Lansdowne 2.0 Will Be Failure 2.0: BENN

Published 04/29/2023 · Updated 04/29/2023

benn.logo

Don’t throw good money after bad.

That’s an old business adage to keep in mind when an organization is citing the need to continue to salvage a failed project. An old business adage that Ottawa’s city councillors should keep in mind as they consider Lansdowne 2.0.

Lansdowne 1.0 has not been a financial success. Not according to the owners of Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group. Certainly not for the City of Ottawa. The continuing challenges of operating a mixed commercial retail mall and some special events facilities is not providing the return on investment that the OSEG partners envisioned. That they scored big profits on the renovation of the sports stadium and the residential elements of Lansdowne 1.0 is history. Keep in mind that for business people, history only matters when its bonus time.

Reader Mad And Sad About Lansdowne

Just a quick review of what passed for due process by the city when Lansdowne 1.0 was mooted by the principals of Minto, Trinity and Shenkman. In consideration of the developers purchasing a CFL franchise at a cost of $3 million, the City of Ottawa agreed to award OSEG with a non-competitive, sole-source, whatever other combination of words that bureaucrats string together to describe an overpriced gift, to … well eventually get to where we are today. The city’s cost at that the time of the awarding of this contract was about $175 million. Given the city’s penchant for over-budget, under-specification projects … well let’s just leave it at $175 million.

It turns out that the renovation of the north stands did not alleviate the long-term damage caused by the recurring leaks that drained into the arena under the stands. It turns out that for another $330 million, the problem can be fixed. Fixed as in torn down and replacement structures to be bult by, you guessed it. OSEG. Under another sole-source, non-competitive project award. Oh, and more of those profitable residential units.

So, all in, the city will have spent more than half a billion dollars to own a large sports facility in a location that cannot be serviced by rapid transit. Mass transit yes. Rapid transit? Have you seen Bank Street? Not just on game day, every day. A sports facility that whose primary tenants are teams owned by OSEG.

That some people like Lansdowne and some people don’t isn’t the issue. It’s much like people discussing their favourite flavour of ice cream. At issue is the process that got us here. A self-solicited, sole-source contract funded primarily by the city. Not once. Twice. Not to enhance a successful development. No. To salvage a failed development. Failed as in the return on investment is so small as to be a rounding error on one per cent.

Cullen Condemns Lansdowne In Letter To Mayor

A standard question posed in Philosophy 101 is whether the end justifies the means. It doesn’t. And it especially doesn’t when the end that is achieved is a failure.

So councillors. why are you throwing good money after bad? Why are you repeating the errors of your predecessors? Before you cast your vote, have the courage, dare I say the courtesy, to stand up and explain why you are supporting this misadventure.

Ron Benn, a finance executive, has been a member of the Centrepointe Community Association for the better part of three decades.