Lebreton Flats Reality

Since the Ottawa Citizen will not print this letter to the editor, I’ll post it here instead with a few additions for clarity.  But first some background, particularly for those who don’t live in Ottawa.

40 years ago and area of downtown Ottawa, known as LeBreton Flats, was expropriated by the government, in the name of the National Capital Commission (NCC) who, apparently know better than the people who live here how Ottawa should look and work.  They tore down the houses and businesses that were there which, although kind of poor and run down, had been a lively neighbourhood for those lived and worked there.  The land then lay empty for 30 years while they made up their minds what to do with it.  The only worthwhile thing that was then done with it was that the Canadian War Museum was allowed to build a new facility there.  The only other thing that was done was to sell a small bit of the land to developer to build some uninspiring condominiums.  Last year, the NCC decided that they would seek proposals from private developers for developing most of the rest of the land. Four developers showed interest but only two actually submitted proposals.  The common factor in both the proposals was that each planned to build a hockey arena as a major item in their plan.  The rest of each plan included restaurants, condos and other retail outlets.  Opposition has been very vocal.

Recent letters to the editor have universally decried the proposals being put forward to the NCC for LeBreton Flats.  But all of these writers and the many others who have made suggestions are under some misunderstandings.  First, the ideas put forward by the two developers were business proposals not design competitions.  In making their proposals to develop that area, the developers are prepared to put forward their own money to build the buildings, walkways and parks.  But at the end of the day, they are expecting to make revenue from rents, fees and sales to pay for their investment.  The suggestions from readers, which include such things as art venues, large park area and other nice to have things, would not provide the kind of revenue that the developers need to make their proposals viable.  To those who point to world famous edifices such as the Eiffel Tower or the Washington Monument, they should understand that all of those were built with public money by their governments. 

So what are the alternatives?  For those who point out that the land was originally Algonquin land and must be respected as such, then the answer is obviously to turn it over to the First Nations and let them do whatever they want with it.  If, in fact, people want to make the place a world showpiece and hold an international design competition, then the only way it will be built is with public money, in other words, taxes. Noting that the cost for anything worthwhile will probably be in the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, who is going to be responsible for that payment?  Are the taxpayers of Ottawa ready to foot all or a good portion of the bill? Or will it all come out of the national purse?  The national purse, by the way, that is trying to find all of the money to pay for the many promises made by the government in the recent election. 

So the choice is clear.  Get the area of your dreams and pay for it, or let the developers develop it and collect the revenues to pay for it.

For those who think that this a only an Ottawa story, I would caution you that this can happen anywhere where the desire for “world-class” development is being considered.