LANSDOWNE: An Important Open Letter To The Mayor

05/30/2023

This is a very valuable letter to Mayor Mark Sutcliffe from long-time Bulldog reader and community activist John Langstone:

I’m writing to you Mayor Sutcliffe and all of council to defer approval of the Lansdowne 2.0 proposal to allow for further study, including public disclosure of financial details which are not currently available to the citizens of Ottawa who are partners with Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group at Lansdowne Park.

This project will be a significant financial commitment for Ottawa at a time when we already have serious looming financial challenges; the transit shortfall being an immediate one.

I’m trying to understand the benefit of Lansdowne 2.0 to the city, especially what revenues and costs will change as a result of building modern but smaller north stands, and an arena, as well as the condo towers in the park.

Bring On The Sensitivity Analysis For Lansdowne: READER

What I understand to date breaks down into four points:

Part of the partnership revenue is from office type space. The occupancy rates have not been a part of public disclosure that I’m aware of, and as a result, it remains unclear what improvement could be generated for the city from reduced vacancy with the development.
Part of the partnership involves retail. While lease arrangements are not available, such agreements are often part fixed rent and a percentage of sales. From personal observation, businesses in the park do not seem to be doing well. And low sales may affect the partnership revenue. So the question: How much are sales expected to pick up and increase revenue to the City with the venue enhancements and condo towers? Condos were added on the land sold in Lansdowne 1.0, yet retail traffic does not seem to have grown significantly. What substantiated projections of revenue improvement to the City from retail are there?
Part of the partnership will be new stands and an arena with less seating capacity and potentially less event revenue than previously. The north stands are not new, but also are not structurally unsound. And they have been filled. We have a football and soccer team, and other attractions that could use the facilities. The question is: What new revenue will be generated from smaller, but more modern facilities and more importantly, turned over to the city?
Part of the partnership is real estate development. In Lansdowne 1.0, parts of Lansdowne Park were sold to build condos. One hopes that this was profitable – development like that is the strong point of the private partners. But what benefit have the condos been to the public partner – the city? Do we know what the land sold for? Is that information buried? Are the taxes paid affected by the waterfall, a waterfall from which we currently get nothing? Will we know explicitly what the “air rights,” – essentially sale of the land – will bring the City, or will it be buried in the waterfall agreement? And the taxes: will they come straight to the city or are they buried in the waterfall?

Of the four points above, the only one you can safely say may be a financial winner is the condo development. And for the other three, we don’t know if potential additional revenue disappears in a waterfall. Trouble is, this looks to me like something that will only benefit the private partner. I see nothing above that appears to justify a large investment from the City.

Again Ottawa has some significant financial challenges, and this is a big commitment at a time when we have problems funding critical housing for the homeless and low income families, as just one example of issues Ottawa City Hall must manage.

Ottawa taxpayers deserve full disclosure on the above issues, and if they can’t be answered transparently today, it is far too soon to approve Lansdowne 2.0.