^^ I have to thank you for the tip. I had a good chuckle. Just wait, next thing you know, they'll be hurling accusations of racism for trying to make the thing profitable.

The reality is we have plenty of spaces that could easily function as "town squares" but lamentably the idea doesn't seem to be of importance to the north American culture.

Ya I usually do like his articles – even if a little overzealous sometimes – but that one is just absurd. It always has, is, and will be a private mall. When there's a holiday or event to celebrate, people don't go to Portage Place, they go to The Forks or P&M.

Plus, there's literally zero inclination that the mall will change much other than cosmetically. For all we know the mall part stays the same and gets 2 towers on it.

The most insane thing is he didn't even say what he would like to happen. Like what, does he want the government to buy it and get in the mall business, never make a change to it and allow it to fall into a state of disrepair? Does he want to literally force stagnation and stop economic development? Does he not realized that a PP that is "healthier" is better for everyone. Sorry, it would suck for those people he speaks of if they don't have a free private place to hang out in – but it's not their responsibility to provide that.

The whole thing is ridiculous. Especially the part about The Forks – there are SOOOO many free things to do their, and you don't need to have a $10 beer to do any of them. The Forks is probably one of (or the) best examples in Canada of an accessible space for all people of all backgrounds, wealths, etc.

Progressive Urbanists, c.1995-2018: Portage Place is a textbook example of the dangers of developer-driven downtown planning and megaproject worship; it's an insular building that destroyed what diversity and commercial health was left on Portage Avenue and closed off the Central Park neighbourhood from the rest of downtown.

Progressive Urbanists, 2019: Portage Place is the greatest public space in the city and should be preserved just the way it is.

Small note: wasn't PP a government initiative in which a bunch of commercially healthy privately held buildings were expropriated to create the 'way of the future'? I wouldn't exactly call that developer driven.

Common sense should have been enough to decide that a downtown mall wouldn't work unless you had critical mass actually living downtown or maybe it was build it and they will come!

* There were five suburban malls in Winnipeg when PP was foolishly built!

Actually he said this:

"There is nothing wrong with investment, but profit without people is just exploitation. Portage Place is our place and shouldn’t become something it isn’t."

and this:

"Portage Place is about more than profit. It’s a place of accessibility – and one of the only such places left in our city. It’s well known that when public spaces are reduced, social problems and conflicts increase. If a community gives people no place to go, they make spaces anyways – sometimes forcibly and unexpectedly.

When Portage Place changes, it shouldn’t lose its best parts. It is Winnipeg itself."

and this:

"Downtown apartments are fine, but these shouldn’t come at the cost of tossing people on the streets. High-end businesses are also fine, but not at the cost of marginalizing people who can’t afford them. And, of course, people who can pay high rates for space is fine, but let’s not forget the public in public space."

Sounds pretty reasonable to me

I understand his statements as "I would assume that Portage Place will no longer be a public space, even though the sale is still in progress, and the development plan is not even there yet." It seems that the article tries to stir public emotions even before any official announcements or plans are in place.

I'd say adding 2 student housing or whatever they will become will actually boost the "public" nature of the area.

What's a "Progressive urbanist"? Aren't all urbanists, just plain urbanists, there are no distinct characteristics between the?


Does this mean "progressive" in a political sense, like Democrat, Socialist, Communist (Commons)?


I'm lost here.


Medium.com - Andrew Dobbs - Urbanism is not Socialism or Progressive

You forgot:

Progressive Urbanists, c. 1983-1990: A downtown mall like the proposed Portage Place is the ideal mixed-use downtown development. The perfect blend of retail, entertainment, restaurants, the arts, housing for different incomes, and a promenade is exactly what Portage Avenue needs. Not only will it be well served by Winnipeg Transit, but it will also be home to a hidden parkade for those who choose to drive. The ideal urban planning project!

:D

Yes, though I was mainly aping the progressive (ie, left-leaning, critical theorist, etc.) view on Portage Place which existed up until last week.

Yes, I mean progressive urbanists as in the political sense: the David Harvey-reading, knock on doors for the NDP, intern at CCPA, profit-is-a-dirty-word, left-leaning urbanists. As opposed to pro-development "market urbanists," and generally ones who don't apply a critical lense to absolutely everything.

Haha yep! That's usually forgotten but it was very much the sentiment in planning/urbanist circles at the time, as immortalized in this TV news interview.

Reasonable how? "Tossing people on the street"!? - it's a food court ffs. They can go to Cityplace. Just wait until one of the downtown dollar stores gets replaced with something and he writes about how it's an attack on dollar store shoppers' fundamental human rights! :haha:

Fair enough. I don't believe that we really disagree on this one, just wanted to straighten that out

I was casually listening in on some of the people speaking to city council this morning about the future of Portage Place... something about how the mall needs to be kept for seven generations? Okay fine, but one generation ago this was a brand new high-end shopping mall that my older sister tells me was where "all the girls from Tuxedo shopped." Now suddenly it can't ever change?

People have a certain attachment to the place and it's fine, the place does have value as a community gathering point. It's a reflection of downtown Winnipeg in all its gritty glory, and that makes some people love it and other people hate it.

But at the end of the day it's private property with major financial implications for the landlords and the City, so decisions will have to be made on that basis.

Dumb. It's not a drop in, community centre or homeless shelter, it's a private enterprise, i don't know why these people feel so entitled to sitting in a food court. I guess there will always be detractors to progress, reinvestment in this mall can't come soon enough.

Oh yeah, and I don't mean to scoff at the notion that it's a popular community hub. I know that it is, especially for many people who live in and around downtown. It may not be pretty, but it's become a definite "third space" for the neighbourhood.

But like you said, it's a real estate transaction, not a divestment of a public asset like a city park or community centre.

Check out St. Vital Centre foodcourt any given weekday morning - entirely different demographic and in an urban setting, but same principle of people just hanging around socializing.

Notwithstanding the hoards of teenage kids that are dropped off in mini-vans to just hang out at the mall - it's just what happens with malls.

So, now the people of PP are just concerned of losing their place - I get that. But unfortunately that's not a reason for a developer to do what they want with their space.

Arguing that a dingy food court is somehow an irreplaceable cultural amenity is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

And frankly, continuing to operate that food court is slowly becoming less and less profitable. With lots of new restaurants around, cityplace nearby with many of the same offerings in a nicer setting, and Hargrave Street Market opening soon – PP Food Court is going to struggle to keep paying customers coming.