City to consider selling parkland

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 12/01/2011 (5661 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The future of a parcel of city-owned parkland in south St. Vital is up in the air as the city considers selling it to fund an expansion of Jonathon Toews Community Centre.

Okolita Park — nestled between St. Mary’s Road and Sandrington Avenue and just south of Novavista Drive — is one of the last undeveloped properties along St. Mary’s.

It is located east of Dakota Park, which runs all the way to Jonathon Toews Community Centre (formerly known as Dakota Community Centre).

Coun. Justin Swandel — whose city ward includes a good portion of the south St. Vital area — introduced a motion to sell the land at the Dec. 6 meeting of the Riel community committee.

The motion — which must be approved by the city’s standing policy committee on property and development — directs the Winnipeg public service “to do all things necessary to market the city-owned land . . . and set aside the net proceeds for the Dakota Community Centre expansion.”

John Zabudney, supervisor of sales and acquisitions for the city’s real estate division, stressed administrators will carefully investigate the feasibility of selling all or a portion of the land before any decision is made.

What kind of development should take place at the location is the subject of debate amongst area residents.

Mike Belshaw, who has been involved with the environmental group Bishop Grandin Greenway Inc. for several years, said he does not object to the sale of land — especially if it will fund expansions to recreation services in the area.

However, Belshaw said he does not want to see such a prime piece of real estate converted into yet another strip mall.

“I’m very opposed to it,” he said.

What Belshaw would like to see is Okolita Park developed as a community-related project such as affordable housing.

Belshaw was involved with a group — the Winnipeg South Seniors Village Inc. — that wanted to purchase the site for an affordable housing complex for seniors.

He said the group recently disbanded after almost eight years of trying, and said he was disappointed the land may go up for sale now.

Another person raising his eyebrows over the news is Peter Okolita. The park was renamed in honour of his pioneering family nearly 20 years ago.

His grandparents and their six children moved to the area in 1936 during the Great Depression and cleared their plot by hand, eventually creating a family farm.  

The Okolita children eventually grew up with two of them — John and Alexander, Peter’s father — taking over the original farm while William and Michael purchased their own plots.

The three farms became well-known market gardens in St. Vital until the 1970s, when the Okolitas began to sell their land.

In the 1990s, neighbours of the Okolitas petitioned the city to name the parkland behind Dakota Community Centre after the family and in 1991, Okolita Park was formally recognized — with the remainder of the land being named Dakota Park.

But Okolita said getting the city to put up a sign identifying the park took more than 15 years — a delay the city attributed to a clerical error — and several family members died before they could see the finished product.

While Okolita said he understands the need to expand the community centre, he said he hopes the city will move quickly to find another way to commemorate his family if it sells the land.

“I’m a little disappointed that they’ve sort of shown a disinterest in the history of the area and the people who helped develop the area,” he said.

The land’s environmental value will also be evaluated as the city considers selling the property.

In a report prepared for the Riel community committee when a potential buyer approached the city in 2004, the city’s parks, riverbanks and community initiatives branch noted that much of the forest in the adjacent Dakota Park has been identified as ecologically significant natural lands, and Okolita Park “is likely to be more valuable if kept as parkland and restricted all development on it to that which is park oriented.”

Michelle Bailey, a city spokesperson, declined to comment on whether or not that environmental position has changed since 2004, but said the branch would be consulted before the real estate division makes a final decision.

arielle.godbout@canstarnews.com