I don't really have a problem with Lansdowne 2.0. Except for this | Letters to the Editor

Ottawa needs better leadership 

Lansdowne was approved by the Finance Committee, 8 votes  to 3. Observing the proceedings, it seemed to me that OSEG must have solicited every sports-related business in the city to present.  All insisted that a shiny new stadium and arena would be good for business, that sport is critical to the city’s well being. None of the overwhelming number of these pro-Lansdowne 2.0 speakers said a word about the financing or the impact on city debt and priorities. 

Every elected Ottawa official should read this book

Re: City report has too much bafflegab, by Bruce Deachman

Thank you, Bruce Deachman, the term bafflegab captures the essence of the matter in one word. So, Lansdowne 2.0 has looked after the known unknowns. Passengers on OC Transpo know about those. An example is the actual time of arrival of a bus at a stop. That’s one reason why it’s common to see a bus with only one person on board, the driver, a factor contributing to both congestion on our roads and huge emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants, both by buses and by the vehicles that would not otherwise be on the road.

Then there are unknown unknowns, the things that were not foreseen. The Ottawa Public Library has 28 copies of a book by Bent Flyvbjerg, an expert on building projects large and small, and Dan Gardner, a former writer for the Ottawa Citizen, entitled How Big Things Get Done. The message is think slow and act fast. That is the opposite of what Ottawa has done with its LRT. It should not be a surprise that the extension of the LRT to Orléans is late. Every city councillor, oh yes, and the Mayor, should borrow a copy from our wonderful library and read it.

John Hollins, Gloucester

Ottawa is Canada’s Capital for heaven’s sake

The Lansdowne revitalization project was contentious from the very beginning — because the city never collaborated with residents on solving the problems at Lansdowne.

It actually started out well. Council had voted to hold an international design competition, which would have involved both professionals and residents in shaping the site’s future. But Ottawa’s business elite had other ideas. They influenced Mayor O’Brien, and the competition was cancelled.

In its place, the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG) was formed with the city and presented its own proposal. The mayor supported it and promoted it to council. When Mayor Watson took office, his focus on making City Hall “efficient” meant there would be no collaboration with the public.

With no real voice in the process, residents were left only to oppose the proposal. That fight carried through the entire project—into the courts—costing both the city and residents hundreds of thousands of dollars, and leaving behind a deep legacy of bitterness.

Now, with Lansdowne 2.0, we begin from that same bitterness. The city has once again done nothing to involve residents at a stage where their input could make a difference, and nothing to heal the mistrust that remains from the first project.

The mayor’s speech on Monday only made matters worse. By citing “disinformation” and “the same people,” he didn’t engage his critics—he insulted them. All of the financial projections surrounding this project are, ultimately, guesses. Opponents’ estimates are opinions, just as proponents are opinions. The city would do a far better job of uniting our city if they recognized that and treated differing perspectives with respect rather than dismissal.

If Ottawa is ever to move forward together, we must replace confrontation with collaboration—especially on projects that belong to the public.

I believe the collaboration would be most effective if residents were engaged early enough to feel they had had some effective input into the resulting project. The city is the only actor that might make that happen.

I expect the city to try that on a major project going forward.

Jake Morrison, Ottawa

Insult to women and girls of Ottawa

The selective blindness, deafness and downright ignorance of Lansdowne 2.0 supporters as to the growing success and expanding needs of The Ottawa Charge (PWHL) can only be seen as an insult to the women and girls of Ottawa.

Ontario is supposed to be “a place to grow”, unless you are a female hockey player or fan in Ottawa.

Thomas Brawn, Orleans

With Landsdowne 2.0 we could lose this wonderful women’s hockey team that has inspired so many young girls! On top of that what will be the new price of the 67’s tickets?

How many people can afford private boxes, catering to the wealthy at Landsdowne 2.0? I guess that’s where OSEG makes their money.

Please spend taxpayer dollars on affordable housing close to the LRT, fix our aging infrastructure (roads and sewers), handle our garbage when our dump is full and make our city sustainable and liveable.

Nancy Biggs, Ottawa

Doomed for failure?

I really don’t have a problem with Lansdowne 2.0 except that it seems a project doomed to failure for two reasons: 1) no cover over the stands 2) an arena that will be too small for women’s pro hockey and other high level tournaments. Who is going to go to football games to either bake or be soaked? And how long will it take for Ottawa to lose our pro women’s hockey team to a city that provides them a decent-sized arena?

The whole project seems focused on lining the pockets of the developers by selling expensive condos. The rest is merely window dressing.

Such a shame.

Sharon W. Moren, Kanata