Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Royal Mayfair Golf Club lease is expiring

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Also, it would appear the the Edmonton Country Club pays roughly 200k a year in property taxes to the city (ECC owns the land it resides on). In a Journal article, it was mentioned that the Mayfair pays roughly the same, of which 35k/year is the lease and the rest is property taxes. That's some sweetheart deal that the City of Edmonton is extending to the ~400 shareholders at the Mayfair. I'm extremely curious how it can be justified on it's face. Because to me, it looks demonstrably unfair to continue leasing the land to the golf club at such a low rate.
    I don't think this club just benefits the 400 members (cbc article says 750 playing, 200 social). Have you never been to an event there? Its used regularly by the business community for conferences and breakfast presentations (one of the best spots in the city to host an event at). Lots of weddings hosted there too. I've been there quite a few times (but not a member, couldn't afford that).

    Golf courses in general are in a tough spot at the moment - memberships are declining as the post boomer generations seem to favor other sports (like biking). I think the city had to be a bit careful here, before you know it, they would have had to maintain the land (correction from "own the land" - already do), which the members have to pay for right now (I expect not cheap). I can't imagine the outrage if it was sold and developed as housing, but yeah, that would be the "profitable" thing to do.
    Last edited by downtownone; 01-05-2019, 02:58 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by downtownone
      Its used regularly by the business community for conferences and breakfast presentations (one of the best spots in the city to host an event at). Lots of weddings hosted there too. I've been there quite a few times (but not a member, couldn't afford that).


      The revenue from those activities go to the same bottom line for the club. Outside event revenue essentially subsidizes the membership's golfing. Every private and public golf course hosts outside events, tournaments and weddings for that very reason.

      Comment


      • #48
        ^no-one is profiting though. People are paying for the upkeep of the land and the facilities to host a business/social event, or to play golf (playing members, and now the public has the ability to pay to play as well), or to socialize (non playing members). If the city had charged too much, the fees would have gone so high, that it wouldn't be economic anymore for any of those activities to happen. The grounds people, chefs, bar staff and similar would have been out of work, and the city would have some land in a river valley that nobody would let it develop (river valley alliance would have a fit if it was sold to developers). While I don't know the demographics of this club, if its like other golf clubs, I expect eventually the city will end up having to pay to maintain / will regain access to this land anyway one day (most of the members will die out over the next decade or two). If people truly think the city has been ripped off, then go join the club - if your goal is to spend time in the river valley though, you can do that for no cost next door.
        Last edited by downtownone; 01-05-2019, 04:28 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by nobleea View Post
          Originally posted by kkozoriz View Post
          The Mayfair has an area of roughly 150 acres. That bump in lease rate brings it to ~$32/acre. Quite the deal. I wonder if the city would be willing to make similar deals with others.
          $320/acre. Not $32. I think it's closer to 130 acres, so more like $374/acre/yr. ($48,333/yr / 130 acres)
          Pretty sweet deal, regardless.
          Grazing lease rates on crown land are about the same price as this from ball park calculations. And leaseholders in AB of crown land appear to be also responsible for municipal taxes, weed control, managing public and industrial users, maintenance of fencing, etc etc.

          I bet the city could get much more lease income by turning it in to a mobile home park and leasing the lots out. Not that anyone would likely recommend that.
          I think there should be at least another zero behind the lease rate.
          Could have leased it out for RV storage, some heavy equipment storage, etc.
          Maybe add a shooting range on one of the open strips.

          Except it probably should all be re-naturalized. That and the rest of the valley parkland. Victoria course, Rundle, etc.
          Last edited by KC; 01-05-2019, 09:16 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by KC View Post
            Except it probably should all be re-naturalized. That and the rest of the valley parkland. Victoria course, Rundle, etc.
            About 20K in lost revenue a month to turn it back to nature? Seems like a good deal for the citizens of Edmonton.

            Maybe we should have pulled a parks canada. Here's your 30 year lease. At an obscene rate. And at the end of the lease, we get the whole golf course and buildings at no charge. You can sign it now, or turn everything back to parkland if you don't want to sign. Your choice. (This is what they did to sunshine ski village).

            Comment


            • #51
              Reminds me of Radium Hot Springs Resort in Kootenay National Park. Feds determined it was in the way of a natural goat path. Purchased it for an undisclosed amount (likely a substantial amount) and demolished it. A loss for tourists but a means to justify their jobs with the parks service I suppose. Lesson to be learned, don’t set up a business on govt land lease. You may lose your business on someone’s whim.
              Last edited by Drumbones; 03-05-2019, 09:33 AM.
              Just enjoying another day in paradise.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Drumbones View Post
                Reminds me of Radium Hot Springs Resort in Kootenay National Park. Feds determined it was in the way of a natural goat path. Purchased it for an undisclosed amount (likely a substantial amount) and demolished it. A loss for tourists but a means to justify their jobs with the parks service I suppose. Lesson to be learned, don’t set up a business on govt land lease. You may lose your business on someone’s whim.
                Yeah you might get someone’s goat.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by nobleea
                  (This is what they did to sunshine ski village)


                  There's a ton of backstory to that though. The family that owns/operates Sunshine has long had a contentious relationship with Parks, their own staff, and basically anyone else they cross paths with is my understanding. Totally unrelated, but this is one of many examples over the years:
                  https://skitheworld.com/2011/02/suns...rt-management/

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X