Winnipeg Free Press > Latest News > Water-park cash for luxury hotel? > All comments

Latest News

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Water-park cash for luxury hotel?

"ö Company eyes city lot at The Forks "ö City demands 25-year community access

By: Bartley Kives

5/11/2009 1:00 AM | Comments: 34

The only developer interested in building a water park with the help of a $7-million city grant wants to use the public money to erect a $64-million luxury hotel, the Free Press has learned.

For the past two years, the city has been trying to hand $7 million to a private company willing to build a 70,000-square-foot water park that would be open to the general public. The city initially awarded the grant to the Canad Inns hotel chain in 2008, but withdrew the offer this year after Mayor Sam Katz grew impatient with the lack of progress on a $43.6-million facility proposed for Polo Park.

Related Items

  1. Articles

  2. Polls

The city launched a second search for a would-be water-park builder this spring and wound up with only one respondent. On Monday, city councillors were told that proposal involved a 2.4-hectare city parking lot at the southeast corner of Water Avenue and Waterfront Drive. The plot of land is best known as the source of a lengthy dispute over rent between the city and Riverside Park Management, a non-profit organization that sublets city land to the Katz-owned Winnipeg Goldeyes.

More details have now emerged from Monday's closed-door water-park seminar, where city councillors and other officials were asked to sign confidentiality agreements.

According to several sources speaking under condition of anonymity, the potential water-park proposal involves the construction of a $64-million "signature hotel" that would position itself at the high end of Winnipeg's hospitality market.

The proponent would purchase the city lot on Waterfront Drive for $7.7 million, thus immediately repaying the city for its $7 million investment, the sources said.

The hotel would be positioned across the street from the Canadian Museum for Human Rights, which is under construction on the east side of Waterfront Drive. This could present a land-use problem for city planners, as several parcels of vacant land in the vicinity of Water Avenue and Waterfront Drive have been touted as potential parkade sites to serve the museum, The Forks and Canwest Park.

During the closed-door seminar, city officials asked councillors whether they would prefer to shelve the luxury-hotel proposal and issue yet another search for a water-park partner - or continue to pursue the proposal on the table.

Councillors opted to have a luxury hotel plan head to council in the form of a written report, which will most likely be reviewed by St. Norbert Coun. Justin Swandel's downtown development committee.

On Wednesday, Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz said he knew nothing about a luxury-hotel proposal. But the mayor said the city has learned a lot from its experience with Canad Inns and will now require any would-be water park builder to plunk down a $100,000 deposit that would not be refunded if the proponent walks away from a future deal.

The city is also demanding a 25-year community-access agreement that would ensure free or discounted water-park admissions for people with low or limited incomes, the mayor said.

The expenditure of $7 million -- the remnant of a $43-million recreation kitty created from the ashes of a cancelled rapid-transit plan -- is worthwhile to create a first-class water park, the mayor said.

"What we want to do is have a city that is attractive to all people. And in order to be attractive, you want vibrancy and you want excitement. A water park is part of that," Katz said.

Public funding for a water park is no different than government subsidies toward other major amenities, such as hockey arenas or football stadiums, he added.

The mayor's drive to build a water park has confounded critics on both the left and the right.

"Our streets are falling apart. We shouldn't be spending any money on water parks," said Colin Craig, the Manitoba director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. "What's next? Is the city going to decide we need a major-league baseball team, or Disneyland? Just because this city doesn't have things other cities have doesn't mean it's the city's role to take tax money and build those things."

Shauna MacKinnon, director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, said she's concerned about public access to a private water park and thinks city recreation funds would be better spent on public facilities that don't charge any fees.

"We wouldn't support this anyway," she said of the water-park proposal. "We have all kinds of needs in this city that take precedence over luxury hotels."

 

bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition November 5, 2009 B1

  • Rate this Rate This Star Icon
  • This article is currently rated an average of 3.7 out of 5 (3 votes).

    • We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

    You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

    Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

34 Commentscomment icon

Yes macboy.Perhaps an architect might call it differently but the rest of us (you, me, others) still have our opinions.
There are so many bildings from the 70's where there are only windows on 2 sides of the structure and strictly concrete on the 2 others.
Very unwelcoming, prison like.

The two, perhaps three, high rise hotels which are arguably in the Brutalist style have plenty of windows. Fort Garry Hotel, in the style of a French chateau, could be considered a high rise, and is certainly not brutalist. Armchair (read: amateur) architecture critics are amusing to say the least.

Does anyone with a flair for business post on here at all??????????????
I look forward to finally seeing a new first class hotel erected in Downtown Winnipeg.Why this location for the WaterPark and Hotel?
Location!...Why do many Winnipeggers want to live in Southwest or Southeast Winnipeg??? Location!.That is what ...There are gorgeous homes not selling in the north sectional of the city an why??because that is not the first choice for some reason.
Obviously many people posting are not business people.That is ever so clear.
This is at the edge near The Forks and actually benefits Downtown much more than other venues at The Forks.
We all see how many new hotels are being in Winnipeg near The Airport and so obviously there is now room for a private investor to build a classy $64 million dollar hotel.With the closure of The former Sheraton and The success of the MTS centre, there is need.
All our major high-rise hotels Downtown are from 3.5 - 4 decades ago, ugly , brutalist stylings, concrete prison looking structures with few windows and this will surely shake things up.
A parkade can and must be stipulated in this project.
I believe a few parkades should be built around the museum and this development but preferably with some other destination on top such as multi purpose...mixed use building or a condo, office building etc if facing towards the Portage & Main side.I am certain this will be a catalyst for more growth near Portage and Main.

i don't know too many luxury hotels that have water parks attached to them.

I don't have a problem with building a luxury hotel there, it actually makes sense at that location with the museum and all. But the water park there is a ridiculous idea. The city should sever the two projects.

Why does everyone want to build everything @ the Forks?? Is there no other areas to build in? Or possibly Katz wants everything built close to his taxpayer assisted ballpark for future revenue? I am sick and tired of Sam Katz the bussisnessman using taxpayers to better the bussisness community, which he is a major part of. Will never vote for him...

The last thing the Forks needs is another hotel & now a water park!?!?!? What about all that land sitting empty on Marion where the packers used to be? What's happening with all that empty acerage??? How about some "vision" people - that's directed for those of you who get the big bucks for this kind of thing!!!

For people complaining the waterpark will be attached to a hotel - give your head a shake. This is common practise in many other cities where the hotel/waterpark combination exist. You can go to the waterpark and not have to set foot in the hotel - they may be the same building but are separate businesses

One thing that the Mayor point out was that the money been given to the water park is "Public funding for a water park is no different than government subsidies toward other major amenities, such as hockey arenas or football stadiums" well Mayor. When I go to a Hockey, Baseball or Football game the City has no access agreement that would ensure free or discounted prices for people with low or limited incomes. Either you treat everyone the same, or forget the park.

Why not put this water park near IKEA. Isn't that were half of Winnipeg will be on a weekend anyway? Isn't that when both IKEA and the water park would be in the highest demand? On weekends? Mom can shop, and the kids can swim. As for the parking issue, there will be no problems as there will be lots of space. If there is not enough space, at least it can be expanded. There is no expansion at the Forks period, so let's use the money and what little space left at the Forks wisely.

Also, keep in mind that not everyone will be going to the Water park on a regular basis, nor will everyone shop at that IKEA store on a regular basis, so when doing one do the other and make a day of it.

Just as a side note, if we are going to make the Kenaston area crowded, let's make it really crowded. If the roads now being built are to accommodate high levels of traffic, then that is where the park should be placed. The Forks is not that place.

On a very serious note,is the city council going to be dictated to again? The developer barks and the councillors jump! Show some backbone! When deciding what to do in the future months, remember what mess you made of Polo Park with your big box stores. Look at the traffic congestion.

I thought one of the major aims of the downtown area was to make it nice. A water park is not for an downtown area.

If the IKEA site doesn't do, then what about the yards in St. Boniface that Canad Inn owns?

Leo Ledohowski must be splitting his gut over this.

Follow the money trail. Something isn't right. If the developer purchases the land with his own money, develops it, that's fine, more power to him. [edited] something smells. Let's start sniffing at city hall.

What would be the price of admission? How much would a family of 3-5 pay? Would the kids who need recreational facilities (yes, because there are fewer community places) be able to come without paying? This would not be city run, I'm guessing. How often would people go? once or twice? The thinking behind city (non)planning is pathetic.

They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot SPOT
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don't know what you’ve got
‘Til it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

They took all the trees
And put them in a tree museum
Then they charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see 'em
Don't it always seem to go,
That you don't know what you’ve got
‘Til it’s gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot


Lyrics by Joni Mitchell

Aren't we really over the whole water park idea? Why do we continue to talk about water parks? What's with the water park?

My kids would probably like to check it out once. But what are we expected to do, visit this water park a few times a week?

What about Fun Mountain, and Wet and Wild? How many times did you ever take your kids there? Why did they close?

Aren't we supposed to be finding ways to conserve water anyway?

In my opinion a water park is a luxury item - a sign of wealth. Winnipeg is not a wealthy city. Our roads are crumbling and new, modern infrastructure isn't being built. We've cheaped-out on mass transit and have no money to build anything close to what we need. Businesses that pay taxes are constantly being maligned as being profit-hungry so they leave and invest in jobs in other regions, outside Manitoba.

Winnipeggers constantly demand amenities but then drive out the investment and entrepreneurs who can realize these amenities. We are over-taxed to fund bloated bureaucracy that rarely delivers value for the money being spent. Everything is over-politicized, which stalls positive change and drives out much-needed investment.

Luxury items like a water park should be realized because the city makes smart sacrifices and creates real wealth that can be used to fund luxuries. We can't keep demanding that government do everything for us. As every entrepreneur knows, vision, hard work, determination, innovation and flexibility are key to success.

A poor person who takes personal responsibility, has a will and a vision will eventually be able to afford a BMW - and a nice big driveway, too. A poor person who demands that someone else buy them a BMW will soon lose that BMW and never have a nice big driveway.

If a water park is viable in Winnipeg then it can be built without tax dollars.

This idea is absolutely rediculous!!!!!!

Nothing wrong with the rich having a waterpark in Winnipeg - just let the rich pay for it, not the taxpayers directly or indirectly (note - I am very well off). It is disgusting how our governments always end up coughing up OUR $$$$ through Katz and his cronies under the guise of public well being.

WATER PARK . POLO PARK

Just Me.....ditto that comment! TONS of room and easy to have buses routed to that area. Can't it just be a waterpark? Why a fancy schmancy hotel that most people couldn't afford to stay at just to have the opportunity to go to the waterpark. JUST a waterpark, maybe with a hotel on the same property, but seperate entities entirely would be a much better plan. These people need some vision! And not tunnel vision!

I just can't understand this fanatical "must-have" obsession with a water park. Do we really honestly need one? Will people flee the city in droves because we don't have one? Is this really that important?

I could name more than a few roads that could use a bit of work.

I cannot see how the city could even pass this further down the line for consideration. Are the mayor and the councilors so dim that they cannot see how the Forks location is NOT the right place for either a hotel or a waterpark? What happened to the vision of "Green Space" at the Forks? Nothing green about putting up a bunch of buildings and having no parking for any of them.

At a time when our streets need more replacement rather than repair, how can the council even consider any such dumb ideas as paying for a "hotel"? There are more important things that need to be done in this city. We do not need another hotel.

A waterpark, in the right location, would be a great added feature to the city, but NOT if a hotel chain has control over it. If a waterpark is to be built, then it should be in a location that is "easily accessible and has room for lots of parking".

Use public $$$ for a private hotel? It is unfair to even consider using $$$ for this as it sounds as though the general public would never "qualify" to be in such a luxury hotel. And really, the developer isn't buying the land. City has money and land, gives developer the money to buy the land, developer gives back the money, and keeps the land. Just looks good on paper, that's all. How sad that such a historic and beautiful area is becoming so concrete and commercialized.

What is it with this obsession about a stupid waterpark??? The remainder of the Forks needs to be made more beautiful with trees, landscaping, etc., NOT more buildings and parkades.

What's wrong with all the land further down Waterfront Drive that's begging for development. I'm all for a luxury hotel, but where is the planning? Where is the vision?

No! No! NO!

[edited] Sammy needs to get removed from office NOW!

There is no way that ANY PUBLIC MONEY should be given to ANY DEVELOPER!

No! No! No!

avatar

So the city is essentially going to hand over the land for free, and hope the developer builds a nice water park.

Good luck with that.

[Edited]

Five comments...five NEGATIVE reactions. Welcome to Winnipeg!

I just don't get why we are always negative at the proposition of a new development, especially this one with mostly private funding. It's one thing if the City is spending all 64 million on a water park or hotel, but they have a 7 million kitty ready for a water part development.

It's at the Forks, not a bad location considering it is a well known tourist area. Earl, the Musuem is being built, give it up already. Any chance to have to take a pot shot at the CMHR you do it, but why? It's over, get on with your life already. This would compliment the CMHR and Forks area nicely.

There's not going to be a location that everyone likes. You put it in the suburbs, and the downtown and less well off will complain. Put it downtown and they will complain about lack of parking. Put it outside the Perimeter and people will complain about getting there. No place is perfect.

Have any of you ever heard of the "Build it and they will come" notion? Look at the Goldeyes stadium, MTS centre, etc, etc!!

I agree if we are going to build a waterpark it should be in a better location than the forks. Whatever happened to the idea of building the waterpark where the Odeon Drive-inn used to be ??

Whenever this topic comes up someone always mentions that only the rich will be able to afford to take their family to a water park. So my question is, should the rich not get an opportunity to take their family to a water park in Winnipeg? Or should they just travel to other cities to attend water parks, because obviously they can afford to do that.

Has anybody considered the long-term environmental impact of a park that needs vast amounts of water? Who will be able to attend a waterpark attached to a luxury hotel? The rich of course! The lower income people wouldn't be able to afford a day at such park.

The Forks is the worst possible place for a waterpark. Why does the City insist on crowding the Forks with all these buildings? There are so many events that happen at the Forks that attract lots of people and there already isn't sufficient parking. Such as Dragon Boat every year, concerts, the Folklorama party, fireworks, fairs etc. etc.

avatar

Unless I am missing something, at the end of the day the unnamed developer gets the land for next to nothing. Of course, the value of the land will dramatically increase after the museum is completed and the hotel is built. The developer will probably fund the construction of the hotel with a mortgage using the land for the down payment, ending up will a premium hotel on a prime piece of property using very little of there own cash. A sweet deal for sure. Why the city peruses deals like this raises numerous questions about priorities and doing what is best for the city. We need a leader with vision, and ditch the “ when in doubt do nothing” mentality of the council. At some point the city will have to deal with the downtown railway yards. You would think that this water park could be a catalyst to redevelop that land, which would also be a good location for the stadium IMO. Like a LRT system, we end up with a half-baked bus based system that fails to address the problem. And don’t get me started about Kenaston and the traffic nightmare (just wait for IKEA!). Where may I ask, is the next Steven Juba?

"Our streets are falling apart. We shouldn't be spending any money on water parks," said Colin Craig, the Manitoba director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Colin Craig is right on the money. Too bad his organization didn't have the same concerns about the human rights museum.

$7M is a small investment into this city. The waterpark near the forks would be a nice attraction for the cold winter days and the $7M probably will not take long to get back with the added tax base from this property.
People in this city think so small and never want anything new or exciting to happen.
YES our roads suck and something needs to be done. We need the feds to give us the cash they collect ont he fuel surcharge for this very purpose. We also need some quality control in our road construction. How do we allow the contractors to get away with such c****y roads that need resurfacing every year? Why not FIX the roads instead of patchwork? The province and city should do some R&D on road construction in this city/province and anything they learn can be sold to other cold-weather cities and generate a source of revenue to this city. (Edited)

The comment period for this story has ended.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

Special coverage

Poll

Would you pay more to supersize your garbage bin?

View Results