Giving away city parkland to private interest

User avatar
onestop67
Guru
Posts: 9531
Joined: Sep 10th, 2006, 11:12 pm

Re: Giving away city parkland to private interest

Post by onestop67 »

XT225 wrote:...and by the way, most of them are NOT against water slides; they just don't want to lose the park space. I am NOT a senior by the way but I DO use that section of the park often and do not want to see it lost to a water slide. The noise alone will be hard to stomach in such a serene location. Put it on PIB lands that are currently available are far more suitable for such a venue.


The only big change is the waterslide section. And believe me, if Trio giving up the waterslide park will get them approval for the rest of the project, they will ditch the waterslide idea in a heartbeat.

I agree, and I think Trio Group would give up the waterslide part of the project, to maintain some kind of peace. The waterslide part of this project is just not that important.
Last edited by ferri on Aug 7th, 2015, 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fixed quote
User avatar
onestop67
Guru
Posts: 9531
Joined: Sep 10th, 2006, 11:12 pm

Re: Giving away city parkland to private interest

Post by onestop67 »

ToddT wrote:onestop67 you seem to have it in your head that because a group of seniors is spearheading the campaign to prevent the city from giving away our greenspace, that it is all seniors in this town that are against young people.

That's ignorant.

I'm against the project and the plan, I'm 32, and my kids would use waterslides lots. What's funny, is that it's for my kids that I want them to save the park space. Not enough value is put on this type of land. Once you give it away, it is gone, forever.

You also mention that you are against the 30 year lease and that it should be a 5 year "trial and error" approach. That to me speaks volumes about the people's faith in this company, or moreover, the viability of waterslides in general. Why would we tear up and destroy park land and lease it to a private investor that we aren't confident can run the property for more than 5 years?

Build a marina - check
Build a restaurant - check
Destroy valuable park land and a budding ecosystem - I don't think so.


Bahahaaaaaa...are you serious?

I never said ALL seniors. But if you were at the City Hall protest the other day, you would see that of the 650 people that attended, 643 of them were 60+. There was even a news report about it. (might have been on InfoNews)

Yes, Penticton has a large volume of seniors. They don't like change. And they also don't like anything that may disrupt their quiet retirement lifestyle.

A 5 year lease is hardly "trial and error". It"s just a much more sensible committment from the City than a 30 year deal. So yes, if this company fails after 3-5 years, they are still the lessee's for another 25 years? Dumb.

As for the "tearing up parkland" they are not doing that, other than the possibility of the waterpark, which I have said I'm against. They may slightly expand the restaurant building, and add more slips to the marina. Those changes will not really change the current landscape.
ToddT
Übergod
Posts: 1006
Joined: Dec 16th, 2010, 2:48 pm

Re: Giving away city parkland to private interest

Post by ToddT »

I like how we're building condos where the waterslides used to be. What if we built condos on parkland and gave the waterslides their old home back? Lol I'd love to see what the "pro" side says then.
twobits
Guru
Posts: 7964
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Giving away city parkland to private interest

Post by twobits »

onestop67 wrote:

The only big change is the waterslide section. And believe me, if Trio giving up the waterslide park will get them approval for the rest of the project, they will ditch the waterslide idea in a heartbeat.

I agree, and I think Trio Group would give up the waterslide part of the project, to maintain some kind of peace. The waterslide part of this project is just not that important.


Funny that you should bring this up cuz just today, I went into the Marina building where they have the conceptual drawings set up for public scrutiny. I have looked at them twice before but wanted to look at them again. I entered the building about 10 seconds after a fellow in front of me. He was greeted by the manager who asked him if he would like a seat. He replied that he was just looking for the drawings about the proposed development and what all the fuss was about. I stood back about 15 ft pretending to be interested in other things but was keenly tuned into what clearly and very quickly became a real estate sales pitch akin to what might encounter for a time share resort in the tropics. The fellow looking at the drawings was completely respectful. He was trying to locate landmarks on the drawings that gave him reference to the actual property he was standing on. When referencing the water slide footprint he commented, "this does look to be covering a lot of current greenspace". The reply from the manager, was get this, "these are only conceptual drawings.....the water slide will actually be over this way"!!!!! The fellow then astutely said, "was the decision to move forward with this project made with more accurate drawings?" The answer, "no, we only have conceptual drawings at this time and we don't even know if we are going to proceed with the proposed developments on the SE corner of the property yet". "The fellow", and I am liking him more by the second goes quiet for about a minute. Then he says this, while waiving his hand over the Marina expansion and restaurant...."I get this part but why the water slides? Seems to be a waste of money and parkland".

The response, and reason for my response to this post was his answer. He said, "The water slide is the cash cow for us. The Marina, the restaurant and the water slide are three different components to the business plan but without the water slide, it would not be possible."

Now think about this folks....if the water slides were such a key cash cow to this plan, why was that kept secret until the 11th hour?
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.

Return to “North Okanagan”