in our city and what we really think of our city representatives.

They have been more than supportive of me with my constant nagging. lol lol Hay watch it you two. I resemble those remarks. lol lol

[Lydia]

Thanks Patti,
I think it is crucial that these builders make it very well known to the residents of this city that they are prepared to do so. That way it CAN'T be said that no one stepped up to do the work. That way council can't go before closed doors and say no body is interested.

[Jeffrey Lowes]

I would just like to add a comment to this debate on having a complex that offers more than one sport. I did swim competitively, and spent on average 2 weekends away at swim meets over the course of the school year.

Kingston would be able to hold a swim meet once a month that would attract over a 1000 swimmers and family members to Kingston. We could hold higher calibre meets 4 times a year and one national meet. This is swimming only! Now add diving, synchro, and water polo. Now you have a facility that will generate income and not just for the pool.

Where the message is getting lost is on the business community. If you told the business community that the city is going to build a place that will attract 1500 to 2000 people every weekend and these people will need hotel rooms and food do you think they might share some interest? Then tell them the people will be coming during the non-tourist months and maybe the council will listen.

I had suggested that the sports facility be built on the corner of Division and Railway( Pittsburgh District All Candidates Meeting ) and include the Kingston Curling Club and the Hockey Hall of Fame. A 6500 seat arena and 3 additional ice pads and pool would help put Kingston on the map during the non-tourist season. Tournament play in hockey would have the same effect as the pool. To date the curling club is moving to Days road and the Hall is trying to keep the doors open.

We would see some much need growth in Kingston. The spin off could help our retail, restaurants and museums by extending their tourist season. We would see some new hotels and of course new jobs that run year round. This sports facility would bring in cash to the city rather than another retail operation. Kingston can only feed on it’s self for so long.

As most people know location is everything! A piece meal approach will not work, the location that will work is Kingston. Missing this opportunity would be like say no to a casino, oh well I guess we get what we vote for.... ;)

Jeffrey Lowes

[Lydia]

Thanks Jeffrey
Your input on this is much appreciated. Yes Kingston council did say no to the Casino. I guess they wanted to help Gananaqui instead.????

Here they go again, saying that they are only interested in the 4 ice pads for now. Should we trust their decisions??? I think not.

[Patti Arnold]

FYI - I am still hearing from companies interested in building both ICE and POOL. They are out there, they want to build it - it is a matter of the City being transparent with the Proposals.

All that Jeffrey mentions about all types of water sports, has been shared over and over again with not only City Hall, but hundreds of people. The fact that both Swim Cananda and Swim Ontario have clearly stated the easy $22M per year that only swimming could bring to Kingston, is being ignored.

Yes, add diving, waterpolo, synchro, and all those who would use the facility recreationally - say pulling in off the 401 to give their kids a break in the splash pool, or tourists in town looking for something to do on a rainy day - all that adds up to DOLLARS.

The original plan as proposed by the Community Advisory Group, DID include one ice surface with seating for 5000 which would expand when the ice was not in use. THAT could be the LVEC of the Multiplex.

The millions of dollars wasted on building two facilities is shameful.

Thanks for posting Jeffrey - how do we get Kingstonians to react? People seem to be sitting back and just watching their tax dollars be railroaded away. Imagine, signing a contract with the Frontenacs and bidding on the Memorial Cup when the facility has yet to be built or even have final approval? That the Market Study is being done by a man who has already publicly spoken in favour of the LVEC - well, that speaks for itself. But what can we do? Patti

[keoadmin]

Have you spoken in depth to the Council members who disagree with you?

[Florence]

Please Jeffery tell us what city has a competive pool so that we can question them about the pool economics. I distrust guesses.

[Jeffrey Lowes]

Take a look at the Neapean Sports Plex and the 50m pools in Guelph, St. Catharines, Ottawa U, McGill and U of T. Keep in mind that we are within 4 hours of other urban centers in Upper New York State. What is more interesting are the locations of existing 50 m pools. I am not sure on Trent U but I am pretty sure there is not one between Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa. Amateur sport could have a new hub (Kingston) and this could make up for the loss of the casino. I can’t stress how important this could be to the future of Kingston.

Jeffrey Lowes

[Lydia]

Please Jeffery tell us what city has a competive pool so that we can question them about the pool economics. I distrust guesses.

Thanks Florence, you hit it on the nose. Exactly another reason to have the 50meter pool. Being the only one around would be a HUGH advantage to this city. (No competition with other cities)

I like what Patti Arnold told council.
Ice Pads are great for young kids to young adults. Pools are greater. Have you see babies on ice? We have seen them in water! Have you seen seniors with medical problems on ice? We have seen them in water. So tell us which is more important.

[I.M.Pertinent]

Instead of demanding a pool at the multiplex - an idea council has dismissed more than once - why not get all the pool proponents to throw support behind Vicki Keith and help raise money for a new pool at the Y?

[Valley]

Perhaps it make far more sense for our local government to collaborate with the Y to build the Multiplex. At least it would be operated by a local not-for-profit organization that has a track record in our community.

[Florence]

This is a great idea. Hope the 'pool' people take hold of it. Anyone out there?

[Patti Arnold]

My husband has been diagnosed with a rare and aggressive form of cancer so that has been a priority these days.

Everything each of you has said is valid and has been attempted. The Y was contacted back in February or March I believe. Vicky has been supportive of the 50 M pool, has written me lovely, personal notes, but I completely understand her focus on the new 25 M at the Y. And yes, all local Clubs have found some way to back that project financially - as well as many members doing so on a personal level.

Jeffrey is bam on about the 50M pool locations. UofT and Nepean - nothing in between, which is what we have said over and over again to Council: it is not just the local competitive, diving, synchro, etc Clubs which would PAY to use the facility, but also teams from Belleville, Trenton, Port Hope, Brockville, Perth who could rent the facility for meets or training camps.

Knocking our heads against the wall - but the best case scenario for our City and we taxpayers would be the MPLEX and LVEC to be one in the same entity at half the cost.

Farewell for now friends. I may not be back for a few days.
Patti

[Lydia]

Instead of demanding a pool at the multiplex - an idea council has dismissed more than once - why not get all the pool proponents to throw support behind Vicki Keith and help raise money for a new pool at the Y?

Interesting. Instead of DISMISSING what the people want why doesn't council support the pool people. People like Vicki Keith. After all she doesn't swim on ICE. :p :p :p



Hi Folks,
One of the top representatives from the YMCA has been at the Multiplex Advisory Group Meetings. She was very supportive of the Advisors and very upset with the Administration.

She certain has given them (especially Flloyd Patterson) something to think about. Trust me on this She wants to know exactly what the group REALLLLLY wants with this pool.

I only wish i could remember her name because i didn't get the meetings of the last meeting.

[macphail]

My husband has been diagnosed with a rare and aggressive form of cancer so that has been a priority these days.

I am so sorry to hear that Patti. All my best to you and your husband.

Sincerely, Derek

[macphail]

Who here thinks that there will actually be any movement on the multiplex?

My thoughts all along have been the hoopla around the multiplex is the proverbial smoke being blown.

After hearing the consultant last night (the proposed multiplex and M Centre would "compete" with the LVEC) and the fact that there isn't much hope in the prov or feds coughing up enough dough to fund all of council's recreational fancies, the multiplex will be shelved along side the many other studies undertaken over the years.

Whatever happened to the twinning of Centre 70? Council went so far as to start collecting funds from user groups to pay for it, but to this day, no RFP has gone out to signal it will actually be built.

The LVEC will come first. After that - if the funds actually materialize - council will announce that the fund barrel has run dry and if the citizens really want a multiplex built, then something (municipal properties, services, staff, other projects) will have to be sacraficed.

Cheers, Derek

[Lydia]

Yes, Patti, Take care of yourself and your hubby.

Derek, I must confess I do think you are correct. Having said that, I also know that one of the councilors has told me personally that it will be the Multiplex that will be first.

Either way, this whole situation stinks as far as i am concerned.

[Florence]

I agree with Derek - the Multiplex will not see the light of day unless something intervenes on the road to the LVEC.

[Valley]

As the LVEC costs - both stated and unstated - easily head north of $50 million you have to wonder if Council wants to fund such an expensive project. With a municipal election only 14 months away it will be interesting to see how the votes line up later this month.

[Jeffrey Lowes]

The real debate is the Multiplex or LVEC

Let's do some math

15 million @ 2.95% over 20 years = $82,814.69/month payment

15 million @ 5.00% over 20 years = $98,993.36/month payment

15 million @ 6.50% over 20 years = $111,835.97/month payment

20 million @ 2.95% over 20 years = $110,419.59/month payment

20 million @ 5.00% over 20 years = $131,991.15/month payment

20 million @ 6.50% over 20 years = $149,114.63/month payment

With the current total price tag of the LVEC not set someone must think that they are the world's greatest fund raiser.

How much is the LVEC going to make per month? There is a limited pool of funds at the provincial and federal levels and they (gov) will see through all the smoke and mirrors. I will make sure of it!

The Multiplex will not see the light of day if we have to pay for the LVEC.

The time is right for a reality check.

What I have yet to see is the breakeven analysis of both projects or a cash flow analysis model. The blending of the two projects and an evaluation of the absolute and comparative advantages of one over the other. This point is currently lost at the council level.

The microeconomics of Kingston vs that of the region, with the economic net gain of extending the tourist season beyond the conventional summer months. We need to look beyond how much a hockey game will make and look at the secondary spin offs. (This is not unlike looking at the cost of a house. You look at the cost of land and secondary costs of building ;) )

We are about to allocate resources that we do not have on a scaled down model of what this city needs. The Multiplex needs to be outside the box inorder to work. The LVEC is a box that someone is trying to back fill.

Possibilities are endless unless we exept the trade offs



http://friendsoftheec.org/images/LVEC_BusinessPlan_Summary.pdf

We do need something and I think everyone wants what is best for Kingston. The problem that I've had from the start is the lack of vision and the ability to look beyond the city limits. The business plan states that they need 16 million in long term debt and is not including the land costs. The other point is that the LVEC will have the ability to grow in size which means all the studies are not to scale. It is easy to say yes or no on a project, which is how this city has operated in the past.

There is an inherent inability to create something that will grow if there are restrictions and limits inplace before it is even started.

[Patti Arnold]

Hi friends!

I am taking a moment to point out that the Community Advisory Group for the Multiplex originally proposed that one of the ice arenas have a seating capacity of 5000. At the final Steering Committee, the Mayor sat in and made sure that this element was removed from the RFP so as not to compete with the LVEC. I may be sounding like a broken record, but WHY can't the LVEC/Mplex be built as one saving us millions of dollars and offering both recreational and entertainment facilities to a far larger group of people? It boggles the mind!

Also, the Deputy Mayor made a pertinent point at Council the other evening, asking if the Market Study supported people attending an event at the LVEC and then staying on to spend money in Kingston (hotels, food, shopping, sightseeing.) This is important to keep in mind. In my own personal experience, when travelling to Toronto or Ottawa for a show, concert or game, we usually return home the same day or night. BUT when we travel away for a swim meet, we are in the host city for 3, 4 or 5 DAYS.

The Multiplex is where the money is. Hosting hockey and soccer tournaments, swim meets be they competitive or synchro or diving, figure skating and speed skating competitions - all of these people are truly the "captive audience" and will be staying in hotels, eating in restaurants, finding other forms of entertainment between games or events.

I may be wrong, but I don't see people driving from Trenton or Brockville, for a 5000 seat event, spending $200+ a night in Kingston when they can drive back home.

One facility, serving more people, costing far less. It just makes sense.

(PS... thanks for the good thoughts, prayers and well wishes to our family. Your kindness is truly appreciated.)

Patti

[macphail]

Kemptville has an interesting facility.

They have built - for just under $17-million I understand - a municipal facility that includes:


Municipal office space (12,000 sq. ft. I believe)
2 NHL size ice pads - one with seating for 300 and one for 2,000
A small theatre (seating for 300) where council meetings are held as well as small plays and movies for seniors.
Banquet facilities with a bar and kitchen that also serves the arena
Doesn't Kingston need multiple pads? Doesn't Kingston also want to consolidate its operations?

Food for thought.

Cheers, Derek

[Frontenac]

The Kemptville approach sounds both affordable and more community oriented than the floundering LVEC mega-project. A rejuvenated Memorial Centre property and buildings could easily accomodate these types of uses. We could also have these centrally located facilities built and operated at a far lower cost than those proposed for both an LVEC and a multiplex.

[Lydia]

I agree with you Derek and Florence, this is the type of sports/entertainment center that would serve Kingston very well. I think that I would prefer it to be a little bigger but not much more bigger unless the city chose to COMBINE BOTH THE LVEC AND MULTIPLEX under one roof like Patti has mentioned above.

However, what do i know, im only a "Transplant"" = (Township of Kingston tax payer"" like one of Springer's group tried to attach Sara Meers and got into her face and then into mine. lol lol lol.

I guess she tried intimination which backfired on her. Okay people I need help. I am working towards having a Street Representation on every street in Loyalist Cataraqui Ward 2 District. I have three District Representatives who need to get the names of Street Representatives. This is for the newly formed Kingston Electorial District Taypayer's Association.

If anyone knows of anyone who would be interested on giving information out to their neighbours about situations that happen at city hall or around our tax dollars give them my e-mail address at taxpayerkingston@hotmail.com. I would need their phone number or e-mail addresses to get in touch with them. I am mainly looking for people in my district however if you know of anyone in another district i will gladly pass on their information to the appropiate district supervisor.

[Patti Arnold]

Yep yep yep... rejuvenated Memorial Centre is the answer! Patti

[macphail]

I've sent a letter to the Mayor and Council last night suggesting they look at the Kemptville model.

Let's see if I get any response.

Cheers, Derek

[Lydia]

Great Idea Derek,

Let's just hope that these councilors actually listen to other ideas.

[Lydia]

Well Folks, It is very interesting how reactions to different statements made by Our Steering Committee on the Multiplex have developed.

On November 14, 2005, there was a meeting with three main groups of representatives, the CAG (Citizens Advisory Goup), Steering Group (5 Councilors) and Technical Advisory Group (Technical City Staff).

Meeting started with the intention of getting back to the project in hand and to learn abount the RFPs (Request For Proposal) progress. There was a presentation and an appeal from Alex Palilionis, Pool User Advisory, which again showed exactly why we need the 50 meter pool. Most of the public who attended the meetings wore the label "SWIM FOR LIFE" to show the Steering Committee how important it was for us to have this 50 meter pool to be part of the Multiplex.

In attendance were Kingstown Chairperson of the Kingston Taxpayer's Association, Mr. Jim Butler, Councilor Steve Garrison, President of the Kingston Taxpayer's Association, Mr. Harold Stone. And these are just a few of the distinquished members of the public that were there.

People listened to the discussions that took place between Councilors and the Technical staff regarding the RFPs. A question came from the public asking if the Technical staff if there were any which discussed the 50 meter pool. Unfortunely, the first response to the question was a ''NO'' followed by an explanation which indicated that the 50 Meter pool was discussed. The silence that took place when told "NO" was unbelievable and then a more relaxed feeling came over the public once the explanation that indicated the 50 meter pool was associated in some way with the RFPs.

Leon Doucet and Ken Ohtake both sparked discussion between the Councilors and the CAG group. Leon finally got an answer to where the "Hocky Hall of Fame" MIGHT be placed. After months of asking finally got an answer. Ken Ohtake spoke about how people who were involved as members of the CAG group feel like giving up and felt discouraged. Of course it was hard to deal with when Kevin asked if 'STUPID WAS WRITTEN ON KEVIN'S HEAD". OOPs don't look now Kevin someone might have with that comment. Of course we realize that Kevin's comment was because people are getting very sensitive around the Multiplex issue. Kevin also indicated that Money is not a problem and that the financing of the Multiplex will be there so that we can have the finest facility we want. I have question. If that is true that money isn't an issue then why not build the 50 meter pool.

Mayor Harvey Rosen did come to this meeting (LATE) and left (EARLY) however he did put in his two cents worth regarding the Memorial centre discussion. He said that talking about the Memorial Centre was like talking about Motherhood and Apple Pie. I actually agree with him because if it was not for Motherhood he would not have been there and for the Apple Pie it is much sweeter than the Crap that we have seen come out of Council of the issues of the LVEC. So Harvey, Give us what we want the Memorial Centre to be the finest we want, (motherhood) and Spend the money for the Multiplex ( Apple Pie).

One good thing was discussed for the Memorial Centre. There will be a Memorial Garden there. That is a nice start, now give them the rest of the improvements to go with the Garden.

A e-mail between Jim Butler and Councilors has really showed how the Councilors are feeling at this time. Jim indicated his displeasure on how Steve Garrison was NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK BECAUSE he was considered part of the public. Yet Mayor Rosen was allowed to speak on the Multiplex. Does this mean that Mayor Rosen's views are more important??? Better still Does this mean that the PUBLIC'S VIEWS ARE not as important as the Mayors? Something to think about????

[Patti Arnold]

Thank you Lydia for your update regarding Monday's meeting. I was called out of town unexpectedly due to the death of my sister-in-laws father, so was unable to attend. I have been cc'd on many interesting emails. One in particular contains this quote from Councillor Kevin George, the Chair of the Steering Committee:

"I have already been informed by many in attendance at the meeting last Monday that they are well aware of the process and support the actions so far. This has been said to me in person as well by many e-mails. If you have so many that are concerned as you say there are I would like to hear from them personally."

Kevin is inviting personal responses to himself, perhaps everyone who is feeling frustrated by the lack of logic in spending millions of dollars on an LVEC and Multiplex would consider taking a moment to email him. A rejuvenated Memorial Centre, with an aquatic facility including a 50M pool, could be a world class facility all at one convenient location, serving the entire community, and generating millions of dollars every year for our City. Tax payers would get "more bang for their buck" and all citizens would have access to both a recreational and entertainment facility at one central location - walking distance for thousands, and an easy drive for those of us in the west end who usually drive everywhere anyway.

All it would take is for Kevin, as Chair of the Steering Committee, to be willing to take a stand and say NO to wasting millions of dollars to provide a service to only a portion of our Community.

Kevin George
E-mail Address(es):
KGeorge@cityofkingston.ca

Thank you again Lydia, for the time and effort you put into attending these and other meetings and reporting on them.

Patti

[Lydia]

Thanks Patti for your support. We are both seeing things the same way.

Lydia

[Patti Arnold]

I understand that Friends of the Memorial Centre and Williamsville residents do not want the Multiplex or LVEC at that location, so I apologize if my thoughts have offended or upset any one. Unfortuantely, citizens have been encouraged to visualize these buildings as being concrete, glass and steel monstrosities when in fact they can be built to be aesthetically pleasing and to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. 23 acres of land in a prime location already owned by the city for a facility which could serve dual purposes is more cost effective for all of us. Again, apologies to anyone I may have offended.

[Lydia]

Monstrosities = HECK NO.
Building of culture, art, community, beauty, nature = HECK YES.

Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That is okay Patti because at the last Steering Committee meeting it was already mentioned that the MULTIPLEX will NOT be on the Memorial Centre grounds. A Memorial garden will be there instead. lol lol. Since gardens are good things to beautify a building, I think it will be nice. As long as they get more than just the garden.

[Lydia]

The following e-mail has been circulated on the KCAL.CA website. Bruce Todd is the Chairman of the Kingston Taxpayer's Association For District 3. He has allowed me to place his email on our site. I think that it is very interesting to understand the frustration of people who are truly interested in the city. Frustration of people who have dealt with Councilors dealing with the Multiplex and also the LVEC.

The question we all need to know as residents of this city is this." Does Bruce Todd's frustration resemble our own?" If the answer is "YES" then try doing what Bruce does. He becomes involved with Members of Our Site "Kingston Electors" and also the KCAL.CA. Get involved with the person I know who will listen to us, our CAO Mr. Glen Laubenstein.

My experience speaking one on one with our CAO is that he is very approachable and very determined to make this city WORK TOGETHER. Good luck Bruce and Jim with your meeting with Mr. Lance Thurston. I firmly believe that you will also be surprised with dealing with Lance. I believe that you will find his manner of dealing with the public the same as our CAO's.

Just remember we ALL have a common goal. To make this city the Best place for the future. Let's take a lesson from Mayor Hazel who runs Mississauga without debt, and prosperous. She has NEVER borrowed she has always used what she had to work with. Taxes. She never squandered money and she has been considered the Greatest Torontian. Check it out on the Global News Television Station.

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 19:57:19 -0500
From: "Bruce Todd" <btodd1@cogeco.ca>
Subject: Re: A personal note as requested


Hi Jim - would you please include me in, as an observer at least when you have
your meeting with Mr Lance Thurston.

I want to tell you that I have known Mr Thurston for quite some time, and I can
tell you he is a professional in every respect, and a citizen of this community
that has worked hard for and cares about what happens in Kingston. But as all
city hall workers, they must operate under a broader umbrella, that is, things
don't happen precisely according to their personal agendas or beliefs.

I have so many things to say about the LVEC, about the Multiplex, about every
arena and entertainment facility in the city, that I am completely frustrated. I
don't know where to start. It seems as if no one is listening.

In February of 2004, I submitted to Ms Leonore Foster several pages of a précis
indicating that we should not be looking at just an upgrade of the Memorial
Centre, as suggested in Mayor Rosen's speech, but a plan to look at all of the
entertainment and recreational facilities of Kingston as a package. The Arena
Capacity and Expansion Study gave us a good picture of where Kingston was and
should be headed, and I suggested we should listen to it.

That study and my remarks were ignored.

Later in 2004, I submitted to the Whig Standard a letter to the editor outlining
26 points comparing the Memorial Centre to the proposed site of the LVEC at
Anglin Bay. This was done for two reasons - to show that the Anglin Bay site was
not comparatively suitable, and to demonstrate the kinds of comparators one
should use in selecting an appropriate site. My letter was never published - it
was rejected by editorial staff of the Kingston Whig Standard.

Nobody wanted to listen.

When the Market Study by Ron Bidulka was presented to Council, I wrote to
councillors saying that a number of important points were omitted from the
Market Study. It only took a dummy to see the omissions.

Mr Laubenstein, are you listening?

The Market Study failed to tell the people of Kingston a lot of things. I am not
an expert in marketing, but if Ron Bidulka says he has told you the whole story
about an LVEC in the downtown, I say he needs to be ashamed of the extent of his
information.

I wrote to everyone about the holes in Mr Bidulka's study. No one replied to me.
Not on any one of my points. None of you had the balls to speak out.

Don't give me a lecture on language. Your ad hominems don't excuse your actions.

I told you Mr Bidulka didn't include the impact on the Memorial Centre - a point
which now Councillor Rick Downes has been trying to hammer home - what happens
when all the revenues are taken away from our Memorial Centre? How then do we
support this site?

I also told you Mr Bidulka didn't disclose the full impact on the Grand Theatre.
Why would an act come to the Grand Theatre for three nights at 800 seats per
night when it could come to the LVEC for one night?

I also told you that there are other consequences to having an LVEC in the
city.

I am not happy that so-called celebrities can come into town and perform, and
then drive away down the 401 with hundreds of thousands of dollars of Kingston's
money, to spend in other cities or other countries. Please, someone tell me how
this benefits Kingston? Yes, it is nice to have things going on in Kingston.
Yes, it is nice to be able to stay in Kingston and enjoy things. But if all
those dollars don't stay in Kingston, please tell me how that benefits Kingston
financially?

I am not happy that there will be a three-hundred seat restaurant in the LVEC
facility, required to help pay for the LVEC, that will capture thousands of
dollars, and deprive those dollars from local downtown restaurants. Am I the
only one who has heard that you can only spend your dollar once?!?

I hear that skating at the Market Square will be free. Great. But who pays for
the maintenance and supervision? Maintenance costs money - that's nobody's
fault. But I am sure we will hear that the city cannot afford to provide free
rinks at Market Square and at all other places now currently on the list. I
feel the city will be under siege when that happens!

When I talk to some councillors, they tell me that they know exactly what I am
saying, but they cannot admit to it because of so many other reasons. We are
living under a phoney shell.

Perhaps we are caught in the web of too few people, caught on too many
committees, reporting to too many competing interests, shaking hands with too
many friends, that expect too much loyalty from us all. The reality of life is
that you can't smile at everyone and say yes, unless of course you want to be a
phoney and a wimp. There comes a time when you have to hug your friend and say,
I respect you, but no!!!

The LVEC is about to be built on the northeast corner of the North Block backed
by the very worst information the city could rely on.

To say that the Traffic and Parking Study, as applied to the Anglin Bay site, is
just as appropriate to the North Block site, is to admit to a lack of
professionality. Anyone who is truly knowledgeable about traffic would never
make such a statement

I agree with Councillor Leonore Foster that we should respect city workers. Ms
Foster is adamant about showing respect for city workers. In my experience, of
all the city workers I have ever met and dealt with, they have been most helpful
and respectful, except for possibly two.

I recently asked for a source for the comment that certain parking garages are
within 600 metres of an LVEC on the North Block, and therefore, that there is
sufficient parking for an LVEC on the North Block. The answer I was given was
that a certain consultant had used that figure in his report regarding an LVEC
on the Anglin Bay site; therefore, 600 metres was an acceptable walking
distance.

Apparently, this information comes from a man called John Uliana who, in my
opinion, doesn't know Traffic from Tarpaper. Yes, Mr John Uliana, you are
getting a copy of this information!

I say to Ms Foster, city staff will get respect when they show respect, and when
they demonstrate a respect for the limitations of traffic engineering
understanding and boundaries.

The fact is, when you are asked what the source is for a traffic engineering
fact, you do not say - "well a consultant used it in his report".

Mr Laubenstein, if you want my respect, you will stop this charade of
incompetency, and direct city hall staff to answer in a professional manner!

The fact is - there is no basis for a walking distance of 10 minutes, or of 600
meters. This has been fabricated by a consultant that was brought into the city
to "MAKE IT FIT", by a mayor who has told people to MAKE IT FIT.

Councillor Foster, people will automatically get my respect when they act
professionally and answer questions professionally. The answer I got from
traffic personnel was very unprofessional and very undeserving of my respect.

I do not profess to have the answers to everything.

I do not suggest my opinions are the right way to go.

But I expect decent professional answers to my questions.

The traffic engineering department of the city of Kingston has disappointed me,
to say the least.

The traffic engineering department of the city of Kingston is allowing this city
to go to hell in a handbasket while it watches traffic mess after traffic mess
to develop without saying a word!

If I am not right, where was the traffic engineering section when I analyzed 14
aspects of the CastleGlenn Traffic and Parking Study. Did they say one word
about the study or my comments? No. Not one word. They sat silent. They didn't
even suggest a meeting with me to discuss the traffic situation. They didn't
have the balls to speak up. That's because they don't have an opinion. I wonder
why we even pay them to be in existence.

Mr Laubenstein, maybe you can bring some sensibility to this city!

If we think we need an LVEC in this city, and I think there are a growing number
of people who think it is an extravagance, let's have a WEEK OF DEBATE in
Memorial Hall - let's allow 15 minute speeches - let's let the press record
everything - let's talk from 6 p.m. to midnight - lets let this be our
mini-referendum - let's listen to all sides - let's have the gumption to PUT
THIS ON THE FLOOR AND LISTEN TO EVERYONE. There are many ways to hold a
referendum on matters.

Given that we are talking about many millions of dollars, is there a city will?
The city is not bound by legislation to do the right thing.

Perhaps later, I will tell you about what I really think about the ongoing
governance of this city!

Bruce Todd,

[Valley]

After hearing the recent CKWS report on the proposed multiplex, you have to wonder if it has developed "LVEC" problems. Will the public-private partnership approach to the development and operation of this proposed project be cost effective in the long run?

~~~~~~~

Multiplex Delayed CKWS-TV
Dec, 29 2005 - 8:00 PM

POLITICIANS AND THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE TO WAIT ANOTHER MONTH TO GET THEIR HANDS ON A REPORT TO BUILD KINGSTON'S NEW RECREATION CENTRE.

WE'RE NOW TOLD THE REPORT WON'T BE READY UNTIL JANUARY 23...BECAUSE STAFF NEED MORE TIME TO FINE TUNE THE DETAILS.
THE SO-CALLED "MULTIPLEX" --CONSISTING OF A 4-PAD ICE ARENA IN ONE LOCATION -- AIMS TO REPLACE SOME OF THE CITY'S AGING NEIGHBOURHOOD RINKS.

THE LONG-AWAITED REPORT WILL TRY TO ANSWER SOME KEY QUESTIONS.

NAMELY, WHO WILL PAY FOR THE 20-MILLION DOLLAR REC CENTRE.....WHO SHOULD RUN IT...AND WHERE IT SHOULD BE BUILT.

THE REPORT COULD ALSO INCLUDE OPTIONS TO BUILD A SWIMMING POOL.

THE CITY SOUGHT PRIVATE PROPOSALS TO DESIGN, BUILD AND OPERATE THE MULTIPLEX ON ABOUT 20 ACRES OF LAND.

[Lydia]

Hi Valley,
I am actually very happy to know that the Staff is going to take their time to make SURE of all costs associated with the Multiplex. This is actually encouraging because I truly don't feel that the LVEC project costs were taking seriously enough. Heck even A recent Developer wondered whether he could ask for MORE time to study the best possible way of development of the LVEC.

Too often council just jumped into projects without known ALL costs. Hopefully the Staff dealing with the Multiplex take as long as you need to in order to get things RIGHT.

It might mean that we have to wait a little longer for the Multiplex to be build, however, that is actually a good thing. I personally think that the staff dealing with the Multiplex are doing a wonderful job, at least so far.

[Lydia]

Happy New Year Everyone
I am not happy!!! Yep i hate it when there is a possibility of a Councilor being correct and I don't understand why he is correct. Hum or is he????

Recently, I have discussed the cost of the 50 meter pool with one of the councilors on the Steering Committee. (as you know not my fondest committee lol lol) However, I will have to admit that I don't have all the answers to this question.

Does Kingston Taxpayers wish to fund the Multiplex as well as the LVEC which we all know we will have to do. Apparently this councilor is not total in love with the idea of the 50 meter pool because of the following reason.

He belives in his heart and soul that there has never been a BUSINESS PLAN THAT CAN GUARANTEE THAT THE POOL WOULD NOT BE A BURDON on the taxpayer. He states that Queens and and the YMCA have not been able to produce this kind of Business Plan that would guarantee that it would not be a drain on the taxpayer.

Sorry folks, you all know that i am complete in favour of this 50 meter pool. I still am. however, I believe that it is the most important thing to do is to present both sides of the issue. Good or Bad.

Is there anyone out there, Alex, Patti, Anyone who can clear the air for this Councilor in order for him/her to VOTE FOR THE POOL.

As a taxpayer, my stand is YES I AM, for me everything and service that involves this city is a drain on my dollars. However, I also know that there are many many people who do not feel the same way I do.

I also have heard from a lady who was NOT in favour of this 50 meter pool because as she stated " I am not an Olympic Swimmer and there is not enough 25 meter pool for the public at large"

Okay folks, speak up, If you don't know it yet, things are narrowing down now to 4 (FOUR) RPS. Personally, I don't know yet what the technical staff, steering committee, or Citizen Advisory Group have to deal with but I know that it should be much clearer by the end of this month.

[Valley]

Why do public services need a 'business plan'?

Local government is clearly not a business. If it is agreed that a new service is important to the community than we must expect that there will be a cost that goes with it paid through our local taxes.

Interestingly we do not have business plans for a whole variety of public services where there is little or no expectation of income, for example, roads, bridges, general planning, libraries, parks, etc.

[Lydia]

Good Point Valley, That is the reason i still am in favour of the 50 meter pool.
Thanks I told this councilor that i would put his reason on our website so i KNOW THAT THIS COUNCILOR will read our responses.

:p

[Jeffrey Lowes]

There is a point to a business plan, and one point is it should show the pro’s and con’s of taking or making a decision that could change in a direction the current model. I don’t think the operation will be public and it will be competing with Queen’s and the YMCA so I don’t think they will support it

Jeffrey Lowes

[Patti Arnold]

Hi gang! Been out of touch for a bit. Spent 6 days at U Sherbrooke with some of the team so that they could train in a 50M pool! The Queen's team was there also. Yes, we have to ship our kids out of town to train. I would have much rather spent that money in Kingston. I'm sure the other teams would have enjoyed spending their money in Kingston too.

This past weekend, at a meet in Perth, only a 25 M, I spent over $500 on hotel, food, entertainment, travel. There were 409 swimmers there. In a few weeks, I have to go to UofT, London, then later in April, Brantford, Nepean, Guelph, and back to Nepean. Simply put.... do the math.

This is only competitive swimming. This does not include numerous other water sports which we tend to forget about in a hockey oriented town. I personally love hockey, I just happen to have kids who swim.

The nature of the sport, just for a few of you who don't understand, I'll use me as an example. On a Thursday my son may swim one event and is in the water 30 seconds. On Friday he may have two events, so maybe in the water 3:minutes. Saturday another 35 seconds in the water, Sunday maybe a minute. The events are all spread out over the days of the meet. Sooooo that leaves hours and hours to spend doing other things, namely spending money. Kingston especially offers so much to spend money on. Besides food, drink, shopping we have tourist attractions that other cities don't offer.

All of this is to say, any Councilor may be able to say it isn't feasable to build a 50M due to initial costs, but they are ignoring the money which would be injected back into the community. As well, they are ignoring the fact that all ready we are underserviced by pools, swimmers, teams, high school teams cannot get pool time. A 50M when divided by the bulkhead becomes TWO 25M's... getting more bang for your buck.

What they are also ignoring is the future. The future is seniors who can float and swim to stay healthy and active and our children who deserve more opportunities than just skating.

Gotta go!

Patti

[Lydia]

Thanks Jeffery and Patti, I knew you both would come forward. Go get them Patti. I fully agree with you and I am willing to spend tax money on a 50meter pool.

Having said that I also believe in my gut that the people who are not for this project also have a say.

Thanks again folks.

Lydia

[Lydia]

I got an e-mail addressing the Councilor's question regarding the 50 meter pool's business plan. Below is a copy of the body of the e-mail.



Lydia's discussion with a Councillor about cost has no grounds. RMC and Queen's are client based operations and a 50m pool certainly has a difficult business case for servicing their
numbers of 20,000. No one should use this in comparison to the City's situation ... it's like comparing an apple to
a grape ... the City has a population of 116,000 with a broader public community of 148,000 that does have a greater
need. The other point to provide is that the Counter Street expansion in the City will cost $25M. Not one bit of revenue will be generated by this, yet it will service the community.
A 50m pool on the other hand is seen as being an operation that will operate at a loss. NOT SO! Unlike the
spending $25M on a street improvement, the pool will enhance our lifestyle, the needs of the youth and elderly, attract businesses who are looking for progressive communities to re-locate to, AND generate revenues in the local business community (unlike the Street improvement which will never see a $ come back to the community since it is a strictly service/utility cost).

Time to break out the big guns!! AND FAST!!!

Thanks to the writer of this e-mail. Anyone else have anything else to add?

Just was informed that Mr Gredge has come on board of the Muliplex issue. If everything is above board with the STEERING COMMITTEE then why meeting coming up without the CAG????? Interesting Development. Stay tuned Folks. Big News coming soon

[Lydia]

All is not well with the Multiplex Community Centre Project.

The following is occurring:

The Steering Committee is proceeding to a meeting on the 16th (not the 23rd) and without the CAG being directly involved (this is contrary to the motion put forward by George Stoparczyk and adopted by Council before it was placed in the Actual RFP document (not sure what page, but it is there).

The Steering Committee is acting contrary to council's
endorsement of the RFP.

Their intentions are clearly in bad faith. There are apparent changes in the Committee Structure such as Don Gedge coming on board that the CAG has not been advised of yet, even though their intentions were made known a month ago.

On Friday the 13th, City Staff are releasing some sort of report(s) for public consumption prior to the Monday night meeting.

I don't know what it is but the Committee is prepared to accept the recommendation of staff to proceed to the next council meeting. Is there a pool? possibly. Is it a 50m pool? unlikely.

The Steering Committee needs to be taken to task for their underhandedness and presumably their interests to
blind-side the Community's interests in a 50m pool. Their process does not have the community interests as first;
they are following their own agenda of backroom deals.

Everyone, please read the City Report (which is supposed to be on the Web site as well by Friday)

[Lydia]

An excellent motto: If I was there I would make a sign and march;"melt the ICE, build a pool."


SHARON DONNELLY
TRIATHLON
Web: http://www.sharondonnelly.com


10 January, 2006

To Whom it May Concern

This letter is to offer my support of a 50 metre Pool in the Multiplex Community Center Project. My support is not only from the competitive perspective but from one that recognizes what other municipalities have seen fit to do, provide a diverse array of recreational facilities to benefit young, old and even physically challenged and aging sectors of our community. To this end, I believe a multi-purpose recreational facility is a goal that must be applauded and supported by all sporting and recreational enthusiasts throughout this community.

From my experience as an athlete, I can say that this community is not serviced adequately for competitive level aquatic programs as there is not enough pool time available with the existing facilities and the quality of the facilities is severely lacking. I had to travel to other city centers to get quality training because my hometown could not provide the pool facility I needed. Now as a triathlon coach, I cannot offer my athletes the service they need as I cannot obtain any pool time. It is extremely frustrating to have such motivated people only to tell them that I cannot help them. Most of all, I think of my new daughter who I would like to commence in lifesaving water courses as soon as she is capable, but I wonder if there will be space and what the condition will be of the aging aquatic facility, Artillery Park. I do not enjoy training there, but I have no choice as it the only community 25m pool.

Kingston desperately needs an aquatic facility to service the growing population. We are situated on water thus making the need for lifesaving programs even more important. Where are the skills learned for this – in an aquatic facility. It just makes fiscal and common sense to include a pool in the new Multiplex, and make it a pool that can satisfy the whole community (50m, water entertainment, life saving, and relaxation).

I have traveled around the world and every time I return home, I find myself disappointed at the lack of community recreation facilities. Kingston can and should do better for its citizens of today and those of tomorrow. A true multiplex will bring together all forms of recreation, sport and people and I hope that the decision makers will support the 50m pool.

Best Regards,


Sharon Donnelly

CANADIAN OLYMPIAN &#183; OLYMPIENNE CANADIENNE

[Lydia]

For anyone person on the face of the earth to say that the Multiplex issue was not fair to the public is INSANE.

1: From day one, the public was asked if they would want to be nominated to see on the CAG group. (Citizens Advisory Group)
2: From day one, the technical group and Steering Committee have ALWAYS allowed people to sit in on EVERY MEETING BETWEEN THE CAG AND STEERING AND TECHNICAL GROUPS.
3: From day one, the public was told that THEY DID NOT HAVE VOTING OR DECISION RIGHTS ON THE MEETINGS. However there would always be about 15 minutes available for public input should the public wanted to express their own views.
4: From day one, the CAG, AND TECHNICAL GROUPS have always been WILLING TO LISTEN TO PUBLIC VIEWS before making their OWN MINDS UP SO THAT THEY COULD MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS.
5; From day one, the Multiplex issue has been an open book for anyone interested in attending
6: From day one, All three Committees have been open and e-mailed everyone who showed the least bit of interest in the project.
7: From day one, NONE OF THE ABOVE WAS EVER ALLOWED TO HAPPEN WITH THE LVEC.

Just maybe if the Mayor had conducted the above method of dealing with Council's decisions and Committees things would have been different. Just maybe the Kingston Electors group and the Kingston Taxpayer's Group and the KCAL Group members should be allowed to OVERSEE issues presented to all committee meetings then NOBODY could ever have a reason to mistrust Council.

Just maybe if EVERY COMMITTEE CREATED BY COUNCIL should be conducted the same way. Just maybe we would not be so untrusting of them if they did things the way the Multiplex issue was and is being handled.

NOTHING HAS BEEN COMPLETED DECIDED AS YET. THERE IS NOTHING TO INFORM THE CITY ABOUT AS YET. THE RIFS WERE PUT OUT, THE RPFS HAVE BEEN PUT OUT. DECISIONS ON EXACTLY WHAT COST WILL BE HAS NOT AS YET BEEN FULLY CALCULATED. THE MULTIPLEX COMMITTEES ARE DOING THINGS THE RIGHT WAY. THEY ARE GETTING THE FACTS BEFORE PRESENTING THEM TO CITIZENS AS A WHOLE.

ONCE EVERYTHING IS DISCUSSED and KNOWN, I KNOW THAT THE MULTIPLEX WILL HAVE THE PROJECT PRESENTED TO THE CITIZENS FOR TAXPAYER'S input. Did that happen with the LVEC? NO IT DIDN'T AND IS COSTING US BIG TIME NOW. The LVEC has divided the city more than any other project. The division between the a small core group of ""down owners" and the rest of the entire City's residents, not to even mention the Township residents.

The people are not told that some of reasons the rinks are being considered for re-purposing is because of the following
1: Cost of upgrading
2: Environmental reasons

For the people who are upset about the location that has been mentioned, I have a question? Is it the Us versus You mentality (DOWN TOWN VERSES TOWNSHIP) I know for a fact that there was at least one person that mentioned it last night?

Sara Meers has been a consent voice of reason. She is 200% correct about Wally Elmer and the children in that area. I firmly believe that she alone has always made them her main concern. Isn't it fully that people would be upset that their main supporter be attacked because the DEVELOPERS WHO SUBMITTED RPS wanted Her District to put it in?

Last night's meeting regarding the Multiplex has been the best meeting ever held in this city in the past 6 years I have been here.

The Mayor, CAO, The City Manager, Accounting staff, the City staffers, the Steering Committee, the Councilors, the CAG group, the Technical group, The Taxpayer's Association group, The supporters of the 50 Meter Pool, the Kingston Elector's representative and the ordinary citizen was there.

Does that sound like the Multiplex issue is being HIDDEN???? OR UNFAIR????

These Multiplex committee members will present this project to the City residents once they KNOW all the FACTS ABOUT LOCATIONS, COSTS, PROGRAMS, AND DECISIONS ON WHAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE MULTIPLEX. This group will never try to RAM this project down our throats.

Last night was the first time that I have not disagreed with ANYONE OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE. I have always picked on them and gave them grief. I have done so to make them think. Last night I was PROUD TO HAVE THEM AS OUR COUNCILORS. For the Mayor to put down any of them shows me that he must be worried about his position. I suggest that as Mayor that he ensures that every one of his committee groups be handled the way the Multiplex project is being handled. Mayor I supported you when you came in. Stand up and become accountable to the taxpayer and you will be around for the next election and everyone to come after that.

[Valley]

While it is true that there has been a continuing consultation on the proposed multiplex, this consultative group consists of a relatively small number of City Council members, city staff and citizen advisory members.

When major decision points are reached in a project decision making process, a well advertised public meeting allows the broader community to attend and comment on the proposal. This is the process used at the City's Planning Committee and flags significant issues that may be of interest to the public.

[Lydia]

Valley, I agree with you fully, and this will happen. However, give the Technical group, CAG group and Steering Group time to gather the facts before they actually make the FINAL DECISION

This is the very reason why people got upset with Mayor Harvey last summer when HE stated that the Multiplex would be in the West end. He did this before anyone had even talked about it. The Technical Staff, Steering Committee and the CAG group had not even discussed the site until the last meeting.

These committee members didn't choose these sites at all. The people who put in the RPFs have stated where THEY wanted to build the Multiplex.

I am SURE that there will be a hugh public meeting advising ALL citizens of this city why, where, and when the committees have decided on things and to get FULL disclosure and to ask everyone's advise. Something that was not dont with the LVEC.

These committees have done the RIGHT THING IN GETTING ALL THE FACTS BEFORE MAKING OPTIONS public. Maybe we should be upset with the Developers who put in the RPFS for their reasons to select the site which all of these developers had chosen???? Maybe with them but certain not with the Steering, CAG or technical staff.

In the mean time, I agree with you Valley, there has to be and I am sure there will be meetings to inform the people of the chooses to be made. My only hope is that they don't get rid of the community centers only to build a new facility which would not be around 10 years from now. Lets hope that since we are building this that it would be a place where tourists would flock to come and that we would be proud to have.

Various sites had the chance to get this however people in various areas had decided that they didn't want it. These people had been at all the CAG meetings and Steering Meetings. Also sites like the Alcan site was looked and and was not up for sale. Should they go in an exporporate them when the City already ownes this site?

[Patti Arnold]

You are right, all meetings which concern issues regarding our Community should be well publicized. Lydia is also correct in that the Multiplex CAG and SC have held more open meetings than some other projects and issues which City Hall is addressing. There was a good turn out Monday night of interested people not on committees or staff, so the word did get out somehow. It was actually better attended than some other meetings which have been better publicized. Let's keep interested and insist on more open, public meetings in the future.

[Lydia]

Referendum or No Referendum

Okay Folks, Let’s talk about this. On January 26, 2006, the Discussions on the LVEC and the Multiplex issues were continued during Council Meeting. I cannot speak about what happened during the Tuesday 24, 2006 meeting because I was not there.

There was a Hugh conflict between Rick Downes and Kevin George. Rick had to be on something when he spoke that night because he was WAYYYYYYYYYYY OF BASE.

1: Spoke about the fact that the Multiplex was going to be private. (THIS HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED BY ANYONE BY THE, CAG, THE STEERING GROUP, OR THE TECHNICAL GROUP).

(Leonore Foster stated she could care less if it was Private or Public as long as the CITIZENS of this city got what they wanted) Okay Folks do you agree with that or not? Personally I do agree with that because any venue that brings tourists into this city is great news to business here.

2: Rick Brought up the concept of having a Referendum on the LVEC.
(Leonore Foster stated that there should not be one due to the fact that this was a project. If there is going to be a referendum on the LVEC then EVERY PROJECT THAT WILL TAKE PLACE IN THIS CITY SHOULD ALSO HAVE REFERENDUMS.) Okay Folks do you agree with that?

3: Rick decided to recite This Little Piggy when to Market.
(Mayor Harvey recited another poem, which I cannot remember) Okay Folks does this sound like something that should be done during business of Council?

4: Rick Stated his position on the Multiplex being Private. Stated that in areas that had private rinks the children went to the new rinks instead of the old ones and those older rinks did close. He stated that the children where the rinks closed became Charity Cases and had to beg the Private Company for admission to the New Rinks or for *****er rates.
(Do you believe that if a Private Company builds and operates this Multiplex that your children will become Charity Cases?)

5: Rick asked the question “If this Multiplex gets build in the West end does that mean that for the next 40 to 50 years that a multiplex would not be build in the city or the east end?” (Great question now turn it around does that mean that if the Multiplex or LVEC is build in the city does that mean in the next 40 to 50 years a Multiplex or LVEC won’t be build in the west or east end?)

6: Rick keeps saying that the rinks will be closed. NOTHING HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE CAG, STEERING OR TECHNICAL GROUP.

7: Rick believes that people around the 401 are WAYYYYYYYYYYY UP THERE and that it is too far to go. (Interesting concept when you learn that people from Penegan travel to Etobicoke to work DAILY. Interesting when you learn that people who live in Brampton travel an hour to go to Square One to shop DAILY) I can get from the Bath to the 401 in the Joyceville area in less than a half our. Don’t find anything WAYYYYYYYYYYY OUT THERE in this city.

8: Rick stated that building the Multiplex by the 401 would ONLY bring visitors who would use our highways and our infrastructure which as taxpayers we pay for. ( I agree these people will do just that however so DO TOURISTS WHO SPEND MONEY HERE) These tourists will also spend GST, PST, and purchase products from us. (Okay folks do we want people to come here and find that it JUST MIGHT BE A GREAT PLACE TO MAKE HOME once they see that we are accommodating?)

8: Kevin George stated that he found Rick calling the people who do not live “”downtown” people who live in the boonies. (As if living in the boonies is something to be ashamed off). Do you believe that people who do not live “downtown” people who live in the boonies? (Of course if you live in Toronto and Montreal then you might consider Kingston is a Boonie? However only people who have to put people’s addresses down are ignorant. Also just maybe the people in the boonies are better off than the ones in the city? I personally don’t know because I lived in both places and found that people live where they live because of circumstances of life, career, children, wealth hobbies, etc.)

I wonder if the people who live close to the 401 consider themselves boonie people? Or do they consider themselves people who live in the CITY OF KINGSTON? I am sure that these people will truly want to spend THEIR MONEY and Taxes to support us after Rick’s name-calling.

I have to admit that I personally would never want to have a referendum on EVERY project in this city. Even thought I have to admit that I want one on the LVEC. (Could I be WRONG for wanting one and could I be WRONG for not wanting my tax dollars spent on referendums for all projects)

Kevin has been attacked by members of this city and told that they will never see him as Mayor of this city. That is fine and these people don’t have to vote for him. However attacking him for voting not to have a referendum because he knows that this city has been struggling with the LVEC and Multiplex sense 2001 and both the Pittsburg community stated they didn’t want them and also the Friends of the Memorial Center stated this as well.

I wonder what Wayne Gretsky would say about all this. He learned his skill in his back yard on a location Pond where HIS FATHER AND MOTHER supported him. I also wonder where were the people of the city when they know about their rinks being uncared for. Why didn’t they fight with the city for maintaining them?

Brings us back to the original question about location for the Multiplex.
1: Alcan won’t sell to the City anymore property for this kind of development
2: The people who presented their RPFs wanted the location in SARA MEER’S DISTRICT NOT KEVINS
3: City already owns this property, won’t be closing businesses to get it build

Rick has not attended every meeting between the CAG, STEERING and TECHNICAL groups. When he states that he does not even want anything to read about the RFPS coming to his home then I ask what is he making his decisions on???

I truly believe that Rick Works very very hard for the people who he represents. It may not sound as if I think Rick is a great councilor. I actually think he is a Great Councilor. I just think that he has another agenda which I don’t know about.

If he is only attacking the location just because it is WAYYYYYYY OUT THERE or that it is in the West end then SMARTEN UP. Instead of putting down Districts this city has to learn to RESPECT EVERY DISTRICT IN THIS CITY.

[Lydia]

The Issue of the LVEC and the Multiplex has been around since 2001. The first time it was being offered to the Pittsburg Township and the people decided NO.

The Friends of Memorial Centre stated that they were NOT interested in having 4 ice pads and a swimming pool there either.

The Alcan Corporation said they would not sell any more property for this kind of development.

Fortun Crescent and the 401 has been chosen because it IS THE BEST LOCATION for the Multiplex. Did anyone ever think that this site was chosen by the Developers FOR A REASON??? Developers will only choose a location to MAKE MONEY. Just maybe that is why it was not chosen down town?

I agree with Vicki Schmolka the Box Stores will benefit greatly from it being there. Maybe this is because the businesses downtown and residents there did NOTHING TO STOP THE ISSUE OF PARKING FOR FREE so that people from the northern part of the city, and the western part of the city could go and SHOP downtown. It all stems from the Parking Issue. If Brockville and Belleville can make it more attractive to shop for free why couldn't the merchants down town Kingston do the same? Why didn't the residents of down town tell the Council that parking was not a problem for them? You can't have people coming down town and then tell them that you don't want them down town.

Since businesses tried to come into the city and were greeted with the same friendless that is show by the downtown people towards the township people, these businesses decided it would be best to be out the west end due to the fact that THERE ARE NO PLACES DOWN TOWN to build Multiplexes, Box Stores, etc. Heck take a look at the LVEC which we have all dealt with first on Anglin Bay and Now the North Block. Very very few people are happy about that.

People in the city tell us NO WAY ARE THEY EVER GOING TO GO OUT TO A MULTIPLEX ON FORTUNE CRESCENT NEAR THE 401. Okay, I guess that should mean THAT THE 55,000 PEOPLE IN THE WEST END SHOULD EVER GO DOWNTOWN TO THE LVEC??? Do you people not find that kind of reasoning absolutely STUPID. US VERSUS THEM mentality.

I will go downtown to the LVEC and I will go to the Multiplex as well. The people with the US Versus Them mentality can all stay home. The Mutliplex will bring in tourists and help the FAMILY business in the West end and not just the Box Stores. The LVEC will be great for down town because it will show cases the businesses down town and also bring in Tourists. Or is that people AGAIN don't want tourist to come in like they didn't want the business to come in?

It seems to me that people in the city were all upset with the Kingston Stopping Center's changes because it was not all under one roof. I am old enough to remember when people were ALL upset to even having Shopping Centers. Probably the same people who are against Box Stores.

Why were the Wally Elmer and the other arenas NOT MAINTAINED? What was your first clue that they were NOT MAINTAINED? Why didn't the people down town fight to have them maintained? What makes people think that if the Multiplex was placed there that it would be maintained over the next 50 to 60 years? Why did the charitable auctions help out in maintaining these arenas?

The reason to build a Multiplex is because these arenas were allowed to be destroyed instead of maintained the ENTIRE city now has to pay more taxes to keep them safe. When Napanee can have a more modern facility than Rich Kingston does then there is something wrong.

[beehummingbird]

memorial centrenot maintained - rinks not maintained.Makes you wonder what else isn't being maintained doesn't it?

[beehummingbird]

City Hall is not being maintained. Looked at the carpets lately?

[Lydia]

You are correct Bee. Our City Hall and other important buildings could and should be spruced up. However i do believe that this council has taken steps to do just that.

Of course, we must keep in mind that the Prime Minister's Home in Ottawa isn't up to standards that our own homes are either.

Makes we wonder where are our taxes actually going?

[Lydia]

I agree with Howard Stone on how Council has arranged for the public to “ be lulled into believing that the projects are presented in a public way and at the same time fully ignoring what the public is and will say about the projects””

I agree that is done by setting up Citizen Advisory Groups and then ignoring or choosing to not inform these Citizens in the group on the exact processes happening. Example the CAG did not have a say in the location for the Multiplex.

You are correct when you say the Committee Chairs are the ones who are rubber stamping these projects and the only way out is “IF OTHER COUNCILORS CHOOSE NOT TO COMPLY”


Maybe it is time to go back to Committee of the Whole system, where the Public always had an opportunity for input at the Committee of the whole meeting and the subsequent Council Meeting held for final approval.

I have always said that projects should be done in brain storming fashion where the advantages and disadvantages should be presented. Allowing the public to indicate exactly where they stand on the issues. Then having Council rubberstamping the public’s will because these Councilors would then be acting like a Board of Directors.

The taxpayers should have the right to call the councilors on their positions. Therefore I still believe that the public will have the opportunity to have our say on both the LVEC and the Multiplex.

Referendums on all projects. Is a red herring or is it? The question still remains. If you call referendum on the Multiplex then why not on every project that ever comes our way.

Like you said: Re: Location of Multiplex Normally, a city would determine a location based on need , geography, future growth patterns traffic patterns and the need to
upgrade facilities, normal planning processes together with the normal constraints of the process. Do any of us know that this was not taken into consideration by the developers? Didn’t the Rights for Information process get posted for the public to indicate that they wanted information on the building of this Multiplex? Where were the people that wanted the multiplex placed somewhere else?

If only the people who asked for this applied and then only the few of them actually submitted RPFs then who are we to judge their selection? I believe that it would not matter if the developer or city staff members made the choice we still would be unhappy with the location.


At the Multiplex Meeting on Wed Feb.1 2006, Commissioner Beach confirmed that the new location is cast in concrete. This is in spite of the fact that the general public had no input. This was also the position of the Citizen Advisory Group as well. I for one indicated that I was not happy with that and that I wanted them to tell us where they would want it instead. I wanted them to tell us where they wanted it and No body stood up to tell us.

I agree fully that the real problem that has not been tackled by the City is the debate between Community based Arenas and. Large Centralized Multiplexes or a combination
thereof. ( really an economic analysis). Frequent users have been asked but not the general public who fund and support the Arenas. The question has not been addressed by the taxpayers and it needs to be aired publicly.

Thank God for Sara Meers who does understand the problems associated with poverty and the need for organized activities in North Kingston area. She will make it happen.


The Multiplex will be build on City Owned or Private Lands. That we all know. The Question becomes “Will it be least expensive to build on property that we already own or go out the purchase lands from private businesses and homeowners?” Both options will increase my taxes and therefore it does not matter to me personally. Would I want to have the Multiplex and the LVEC taking my taxes. HELL NO. I would prefer to have my taxes be used for infrastructure instead. However, I didn’t have a say in deciding which projects were going to be tackled first.

The question also comes to mind is whether this city truly wants industrial growth and taxation. Where in this city can industry grow? Where in this city will the public be happy to see growth develop and expand because it seems to be that the public does not want urban sprawl.


The taxpayers did come out and state that they didn’t want the Multiplex on Memorial Centre Property. They didn’t want the 4 ice pads and 50 meter pool. They won their fight because now they are becoming vibrant and good for them. They will be the ones deciding what they want. I total would have loved to have seen the Multiplex placed on the Memorial Centre Property, however, I am not a resident of their district and I will respect their decision on what they want.


The friends of memorial centre will never allow their arena to be sold and neither will anyone that I know off will allow that to happen either. Their residents have stood up and became accountable. As a resident in another district I will personally support their cause.

Personally on the topic of the Downtown group owning all of Council, it may happens and then the Township will just de-amalgamate and create it’s own city instead. Don’t forget the Townships never wanted to join. It is time for all of us to realize that We are a CITY, like it or not. Trust me there are just as many people in the city as in the townships who would prefer that not to be the case.

It is interesting to learn about the two hotels, two office buildings and 5 fast food restaurants on a 32 acre Industrial site being located just north of the Multiplex site.

Thanks to Jim Butler who has indicated that the city is working on servicing another 59 acres and purchasing priviately held property. I personally believe that Jeff Garrah as Acting Chief of Kedco is indicating that if this city is to grow instead of declining in growth , we will need to make this city attractive to industries to come here. The same thing happened to Brampton, Ontario. That is why I keep asking this question “Do we want this city to grow or not?”. We need to be very careful for what we ask for.

In order for Kedco or any other association to attract any industry we need to make Kingston attractive place to come.

[Lydia]

Zoning Amendment of the Multiplex Site

The site chosen for the Multiplex is located at the corner of Gardiners Road and Fortune Crescent. The site is currently zoned as industrial. The zoning by-law states that the site can be used for public use however it specifically excludes arenas. Staff has applied for an amendment to the zoning by-law to accommodate the Multiplex.

The Multiplex Steering Committee will be hosting an Open House to receive comments on the zoning amendment application on Wednesday March 22nd from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at 1425 Midland Avenue. A Statutory Public Meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday April 20th at Kingston City Hall in Council Chambers

The zoning amendment would allow for an arena along with the potential for a free-standing restaurant, offices, meeting rooms, a clinic, a pro shop and a coffee shop

Meeting dates and General Information

A survey specific to ice usage will be distributed on Monday, March 20th to user groups.

A similar survey specific to pool usage will also be distributed on Monday March 20th to user groups.

Both surveys will be available at the Zoning Amendment Open House scheduled for March 22nd and will be on the City’s Web Site. Surveys must be returned by March 29th. They can be dropped off at the Open House on March 29th (details below) or faxed to 542-1332 attention: Christy Moreland.

The Multiplex Steering Committee will be hosting a Public Open House on March 29th from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at Portsmouth Olympic Harbour to receive input on both ice and pool usage.

A Community Advisory Group meeting is being scheduled for March 30th from 7:00-9:00 at City Hall, in the Loyalist Room.

A Multiplex Steering Committee Meeting will be held on April 3rd from 7:00-9:00 at the Portsmouth Olympic Harbour.

[clio44]

Hi all, I just joined this group :)
I'll let you know straight-out why I'm here: I would like people to be aware of the sports Kingston has been overlooking for many years...... namely tennis.
Now, granted I come from the Niagara Region, where every city and their dog has a city-financed indoor tennis club, even the ones 1/4 the size of Kingston. Do you know that Kingston tennis lovers have to drive to Belleville if they want to play indoor tennis in the winter? That's a pretty hefty drive. I was reading this thread and a letter sent on behalf of those asking for a 50m pool, and I'm all for it, but it seems to me they still have it better off than those of us wishing to play our sport for more than a few months...... I could be wrong. After all, stand up for your sport, right?
Anyways, I've contacted Mayor Rosen on this matter, and his cronies--sorry!--assistants essentially told me they're a little busy what with the LVEC/Multiplex, etc..... where they are going to be building hockey rinks. How many? 4, so they can have tournaments. Okay, I understand the Memorial Centre's crumbling and we don't want to let hockey die in our city (go Hockeyville/Kingston!), however, could we not build one of the two and use that extra cash/loan/debt to build something to house all the sports that are being left behind? Like, swimming, tennis, curling.....
Call me old-fashioned, but I'd much rather have a city that encouraged expanding horizons, learning new sports and having fun, rather than a single competitive sport. But I realize that's just me.
I did a little research before e-mailing the mayor, and I wanted to share my results with all of you so that I don't just seem like a whiner. First of all, let me say in the responses I got from the mayor's assistants, they gave me a nice list of the 33 tennis courts in Kingston -- all outdoors. Here's the problem:
"I researched statistics about Kingston from The Weather Network, and
found that out of 214 possible days between April and the end of October, 80 of them had precipitation of over 0.2 mm, with 34 of those days being over 5 mm of rain. It is fairly safe to say that after a bout of rain measuring over 5 mm, it will take an extra day to dry up the courts if a court-dryer is not employed. Estimating that half of those 34 days were in a row, let's say that 16 non-raining days were lost due to wetness on the courts. Those 16 days in addition to the original 80 days of rain, makes 96 days whereby outdoor tennis courts in Kingston are useless. Out of the 214 possible days, that leaves 118 days of use (only 55% of total, even excluding winter months!). That means the courts are usable 32% of the year, whereas the indoor facilities are usable..... well, 100%. Surely it is clear how much we could use these facilities." That was before last summer's ridiculous heat wave, which I hadn't accounted for in the greatly over-estimated estimate and incapacitated us tennis afficionados for the majority of that 32%. Twice I even took a digital thermometre outside out of curiosity and it got fried (I don't think it was really 47.5 degrees Celsius, but hey, if it was, it proves my point even more :rolleyes: ), so on those days people really shouldn't even be outside for more than they need to be, let alone playing a taxing sport..... Anyways.

Here's a quote I like:
"The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and, if they can’t find them, make them." -- George Bernard Shaw

And so I am here.

Laura a.k.a. clio44

[Lydia]

Well folks, Don't we all feel better to know where the process is regarding the Multiplex? I don't know about you people but i get more confused everyday about it. So i decided to go to the meeting April 3, CAG meeting.

During the meeting Cynthia Beach explained how things were proceeding with the FOUR ICE PADS. It was very impressive. It was the first time that I learned about the MHPM Project Management group. I learned that Lucas Smith from the Kingston branch of the MHPM group was going to dealing with the Multiplex project. I am not complete sure if Cynthia or Lucas are hiring an Architect to design this building. I wondered why so i called the New Administrative Assistant Christy Moreland. She was actually a very pleasant and helpful representative. She was truthful and because she didn't know the answers to my questions she got Lucas Smith to call me. What a delightful experience having someone with respect tell the truth and actually get someone who could help me, for that I am very thankful to Christy.

My question was about the process so far, First the RFI (Rights for Information) Second RFP (Rights for Proposal), Now i thought it was time for tender process. However, during an open house, I thought that Cynthia said there would be no need for tenders because an Architect was not involved and that everything so far would be done in house. Lucas did clearify things for me, Normally an Architect is hired to create a project then tenders would be accepted and the best and lowest bidder would be accepted. However, doing it the RFI, RFP, process, the Architect is only going to be hired to design the project from the information obtained from the RFPs.

So as you see I am probably still very confused.

During the CAG meeting, the Advisory Group members where very upset with the Multiplex's progress so far. The issues that came up are:

1: Since all the information has been dealing with the 4 ice pads, what has been done with the 50 meter pool? Apparently the 50 Meter pool has been put on the back burner, the technical group has been waiting apparently for the Pool Users to submit a business plan of some kind. They do have the YMCA's plan but not for a 50 Meter pool. (Don't quote me on that because I am not complete sure what the YMCA's plan is) Still after all these months the only thing that seems to have a life is the FOUR ICE PADS.

2: Two GAC members are still very upset with the location. Last Year, Howard Stone actually indicated that there is a cost to using up Industrial property. The GAC members were told that there was no cost to the property because it was already City owned. However, the media did indicated that ONE MILLION dollars was the cost. Confused again, Is there or is there NOT a cost. Cynthia did say that of course the one million dollars would be a cost that would pertain to the Multiplex, everything has a cost.

3: One GAC member spoke up beautifully told Cynthia that the GAC group was not an advisory group for 4 ICE PADS, He stated that this GAC group WAS an advisory group for the MULtiplex, not just ice. God bless this gentleman because even thought his heart is for the ice pads and his love for his community group, he cared about the other sport. Thank you Thank you Thank you.

4: Orginally there were 16 members of the public who indicated that they would like to be on the GAC group. However, council decided to vote only 12 or 13. Mark Fluhrer, God Bless him, stated that the CAG group for the Multiplex was going to be very open and that they other 3 members not chosen would be able to attend meetings even if they didn't have a vote on issues. Now however, there are only 9 members left. One new members is Linda Whitfield, who was not elected but whom I believe should definately be elected to sit as a CAG member. I was one of the originally three who was not elected and even if i was asked would not have agreed to sit on the board. Having said that I believe that the other 2 members who were not elected should have been contacted and asked if they would want to sit as CAG members now. I was told that council should now elect new people to sit in on the CAG group. I am sorry but that actually stinks as far as i am concerned. People of the community who have volunteered to help on committees should have FIRST CHOICE, otherwise the council will only elect people who they think will further there choices and not the public's.

Having said that, understand that even when councilors choose the people on the Advisory Groups for the LVEC and the Multiplex, these councilors are not really listening to the people THEY chose. If i am wrong, show me. That is the reason I won't volunteer to sit on the commitees, why bother.

Okay Pool people, If you truly truly want that 50 Meter Olympic pool, submit YOUR BUSINESS PLANS. Alex Palilionis has been the most out spoken and supportive of anyone in this city for this pool. Time for the rest of the Olympic supporters to show up with business plans, etc. Time for them to contact Cynthia and the technical group and get involved with the plans for the 50 meter pool. I find it very hard to understand why that was not done earlier, however, Did i mention to you that I am confused about the progress so far???? lol lol

Now, I did mention on here that Premier Fitness was going to put in an Olympic size pool at the old Walmart location. Alex, thought that I was saying that would be no need for a pool at the Multiplex. Sorry Alex, that was NOT my intention at all. What I found very odd is that nothing was told to the public about any kind of Olympic pool coming to Kingston. Apparently this was so secret that even the Rio Can group didn't know about it. Apparently even the Technical group didn't know about it. Isn't it interesting that the CKWS knew about it. However, Alex has stated that the pool that Premier Fitness was going to build, along with water slides isn't what the Olympic members are looking for. Did I mention that I am now confused???


The meeting ended again without participation from the public because Floyd Patterson didn't allow for time from the public to ask questions. Oh well so be it. In his defence however, he did introduce the members of the public who did show up.

[Exhibitionist]

(request for proposal)

[Lydia]

Welcome Laura, Thank you for your input, You have illustrated the need for different types of activities that should be considered at a Multiplex. NOT JUST ICE. I am impressed with your love of Tennis, Your ability to size up the croanies (opps) for what they are, Your Ability to see through the crap that City hall gives when it deals with anything other than ice.

Just remember this motto " The squeeky wheel gets more oil." What it means is this: If you speak up more often, people will want to SHUT YOU UP (just like what they want me to do) therefore they will at least listen and then try to SHUT YOU UP. (at least you can make your point with the hope that someone, someday will help) Of course this does make me a whiner. I figure if you see a baby whinning, you at least try to figure out how to help the baby. Just maybe it will help us. lol lol.

If you can gather a group of people that can make a presentation to the councilors in your areas, just maybe they might listen then. Go get them, girl and good luck.

Again Welcome aboard.