More Information

Lansdowne Park is a 40-acre parcel of city-owned land that has been part of Ottawa’s history for 150 years. Centrally located with unique heritage features, green space, local sports, and city facilities.

The Lansdowne Partnership Plan (LPP) 

On October 12, 2012, the City of Ottawa and the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (the “Partners”) entered a 30-year limited partnership agreement for the redevelopment of Lansdowne Park. Some concerns about the proposal and the process at the time can be found here.

The City of Ottawa 

• Funded the renovation of the stadium and the development of the Urban Park 
• Is responsible for the programming and management of the Urban Park which includes the Aberdeen Pavilion, Horticulture Building, Aberdeen Square, the Great Lawn, skating court, children’s play structure and community garden. 
• Manages a long-term contract with the Ottawa Farmers Market  
• Leases the Stadium/arena and retail land to OSEG for $1/year 
• Retains ownership of all 40 acres of land  

 Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group 

• Manages the sports teams on the site (with the city as a 50% silent partner for the 67’s and RedBlacks). The Project Agreement requires that the CFL team be operated for at least 8 years “unless the CFL ceases to operate during such period”. The team has been operated through 6 years being 2014 through 2019. The CFL did not operate in 2020, so two years of operation remain in this obligation. 
• Is responsible for the operation and programming of the stadium, arena and parking  
• Built and manages a mixed-use development that includes an office building and a large retail complex with restaurants, stores and a cinema (took out a loan for this). 

The Subsidiary Businesses 

• Ottawa 67s Limited Partnership (“Ottawa 67s”)  
• Ottawa REDBLACKS Limited Partnership (“Ottawa REDBLACKS”)  
• Lansdowne Stadium Limited Partnership (“Lansdowne Stadium”)  
• Lansdowne Retail Limited Partnership (“Lansdowne Retail”) 

The funding that goes into the partnership does not include: 

• The sale of condo’s and associated fees on the site (air rights sold to Minto by the city) 
• The other sports franchises 
• Annual fees received from loan guarantees to the partnership 

A complicated ‘Waterfall’ structure was set up to provide returns to the City and OSEG. 

• The city is currently projected to receive $0 from this waterfall. The city funded $210 million of improvements to the stadium, arena, parking garage, horticulture building relocation and retrofit, urban park, and soft costs. The city took on debt and maintains a loan (Stadium and Parking Garage is $127.6M and $26.4M for the Urban Park), which it pays annual interest on. The only deemed equity considered in the waterfall for the city was $23.75 million for the ‘market value of the retail lands’. 
• OSEG is deemed to have contributed $152 million. The city is estimating this contribution will increase. It is important to note that most of OSEG’s contribution ($97 million) came from annual ‘operational losses’ incurred, which are rolled back into the waterfall for OSEG with an 8% annual return. In the last two fiscal years, operational losses only occurred because of the depreciation of assets in the accounting.  
  

Lansdowne 1.0 Timeline

• October 2007: The City of Ottawa initiates a redevelopment of Lansdowne Park due to cracks discovered in the stadium.
• October 2008: OSEG proposes a plan to revitalize Lansdowne Park by entering into a partnership with the City of Ottawa.
• April 2009: City Council directs City staff to work with OSEG to develop a plan to revitalize Lansdowne Park.
• September 2009: City of Ottawa staff and OSEG present City Council with a plan to redevelop and transform Lansdowne Park under a Lansdowne Partnership Plan (LPP).
• November 2009: City Council approves(External link) the Lansdowne Partnership Plan and directs staff to negotiate a project agreement framework with OSEG.
• June 2010: City Council approves the Lansdowne Partnership Plan and Implementation Report and votes to proceed with sole-source negotiations with OSEG after reviewing studies on the proposal.
• June 2011: Ontario Municipal Board Decision on Lansdowne
• October 2012: The legal closing of the LPP is approved by City Council and the City enters into a 30-year partnership with OSEG.
• November 2012: Construction begins on the redevelopment of Lansdowne Park.
• August 2014: Construction completed and Lansdowne Park reopens.

P3s are multi-year, often multi-decade, contracts in which a corporation or consortium of corporations assumes responsibility for activities previously undertaken by the public sector. These responsibilities include direct financing of infrastructure, as well as management, operation, maintenance and/or ownership of facilities.

P3 models have varying degrees of private involvement. At one level, the private sector may operate or maintain public sector infrastructure, delivering services within the municipality’s prior budget and retaining a portion of any savings. At the other extreme, the private company may design, build, finance, own, operate and maintain the facility. In between, the private partner undertakes some combination of these tasks. In some cases, assets are sold to the private sector and then leased back over the life of the contract.

Contracts range in length from 20 to 40 years (Ontario’s Highway 407 is an extreme 99-year contract), though service contracts can be shorter. The attraction for the corporation or consortium is that private delivery of municipal infrastructure and services can be extremely profitable. The return on private equity can be as high as 10 to 20 per cent, and in some cases higher. Long-term high rates of return at a low risk guaranteed by the public sector are very attractive for private sector investors in the current economic climate.

[Notable examples of Municipal P3s in Ottawa include Ottawa's LRT, and Lansdowne Park]

TEN ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS TO ASK

P3s can negatively affect public services, local democracy and the public interest and are neither the best, nor the only option. The following 10 questions should be considered by mayors, councillors and citizens whenever public-private partnerships are proposed for the delivery of local infrastructure projects:

1. Will there be full public consultation about the project, including the question of whether the project should be publicly or privately delivered?
2. Will elected officials be fully informed about the alternatives and be able to speak freely about the information they receive concerning development of the P3?
3. Have the full, lifetime costs of delivering the project through a P3 been calculated and compared to public alternatives delivering the same level and quality of service, and will the detailed information and calculations be made public?
4. To what extent does the financial viability of the P3 proposal rely on cost savings through risk transfer to the private sector, and if so, was the analysis objective and will it be made available to the public?
5. Could any promised risk transfer instead be delivered through a public procurement process that involved a fixed price contract?
6. Will the municipality be responsible for guaranteeing the private sector’s profits? Who will be liable for cost overruns, or project deficiencies?
7. Does the municipality have the capacity and resources to properly evaluate, administer and monitor a contract of the length, scale and complexity of the P3?
8. Does the P3 permit the municipality the flexibility to make future changes in service delivery or other public policy decisions, to end the P3 in the procurement stage, and to terminate the contract if it is not meeting the public interest?
9. Are the private consultants involved in the project truly impartial or are they affiliated to organizations or businesses that have profited from or have an interest in the delivery of P3s? For example: the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships or P3 bidders.
10. What impact will the P3 have on the local economy and on workers’ jobs, pay and benefits?

A Visioning Exercise for Lansdowne Park—April 2, 2019

Overview

The re-development of Lansdowne Park was undertaken as a partnership between the City of Ottawa and the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG). The agreement between the two parties called for revenue distribution to follow a “waterfall” method, whereby the costs of capital investments would be paid back before other payments were made. The city would receive payment on accrued interest on “deemed equity”. Further down the waterfall, OSEG and the city would split any profits.

With the 2017 Lansdowne Partnership Annual Report comes news that the economic and financial outlook of the park has been adjusted. It is now predicted that the City of Ottawa will not receive re-payment for interest accrued on deemed equity, nor will we earn any profits throughout the life of the 30-year agreement. Further, OSEG is not expected to receive re-payment on $120M worth of capital investment.

Narrative 

Lansdowne has been a thorny issue for the city, for Capital Ward and for the Glebe for many years. Originally used as an exhibition grounds that would help animate the waterfront along the canal, the park has taken on numerous iterations, and hosted a variety of events and organizations—from agricultural expos to military exercises; from sporting events to the Central Canada Exhibition. Currently, it is best known as the home of Ottawa’s CFL franchise, the Redblacks. 

Before the rejuvenation of the park, Lansdowne was in a sad state. The lower level of the south side stands had decayed beyond repair. The grounds were essentially a giant, rut-filled parking lot. Despite still hosting—often successfully—some events, the park was mainly a testament of urban decay. It was—and had been for years—a significant expanse of underutilized, under-performing and under-visioned city property...not to mention a neglected part of Ottawa’s history. 

The city moved on, though. It grew and expanded. The surrounding community, the Glebe, continued to prosper, with an engaged community, vibrant shopping and commercial district, and lively street culture. 

It was hoped that Lansdowne would fit in and benefit from this thriving urban community. It was to be an “urban village” that would offer a wider variety of stores, restaurants and residences. It would enhance and complement what was already working so well in the Glebe. 

But it has not quite worked out the way it was sold to the community 

But that doesn’t mean we have to accept defeat. We have decades left in the current arrangement, and it is imperative—again, for the city, the ward and the neighbourhood—that we do what we can to fix the problem that is Lansdowne. 

A New Vision Statement 

If we want to get Lansdowne right, we need to decide what it is we should expect from the park. It’s clear that the current vision for Lansdowne—a place of big events and bigger festivals—has failed, neither bringing sustained financial benefits nor fostering a consistent, active and animated urban environment. The urban village has been reduced to an urban wax museum, where life-like city vibrancy can be seen, but can’t come to life, can’t interact, can’t speak to you. 

So let’s talk about what Lansdowne should be. 

Most importantly, it should be... 

A Place for People 

Sure, this sounds simplistic or obvious, but in all the desire to “fix” Lansdowne, a focus on people has gotten lost. Pedestrian areas are overtaken by fenced off patios and parked cars. They’re used for loading zones, staging areas and storage. The layout and the traffic don’t make space for people to walk, wander, linger and make the grounds their own. 

A Place for Families 

There are many events that are family-friendly at Lansdowne, but there are many that don’t make space for parents and children—they are expensive, loud, lack amenities for kids or have an over-reliance on alcohol consumption. 

However, kids have always made the best of Lansdowne—whether it’s the play structure, the skatepark or the sledding hill, children animate the park more than any other demographic; yet, children’s space is relegated to the back of the park, away from anything for parents (including shade). It’s regularly taken over for staging special events. And to get to it, children are forced to navigate car traffic that regularly drives too fast and too negligently through the park. 

Restoring much of the park for families will make for a livelier space; it will invite more people at more times to the park; and it will help ensure that a generation grows up with a fondness and connection to Lansdowne Park. 

A Place for Mobility 

Lansdowne Park has become a place for cars, first and foremost. Even the most recent store opening was of a car dealership. It’s an odd look for an “urban village”.  

We have routinely made more and more accommodations for driving. Shortly after the opening, we painted lines all over the park, making the “Pedestrian Priority Zone” an afterthought—nothing more than a couple of signs posted at the side of a typical road. Stores are allowed to offer validated parking, further incentivizing driving at the expense of other modes of transit. We routinely allow parking all over Aberdeen Square. We allow parking on the south and east sides of Aberdeen Pavillion. We lack parking enforcement. When people were parking illegally near the basketball courts, we simply made that parking legal, conceding even more space to cars.  

We focus so much on driving that we ignore the fact that it does not enhance mobility. Moving around the park is uninviting and challenging, as the sides of the Pedestrian Priority Zone are clogged with parked cars, and the rest of the Pedestrian Priority Zone sees an immense amount of traffic, often speeding, often using the park as a cut-through between the QED and Bank Street. 

We need a more inviting space for pedestrians, bicyclists, people on scooters, skateboarders and everyone else not in a car. 

And this goes beyond the park grounds. The Glebe has insufficient infrastructure for active transportation. We need to get people to the park using buses and bikes. We need them to be able to walk. 

A Place for City Life 

There’s no coffee shop at Lansdowne. Sure, there are places to get a cup of coffee, but the two legitimate coffee shops have closed down. Imagine an “urban village” that can’t support a coffee shop. 

It might seem like a weird complaint, a trifle, a peccadillo, but it’s quite telling. Lansdowne lacks a vibrant urban street life. It lacks the basics of city living. There are reasons for this, much to do with the built environment, but it’s also about our intentions—the approach we’ve chosen for Lansdowne. 

Reading the recent report, you’ll learn much about the special events at Lansdowne (The Grey Cup! CityFolk! The Mayor’s Breakfast!), but as fun as these may be, they offer nothing in terms of day-to-day vibrancy. Lansdowne is slow and dull on a Tuesday morning (while a block away, Bank Street is alive). 

Choosing to create an event space is completely at odds with urban living. It’s not that festivals or special events can’t take place in an urban environment, of course they can (La Machine! The Great Glebe Garage Sale!), but the festivals must fit into the life of the urban environment. The urban life can’t be made secondary to special events.  

Yes, throwing 181 events in a year will get you a lot of visitors at those events, but it will be hollow. You don’t want people to use the park; you want them to enliven the park. 

Proposals 

So we’ve identified the need for a new vision; here are a few things to do to make the park more livable, inviting and dynamic. Some will overlap, but that’s okay. There’s a spectrum of options and there should be a harmony to various improvements: 

Reduce the number of cars on the grounds

• Eliminate all non-accessible surface-level parking (excluding car share) 
• Close off the grounds entirely to cars (except to access the parking garage) 
• Close off the grounds entirely on weekends or in the summer 
• Reduce the number of “roads” cars can travel on 

Provide more pedestrian space 

• There are numerous pinch points for pedestrians, especially around patios—create more space exclusively for pedestrians around these pinch points 
• Ask the province for permission to let restaurant patios be open, not walled off. This would facilitate a lot more movement and interaction between visitors 
• Improve the intersection of Exhibition Way and Bank Street—it's dangerously wide and difficult to cross. 

Animate Aberdeen Square 

• Don’t allow parking on the square 
• Install tables, benches, chairs and other furniture (maybe giant swings!) 
• Put up canopies in summer to provide more shade 
• Install interesting lighting across the Square 
• Install a monument, statue or fountain in the centre to act as wayfinding/placemaking. It needs a landmark to visually anchor it for people walking through the park (other landmarks at Lansdowne tend to be big—you won’t tell someone to meet you at the stadium) 
• Don’t have car traffic encircling Aberdeen Square 

Improve Winter Use

• Maintain Aberdeen Plaza for continued use throughout the winter 
• Launch the winter market 
• Add a second skating rink 
• Sell hot chocolate outside 
• Provide fire pits/warming areas so that people can enjoy outdoors during winter 

Provide consistent, year-round free space/programming 

• Create a community drop-in in an empty storefront or in the Horticulture building where people can stop in to read, work or drink coffee 
• Create a Lansdowne Museum or Wall-of-History telling the stories of Lansdowne. Some really interesting stuff happened! 

Maintain public space 

• Hold fewer events that take over large sections of the park, including the water feature, skate park and basketball court  
• Fix broken or damaged infrastructure in a timely manner (the state of Uplift has been an embarrassment) 
• Provide more space for teenagers to hang out—over lunch hour, students from the Element will gather on the play structure to just sit and chat; it’s great, but it’s not necessarily the most desirable spot for them. 

Improve transit access   

• Improve transit service...at all times 
• Create a shuttle that would run from downtown to Lansdowne (maybe also to Little Italy or Hintonburg) and/or introduce fare-free transit along Bank Street. 

Conclusion 

The office of councillor Shawn Menard is committed to working with various stakeholders from the city, OSEG and the community to help make Lansdowne Park into everything it can and should be. To that end, we are looking to re-establish the Lansdowne Park Working Group, to ensure better synchronization between the city, OSEG and the neighbouring communities. 

It’s okay to admit a mistake. In fact, we must admit our mistakes if we’re able to move forward and build a better city. This is our chance to correct the mistakes of the past five years and make Lansdowne a thriving part of a larger, dynamic community. We can’t squander this opportunity. 

It’s time to make Lansdowne Park A Place for People; A Place for Families; A Place for Mobility; and A Place for City Life. It’s time to make Lansdowne Park our own. 

Click here to download the PDF.

The press release put out by Councillor Menard's office at the time:

For Immediate Release

October 25, 2019
Updated November 4, 2019

CITY LOOKS TO GIVE AWAY FULL CONTROL OF LANSDOWNE PARK TO FOR-PROFIT PARTNERS

Ottawa—In a staff report coming to the Finance and Economic Development Committee (FEDCO) on November 5^th, 2019, the city is seeking to direct staff  to strike a deal with the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG) to transfer operations, programming and city control of half of the site over to OSEG. This would mean Aberdeen Pavilion, Aberdeen Square, the Horticulture Building, the Great Lawn and other areas of Lansdowne would be transferred in a commercialization of the remaining public space at Lansdowne. No business plan has been presented for such a move. No vendors who rent the space have been informed and zero public consultation has taken place. 

“The city programming has been quite good on the site,” notes Capital Ward Shawn  Menard. “We have good programming that is free and family-friendly, like the Farmers’ Market and 613Flea. There are nearly 100 free events we offer in a public park right now. The city is also under budget and returns funds back to city coffers every year.” 

The report does not articulate a real public policy concern that would be addressed by ceding control of the public park. It speaks of the need to avoid scheduling conflicts, but the coordination of programming has not been a big issue, argues Menard.  

In fact, the report raises the question of whom Lansdowne Park should be benefiting. This report was initiated by a letter from OSEG to the city on September 24^th, 2019. One month later, a city report has been released echoing this position. 

“If anything,” says the Councillor, “keeping the city involved in programming helps ensure that Lansdowne is run for the benefit of the city, as a whole—for the benefit of all residents. That is the city’s job, to look out for residents. I would be more than happy to find some middle ground on this, but the report is black and white”. 

The report will go to FEDCO on November 5 and then to City Council the next day on November 6, giving the public and city councillors very little time to deliberate on this important issue. Community Associations in the area have organized a hastily-called public meeting to discuss the issue on Monday, October 28^th, 2019, from 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm at the Horticulture Building at Lansdowne Park. 

“It’s very disappointing,” laments Menard. “Lansdowne is a tremendous public asset, and yet the city seems eager to turn it all over to a private entity, whose primary objective is to make profit, with little public oversight or scrutiny.” 

You can download this press release here [PDF].

A full note covering Councillor Menard's concerns at the time here.

Proposal Defeated

Over 2,500 residents signed a petition organized by Councillor Menard's office opposing this proposal. Hundreds came to a community organized public consultation. Residents wrote to Councillors and the mayor. Residents showed up to a rally organized by the Councillor's office before the Finance and Economic Development Committee (FEDCO) meeting, and then they came in and gave thoughtful, passionate delegations in defense of public space. The proposal was eventually withdrawn as a result of these efforts.

Press Release Put Out by Councillor Menard's Office at the Time

For Immediate Release

Over 200 residents joined an online Zoom public meeting hosted by the office of Capital Ward Councillor Shawn Menard to discuss changes to the Lansdowne Park deal proposed by city staff.

The staff proposal, framed as a response to the pressures brought on by COVID-19, seeks to change key aspects of the Lansdowne Park Agreement, including extending the term of the deal by ten years to 2054.

Capital Ward Councillor Shawn Menard expressed concern about the deal after it was released at the last minute without any input from the public or city councillors, worrying that the deal is a “a short-sighted stop-gap measure created out of panic”.

Today, the councillor’s office released a backgrounder on the Lansdowne deal today on the councillor’s website, the document notes:

There are significant problems with the city report that requires more reflection.  

It is very unlikely that OSEG would choose to default, and they have not indicated this. Any decision by OSEG to walk away from its obligations at Lansdowne would represent a default under the Material Agreements that would result in OSEG losing the equity (>$150 million) that it has invested in the project. That is, and will continue to be, the major deterrent to OSEG withdrawing from Lansdowne. 

At tonight’s meeting, residents expressed concerns about the deal, pointing to the lack of financial details and questioning what benefit it would actually bring to the city.

“This is the only time the community will be able to come out and discuss this important issue before the FEDCO meeting. That’s not good governance; that’s not respect for our constituents; that’s just not right,” argues Councillor Menard.

City management declined to attend the public meeting. The city has not held any public consultations on the issue.

“We had over 200 engaged citizens make time and come out on short notice,” he continued, “and city management wouldn’t even come out and participate in the discussion or listen to residents’ concerns. This is no way to run a city.”

OSEG CEO Mark Goudie joined the beginning of the meeting to speak to OSEG’s position, explaining that the pandemic has affected the retail and commercial businesses at Lansdowne, as well as forcing the cancellation of the corporation’s large events, including the 2020 CFL season.

June Creelman, a Glebe resident and member of the Community Association, was also invited to speak at the event. Creelman has been involved in the Lansdowne issue from the community side and expressed concerns about the lack of transparency or consultation from the city and OSEG, noting that “it’s hard to have a public space where you don’t involve the public.”

The staff report will be considered by the city’s Finance and Economic Development on Thursday. If it is accepted, it will go to city council on November 25 for final approval, without any further public consultation events.

- 30 -

Download this press release [PDF].

More info on the proposal released by the Councillor's office at the time

 This proposal would extend the deal for an extra ten years to 2054; and would give up future rental income and net retail profits for the city until 2066. 

Under the Lansdowne agreement, the original waterfall was expected to deliver further gains for the city and OSEG. Under the proposal in front of Council, here is what it looks like: 

*OSEG’s contributions have mostly come from annual operational losses, which are returned to the waterfall as equity which earns interest. 

While some short term offer of assistance to get through the pandemic might make sense, the deep, long-term changes being proposed are a question mark for the city. There is no vision behind it right now. And there is no business case supporting it. 

We received a report from the Auditor General on Tuesday regarding the Lansdowne Waterfall. It is very concerning and does not bode well for sweetening the deal. You can read the report here. 

Our office has also put together a financial assessment of the proposed deal, you can read it here. Lansdowne is a valuable public asset and should be treated as such.  

The proposal was supposed to be considered at this week’s council meeting, but the Mayor has indicated he now wishes to move the report to the December 9^th Council meeting. This is the same day the budget will be considered.  

City staff developed a lengthy report on the possible future of Lansdowne Park. The report addressed the infrastructure needs of the park—including how to deal with the north side stands and civic centre—as well as how to better utilize the public amenities and animate the site in order to improve the day-to-day experience of residents. The report passed promising public consultation before a proposal was brought forward. This did not happen.

You can read the full report here.

An OSEG proposal to re-build the north side stands and civic centre at Lansdowne goes to committee and council during its lame duck period at the end of its term. The proposal includes building three towers of 35, 40 and 46 storeys along the stadium, and building a new event centre into part of the great lawn. The entire project is proposed to cost $332.6M, and the city would take on significant new debt and interest payments. The previous direction for the city to engage in consultations was not followed. The Councillor's office organized another last minute consultation of their own, and put out a list of top ten concerns with the proposal. The proposal was approved in principle with final approvals and decision making left to the next term of council.

In an unprecedented move, members of the Finance an Economic Development Committee, including Mayor Watson, refuse to allow Councillor Menard's motion to be tabled and discussed. However, the Councillor was able to make some improvements to the original plan proposed later at the Council table.

This included a direction to staff to embark on a public consultation strategy, covering the overall concept plan, the rezoning application for the proposed skyscrapers, and the improvements to the urban park and public realm, as well as a full explanation of the proposed business model, including the selling off of public land and air rights. Councillor Menard also passed a motion improving the transportation planning around the site, including directing staff to plan for low- or no-cost shuttle service on Bank Street, to review parking requirements for the proposed residential developments, to devise mitigation measures to improve transportation through the site, and, importantly, to work with OSEG on a Traffic Impact Study, supported by consultation with the Glebe Community Association, the Glebe BIA and the surrounding community associations. Finally Councillor Menard passed an amendment to the plan, directing staff to explore different massing and heights for the three proposed skyscrapers and explore making the green roof of the event centre accessible.

In an attempt to make the proposed Lansdowne 2.0 "revenue neutral", staff are recommending that council approve use property tax uplift to help pay for the development. You might be wondering what property tax uplift is, what it means for city tax revenue and how it differs from tax incremental financing.

Community member Alexandra Gruca-Macaulay has provided a brief explainer on property tax uplift and its affect on our ability to pay for city services in the future here.

Gruca-Macaulay also prepared this written primer here.

Legislative & Consultative Timeline:

March

• Public education & Awareness on the Lansdowne 2.0 concept Plan
• Targeted and Public workshop

April and May

• Launch City initiated Zoning By-law Amendment
• Community public consultation
• Introduce key ideas for the future of Lansdowne 2.0
• Gather feedback and ideas
• Targeted and Public workshop

June and July

• Community public consultation
• As we heard it report
• Incorporate feedback on the key ideas for Lansdowne 2.0
• Funding Strategy and Business Plan to Finance and Corporate Services Committee
• City Council votes on the final Funding Strategy and Business Plan

August to December 2023

• Finalize the plan in response to comments received
• Zoning report to Planning and Housing Committee
• City Council votes on the Zoning report for Lansdowne 2.0

January – March 2024

• Next steps on Site Plan, Design and Construction 

The City of Ottawa Launches an Engage Ottawa website for the Lansdowne 2.0 Proposal. This website includes an initial "Overall Concept Survey", as well as information about the proposal, background information about Lansdowne Park and the P3 agreement, and a timeline for the current proposal. Residents are invited to direct questions about Lansdowne 2.0 to [email protected]

Kevin Page, Michael Wernick, Paul Champ, Joanne Chianello, and Penny Collenette pen an open letter to Mayor Sutcliffe requesting more meaningful public engagement and financial transparency before further Lansdowne decisions are made.

View the open letter here [PDF]

Councillor Menard hosts a site tour of Lansdowne Park for members of the media and interested residents on June 26th. Preliminary results of the Better Lansdowne survey are released at this time, with a full report released a few days later.

Video From The Site Tour

Key Findings

"The main takeaway of these survey results is that there is very little public support for the current Lansdowne 2.0 proposal whether taken as a whole, or broken down to its constituent elements. Residents do, however, support proposals for meaningfully affordable housing and residential development at Lansdowne; they support public realm enhancements and transportation solutions that prioritize public transit and active transportation. Finally, residents oppose the continued use of the P3 model at Lansdowne, and they feel that the city has not been transparent about the financial aspects of the P3. These results largely hold true regardless of what area of Ottawa respondents live in."

Read the Full Report Now

Key Takeaways from the Report: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly 

Read this in PDF format here

Given the length of our comments provided in the report, we have prepared a list of key points from those comments, while also highlighting further details in a breakdown of what is good, and not so good, in the current Lansdowne 2.0 proposal.

Full Comment from the Report