So What’s Up With This Lansdowne Land Parcel?

05/18/2023

A long-time Bulldog reader has questions about Lansdowne 1.0 and 2.0:

Hi Ken,

There was a Lansdowne 2.0 zoom meeting last night. It was supposed to be focusing on the public realm issues, and really looked like a wish list of goodies in the parks and such that might sell the idea in the community. There was a poll I refused to participate in. It was one of those situations where they wanted to have responses to the question, “with Lansdowne 2.0 a done deal, which of these goodies do you want most?”

LANSDOWNE: Elevator, Elevator, We Got The Shaft

We just lost 58,000 square feet of park to a new arena (that we can make a green roof on you know), have a new world-class stadium, a bunch of towers and a whopping big debt that will be handled by the taxes we (might) get.

But that isn’t why I’m writing this. I attached a screenshot I took of a slide that was shown to “clear up” ownership at Lansdowne. I thought the city owned the property, and it was leased out to Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group to manage and program. So the retail in green confused me a bit.

But the key thing is the white area. The high-rise condo on the canal. The slide doesn’t say this, but the presenter said this was owned by others.

Now maybe I’m out of it, but I was never aware of a land sale of a parcel of land at Lansdowne Park. So if this actually happened, how did this happen? Was this land sold by public tender or in another manner? If it was sold, what did the city get for it?

Do you know anything about this?

Well Bulldog readers, what do you know about this? I’m not up on that kind of detail on Lansdowne.

lansdowne.parcel.h

At question is the parcel of land in white on the left-hand side and bottom of the screen grab from the city online Lansdowne presentation.

—

Pop Gossip Your Home Relax …

Bulldog Weather Full Local Sports

Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6

Other features: Full Bulldog Index Return to Bulldog Home

Tags: land parcel Lansdowne Ottawa

Ron Benn says:
05/18/2023 at 12:43 PM
Is this the existing high rise tower that overlooks the field? If so, I think it was part of the (very profitable for one or more the OSEG partners) development that was Lansdowne 1.0. The one where former OSEG partner Jeff Hunt owned a unit. The same tower where a fund raiser for then mayoral candidate Mark Sutcliffe was hosted.
Jeff Arron says:
05/18/2023 at 12:50 PM
Lansdowne 2.0 is a concocted deal for the private sector to build with taxpayer funds more soulless Toronto designed architectural obscenities. The whole mess is doomed for failure as all it does is pack more people into space which is already overcrowded. Given the single lane streets around the park and no access to the sometimes functioning light rail, it will be a sardine can that will be unaccessible and uninhabitable.
More idiocy from the politicians.
What is needed is an investigation that gets to the bottom of the whole mess.
Bruce says:
05/18/2023 at 1:18 PM
I repeat myself but sometimes to be heard one must be repetitive.
BITE THE BULLET
Stop all work on this fiasco, tear down all but the heritage buildings and make a “central park” type of location. Include market gardens, craft persons and community usable green space and play areas. Examine the possibility of a day only marina
Revitalize and build a new hockey arena, soccer field and other sports fields on Lebreton flats in a PPP arrangement. with OSEG and or Senators Hockey
Brocklebank says:
05/18/2023 at 1:52 PM
My understanding is that the white patches are the residential buildings (two towers and townhouses along Holmwood). For those structures, the City sold or leased out air rights, allowing the structures to be built while the City retained ownership of the land.
I have long wondered about the details of the arrangements in place. Were the air rights sold or leased? What was the the sale price or the rent paid? If the sir rights were sold, is the City obligated in perpetuity to maintain the structure under the buildings?
Ken Gray says:
05/18/2023 at 2:12 PM
Ron:
Just random facts you picked out there, Ron.
cheers
kgray
Ken Gray says:
05/18/2023 at 2:17 PM
Jeff:
Good points. Has anyone called it world-class yet?
And if not, why not?
cheers
kgray
The Voter says:
05/19/2023 at 5:20 AM
If we’re talking about the white rectangle on the lower left and between Bank Street and the football field, that’s the condo building Ron’s referred to. The ground underneath it is still technically owned by the city with the condos that float above it owned by the purchasers of the various units.
My question is whether the condo owners got a price reduction because the common elements don’t include the land. Or are they paying to lease the air rights as part of their condo fees? If the air rights were sold, who owns them? OSEG? The condo corporation? If they were leased, how long is the lease for, who’s making payments on it and where does that income to the city show up? Or is it part of the infamous waterfall? What would happen if the city cancelled the lease?
There definitely was no public tendering of the land or the air above it. How much is air worth? How do you put a value on it?
John Langstone says:
05/19/2023 at 11:29 AM
To chime in here, the subject land is in fact privately owned. In addition, the land at the corner and along the south side of Homewood. The core issue to me is that parts of Ottawa parkland appear to have changed ownership at the time of Lansdowne 1.0. And looking at the comments here, I’m not sure anyone is. Was this land transfer in fact knowingly approved by council? Transparency from Lansdowne 1.0 has been seriously lacking from where I sit. So here we are proceeding on Lansdowne 2.0 with the same sort of story line and quantitative support. Will council approve Lansdowne 2.0 with the sort of transparency that didn’t appear to disclose a parkland ownership transfer from the City to private interests? There is no rush to go ahead with Lansdowne 2.0. The stadium is not going to fall down any time soon.