Proposed Hotel

[kev427]

http://www.pentictonwesternnews.com/news/300866201.html

Does this make sense to anyone? IIRC, when Coast bought the former Travelodge, they planned to start an expansion right away, but decided against it as they discovered there was a surplus of hotel rooms in Penticton.

If this has changed, wouldn't it be better if the Coast Hotel expanded, rather than replacing park land, which Penticton is already short on. Also the El Rancho Motel has been for sale for a while now. It seems like a prime location for a hotel, and it's right across the street from the PTCC.

[madmudder]

The ball field land behind the PTCC was donated by a private individual decades ago to the city of Penticton as long as it remained a park.

[fluffy]

Also the El Rancho Motel has been for sale for a while now. It seems like a prime location for a hotel, and it's right across the street from the PTCC.

Excellent point. The place has seen its better days anyways, why not pretty that piece of property up before we start selling off parkland.

[Anonymous123]

The ball field land behind the PTCC was donated by a private individual decades ago to the city of Penticton as long as it remained a park.

Wasn't that the old rodeo grounds?

[Tony]

The old rodeo grounds are where SOEC stands now.

[livewire]

This will still be a park many moons into the future because no 'high end' hotel is going to spend 25 million dollars building a hotel because the city says one day they might get convention business. If the city said to a 'high end' hotel chain, 'Hey we have 45 million is convention business booked over the next 10 years....maybe.

I can think of 3 or 4 hotels within walking distance that could easily add the rooms needed and would LOVE to - if there was a market for it. What the city should do - but have no clue what they are doing in this case - is offer the hotels that can expand a 5 year tax break (or whatever that number is) to build the necessary rooms. No one is going to use their money to build more rooms or hotels to sit vacant while someone at the city (Is there someone at the city?) try's to book conventions 5 years in the future. Any large convention is booked 3-5 years in advance so there is no business large convention business for minimum 3 years. Didn't the ding dongs that suggested this plan go to business school?

So, parkland it will probably be for a good 20 more years.

[ToddT]

I think the idea is that people at the conventions would stay at the hotel on site, instead of the hotels nearby, thus putting more money in the city's pockets and killing local business. I would think that the profits from the hotel on site would have more than a small percentage of the city's interests.

[twobits]

I think the idea is that people at the conventions would stay at the hotel on site, instead of the hotels nearby, thus putting more money in the city's pockets and killing local business. I would think that the profits from the hotel on site would have more than a small percentage of the city's interests.

The City would never in a million years be a partner in a hotel.

The only palatable spot for me for a hotel there would be the footprint of the Wine Tourism building along with the lawn area directly east. The Hotel could tie seamlessly right into the north entrance of the convention center and be 8 or 10 stories in height. No parkland lost.
That could actually work and be a complementary addition to the whole convention, community centre, SOEC complex. Concerts, conventions, sport tourism from hockey to curling to swim meets and more. I like it. Pretty sure the Prystay and the PHA would fight tooth and nail against though lol.

[ToddT]

Don't have to be a partner. You scratch my back I'll scratch yours type of deal.

With your idea, the wine tourism building could be established on the lower floor of the new hotel. Win/win.

I'm not really "for" losing parkland, but it's kind of a stupid spot for a baseball field. It made a lot more sense when the other ball fields were there.

[twobits]

Don't have to be a partner. You scratch my back I'll scratch yours type of deal.

With your idea, the wine tourism building could be established on the lower floor of the new hotel. Win/win.

I'm not really "for" losing parkland, but it's kind of a stupid spot for a baseball field. It made a lot more sense when the other ball fields were there.

I think it is a stupid spot for one ball diamond as well but am trying to be realistic in proposing an alternative that might fly. Let's face it.....this is not a park....it is a user specific piece of ground to play baseball. I would surmise that of all the letters to the editor opposing this suggested use of lands, nery one has ever once set foot on the soil there. It is just a devolved confrontation between those that look for opportunities that can benefit the community as a whole, and those that just oppose everything for their own philosophical and political agendas.
A hotel developer could even step up and say they would duplicate the ballpark footprint elsewhere and there would be a segment of the population that would then demand that both pieces of land should be reserved as parkland.

[sale4u]

First off, the Coast Hotel owners spent a fortune on acquiring the land around their existing location. If there was a "true" need for "high end" rooms these owners would be the ones that could do it.
Secondly, doesn't the city have land that was supposed to be a a Hockey Dorm that they could use to build on?
Lastly, didn't I just read that the City and the PHA came to an agreement on a new position that is going to pay over $90,000 a year to promote "Sport" tourism? What kind of sports? Obviously not baseball as they are decreasing the amount of diamonds with this plan. And not Tennis because they already built the SOEC on the only indoor courts we had.
The whole thing is ridiculous! Nice to have youth at city hall but I wish it came with wisdom of old!

[ToddT]

Just throwing this out there...there are around 24-30 kids playing t-ball this year. After a few drop out in the next couple of years that leaves enough for about 2 full teams of kids. Penticton has 4 serviceable youth ballparks, not including what you see at the schools, or the two well maintained hardball parks that the older kids play at.

Let's be realistic here.

I grew up playing ball in this town. When we had the 3 diamonds beside eachother, complete with bullpens and batting cages, that was to die for. I remember foul balls bouncing off the tennis bubble lol. The fact is, there are not as many kids playing sports in this town anymore. And it's not just baseball. Look around.

Figure this one out, but I think we need the sport tourism, but do we need all the facilities?

[Static]

Was it not the Ramada owners that bought the Travelodge?

[twobits]

Was it not the Ramada owners that bought the Travelodge?

Yes, the Agur family. The face for the Ramada would be Robin. Long term and storied Okanagan family. They would be the Okanagan version of the Louisiana Plantation land owner.
Real Estate....once you own enough of it, the gift keeps coming generationally.
The guy that runs the Lakeside Hotel/Casino and was just a Vancouver City cop for a few years also appreciates the benefits of generational wealth.
The difference is one is a quiet and generous community philanthropist and the other a buffoon looking to make a headline wherever possible.

[sale4u]

TwoBits, it's not just kids using the fields but a huge collection of Rec Leaguers too! I agree that eventually this land will probably out live its ballpark days but with all the land surround the convention centre it makes no sense to take that land now. What if they want to expand the convention centre some day, then what.
I agree 100% with your take on the difference between the two hotel owners.