|
1.
Multi
Purpose Sport Development and Training Facility Installation
d’entraînement et de perfectionnement sportif |
Committee
Recommendations as amended
That Council:
1.
Receive for
information the Feasibility Study for a Multipurpose Sport Development and
Training Facility prepared by the consulting firm of DMA Planning &
Management Services. (Annex A-
Executive Summary). The Consultant’s full report will be provided to all
members of Council under separate cover.
2.
Approve, in principle,
the option of developing a multisport center in the City of Ottawa.
3.
Direct staff to
proceed with a detailed business plan including: an evaluation of the financial
feasibility of this option (senior levels of government and public-private
partnerships); a review of existing models of delivery; identification of
capital and operating requirements; identification of the facility, program and
budget requirements for consideration in the 2003 budget process.
4.
Approve, as part of
the business plan development, a public participation process, building on the
dialogue established in the earlier phase and close cooperation amongst the
sports groups.
5. Direct
staff to ensure this worthwhile project does not lead to pre-empting or
deferring previously approved capital priorities or key legacy projects from
the former municipalities that are being priorized for the 2002 and 2003
capital budget cycle.
Que le Conseil
municipal :
1.
prenne connaissance de l’étude de
faisabilité sur une installation d’entraînement et de développement multisports
préparée par la société d’experts-conseils de DMA Planning & Management
Services. (Annexe A- Sommaire
exécutif). Le rapport intégral de
l’expert-conseil sera transmis à tous les membres du Conseil sous pli séparé;
2.
approuve en principe, l’option
d’aménagement d’un centre multisports dans la ville d’Ottawa;
3.
enjoigne le personnel à procéder à
un plan d’affaires détaillé, y compris : une évaluation de la faisabilité
financière de cette option (paliers supérieurs de gouvernement et partenariats
publics et privés); un examen des modèles de prestation de services actuels; la
détermination des besoins en matière d’immobilisations et de fonctionnement; la
détermination des exigences relatives à l’installation, au programme et au
budget pour examen lors du processus budgétaire de 2003;
4.
approuve,
dans le cadre de l’élaboration du plan d’affaires, un processus de
participation du public qui s’appuie sur le dialogue établi lors de la phase
antérieure et sur une collaboration étroite entre les groupes sportifs.
5. donne
instruction au personnel de veiller à ce que ce projet valable ne donne pas
lieu au déplacement ou au report de priorités en matière d’immobilisations ou
de projets commémoratifs clés des anciennes municipalités qui sont priorisés
pour le budget d’immobilisations de 2002 et 2003.
Documentation
1. General
Manager, People Services Department report dated 14 January 2002 is immediately
attached (ACS2002-PEO-IDP-0003)
2. Extract of Draft Minute, 7 February
2002, will be circulated prior to the Council meeting.
Report to/Rapport
au:
Health, Recreation
and Social Services Committee
Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services
sociaux
and Council/et au Conseil
14 January 2002/le 14 janvier 2002
Submitted
by/Soumis par: Dick Stewart, General
Manager/Directeur général
Contact/Personne-ressource: Josée Hélie, Program Manager, Planning and
Development
Innovation,
Development and Partnerships
Gestionnaire, / Planification et développement
Innovation, développement et partenariat
|
|
|
Ref N°: ACS2002-PEO-IDP-0003 |
SUBJECT: Multipurpose
Sport Development and Training Facility
OBJET: Installation d'entraÎnement et de
perfectionnement sportif À usages multiples
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That
the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend Council:
Que le Comité de la santé, des
loisirs et des services sociaux recommande au Conseil municipal :
4. d’approuver, dans le cadre de l’élaboration du plan d’affaires, un processus de participation du public qui s’appuie sur le dialogue établi lors de la phase antérieure et sur une collaboration étroite entre les groupes sportifs.
In 2001, the Department was asked to undertake a feasibility study for an indoor track and field study. Given the time constraints and a wish to be cost effective, the Department prepared Terms of Reference for a high level study for such a facility in order to determine its viability and potential costs.
Recommendation 1
The consulting firm of DMA Planning & Consulting Services were engaged to prepare the feasibility study and delivered their report to staff in October 2001. The full report has been circulated under separate cover to Committee members and the Executive Summary is contained in Annex A of this report.
Recommendation 2
As stated earlier, this study began as a facility that would provide primarily an indoor training and possibly, space to host competitions for the track and field community. As the study progressed and validation of the need confirmed, it became apparent that while taking into consideration the number of users to be served, the cost associated with such a facility (with or without partners) and the mandate of the Department, justification and support for such a facility could prove to be extremely limited. As a result, the scope of the investigation was broadened to include areas of program-delivery deficiency (and as a result, infrastructure deficiency) in the Department and new initiatives being developed at the national and provincial sport governing bodies.
The multi-purpose development and training facility would encompass not only the track and field community (both able-bodied and disabled), but also an array of other sports users that could include rugby, soccer, rowing, basketball, volleyball etc. The facility would become the center for sports skill development, from the early introductory level to the advanced, provide the venue and equipment for training and conditioning for a variety of sports that have many common requirements and capitalize on the new opportunity being offered to establish Regional sport development centers for coaching excellence. Additionally, opportunities also abound for use by variety of different clients, from those simply wishing to maintain a healthy lifestyle through physical activity to use by clients requiring rehabilitation from health problems and/traumas.
It is therefore recommended that rather than further define primarily an indoor track and field facility, that the project be broadened to include a multi-disciplinary facility, accommodating a variety of sports users and individuals pursuing a healthy lifestyle.
Recommendation 3
The feasibility study provides base information for such a facility concept and rationale, but prior to making any decision, additional details are required. It is therefore being recommended that a business plan be undertaken, providing specifics in the following areas:
(a) Financial Partnership Opportunities
The project intent is to establish a facility with substantial funding emanating from both the public sectors (federal and provincial i.e. national sport bodies) and the private/corporate sectors. Investigation must be pursued to determine the funds available for such a project, which in turn will assist in the determination of groups to be accommodated.
(b) Existing Models
The business plan would include a review of other similar facilities throughout North America and beyond to confirm the validity of such a concept, appropriate mix of users and spaces, operating and management scenarios being used etc. Review of past experiences, successes and concerns will assist the City in preparing a successful City of Ottawa model.
(c) Capital and Operating requirements
The preparation of a budget will detail the capital funding requirements from all partners, as well as the operating costs implications for the City and other partners.
(d) Facility and Program Plan
Depending on funding opportunities and the determination of sport disciplines that can easily co-exist and flourish, the layout and space requirements will be identified and detailed. Furthermore, a plan will be prepared presenting how each group will access and interact with one-another, the spaces and programs to be offered, private sector components etc.
The intent is to complete the business plan in time for the 2003 budget discussions.
Recommendation 4
Throughout the development of the initial feasibility study, an extremely productive dialogue has been established with an array of sports community representatives and individuals. It is proposed that their close involvement and participation continue into this phase, working with these groups and any others expressing interest.
Two public meetings (July 26th and November 22nd) were held throughout this study, as well as a series of interviews with stakeholders. Both meetings were advertised in the Ottawa Citizen, the Sun and Le Droit. The consultant’s final report was presented at the November, 2001 public meeting, where those in attendance (approximately 55) expressed support for a new Multipurpose Sport Development and Training Facility.
Discussions developed concerning the specifics of the proposed project such as which groups can and cannot be accommodated, the details of the track etc. Answers to those questions will be part of the business plan being proposed.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Costs associated with the detailing of the business are to be comprehended in the Department’s 2002 budget submission.
ATTACHMENT
Annex A: Consultant’s Study Executive Summary
Peoples Services Department will be responsible for the implementation of the Business Plan.
Annex A-Executive Summary
MULTI-PURPOSE
SPORT DEVELOPMENT and TRAINING FACILITY
The City of Ottawa contracted with dmA Planning & Management Services to undertake a feasibility study for a multi-purpose sport development and training facility. The study assesses the market for an indoor track and field training facility and recommends an appropriate approach to providing such a facility in Ottawa.
The process included:
§ A review of relevant trends;
§ Preparation of a community profile;
§ A review of similar facilities across the country;
§ Preparation of a market profile and service direction;
§ Consultation; and
§ The development of a facility concept, business plan and implementation plan.
The majority of indoor track and field facilities are currently provided by, or in partnership with, Universities or other non-municipal providers (i.e. Canadian Forces Bases, or a legacy from hosting international competitions such as Commonwealth Games). There is some indication that larger municipalities are now beginning to provide these facilities independently.
Most major centers have indoor facilities, including Halifax, Moncton, Quebec City, Seabrook, Montreal, Kingston, Toronto, London, Windsor, Petawawa, Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Edmonton and Calgary.
The City has a large number of recreational runners but it is unclear whether they would use this facility on a day-to-day basis, particularly if it were not close to their work or home location.
Two key economic drivers in support of such a facility are:
Such a facility would support the City’s economic development goals as well as providing marketing potential.
The new City’s service delivery model for recreation supports the integration of services and promotes a continuum of service from introductory, intermediate and advanced skill development and competition. Priority programs to be funded from the tax base are the introductory and general skill development end of the continuum. The advanced /competitive programs would receive less tax support and would be funded through partnerships.
It became quite clear that a business case analysis would not support a stand-alone facility for solely track and field, nor for one combined with an indoor soccer field at the center of the track. Instead, the approach taken was to examine and evaluate a Multi-Sport Development and Training Facility.
The National Sport Centre-Ontario (NSCO) is part of a network of multi-sport development and service centers across Canada. These centers are designed to contribute toward enhanced training environments for current and potential high performance athletes and coaches. While these centers are service networks and not facility-specific, there may be an opportunity to combine the services of such a center within a Sport Development Facility.
The market for a sport training and development facility involves the entire spectrum of service delivery, including:
§ All levels of sport development and training;
§ Opportunities for coaching development;
§ Participation by the health maintenance sector; and
§ The rehabilitation market and recreational programming.
The market includes the advanced athlete in a variety of sports and the City’s core service market, i.e. children’s camps, coaching development training, skill development workshops, school use etc.
|
City Capital Cost: |
Estimate $25-$30 Million |
|
City Net Operating Costs: |
Estimate $590,000 annually |
|
Preferred sites: |
Terry Fox Athletic Facility adjacent to the Outdoor Track or Ben Franklin Park |
|
Benefits: |
§ Prestige, highly visible. §
The City has full control as sole owner and § Athletes have maximum access. § The amount of training time, opportunity to reduce capital and operating costs with partnerships with other sport governing bodies, private sector service providers, selling of naming rights etc |
|
Limitations: |
City assumes most of the capital and operating costs. |
|
City Capital Cost: |
To be negotiated; could range between $10-13 Million |
|
City Net Operating Costs: |
None. The University is solely responsible. |
|
Site: |
Carleton University Campus |
|
Benefits: |
§ Annual operating cost required from the City. |
|
Limitations: |
|
1. If the City pursues a stand-alone facility, the most appropriate site (of those evaluated) is adjacent to the Terry Fox Athletic Centre or the Ben Franklin Park site.
2. The City should develop, in partnership with others as appropriate and available, a multi-purpose sport training and development center to respond to the needs and interest of a wide range of compatible sports. Further, this facility should support in its services and partnerships, the development of coaching excellence, integration of wellness initiatives, and opportunities for athlete training at the introductory, intermediate and advanced training levels.
3. Before proceeding with the development of a multipurpose sport development and training center, the City should review the space needs of all major indoor sport groups to confirm space requirements.
4. The City should meet with Carleton University to determine the degree to which the directions of both organizations can be accommodated in one center.
5. City Staff and Elected Officials should initiate discussions with potential significant partners at the local, provincial and national levels, to identify funding and operating partner opportunities.
1. Review of Feasibility Study by Committee and City Council.
2. Confirmation of service delivery approach.
3. Confirmation of appropriate partners.
4. Confirmation of facility components.
5. Confirmation of capital costs and capital funding commitments.
6. Confirming operating and service structure.
7. Approval of capital and operating budgets.
8. Design, tendering and development.
MULTI PURPOSE SPORT DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING FACILITY
Installation d'entraÎnement et de
perfectionnement sportif À usages multiples
ACS2002-PEO-IDP-0003
Colleen Hendrick, Director, Innovation Development and Partnerships, provided the Committee with an overview of the staff report.
Councillor Bloess asked what the actual cost of the study would be. Ms. Hendrick advised that staff had estimated it could cost in the neighbourhood of $40,000 to $45,000 to develop the detailed business plan to the degree necessary. Councillor Bloess stated he had received the impression from the report that there was hesitation on the part of staff to look at Carleton University as the most viable option for partnering. Ms. Hendricks responded that the initial intent of the facility was for an indoor track and field facility that Carleton was looking at as a partnership and staff were not recommending this. However, as stated in the report, staff are suggesting that the City go back to Carleton University to discuss a potential partnership in the new multi-sport facility. Councillor Bloess noted Carleton had announced earlier in the week, that they are trying to fast-track an athletic facility they are building and he stated he would hate the City to miss the opportunity to either add on to that or benefit from it.
The Councillor observed that what started out primarily as a track and field facility had been expanded to include other users. He asked if there was a danger of the dilution of what the facility is suppose to be. Ms. Hendrick noted staff recognized that in the community there were opportunities to look at the scale proposed; from a developmental early stage initiation into the area of sports development, right up through to the range of athletic skill expertise. She said this fit with the overall model for the Department in terms of wanting to see whether or not there were opportunities to take a broader approach, rather than focussing on only one area. In addition, staff are of the opinion that the broader focus would increase the viability of securing different levels of public and private involvement. She noted it was staff’s understanding that the general direction at the Federal level was in working towards more of a comprehensive approach and an integrated approach to sports development. Ms. Josée Hélie, People Services Department, added that the challenge of the next phase will be to find the balance where the facility is not made so general that no one can do what they need to do there. She said it will be necessary to find the appropriate mix of sports groups, the time that they need and the facility that they need.
Councillor Deans noted Recommendation 3 speaks to having this prepared for consideration in the 2003 budget process. She asked if staff saw this as being put somewhere in the 10 year capital strategy or were they envisioning that we might be able to fund it in 2003. Ms. Hendrick said the concept has already been identified as part of the Phase 1 facility study and it is recognized as one of the areas of high need. She said in terms of funding, staff envision bringing in the detailed business plan will require some detail around the funding sources. This will be important to have in terms of what staff will be recommending vis-à-vis the City’s role, other sources of funds available at the Federal and potentially the private and other types of partnership opportunities.
Dick Stewart, General Manager, People Services, added that very clearly, Recommendation 3 is indicating that having done the business plan, it will position the City to be able to forecast, in the ten year capital forecast, this project with some estimates of cost. He stated given the circumstances the City is in with respect to the capital affordability envelope, to suggest that the City is going to fund this project in 2003 would be a misrepresentation of the facts.
Councillor Eastman stated he could not recall the Committee directing staff to undertake this study nor could he recall receiving the terms of reference for this study. Ms. Hendrick advised the Committee had not directed staff to do this. She said the concept had been identified in the former City of Ottawa before amalgamation. Councillor Eastman stated that he would have thought if major studies such as this were being undertaken by the City, that the HRSS Committee should be the force that decides if it goes ahead or not. He said although it was an excellent in-depth report, he felt the Committee had been left out of the loop.
The Councillor then noted the report was completed last October and questioned why it was just being considered in February. Mr. Stewart confirmed the report was completed last October but noted there was a public meeting (as the commitment had been made to those who came out to the initial consultation, for some feedback) and staff received the further comments during that feedback session. He said although the report could have been in front of the Committee in January, the Department was experiencing other pressures with respect to the preparation of the budget.
Councillor Harder suggested the City should be looking at a multi-level facility because, if it were built structurally correct, there could be hockey rinks on the bottom, lacrosse above that and a training track on the top floor. The Councillor felt this could generate more interest from the business community. Ms. Hendrick confirmed this was a possibility.
Referencing the study on recreational infrastructure, which the Committee had considered some months earlier, Councillor Doucet said he had expressed concern about small-scale facilities, such as community centres, and was advised at that time that this type of facility would be considered later. He questioned how the two pieces (i.e. this larger piece of infrastructure and the smaller facilities) fit into the picture. Ms. Hendrick replied the initial report on the facilities study provided a background on the distribution and the inventory of existing City facilities. Staff are proposing in the 2002 budget, to proceed with Phase 3 of the facilities study and this phase will finalize the inventory and begin to look at some of the broader facility programs and services in the community. It will be larger than what was done in the first phase and it will be a complementary component of the planning process. She noted staff were still working on the terms of reference for Phase 3. Councillor Doucet stated he would like a written reply explaining how the two things fit together, because he said he did not understand it. The Chair indicated this could be debated later, as there were quite a number of public delegations.
Councillor Chiarelli related a situation in the former City of Nepean, when they considering a facility similar to this. He said in order to maximize the use of the facility during a twelve hour period, Nepean was considering acquiring Confederation High School, which is located next to the Sportsplex and approaching the Ministry of Amateur Sport to ascertain if they would consider operating an academic school for high performance athletes. In this way, the City would have a revenue stream developing from high performance athletic use into the whole complex into the hours when you would normally be down. He asked staff if they had contacted the Ministry responsible for amateur sports at the Federal level and whether staff would be willing to look at whether there was any synergy or feasibility that could come out of that. Ms. Hendrick noted this possibility was addressed in the report (the second point in the report). As well, the Consultant’s report mentions there is a possibility that the school boards may start looking at some specialized fitness and sports related programs and further suggests pursuing the rehabilitation and wellness stream, which could result in heavy daytime that would off-set the downtime.
Councillor Chiarelli offered there was also a lot of sponsorship money that comes through fitness and amateur sport for usage of time and facilities. Ms. Hendrick stated this would be part of what staff will be proposing in the business plan in the detailing, the program and the components that a facility of that nature would deliver. These would be part of the discussions with the Federal, Provincial and other funding bodies.
Councillor Arnold had questions regarding staff’s concept of the profiles of the users of this type of facility. She said from her experience, having been involved in athletics for many years and having had the opportunity to travel around the world and look at various training complexes, these types of facilities, although appropriate for elite athlete training were predominantly used by the general public. Ms. Hendrick replied that initially staff were looking at how this type of facility would respond to gaps and needs that are in the community, that are not necessarily met through the existing facility structure. Iin doing some of the preliminary scoping for this review, the consultants identified the fact that there are increasing numbers of individuals both developmental and right up to the elite, who need access to additional facilities. An example would be the increased number of individuals who use wheel chairs and their need to access other types of facilities. She advised the second phase of the business plan would define and identify concretely who the users would be.
Councillor Arnold stated it would be very helpful to have these details in the next phase. She pointed out the aging population would be one possible user of such a facility (e.g. mall walking clubs). There are other segments of the community that want to be active at different times of the day, but are currently excluded from participation and recreational activity because the facilities are not appropriate.
The Committee then heard from the following public delegations.
Ken Parker, advised he had been active in the Ottawa sports community for the last 26 years as a coach of track and field and basketball, as an athlete, a race director and a sponsor. He said he currently coaches the OAC Racing Team, a woman’s road running and triathlon club. As well, his company, Serious Consulting, currently sponsors a bantam boys basketball team; bantam boys hockey team; Olympic triathlete Sharon Donnelly; and the Serious Sprints (a cross-country ski race to be held in the market on 15 February). Mr. Parker noted he had provided written material to the Committee, together with a petition with 450 signatures (held on file with the City Clerk).
Mr. Parker went on to say there were a number of supporters of this proposal, who were unable to attend the meeting. For example, Leslie Estwick, a former 15-year national team member in track and field, a masters world record holder and a current coach in the Ottawa Track community. Ms. Estwick had to leave the City of Ottawa to stay on the National team because of the lack of training facilities here. As well, Joanne Mortimer, the Chief Operation Officer for Athletics Canada (the National sports governing body for track and field) was unable to attend. He noted Athletics Canada is in the process of moving their headquarters from Toronto back to Ottawa and Ms. Mortimer has expressed an interest in co-locating their national office in a central facility if one were to be built here and trying to have Ottawa designated as a regional training centre. There would be revenue streams possible from both of these initiatives. Mr. Parker advised that Sharon Donnelly, a 1999 Pan Am champion in triathlon and Sydney Olympian, currently lives in Kingston, where there is a multi-sport facility built at the Royal Military College. Ms. Donnelly had relayed to Mr. Parker the need for proper facilities for training in Ottawa.
The speaker stated the issue of an indoor training facility for Ottawa had been ongoing for many years. He advised in the late 1970’s Ottawa was bidding on the Commonwealth Games and it was hoped if the City had won these games, it would receive infrastructure money to build a facility. There was also an attempt to put a dome over the Terry Fox track, however this initiative failed. Mr. Parker felt Ottawa had regressed instead of progressed, as some years ago the City evicted the track and field team from the Coliseum, which had served as a track and field training centre since the early 1970’s.
Mr. Parker went on to speak of the urgent need for this facility and noted the number of users from the many sports could be in the tens of thousands. The sports in support of this proposed indoor facility would include athletics, basketball, soccer, ultimate, triathlon, rugby, bob sled, and more, from both able bodied and wheelchair sports. He said such a facility would serve the residents from across Ottawa, in all age groups and all levels of fitness. He urged the Committee to support this initiative and provide the requested direction to proceed with the next steps in the process.
Gavin Thompson, a member of the Board of Directors of the Ottawa Carleton Ultimate Association, stated he was in charge of the group’s winter activities. He said his association currently uses the Coliseum at Landsdowne Park, but because this facility is in such high demand, it is only able to accommodate approximately 350 of the association’s 4,000 members. Mr. Thompson said the fact that their members play up to 12:30 at night on weekend and midnight on weekdays, demonstrates an urgent need for the proposed facility. He felt that one of the reasons that Council might not be aware of this type of need is because it is not visible. The need for hockey rinks is obvious because hockey rinks are there and people continuously try to book them with no luck, whereas with no such facility in place, it is hard to gauge the need of the community. The speaker also advised this type of facility would allow his association to host more tournaments. He said the Ultimate Association would like to see more competitive tournaments in Ottawa, hosting cities from across Ontario and Quebec.
Councillor Deans asked the delegation how a facility such as this one would rank on the priority list against something like the Ottawa Congress Centre. Mr. Thompson stated he saw this as a profitable source of income for the City. He said currently for the facility at Landsdowne, his association was paying four times what teams pay to rent ice in the City (i.e. approximately $420 per hour) and he believed the cost to the City would be less than that, to run a facility of this type. Mr. Thompson stated he understood there would be a great start up cost but with partnerships and sponsoring, he was of the opinion this could be a valuable source of income for the City.
Phil Marsh, Area Manager for the Running Room, a large running retail company in Canada, advised he had moved here from London, Ontario three and a half ago, was astonished to find out there was no indoor track in Ottawa. He pointed out that London, with a population of less than 400,000, has had an indoor track for 10 years at the University. As well, he noted that Edmonton, with a population of slightly more than 900,000 people in the metro area (compared to Ottawa with a population of approximately 1,010,000) has three indoor tracks and in two of these, the Running Room rents space for retail outlets. He went on to say that the major facility in Edmonton, the Kinsmen Centre, had 800,000 people through its doors last year. It is multi-use facility with indoor tennis courts, pools, recreational and indoor track facility and squash courts. Mr. Marsh felt this addressed the question of financial commitment.
The speaker noted Ottawa has a huge community of runners (predominantly women) and pointed out the events sponsored by the Running Room alone last year had over 40,000 participants. As well, he advised the Ottawa Marathon Race Weekend, raised $1.3 million for charities in the Ottawa area. By having these facilities, events can be brought to the City. Edmonton this past summer hosted the World Championships in Triathlon and the World Championships of Track and Field, which attracted over 400,000 spectators.
Mr. Marsh pointed out almost a thousand people run on the canal every Sunday morning and these people would use this facility, particularly in the wintertime. As well, it could be used for such things as cardiac rehabilitation groups, high school teams, indoor tennis, walkers and runners. He urged the Committee to support this facility, noting Ottawa would have a much more fit community and would develop elite athletes that will put Ottawa back on the world scale.
Colin Tim, Co-president of the Ottawa Lions Track and Field Club, advised he had been a volunteer in the Ottawa sports community for over 17 years and was also the Director of International Programs for Canadian University Sport. In his position of Director, Mr. Tim stated he was responsible for coordinating university teams representing Canada in international competition. With respect to the Ottawa Lions Track and Field Club, Mr. Tim advised this organization provides sports opportunities to over 3,000 participants per season, primarily at the recreational level. Programs are open to all, regardless of age, sex, race, or ability and partnerships were developed with the educational institutions, (i.e. high school, college, and university sectors) to enhance program delivery and physical education curriculum and to provide cooperative educational opportunities. Mr. Tim noted the club hosts a significant number of competitions each year and this summer, in partnership with the City of Ottawa, it will be providing summer multi-sport camps. He said the problem is these activities are restricted to six months of the year.
As leaders in the Ottawa sport community, Mr. Tim stated his club recognizes the need for quality, daily physical activity for all ages and a facility of this type would increase the opportunities for program delivery in the City of Ottawa, throughout the year. It could offer a cross-pollination of services between sports and medical and would provide the City with a major component to achieve the following People Services Department vision statement, “A healthy community that promotes and supports quality of life so citizens can fully participate in and contribute to the life of their community.”
In concluding his remarks, Mr. Tim expressed the Ottawa Lions’ full support for the recommendations contained in the staff report and strongly encouraged the Committee to approve in principle and recommend to Council the option of developing a multi-sport facility in the City of Ottawa. He stated his club looked forward to working with the City to make this opportunity a reality.
Councillor Bloess asked the delegation where his club trained in the wintertime. Mr. Tim advised they train only two evenings a week at the indoor facility at Lansdowne Park. He noted there are the club has expanded and there are scheduling problems.
Ulf Lombrink and Dennis Farris, Co-Chairs, Ottawa Indoor Multi-Sport Facility. Mr. Farris advised this organization had members who represented many sports, including basketball, volleyball, rowing, rugby league, wheel chair sports, Special Olympics, and various running groups. He indicated they were before the Committee to ask that it approve in principle, the development and construction of a multi-sport indoor facility. The speaker stated they envision this facility to be a centre for the youth development in sport; a place for serious athletes to train and be mentors to others; a place where Special Olympics can provide the skills required for the mentally challenged youth and adults; and, a place for wheel chair athletes to train during the winter months.
Mr. Farris went on to say through this facility, children would be exposed to multi-sports giving them the opportunity to see their true potential in sport. It will provide a safe place for the public to walk and jog and seniors to gather, socialize and exercise. The speaker also noted a physiotherapy clinic, a sports retail store, a health food and nutritional-supplement store have expressed interests in renting space within this facility. Through these revenues and the revenues obtained through membership and other sporting club fees, these will go directly towards the operational costs. As well, the economic spin offs to local business, such as restaurants, hotels, and retail stores would be enormous. He urged the Committee to put their support behind this project to build a facility to serve the needs of the many elements of the community.
Mr. Lombrink advised he and Mr. Farris had been pursuing this effort for over two years. He said he found it heart-breaking to see the City’s young athletes train so hard, only to realize that they can’t rise to their full potential due to lack of proper training facilities. This is especially true for track and field in the winter, but the lack of proper of indoor space extends to many other sports as well (e.g. wheel chair athletes). Mr. Lombrink spoke of the need to encourage children to exercise in order to remain healthy later in life. He urged the Committee to support this project and allow it to continue to the next phase.
Councillor Deans asked the delegation how this priority stacked up against the need for an expanded Congress Centre. Mr. Lombrink suggested the two facilities could co-exist. He noted there would be floor space in the proposed facility that could for conferences. Responding to further questions from Councillor Deans, the speaker stated he felt this facility was more important than the Congress Centre, as this facility would directly serve the community. Mr. Farris added this facility will service all levels of the community, from the very young to the very old and by utilizing this facility to its ultimate capacity, it would be in very cost effective.
Councillor Harder, referring to the comments about the Congress Centre, suggested that since both of these opportunities are seeking business partnerships, it could be that the very same business might be contributing to both of these facilities at the same time (e.g. for the health of their employees and their business opportunities). Chair Munter stated he would allow statement to be recorded for the minutes but advised the Committee he would attempt to limit a debate about the Congress Centre.
Stephanie Lombrink advised she was 15 years old and had been in track and field for almost four years. She said although she was not an elite athlete, she trained and competed just as hard and noted with training and school, she did not have the time or desire to experiment with things such as smoking or alcohol. As well, athletics is a great way to deal with all kinds of stress. Ms. Lombrink expressed concern about the lack of space available for kids to join sports teams. She said with the proposed facility many sports and athletes would benefit, e.g. basketball, volleyball, soccer, rugby, football, wheel chair sports, and track and field.
Ms. Lombrink stated it was difficult to practise such things as long jump, triple jump or any of the throws in the winter, so Ottawa athletes are at a disadvantage when competing in winter competitions. Most athletes choose to go to university elsewhere, which puts the athletes who remain here at a further disadvantage because they have very few athletes to compete against and fewer athletes to motivate them in training. She noted the new City of Ottawa has a unique opportunity here to help all of its citizens and she urged the Committee to support this project.
Wes Curran has been involved in sports locally, provincially, nationally and internationally, primarily in rowing. He expressed the belief the City of Ottawa is in dire need of a multi-sport facility. The City does not have an off-season training venue and athletes have to make other arrangements, thereby compromising the proper development of their skills. Bringing multiple sports under one roof provides the opportunity to cross-train and to enhance their programs. Weight lifting is part of a training regime for all sports: properly trained professionals could oversee this training component or an athlete could maintain his or her conditioning level during a rehabilitation period. Mr. Curran said another advantage would be the alliances formed between the different sport disciplines. Training would not be geared only to elite athletes: proper training procedures must be established at an early age. Children develop and acquire techniques that remain throughout their lives. Mr. Curran spoke about hockey, noting that the skating ability of players has improved from the early 1970s and these skills have been developed because of the existence of arenas. With regard to older citizens, many are retiring early and have the desire and the time to compete. Masters competitions are growing in all sports and this component of the population cannot be ignored. People seek advice and counsel from professionals in order to avoid injury. Mr. Curran said they also require proper training facilities in order to approach a sport with determination and conviction. He added that, whether it is elite training or general fitness, these are year-round programs.
With regard to funding, Mr. Curran suggested one method is to rent office space, space to commercial establishments and partnering with various levels of government, educational institutions, and the private sector. Donations to the City should also be explored, with tax receipts issued to the donors. Mr. Curran said many sports organizations in Canadian cities would like to have facilities that American universities now enjoy. He called sports an attractive alternative that offers many benefits. Ottawa is the second biggest metropolitan area in Ontario and the fourth in Canada. He felt the City of Ottawa can and should establish a multi-sports centre for its citizens. Residents should have access to facilities where they can undertake to achieve their personal best.
Sally Thomas spent the last thirteen years living in Ottawa and during this time, has used many of the facilities available to her. She averred there is no multi-sport indoor centre that can compare to the one being proposed in the report. She said she has travelled outside the City and visited other sports centres such as the one in Windsor, for the Windsor Classic Indoor Games, the largest indoor wheel chair sporting event in the world. Ms. Thomas said that she has spent the last eleven years concentrating her efforts on athletics and last year, she decided to pursue power lifting: her goal is to become Canada’s number one female power lifter. Ms. Thomas is a member of the Panthers Athletic Club, established in 1989 for athletes with a physical disability to develop their abilities and skills in the area of track, field, and distance events. She spoke about the importance, when speaking of athletes with a disability, of focusing on their abilities. The Panthers travel across Ontario, Canada, and internationally to compete in athletic events. Competitions range from novice and junior developmental meets, where learning and participation are stressed to high calibre elite competitions where a spot on the National Para Olympic Team might be at stake. All club members gained an appreciation for sports in general and athletics in particular when they enrolled in junior development programs. Once the seed was planted, some decided to move beyond the recreational focus and took an active interest in competitive events.
Five of the club members competed in the Sydney Para Olympic Games in 2000. Of the 96 medals won by Team Canada, four medals were awarded to Panthers Athletic Club athletes. Ms. Thomas said there is no wheelchair accessible indoor track in the City of Ottawa for athletes with a physical disability to train at during the winter season. An indoor facility would help year round cross-training programs for seasoned athletes and also facilitate the development of novice athletes. The Panthers receive many calls from parents who want to introduce their children to sporting program because adapted programs are not usually incorporated into the school curriculum, where their child has been integrated. From November to April, Panther club athletes travel to Windsor and Toronto to take advantage of the indoor facilities and attend developmental and competitive meets. Ms. Thomas said approval of the multi-sport facility will allow the City of Ottawa to host athletes from across the country and the Province to attend indoor events and will generate economic benefits within the community. She added that youth in the community will be encouraged to take advantage of this facility and participate in the programs offered. She noted that, as a certified personal trainer, she tries to emphasize the many benefits of exercise to everyone.
Terry McGuinty, Director of Quality Physical Education at the Canadian Association for Healthy Physical Education. He indicated that, in a former life, he served as a national competition director for elite athletes in track and field. He said facilities such as the one proposed bridge gaps better than most facilities in the community. This applies not just to young children or to elite athletes, but also to the elderly. He expressed the hope the Committee has heard the message that this is not only one group’s thing. Speaking to the matter of the Congress Centre raised by Councillor Deans, Mr. McGuinty said that facility is another piece of the pie, which is surely important, but he suggested that members poll their families and their communities to see which one of the two they prefer. He called the multi-sport training facility a community development tool. Children across the country are very sick, and that is because they do not have good role models to emulate. Mr. McGuinty said he understood Council has to deal with economic issues, but he pointed out that this group has waited more than twenty years for a facility that can do so much for the community.
He
posited that this one would stand up better, or be equal, to any other facility
the city has had to justify economically.
He encouraged the Committee to look at this on a business level and not
to play one project against another. He
averred that the facility would enrich the community and it should be high on
the City’s community development priority list.
Councillor Chiarelli asked how the elected representatives of Ottawa could justify to the public, putting money into this facility, rather than the conference centre. Mr. McGuinty replied Ottawa has a Congress Centre, whereas it does not have a multi-use sports facility. He suggested the expansion of the Congress Centre could be put off for another year.
Committee
Discussion
Chair A. Munter noted Councillor Eastman had put forward a motion to add a recommendation 5, “To direct staff to ensure that this worthwhile project does not lead to pre-empting or deferring previously approved capital priorities or key legacy projects from the former municipalities.”
Speaking to his motion, Councillor Eastman explained his fear was that a major sports complex such as this, would eliminate other smaller facilities. He felt it should be made very clear that this is a separate project that has to stand on its own and should not take priority over other worthwhile recreational projects.
Councillor Bloess noted that an indoor track and field complex is actually one of the legacy projects being studied and has been so for the last 20 years in the former City of Ottawa. He acknowledged there would be competition between various legacy projects and felt Councillor Eastman’s motion was therefore redundant.
The Councillor went on to say there were many fallacies surrounding this project, the first being that this facility would only serve elite athletes. He noted councillor Arnold had spoken earlier about how such a facility would serve the greater population. Councillor Bloess spoke of other cities that have this type of facility. Most notably, Calgary has three such facilities and they made it happen through partnerships. He pointed out the Committee was not being asked at this point to fund the project, rather they were being asked recognize its importance, to look at developing a business plan and examine how the City can make this happen.
Councillor Bloess stated it was his belief that Carleton University would be an ideal location and the City should benefit from their pilot project that is going on. He noted as well, that sports tourism is one of the biggest growth niche areas in the economy and he felt the City would benefit from economic spin-off. The Councillor referenced earlier delegations and noted their willingness to come to the table, as evidenced by past sponsorship and support of athletics. Councillor Bloess urged the Committee to move ahead with this project. He was confident the City would find its share of the money and partners. He said once the business plan is put together, and Councillors do not like it, at that point they could vote against it but he urged them to support it at this stage.
Councillor Cullen referencing Councillor Eastman’s motion, noted what the Committee had before it was the report that is going to go forward and develop a capital project for the 2003 budget. In the 2003 budget, this project will be there with all of the other projects and at that point Council will be able to look at it in the context of what the priorities are and what is affordable. He felt Councillor Eastman’s motion was therefore premature and unnecessary and he stated he would not be supporting it.
Councillor Cullen indicated he was in support of moving forward with this project as he felt it to be legitimate venture, with a long history and he noted the interest in the community was clearly evident. He pointed out Council is facing significant budget pressures and it must decide where its priorities lie. He said when the capital funding for this project is considered in 2003, Council will have to weigh it against all of the other capital projects. At this juncture, Councillor Cullen indicated he was please to support moving forward, noting the cost to develop this plan is $45,000 and this amount will be encompassed within the Departmental budget.
Councillor Arnold stated she was delighted to see this project come forward. She noted this was a legacy project in the former City of Ottawa that the City was not able to fund. She felt the new City, in looking at the list of legacy projects from the former municipalities, will have to look at new ways of operating in order to fund some of these much needed projects. One way will be by developing business plans which will enable the City to go out and engage other partners (e.g. at the Federal, Provincial and private levels).
The Councillor went on to speak of the reasons this type of sports facility is needed. These included to meet the demands of the community; for public health reasons; and, for economic reasons. She noted by finding partners to invest in this facility, it would free up capital in the City budget that could be used to fund other legacy projects. Councillor Arnold stated she hoped the Committee would not approve Councillor Eastman’s motion, as she did not think it was necessary. She said the time to debate when this project should go forward, is once the business case is presented. She urged the Committee to support the four staff recommendations.
Councillor Deans sought clarification from staff as to whether or not Councillor Eastman’s motion was necessary. Mr. Stewart said on hearing Councillor Eastman’s motion, he assumed the Councillor’s intent was that this project would not pre-empt or bump currently funded or planned legacy projects in the 2002/2003 capital budget. He said if that was the purpose of the amendment, then the motion was not redundant. Councillor Eastman confirmed this was his intent. On hearing this, Councillor Deans felt this amendment was very supportable. Chair Munter suggested some wording could be added to reflect this discussion.
Councillor Deans expressed her support for the business plan to move the sports facility forward, noting it had been on the books a long time, there was a clear need in the community and from an economic development perspective it will bring dollars into the City. However, Councillor Deans noted the City only has a limited amount of money to spend and when $25 million is taken out of the capital budget for one project, it will have an effect on others. For this reason, she said she had posed the question about the Congress Centre. The Councillor felt this project, when weighed against the Congress Centre was more worthy, because it will serve primarily the residents of this community and will promote health and fitness in the community for generations. She said the Congress Centre is a provincial centre and because it is a provincial responsibility she did not think the City should be spending $25 million on it and putting this project on the back burner for another 10 years. Councillor Deans urged the Committee to move ahead with this project and look for partners.
Chair Munter advised that Councillor Eastman’s motion had been amended to read: “To direct staff to ensure that this worthwhile project does not lead to pre-empting or deferring previously approved capital priorities or key legacy projects from the former municipalities that are being priorized for the 2002/2003 capital budget cycles.”
Councillor Harder stated she was very excited about this project because it is the first recreation item to come forward in the new City that is for the benefit of the entire City. She opined the City should be looking at opportunities for partnerships for every single thing that it does. The Councillor went on to say the City should have as a goal, full business partnerships to fund an entire facility. The City could then rent the facility back and the user fees would cover the costs. As well, she reiterated this sports facility should be multi-layered, which would be more cost effective to better serve the community. Councillor Harder also felt the City should not restrict its opportunities to add to this multi-sports facility, such things as a high school, a library, social services and retail components. She urged the Committee to move forward with this project, while at the same time keeping in mind that the far-reaching rural areas will still need their own facilities.
Councillor Chiarelli addressed the question of priority and allocation of the City’s resources. He said clearly any dollar that is spent on this project, is a dollar that is not spent on something else. He said in order to fund this opportunity, the City will have to will have to do things a little differently. The Councillor stated he hoped the City would move forward on this project with stance that “there is no project if there is no partnership”. In addition to the partnerships described in the document, Councillor Chiarelli opined the City should keep in mind two goals for partnerships, one is to help subsidize the costs and the second is to make sure the facility is used optimally. Councillor Chiarelli offered his opinion that if this facility were located in the area of Ben Franklin Park, the City would have a unique opportunity (through Fitness and Amateur Sport) to have an educational facility there that will attract enough of the right programs that the facility will be used 12 to 14 hours a day.
Councillor Chiarelli indicated he would be supporting going forward with the study at this time as he felt there was the potential to find the partnerships, the usage and the synergies that can make this type of facility work. He echoed Councillor Harder’s comments that there should be no new major city project that does not involve a partnership.
Councillor Doucet asked that minutes reflect he was in agreement with the statements made by Councillor Bloess.
Councillor Stavinga echoed the comments of Councillor Bloess and Councillor Arnold. She stated the City has a real opportunity to seize possibilities and invest in the community. Referencing the comments made by the public delegations, Councillor Stavinga stated it was clearly evident there was commitment on their part and she felt it would be short sighted of the City to stop at this point in time. The Councillor encouraged the Committee to support the recommendations put forward by staff.
Committee Chair Munter noted all of the Committee appeared to be in agreement with this project; the only question was how does the City do it. The Chair observed the presenters have made clear the sense of urgency that exists in the community for this facility, the enormous amount of patience that has been exhibited and also the offer of help. He expressed his belief that this project was possible and that it would make a significant contribution to the community, but noted the City would need a great deal of help to make sure that it happens.
The Committee then considered Councillor Eastman’s motion
Moved by D. Eastman
To direct staff to ensure that this
worthwhile project does not lead to pre-empting or deferring previously
approved capital priorities or key legacy projects from the former
municipalities that are being priorized for the 2002/2003 capital budget
cycles.
CARRIED
YEAS ( ): Councillors Arnold, Chiarelli, Deans, Doucet, Eastman, Little, Munter
NAYS ( ): Councillors Bloess, Cullen
The Committee then approved the report as amended by the foregoing.