Development around The Alerus

[The Sicatoka]

There was a long article in the Grand Forks Herald yesterday about plans for the area around the Alerus Center.

Your thoughts?

[CoteauRinkRat]

The one thought I have is..................more parking !!!!!!!

[DamStrait]

Sounds to me like a pretty low risk investment for the city's taxpayers. Funding of a water park that is needed anyway to replace the old city pool. Some property tax breaks to developers on land that the city surely is not collecting a lot of tax on now anyway. The return? Something to pull in tourists, conventions, and maybe even some new coporate hq's. Current motel owners may whine, but I doubt they'll be going after the same customers.

[CoteauRinkRat]

The water park sounds like a good deal until one starts looking more closely at the numbers.

The price for admission is still not been set in stone. Anywhere from 12 to 18 bucks a person has been thrown out there.

Is this something the city really needs to be getting into.

[star2city]

The water park sounds like a good deal until one starts looking more closely at the numbers.

The price for admission is still not been set in stone.

[CoteauRinkRat]

lol

Yeah, let's get all of our information from a website that is the main push behind the water park. Council members and private citizen groups have questioned their numbers since they were released. Independent research says the fees will have to be much higher or the city will be bailing it out every year.

If it is such a slam dunk and a great idea, how come it barely passed the city council. 2 of the 3 members voting against are on opposite ends of the political spectrum, one being ultra-conservative and the other one is an extreme liberal. That shoots down any questions regarding their political feelings toward the park.

Why is it that other groups such as the EDC have come out against the park?

There seems to be a lot of opposition out there to such a great and wonderful idea.

[star2city]

There seems to be a lot of opposition out there to such a great and wonderful idea.

In my recollection, three emotionally charged referendums have gripped Grand Forks in the last 25 years: yes or no on the Alerus Center, yes or no on the Columbia Road overpass, and yes or no on Dayton-Hudson building Columbia Mall. In retrospect, almost any reasonable person would conclude the significant opposition to these changes greatly overstated any negative effects on Grand Forks. In fact, all of them have been significant positives to GF.

If the King's Walk Arnold Palmer golf course had been put up for a vote, would there have been opposition? Absolutely. And the arguments would have been the exact same ones now being used against the water park: too expensive, for the rich, somebody else will benefit, too much for North Dakota tastes. There is something strangely wrong and downright vicious with a fraction of the GF populace when they start threatening economic boycotts of water park supporters. It's as if they don't want anyone to rise above their own mediocrity.

I am not a GF resident, but from my view, the major impediment to progress and economic development in GF is residents lacking any vision and faith in what is possible. As much as Grand Forks has been blessed in the last six years, you would think it's citizens, more than anyone, would have confidence in its future and be willing to give the vision of its elected leadership a chance.

[DamStrait]

In my recollection, three emotionally charged referendums have gripped Grand Forks in the last 25 years: yes or no on the Alerus Center, yes or no on the Columbia Road overpass, and yes or no on Dayton-Hudson building Columbia Mall. In retrospect, almost any reasonable person would conclude the significant opposition to these changes greatly overstated any negative effects on Grand Forks. In fact, all of them have been significant positives to GF.

If the King's Walk Arnold Palmer golf course had been put up for a vote, would there have been opposition? Absolutely. And the arguments would have been the exact same ones now being used against the water park: too expensive, for the rich, somebody else will benefit, too much for North Dakota tastes. There is something strangely wrong and downright vicious with a fraction of the GF populace when they start threatening economic boycotts of water park supporters. It's as if they don't want anyone to rise above their own mediocrity.

I am not a GF resident, but from my view, the major impediment to progress and economic development in GF is residents lacking any vision and faith in what is possible. As much as Grand Forks has been blessed in the last six years, you would think it's citizens, more than anyone, would have confidence in its future and be willing to give the vision of its elected leadership a chance.

What s2c said!

[CoteauRinkRat]

Everyone in this city and in this state wants to keep young people here. When push comes to shove, in the state legislature and the city councils, virtually no money is dedicated to this cause.

Why not raise the sales tax in Grand Forks and give tax incentives for young people to move here or to stay here?

I guess that would be tax welfare and people would be against it. We have all types of problems with outmigration, but yeah, let's raise taxes to build a waterpark.

This state will continue to lose people until someone steps up to the plate and actually adresses this issue.

I guess people want a waterpark more than they want a thriving and growing city.

[airmail]

I have recently moved out of Grand Forks, and to the rural Thompson, ND area, in part because of my skyrocketing property taxes. My new home will be twice the size, on an 11 acre lot, and still be just over half of what I was paying for taxes in my old home. The dike second assessment on my property west of I-29 was the straw that broke this camel's back. People are sick and tired of being taxed in Grand Forks. It seems all people want to do anymore is tax and spend, when our damn dikes aren't even paid for yet of all things. I was fed up enough to leave, and judging by the sale of 5 other lots near me to GF residents, I'm not the only one.

[CoteauRinkRat]

I have recently moved out of Grand Forks, and to the rural Thompson, ND area, in part because of my skyrocketing property taxes. My new home will be twice the size, on an 11 acre lot, and still be just over half of what I was paying for taxes in my old home. The dike second assessment on my property west of I-29 was the straw that broke this camel's back. People are sick and tired of being taxed in Grand Forks. It seems all people want to do anymore is tax and spend, when our damn dikes aren't even paid for yet of all things. I was fed up enough to leave, and judging by the sale of 5 other lots near me to GF residents, I'm not the only one.

airmail

My neighborhood is practically empty for the same reasons you stated.

I guess more tax is the solution to the problem.

[PCM]

While I agree that Grand Forks residents are generally very conservative when it comes to spending money on economic development or city improvements, I should point out that millions have also been spent on projects that can legitimately be labeled boondoggles. Those came about because proponents greatly overstated the benefits and payoffs of their project. In addition, some of the "successes" listed have yet to prove that they will indeed be successful over the long term.

There was a study several years ago showing that the rate of taxation in Grand Forks was one of the highest in the state. On top of that, the taxpayers of the city are being asked to foot part of the bill for the new dike system. That

[The Sicatoka]

I can see where both sides are coming from in this.

I'm wondering if it doesn't pass will there be a push for neighborhood pools instead of just splash parks?

Put in three or four neighborhood pools to replace those lost to dike construction and you're still looking at a significant fraction of the water park cost. The catch is, neighborhood pools won't draw in folks off the highway or the Canad Inn.

It really is Scylla and Charybdis.

[airmail]

It really is Scylla and Charybdis.

Clever!

It seems that the only thing GF residents wanted was to have their neighborhood pools replaced. But now the city and their "destination city" deciples found a way to better suit their own needs and wants. (and those of Cannad Inn)

Again, the city of GF is tailoring to their own needs and wishes, not those of its residents. I guess the voters will ultimately decide the fate or fruition of the water park.

[CoteauRinkRat]

My biggest problem with the whole thing is how they have framed the vote.

You can vote no on the waterpark and yes on the sales tax. The waterpark can get shut down, but the city council can still decide to use the sales tax and build the waterpark regardless what the public's voice (vote) says.

[airmail]

Right, CRR... if you don't want the thing you have to vote NO on both. I'm sure most will overlook this, though. Good ol' creative ballot writing.

I expect groundbreaking this spring...

[The Sicatoka]

Clever!

A University of North Dakota education!

[star2city]

... millions have also been spent on projects that can legitimately be labeled boondoggles. Those came about because proponents greatly overstated the benefits and payoffs of their project. In addition, some of the "successes" listed have yet to prove that they will indeed be successful over the long term.

The Alerus is an underutilized GF asset representing $80 million in investment. Grand Forks either needs to help create a critical mass around the Alerus to spur additional development and business for the Alerus, or bite the bullet and accept heavy subsidies for the Alerus for eons.

I have recently moved out of Grand Forks, and to the rural Thompson, ND area, in part because of my skyrocketing property taxes

I think everyone agrees that property tax levels in GF, especially after the dike assessments, are much too high. Mayor Brown wants property taxes reduced, and a stretch goal of 50% reduction by say 2020 should be made. One way to reduce property taxes is increase the taxable base. Encouraging higher-density private development ‘infill’ around the REA, the Alerus, as well as downtown would help, rather than encourage more urban sprawl south of 32nd which requires new investment by GF.

I'm wondering if it doesn't pass will there be a push for neighborhood pools instead of just splash parks?

As someone who grew up in the Riverside Park neighborhood, the loss of a neighborhood pool is a big hangup. What is not mentioned are the deficits that Riverside and Elks pools operate with. Considering existing operating deficits, no year-round publicly available indoor pool in GF, and building a pool in any other neighborhood location would raise neighborhood infighting to new levels, building a waterpark at the Alerus, IMO, is prudent and fiscally responsible.

[PCM]

The Alerus is an underutilized GF asset representing $80 million in investment. Grand Forks either needs to help create a critical mass around the Alerus to spur additional development and business for the Alerus, or bite the bullet and accept heavy subsidies for the Alerus for eons.

I agree, which is why I'll probably vote for the water park.

[CoteauRinkRat]

It will be very interesting to see how those plays out.

[star2city]

The CANAD Inns website has a Dec 18th press release with this rendering of the Alerus Center hotel complex. Interestingly, it includes a water park, although smaller than the version the voters rejected. The website gave no official word on when construction begins or if the scheduled completion date is before next year's World Juniors. With this complex, the Alerus would probably be the frontrunner for the Div II football championship starting in 2006, if it so chose to bid.

[UND Fan]

Thanks for the post. Very interesting!

It sure would have been nice if the hotel were completed before the World Championships but I don't think that is a possibly, is it? Any construction experts out there?

[jimdahl]

The CANAD Inns website has a Dec 18th press release with this rendering of the Alerus Center hotel complex.  Interestingly, it includes a water park, although smaller than the version the voters rejected.

From what I understand, that's pretty consistent with the Canad Inn's development philosophy -- they like to have attractions rather than just depend on the normal hotel crowd. The way I see it, they wanted a waterpark because it's somewhat unique in the area so could convince guests to stay at their hotel instead of another in the area (I don't think it was ever meant to be a Wisconsin Dells-like attraction that would draw people from afar for the sole purpose of water-parking).

Recognizing G.F.'s need for water entertainment for it's own citizens, they gave G.F. an opportunity to buy in, develop a bigger park, and offer volume pricing to the citizens of G.F. Since the voters weren't interested, I would guess that this waterpark will be aimed at out-of-town guests rather than locals, including higher prices and bundling with hotel rooms. Not a waterpark for G.F. citizens anymore, but still good for economic development.

[TheSiouxFan]

The rumor is that they also will build a Movie plex. (source: www.vastlane.org)

[jimdahl]

The rumor is that they also will build a Movie plex.  (source: www.vastlane.org)

I would find a theater curious for a few reasons:

• It's not pictured in their own concept drawing
  
• I personally think of theatres as primarily targeted toward locals rather than tourists; whereas the hotel, convention center, and water park are targeted towards visitors. I don't see much cross-benefit. Maybe people do go to movies while visiting other towns, though.
  
• The G.F. movie scene is controlled by one company with relatively low prices, so other companies would probably be hesitant to compete (or is demand high enough that Carmike would find it worth opening more screens? Are the Carmike 10 stadium seating? If not, they could be attacked on that front).
  

I have absolutely zero inside information on this, it's just my personal gut reaction to the idea.