YOW Alt Hotel [1085 Airport Pkwy] | ?m | 7f | Completed

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by YOWflier

When a CIP is in place any application should be evaluated against the criteria and approved if it meets them. There should be no politicization of that process. That’s how the playing field becomes unlevel.

Here here!

Council had two opportunities to question the merit of this CIP; when they voted in favour of it in July last year, and when they paused the brownfield grants early on during this term.

They did not pause the airport CIP, so of course the hotel submitted an application for a program they qualify for. This is 100% on Council for not pausing or killing this when they had a chance.

Originally Posted by originalmuffins

At first, it felt like Alt was just using this as collateral and holding the project hostage, but now I see with CIP, it is a program that they are eligible for - so the politicization of this is just going to waste more city funds than not. They already agreed to a lower amount, and now there's a potential for a lawsuit to go for the full amount again. Would've been better off just accepting the reduced amount at this point. You and the others have convinced me.

Almost kind of hope the City gets sued over this. Just too bad politicians never get penalized for dumb decisions.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Here here!

Council had two opportunities to question the merit of this CIP; when they voted in favour of it in July last year, and when they paused the brownfield grants early on during this term.

They did not pause the airport CIP, so of course the hotel submitted an application for a program they qualify for. This is 100% on Council for not pausing or killing this when they had a chance.



Almost kind of hope the City gets sued over this. Just too bad politicians never get penalized for dumb decisions.

The program is set up so that individual projects have to be approved by council. Just because you're eligible to apply for something (job, grant, etc.) does not mean that you are going to receive it.

[fanofYOW]

Originally Posted by originalmuffins

If they could get the concessions aspect completed and Line 4 is done - that'd be huge. Porter aims to have their phase 1 of the maintenance facility done by 2023 I think and phase 2 to start in 2024, so if they do announce going through with the hotel regardless of the rejection - that's still good news too. It will mean they can start looking at the southern terminal expansion.

Speaking of the hotel, from this article, it seems like they intend to continue with the project:

https://obj.ca/group-germain-still-h...airport-hotel/

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by fanofYOW

Speaking of the hotel, from this article, it seems like they intend to continue with the project:

https://obj.ca/group-germain-still-h...airport-hotel/

That article was today! Wow. That is great news, here's hoping they can break ground on this sometime within this year. That should really clean up a lot of YOW+'s current main initiatives (LRT station, concession/terminal improvements, hotel). They still have that long-term parking garage they want to finalize but if they clear the other items, then we are looking good at future planning/expansions for... YOW++ (lol). Finally things are looking up for YOW, with some good steps being taken.

[rocketphish]

Group Germain still hoping to build airport Alt Hotel in ‘near future’ after tax break rejected

David Sali, OBJ
May 8, 2023 | 4:33 PM ET

The company whose plan to build a new hotel at the Ottawa International Airport became embroiled in controversy when it applied for and was denied a municipal tax break says it still hopes to complete the project in “the near future.”

In an email to OBJ on Monday, Group Germain’s vice-president of operations, Hugo Germain, said the Quebec-based hotel chain is still working with the Ottawa International Airport Authority on a proposal to build a 180-room Alt Hotel that would be attached to the airport terminal.

“We remain in close communication with the airport authorities and we are working very hard to try to get this development project started,” Germain said.

Group Germain announced plans to build the hotel in early 2019 and initially hoped to complete the $40-million project by the end of the following year.

But the pandemic delayed construction of the hotel, which – like other Alt-branded airport properties in Toronto and Halifax – would offer direct entry to the airport terminal via an indoor skywalk.

Last year, Group Germain applied for a tax break under a new community improvement plan (CIP) for the airport region aimed at spurring new development around the terminal. It would have given the company a discount of up to $13 million on its municipal property tax bill over the next 25 years.

But the city finance and corporate services committee’s vote on the proposal in early April ended up deadlocked at 6-6, and a week later full council rejected a revised plan that would have seen the firm’s tax break capped at $3.7 million over a maximum of 10 years.

Following the vote, Group Germain said it would “go back to the drawing board and hope we can find ways to make this project work.”

In an update at the airport’s annual public meeting last week, Ottawa International Airport Authority CEO Mark Laroche said the hotel chain “was hard-hit by the pandemic” and faces “mounting construction and material costs” that could threaten the proposal.

“Airport-connected hotels are highly desirable and expected of a world-class hub airport,” Laroche added. “We continue to work with Germain Hotels to find a way to move the Ottawa airport project forward.”

On Monday, the company said finding a way to make the proposal financially viable “remains a major challenge” due to the magnitude of the required investment.

“We were, of course, disappointed with the outcome and the rejection of our request for access to the CIP, which would have allowed us to mitigate part of the risk during the startup of the hotel,” Germain said. “The work continues with our team of professionals as well as our builder, and we hope to be able to complete the project in the near future.”

Council members who voted against the CIP proposal for Group Germain, including Mayor Mark Sutcliffe, said they were opposed to giving tax breaks to private businesses. Some, such as Coun. Jeff Leiper, also questioned whether there would be enough demand for such a hotel.

But Ottawa Board of Trade president and CEO Sueling Ching said the project is a “critical part” of the airport’s recovery plan, arguing it will make Ottawa International Airport a more attractive destination for airlines looking to add flights to the capital.

She said that while other major Canadian cities have offered cash incentives for air carriers to establish new routes to their communities, Ottawa chose not to do so, instead opting to set up the tax-break program for the airport area instead.

“We’re not trying to take a slice of the pie from the other hotels (near the airport) – we’re trying to create a bigger pie for everyone,” Ching said. “This is an opportunity that fits in with the long-term growth plan for the airport authority. From that perspective, I think it’s critically important.”

https://obj.ca/group-germain-still-h...airport-hotel/

[J.OT13]

On the one hand, I hope to see it built, though I'm sure it will come with major concessions from the airport. On the other hand, I hope it doesn't so we can throw it in the faces of Councillors who "guaranteed" it will be built anyway (even though that has nothing to do with the program qualifications).

[SL123]

Airport hotel on track for 2025 opening, Group Germain says

A hotel project at the Ottawa International Airport that became embroiled in controversy earlier this year when the developer’s bid for a municipal tax break was rejected is going ahead.

Group Germain plans to start laying the groundwork next week for a 178-room Alt Hotel that will be attached to the airport terminal, the company’s vice-president of operations, Hugo Germain, told OBJ on Thursday afternoon.

Germain said the project, which has an estimated price tag of about $55 million, is expected to take 18 to 20 months to complete.
“The goal is to be open in 2025,” Germain said. “We’re pretty excited about it.”

Ottawa International Airport Authority president and CEO Mark Laroche said the new lodging will put the city on equal footing with other major Canadian centres such as Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary that already have terminal hotels.

“We see it as an important element of supporting our vision of becoming a hub airport,” Laroche said.

“People are asking for a hotel that is directly connected to the terminal. We identified this as a priority many years ago, and it’s nice to see ground breaking soon on this.”

The new hotel will be a scaled-back version of the original proposal, which was slated to be an eight-storey building with 180 rooms.

The revised plan calls for seven storeys and two fewer rooms. Some amenities such as meeting areas and mechanical infrastructure have been relocated from the top floor to other parts of the building to make better use of space, Germain said.

The total footprint will be about eight per cent smaller than the original plan, he explained.

Germain said the company worked with its contractors, including Ottawa-based Thomas Fuller Construction, to find efficiencies as costs escalated from the pre-pandemic estimate of $44 million.

He said that while the current $55-million figure remains a “moving target,” he is confident the final price tag will be close to that amount.

“The pricing pressure is a bit lower, so that’s a good sign, but it’s still a very expensive project,” he said.

Besides two large meeting rooms, the hotel will also feature a gym as well as a full-service bar and restaurant on the ground floor. Germain said guests should be able to get to airport gates via a fully enclosed walkway in less than 10 minutes.

“If they’re going down south, they can wear flip-flops if they want,” he added.

The much-anticipated project appeared to be in jeopardy earlier this spring when Ottawa city council rejected a proposal that would have seen Group Germain receive a $3.7-million tax break over 10 years as an incentive to build the hotel.

The company was the first applicant under a new community improvement plan approved by the previous council in July 2022 aimed at spurring new development in the airport district.

Supporters of the tax break, including Laroche, said it was necessary to ensure the project went ahead. Germain told the finance and corporate services committee last April that the company’s lenders were factoring the projected savings into their financing calculations.

Many local business leaders are also keen supporters of the project.

Ottawa Board of Trade president and CEO Sueling Ching told OBJ in May the project is a “critical part” of the airport’s recovery plan, arguing it will make Ottawa International Airport a more attractive destination for airlines looking to add flights to the capital.

She said that while other major Canadian cities have offered cash incentives for air carriers to establish new routes to their communities, Ottawa chose not to do so, opting to set up the tax-break program for the airport area instead.

“We’re not trying to take a slice of the pie from the other hotels (near the airport) – we’re trying to create a bigger pie for everyone,” Ching said. “This is an opportunity that fits in with the long-term growth plan for the airport authority. From that perspective, I think it’s critically important.”

However, a majority of councillors, including Mayor Mark Sutcliffe, voted against the proposal. Some contended it amounted to a taxpayer subsidy of a private business, while others questioned the need for another hotel at the airport.

On Thursday, Sutcliffe said he’s pleased that Group Germain is moving ahead with the hotel, adding it should help drive more passenger traffic to the airport and might prompt airlines to consider adding more flights to the capital.

“I think it will be great for the airport, great for visitors to Ottawa and great for the economy,” he said. “I’m glad that the airport and the Germain group were able to work out a good plan that is feasible for them.”

The hotel will be Group Germain’s third property in Ottawa and the third airport lodging for the chain, which also operates terminal hotels at Toronto’s Pearson International Airport and Halifax Stanfield International Airport.

“The city has always been very welcoming to us,” Germain said. “Terminal hotels in general are good-performing hotels. It’s a good business opportunity. If we have opportunities to be at a terminal, we try to go for it.”

https://obj.ca/breaking-airport-hote...-germain-says/

[J.OT13]

On the one hand, glad to see this going ahead. On the other hand, I wish it wasn't so we could rub it in the face of the "it will get built anyway" people. CIPs are not about whether something will be built anyway or not. Who knows what sort of additional concessions the airport had to give up to push this through, not to mention the scaling down of the project.

[DTcrawler]

Glad to see it going ahead as well however I can't help but wonder if the slightly reduced scale (one storey removed, 8% smaller footprint overall) has to do with the loss of the CIP grant.

For me, it's not so much that the project went ahead anyway without the grant. It's more about the signal it sends to companies looking to bring investment and amenities to our city when they are met with hostility - especially in this case when the hotel group simply applied under a grant program that was already been approved and created. Do we not care about doing everything possible to help our airport build itself up, especially after the pandemic? Other cities are offering subsides to attract new routes - we're not. So instead, we created the CIP as an alternate means to help, and then pass on following through with that as well.

In this gov-oriented city, where salaries are paid via tax-funded revenues, people tend to over-vilify private industry. Yes, they are looking to make a profit, but that doesn't always have to be a bad thing if residents have access to more choice, more amenities. Being business-friendly isn't a bad thing.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

Glad to see it going ahead as well however I can't help but wonder if the slightly reduced scale (one storey removed, 8% smaller footprint overall) has to do with the loss of the CIP grant.

For me, it's not so much that the project went ahead anyway without the grant. It's more about the signal it sends to companies looking to bring investment and amenities to our city when they are met with hostility - especially in this case when the hotel group simply applied under a grant program that was already been approved and created. Do we not care about doing everything possible to help our airport build itself up, especially after the pandemic? Other cities are offering subsides to attract new routes - we're not. So instead, we created the CIP as an alternate means to help, and then pass on following through with that as well.

In this gov-oriented city, where salaries are paid via tax-funded revenues, people tend to over-vilify private industry. Yes, they are looking to make a profit, but that doesn't always have to be a bad thing if residents have access to more choice, more amenities. Being business-friendly isn't a bad thing.

Fully agree. Our airport in particular needs help as it's often ignored by the Feds (sound familiar?), for example, the Feds swooped in to rescue the REM station in Montreal, providing hundreds of millions in additional funding though Transport Canada and the Infra Bank, while Ottawa's airport was given chump change. It happened again more recently when the new streamlined security check was implemented in all major cities, except Ottawa, but threw in Winnipeg of all places. I think we ended up getting a water downed version after the airport fought for it.

If Politicians don't want the CIP, then kill it. Don't leave it there for the private sector to apply with eligible projects just to reject them. Don't leave it if you have no intention of honouring it.

[Harley613]

We are bidding on this one at work. It is losing a single floor, but going ahead as planned.

[acottawa]

That’s good news. I guess taxpayers weren’t needed after all.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That’s good news. I guess taxpayers weren’t needed after all.

I mean... a floor was axed, 8% of the footprint was axed, and who knows what sort of concessions the AA offered up to keep Germain from walking.

No need to rehash this whole debate but I maintain that it's a horrible look for the city to pass a CIP and then reject a qualified application over the court of public opinion's ruling. The city does next to nothing to help YOW and backtracking on the CIP grant was a slap in the face.

Bet Sutcliffe still posts one of those awkward selfie monologues on IG congratulating himself and council for supporting YOW in getting the hotel built.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

I mean... a floor was axed, 8% of the footprint was axed, and who knows what sort of concessions the AA offered up to keep Germain from walking.

No need to rehash this whole debate but I maintain that it's a horrible look for the city to pass a CIP and then reject a qualified application over the court of public opinion's ruling. The city does next to nothing to help YOW and backtracking on the CIP grant was a slap in the face.

Bet Sutcliffe still posts one of those awkward selfie monologues on IG congratulating himself and council for supporting YOW in getting the hotel built.

Wholeheartedly agree. The hypocrisy is staggering, not just from Sutcliffe, but from the Councillors who voted in favour of the CIP a year earlier.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Wholeheartedly agree. The hypocrisy is staggering, not just from Sutcliffe, but from the Councillors who voted in favour of the CIP a year earlier.

It's just mind-boggling how anti-business this city can be, especially considering Ottawa should be doing everything possible to maximize private sector investment and increase competitiveness. Now Brockington has the audacity to call out the AA for the whole Hunt Club plantation nonsense, as if the city suddenly expects YOW to play nice after how the whole CIP thing went down. You'd think they'd at least recognize how they shamelessly stiffed YOW all in the name of appeasing the whole "wah wah no handouts to corporations" crowd, and let YOW decide how to manage their own land without trouble.

I just hope Sutcliffe and every councillor involved get selected for extra screening every time they visit YOW.

[acottawa]

Community Improvement Plans are supposed to “provides a means of facilitating redevelopment activities with a goal of effectively using, reusing and restoring lands, buildings and infrastructure.”

They are not supposed to subsidize projects that would have been built anyway.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Community Improvement Plans are supposed to “provides a means of facilitating redevelopment activities with a goal of effectively using, reusing and restoring lands, buildings and infrastructure.”

They are not supposed to subsidize projects that would have been built anyway.

They’re actually supposed to support projects that meet the criteria set out in the program, none of which are whether a project would be “built anyway”. Do you really want politicians getting involved in assessing that?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

They’re actually supposed to support projects that meet the criteria set out in the program, none of which are whether a project would be “built anyway”. Do you really want politicians getting involved in assessing that?

Somebody should certainly assessing that. It is an utter and complete waste of money to subsidize a project that is going to be built anyway.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Somebody should certainly assessing that. It is an utter and complete waste of money to subsidize a project that is going to be built anyway.

Maybe, but still not sure how you assess that when you are talking about an individual project and the intentions of a proponent. And i definitely don’t think each application should be a political decision. That is no way to do economic development.

The timing of the project is also important. If it gets a key project built sooner and jumpstarts more development, then it’s not a waste. That was particularly critical where the airport was struggling to recover from COVID.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

Maybe, but still not sure how you assess that when you are talking about an individual project and the intentions of a proponent. And i definitely don’t think each application should be a political decision. That is no way to do economic development.

The timing of the project is also important. If it gets a key project built sooner and jumpstarts more development, then it’s not a waste. That was particularly critical where the airport was struggling to recover from COVID.

Most development companies would have a clear idea of where their profit point is on a project (because they need to get financing, etc). If a project that the city wants built is slightly below that point it might be worth a subsidy. Otherwise it makes absolutely no sense for the city to subsidize the project.