Winnipeg | Downtown | 30 Granite Way | Granite Riverside Commons | 12F | Proposed

[cllew]

interesting comment in the Reddit discussion on this topic about the loss of parking.

"Tell the old codgers to embrace Uber".

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

If it truly is a dying sport, then perhaps they should refocus their efforts on actually getting people to curl, rather spend time and space on things where it would actually benefit literally everybody around them, maybe even themselves.

Rather than blocking this whole development, they should encourage this to actually happen. When this does get built, there may be kids who might be curious about the sport living in this new residential complex who may want to try out curling. This is what's most likely what they're afraid off, because they for some reason can't figure out a way to reach out to the next generation of potential curlers, whether it's at a grassroots level, or a club level, or any level at all..

The Sun article I had posted, says pretty much the same thing. Hockey has this problem too- it's not attracting new Canadians, or any visible minorities. Then again, from what a woman was saying in the Facebook comments section, it seems the GCC is content with the "old boys club" mentality.

[WinCitySparky]

Curling is literally geared for rich suburban type people, this “anti housing in favour of parking” stance just screams that. It has definitely made me realize that it can be quite exclusionary to non privileged people.

[cllew]

Well the rich suburban types in East Kildonan let Rossmere country club shut down their curling rink in 2018 because they did not want to put membership dues into a new ice plant.

From what I have heard they are making more money off the golf simulators they put in the rink area than what they made of curling. Rossmere's building and golf course is also on leased land from the city.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by cllew

Well the rich suburban types in East Kildonan let Rossmere country club shut down their curling rink in 2018 because they did not want to put membership dues into a new ice plant.

From what I have heard they are making more money off the golf simulators they put in the rink area than what they made of curling. Rossmere's building and golf course is also on leased land from the city.

Hmmmm....maybe housing needs to be built on all city-owned country club land.

[cllew]

Originally Posted by pspeid

Hmmmm....maybe housing needs to be built on all city-owned country club land.

Rossmere's lease does not expire until 2058

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by cllew

Rossmere's lease does not expire until 2058

I'll wait...

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by cllew

He is seen on TV every now and then in his ads for his Jam Rock Security alarm installation company.

My old boss ran into him at a security equipment supply store a few years ago. He has that charisma, or "rizz" as the younger Gen Z and Gen Alpha calls it these days.

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

The Sun article I had posted, says pretty much the same thing. Hockey has this problem too- it's not attracting new Canadians, or any visible minorities. Then again, from what a woman was saying in the Facebook comments section, it seems the GCC is content with the "old boys club" mentality.

The "Old Boys Club" mentality, if we are comparing this to hockey with curling, didn't do anyone any favours either. It's a separate topic to discuss, but that sort of thinking had lead to recent scandals and allegations involving Hockey Canada and a certain hockey club at the top level in recent years.

I'm not gonna go further on that as again, that's another topic to discuss, but this going back to the point, curling needs to expand and be more accessible, or it dies because "tRaDiTiOns aREn'T rEsPEcTEd!!" or some dumb thing they would say.

[Flatland Metropolis]

To be honest, there is such hyperbole around this situation it is kind of sad. As much as I support the build baby build crowd (and this is a lovely development), there are legitimate concerns for the club's parking membership here. It would be great if Canada Life and the City of Winnipeg could come to a parking agreement, it would certainly solve everything, but that does not exist at this time. If the City and CL would have something like a 50-75 year lease agreement for 15 stalls it would solve everything. Not sure if this has been presented to council.

As a curling member of Granite it is silly for me to risk my car being towed by parking on someone's private property without something written in stone. Nor should members fully be expected to pay an additional $50-100 on Uber a week for additional fees to attend this central club. Hopefully everyone on both sides of this debate can ratchet down this language and ensure that the club has continue and confirmed access for parking and that housing can be built to help solve the continued national crisis for housing and the unhomed.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by Flatland Metropolis

To be honest, there is such hyperbole around this situation it is kind of sad. As much as I support the build baby build crowd (and this is a lovely development), there are legitimate concerns for the club's parking membership here. It would be great if Canada Life and the City of Winnipeg could come to a parking agreement, it would certainly solve everything, but that does not exist at this time. If the City and CL would have something like a 50-75 year lease agreement for 15 stalls it would solve everything. Not sure if this has been presented to council.

As a curling member of Granite it is silly for me to risk my car being towed by parking on someone's private property without something written in stone. Nor should members fully be expected to pay an additional $50-100 on Uber a week for additional fees to attend this central club. Hopefully everyone on both sides of this debate can ratchet down this language and ensure that the club has continue and confirmed access for parking and that housing can be built to help solve the continued national crisis for housing and the unhomed.

I respect what you're saying FM, but I have to disagree. The level of entitlement from the club is insane. They have no rights to property they don't own and free parking downtown is a luxury, not a right. I can't just develop a neighbouring empty lot because it's next door, they're no different. Further, if they can't afford an Uber, take a bus. Osborne and surrounding streets are flush with routes coming from all sides of the city. This whole thing comes off as a bunch of boomers who are pissed the Poors might be within sight of their curling club (which I know isnt the case, but the optics and NIMBYism around this sure screams it).

[bomberjet]

Could an expanded parking lot on the east side be done where the beer can goes. And just put the beer can in the park area to the east or south?

Generally I'd agree there needs to be some form of parking form at sports facility. But the flip flop, entitlement, "we don't want no bums" attitude makes me lose that sense of empathy for the members here.

[Flatland Metropolis]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

I respect what you're saying FM, but I have to disagree. The level of entitlement from the club is insane. They have no rights to property they don't own and free parking downtown is a luxury, not a right. I can't just develop a neighbouring empty lot because it's next door, they're no different. Further, if they can't afford an Uber, take a bus. Osborne and surrounding streets are flush with routes coming from all sides of the city. This whole thing comes off as a bunch of boomers who are pissed the Poors might be within sight of their curling club (which I know isnt the case, but the optics and NIMBYism around this sure screams it).

That might be the optics but this is not the case, for example, I am a millennial. And the club has stated for a fact they are happy to have more neighbours (there are massive homeless camps adjacent whether this gets built or not).

The club has had soft conversations with the City for repurchasing the property after it was given to the city in 1975, following the financial difficulties then. All the club has asked for is something in writing regarding parking (on adjacent lots or in the new development) and that has not been provided.

Again it is sad that this has boiled down to one liners and off the cuff remarks ("damn Boomers hate the poors"). That's Trump style policy. Taking a minute to work together on good policy and being great neighbours should be what all parties want.

[Mr Tall Forehead]

Originally Posted by Flatland Metropolis

...As a curling member of Granite it is silly for me to risk my car being towed by parking on someone's private property without something written in stone. Nor should members fully be expected to pay an additional $50-100 on Uber a week for additional fees to attend this central club...

Speaking of hyperbole...an Uber from the Granite to the Perimeter Hwy in pretty much any direction runs about $20 most times of the day.

[ColdRain&Snow]

So I don't curl at the Granite Curling Club but my understanding is that most of the curling happens on the evenings and weekends. For those times, the Curling Club should come to an agreement with Canada Life to use their parking lot, since that parking is always empty on evenings and weekends.

For mornings and afternoons on weekdays, my proposed solution is to increase the parking time limit on Balmoral St between Broadway and Granite Way from 1-hour to 2-hours. I walk down that block of Balmoral St fairly often and there's always lots of parking spaces. The Curling Club could then reserve all of their east parking lot (about 15-20 parking spaces) for seniors/people with mobility issues. Younger people could then park on Balmoral and walk 4-5 minutes, which is inconvenient but shouldn't be a dealbreaker.



It's disappointing to see the Granite Curling Club executives making a bunch of demands from the developer (expanding the east parking lot, revenue sharing, etc.), which is a non-profit organization, instead of trying to proactively solve the parking issues.

[pspeid]

I don't know if this has ever been mentioned, but the housing project seems to be depending on the Housing Accelerator Fund for it's completion. Is there a sense of urgency from the city in getting this done, anticipating the fund will be axed under a Conservative federal government?

If this is the case, I think the city definitely has both incentive and the right to get this project going while the fund still exists. Waiting on what seems to be a vague intention, sometime, maybe, by the Club to build on that lot seems to promise nothing is done on that lot, especially when the members still benefit from having it's convenient parking lot.

[Flatland Metropolis]

You are correct, the urgency in getting this done now is the funding may dry up completely in three months if the CPC axes the policy.

[trueviking]

^ even if the program isn't cut, there is a requirement for HAF projects to start construction on a short timeline.

The parking is totally solvable. To me, instead of trying to block the development of a parking lot they don't own, the tenants of the building should have just walked across the street to formalize the agreement they have had for many years to access their parking lot after hours....my hope is that's what happens before the next EPC meeting.

The conversation meandered from parking to the club's ability to develop the property on its own, but if it is really about parking, that should be easily solvable.

[WinCitySparky]

The self-development thing is clearly a weak cover argument I am of the belief. If not then where was the proposal or any talk of it until now? Absurd. Parking — when there are clearly other available means and substitutes — does not take precedence over badly needed housing for people, is my sentiment.

[anthonyk]

After listening through many Council and Committee meetings over the past few years, and especially this Property & Development SPC meeting, I am surprised that some of these councilors able to maintain and get re-elected to such a role when it appears they have such a limited knowledge of the cities administerial procedures, even when said procedures are explicitly explained to them.

But in all honesty, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the time they are purposely misunderstanding the explanations given by administration. I feel sorry for the city staff that have to explain themselves over and over again while being interrupted repeatedly.

Vike, I could see your frustration sitting on the bench while Russ Wyatt rambles on about "why is the proponent presenting if the city is the applicant and there is no official agreement", when a perfectly reasonable explanation had been given in the administration's summary of the file at the beginning of the hearing.

[WinCitySparky]

Wyatt is truly a lunatic