A forumer's long view of Winnipeg

[esquire]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

It's wild to see like 30 posts discussing the decline solely in terms of litter and boarded-up windows with zero mention of actually housing people, treating addictions or mental health issues. Hate to break it to you guys but you can't solve these issues with property development so as long as you keep defining "progress" as development and the state of storefronts then you're not helping anything or anyone.

The focus of this forum isn't the nature of generational poverty, mental health issues, addictions, homelessness, etc. I don't claim to have all the answers to those problems. My focus here is mainly on the physical environment. And I have noticed a real decline in that regard in one particular part of the city.

I am not sure why this kind of banal observation of something any passer-by can clearly see results in such a defensive response.

[davequanbury]

Originally Posted by esquire

The focus of this forum isn't the nature of generational poverty, mental health issues, addictions, homelessness, etc. I don't claim to have all the answers to those problems. My focus here is mainly on the physical environment. And I have noticed a real decline in that regard in one particular part of the city.

I am not sure why this kind of banal observation of something any passer-by can clearly see results in such a defensive response.

I certainly don't have any issues with your observations here esquire. Sometimes the comments I read on this forum give me the impression that there is a disconnect between the reality of poverty in the city and the dreams of shiny tall developments.

I also believe that some developments exacerbate poverty and homelessness, the industry is after all profit driven. Plenty of affordable accommodations and small footprint retail spaces are lost to new construction. These forces mean that poor people are pushed elsewhere and less local businesses thrive. As someone who works adjacent to those in the vulnerable sector I think its important to praise developers who go the extra mile like the Pollards or the U of W development corp. I truly believe that if every developer had a social conscience the industry could really be part of building a just city.

I think all of us love watching Winnipeg grow, and we all want this place to feel energized and urban. To EdwardTh's point though, I think we need to acknowledge that unless new development addresses the social issues, it isn't really a step in the right direction. We can't move poverty somewhere else indefinitely, at some point in time we have to fix it if we want to see our vision of the city realized.

[ue]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

But *a* freeway wouldn't have this effect -- Winnipeg has stroads going in all directions, so a whole network of freeways would be needed to relieve them. And if people think inner-city Winnipeg is in a bad state now, I can only imagine how bad it would be if it were sliced up by freeways and freeway interchanges. Even setting aside the fact that freeways create traffic rather than relieving it.

Like this plan from the 1950s, which would have single-handedly ruined West Broadway, Fort Rouge, St. Boniface, South Point Douglas, the North End, and the West End. Thankfully the Disraeli is the only part of that plan that came to fruition.

Oh I know. I was being glib. Obviously if the previous freeway plans had come to fruition beyond the Disraeli, it would have been devastating. But stroads have also arguably been devastating in their own way. At least with stroads it makes it easier to retrofit them back to being walkable main streets. Winnipeg rammed automobility through these neighbourhoods in the cheapest way.

[ue]

Originally Posted by esquire

The focus of this forum isn't the nature of generational poverty, mental health issues, addictions, homelessness, etc. I don't claim to have all the answers to those problems. My focus here is mainly on the physical environment. And I have noticed a real decline in that regard in one particular part of the city.

I am not sure why this kind of banal observation of something any passer-by can clearly see results in such a defensive response.

It's because being a passerby and having one scene you saw once seared into your brain does not give you the same knowledge of the community as someone who lives in or frequents that community.

Furthermore, you cannot discuss neighbourhood improvements in places like the West End without inevitably bringing up poverty and other socioeconomic issues. You are divorcing the call to clean up and "fix" the neighbourhood from the socioeconomic realities that are deeply embedded in why the neighbourhood is the way it is. You can't talk about fixing up old homes, opening new businesses, and adding neighbourhood improvements without speaking to the needs and issues of the existing populace. Development does not occur in a vacuum.

You kind of ignored my last post, but once again, if you're so concerned, what are you doing about it?

Originally Posted by davequanbury

I certainly don't have any issues with your observations here esquire. Sometimes the comments I read on this forum give me the impression that there is a disconnect between the reality of poverty in the city and the dreams of shiny tall developments.

I also believe that some developments exacerbate poverty and homelessness, the industry is after all profit driven. Plenty of affordable accommodations and small footprint retail spaces are lost to new construction. These forces mean that poor people are pushed elsewhere and less local businesses thrive. As someone who works adjacent to those in the vulnerable sector I think its important to praise developers who go the extra mile like the Pollards or the U of W development corp. I truly believe that if every developer had a social conscience the industry could really be part of building a just city.

I think all of us love watching Winnipeg grow, and we all want this place to feel energized and urban. To EdwardTh's point though, I think we need to acknowledge that unless new development addresses the social issues, it isn't really a step in the right direction. We can't move poverty somewhere else indefinitely, at some point in time we have to fix it if we want to see our vision of the city realized.

The bolded parts of your post are really key, I think. As we've seen with CentreVenture nonsense on Main St and around MTS Centre, there is a real concern that, due to the nature of profit-driven development, there will be gentrification and an exacerbation of issues that just get pushed elsewhere. That isn't fair nor right to those that call the West End home.

Also, this hits the nail on the head:

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

lol, this forum trying to address poverty, addictions and homelessness:


It's wild to see like 30 posts discussing the decline solely in terms of litter and boarded-up windows with zero mention of actually housing people, treating addictions or mental health issues. Hate to break it to you guys but you can't solve these issues with property development so as long as you keep defining "progress" as development and the state of storefronts then you're not helping anything or anyone.

[drew]

Originally Posted by davequanbury

As someone who works adjacent to those in the vulnerable sector I think its important to praise developers who go the extra mile like the Pollards or the U of W development corp. I truly believe that if every developer had a social conscience the industry could really be part of building a just city.

I applaud the success of the recent residential developments at the UofW and how they include low income units - however they also end up sucking up all the available funding in these large scale developments.

In recent years, smaller charitable organizations that work towards providing housing for less fortunate people (one of which I volunteer on the BOD) have lost out on funding our own modest projects because of these types of developments.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by ue

It's because being a passerby and having one scene you saw once seared into your brain does not give you the same knowledge of the community as someone who lives in or frequents that community.

Furthermore, you cannot discuss neighbourhood improvements in places like the West End without inevitably bringing up poverty and other socioeconomic issues. You are divorcing the call to clean up and "fix" the neighbourhood from the socioeconomic realities that are deeply embedded in why the neighbourhood is the way it is. You can't talk about fixing up old homes, opening new businesses, and adding neighbourhood improvements without speaking to the needs and issues of the existing populace. Development does not occur in a vacuum.

You kind of ignored my last post, but once again, if you're so concerned, what are you doing about it?

I do not claim to have the most comprehensive base of knowledge when it comes to the social dynamics of the West End. But the decline in the area over the last decade looks pretty obvious to me. That's a simple observation that I think most people who remember what the area looked like 10 years ago vs. the way it looks now would draw.

I don't know why your response to this is "what are you doing about it" as though I personally hold the answers to all these problems but I'm selfishly refusing to share them. Spoiler alert: I don't.

[ue]

Originally Posted by esquire

I do not claim to have the most comprehensive base of knowledge when it comes to the social dynamics of the West End. But the decline in the area over the last decade looks pretty obvious to me. That's a simple observation that I think most people who remember what the area looked like 10 years ago vs. the way it looks now would draw.

I don't know why your response to this is "what are you doing about it" as though I personally hold the answers to all these problems but I'm selfishly refusing to share them. Spoiler alert: I don't.

I'm not claiming you have all the answers, however what I am doing is listing off a bunch of solutions you can do to both educate yourself and materially help those living in the neighbourhood. Instead of just complaining about something you saw once passing through the neighbourhood I am calling for you to do some work to better understand because it is clear you don't know and then with that knowledge perhaps you can help make the neighbourhood a better place. Instead of sitting on an internet forum complaining about something while being ignorant of how the neighbourhood functions, you could do something about it, and help make the neighbourhood better in the process. I say this because I assume this "decline" you note in the neighbourhood is not desirable to you. So instead of remarking upon it and then throwing you hands up in the air, do something. If you need some resources, I'd be glad to share them.

[GreyGarden]

So many urban neighbourhoods in Canada were at one point low income neighbourhoods – people used to be afraid of going west of Trinity Bellwoods and now the streets are lined with restaurants and shops. Obviously it'll never happen here to that extent, but if Winnipeg wants to offer a lifestyle like what other Canadian cities offer, is there a way we can do that without adversely impacting our most vulnerable population? Obviously we have opportunities like the Exchange and the Forks Railside that don't directly involve displacement, but that’s a completely different type of market. All of our more urban / downtown adjacent suburbs like West Broadway, Wolseley and the West End were or are low income. Maybe I'm wrong but I think there's a market for people who don’t want to live out in car suburbs, but also don’t want to have to take an elevator to get to their apartment. My favourite areas in the country are those in-between areas adjacent to downtowns that consist of mainly houses along parallel streets, and then commercial storefronts with some mixed use medium density development along or close to the perpendicular high street. The best restaurants are never in downtowns or in the suburbs, but in those middle areas. When I look at Winnipeg, the most likely place I see the possibility for that is Wolseley, West Broadway, Osborne Village and likely, down the road the West End.

Obviously, we need to build better affordable housing and create mixed income neighbourhoods, but I’m wondering if there’s a more nuanced answer too. So much of what I’ve read on these topics is Toronto-centric or New York-centric where they already have established walkable urban neighbourhoods and streets lined with restaurants and shopping. What I don’t want to have to say is that 'if what you want is to live in a neighbourhood like that, you should just move elsewhere in Canada.' But the reality is, to support that kind of experience, we'd need a lot of people with disposable income living decently close to each other. So it’s hard for me to see a future Winnipeg that offers that kind of lifestyle that doesn't involve those inner city areas becoming more expensive. I guess partly because as far as I know, that's basically what happens in urban areas in North America and is how gentrification works. In which case, maybe I should revaluate whether what I want from the City in terms of an urban and walkable experience is compatible with the desire to help our city's most vulnerable and to be an equitable city.

[ue]

Originally Posted by GreyGarden

So many urban neighbourhoods in Canada were at one point low income neighbourhoods – people used to be afraid of going west of Trinity Bellwoods and now the streets are lined with restaurants and shops. Obviously it'll never happen here to that extent, but if Winnipeg wants to offer a lifestyle like what other Canadian cities offer, is there a way we can do that without adversely impacting our most vulnerable population? Obviously we have opportunities like the Exchange and the Forks Railside that don't directly involve displacement, but that’s a completely different type of market. All of our more urban / downtown adjacent suburbs like West Broadway, Wolseley and the West End were or are low income. Maybe I'm wrong but I think there's a market for people who don’t want to live out in car suburbs, but also don’t want to have to take an elevator to get to their apartment. My favourite areas in the country are those in-between areas adjacent to downtowns that consist of mainly houses along parallel streets, and then commercial storefronts with some mixed use medium density development along or close to the perpendicular high street. The best restaurants are never in downtowns or in the suburbs, but in those middle areas. When I look at Winnipeg, the most likely place I see the possibility for that is Wolseley, West Broadway, Osborne Village and likely, down the road the West End.

Obviously, we need to build better affordable housing and create mixed income neighbourhoods, but I’m wondering if there’s a more nuanced answer too. So much of what I’ve read on these topics is Toronto-centric or New York-centric where they already have established walkable urban neighbourhoods and streets lined with restaurants and shopping. What I don’t want to have to say is that 'if what you want is to live in a neighbourhood like that, you should just move elsewhere in Canada.' But the reality is, to support that kind of experience, we'd need a lot of people with disposable income living decently close to each other. So it’s hard for me to see a future Winnipeg that offers that kind of lifestyle that doesn't involve those inner city areas becoming more expensive. I guess partly because as far as I know, that's basically what happens in urban areas in North America and is how gentrification works. In which case, maybe I should revaluate whether what I want from the City in terms of an urban and walkable experience is compatible with the desire to help our city's most vulnerable and to be an equitable city.

I appreciate where you're coming from, but I think there are some structural issues inherent to how our society is designed that will lead to displacement with improvement. Obviously that doesn't mean improvement is bad when removed of politics, but these improvements don't exist in a vacuum. The solutions to this problem are probably too radical for most on this forum.

I would also argue that developments in the Exchange have displaced marginalized BIPOC communities in particular. Stephen Juba Park was redone so as to deter homeless encampments. Main Street's Indigenous community was dismantled for institutional centres that often do more harm than good. Routinely throughout the decades of downtown revitalization schemes, the desires of those who actually live in or adjacent to the downtown are ignored, and the desires of capital accumulation are front and centre.

What I would also argue is that those 'middle ground' vibrant urban neighbourhoods you desire already exist in Winnipeg. The West End is one of the most vibrant neighbourhoods in the city. It may not fit the 'vibe' you're after, but it isn't a desolate place. For different urban experiences, there's already Osborne Village, Corydon, Wolseley, and West Broadway. None of these places are exactly Trinity-Bellwoods, but they do offer something for the tastes of more middle and upper income folks who desire a non-downtown urban experience. So why do we need to expand that to places like the West End? West Broadway has already been gentrified. There's enough space for other classes of people in the central city. Instead, we should focus on improving the livelihoods of those in lower income central neighbourhoods in a way that reduces the potential for displacement and ongoing structural harm.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by ue

I would also argue that developments in the Exchange have displaced marginalized BIPOC communities in particular. Stephen Juba Park was redone so as to deter homeless encampments. Main Street's Indigenous community was dismantled for institutional centres that often do more harm than good.

Main & Logan is not the Exchange though. If we're talking about the actual Exchange District rather than the entire north side of downtown, was there really a population there before the current residential redevelopment? I'm not a long-time Winnipegger but my understanding is that it was mostly commercial buildings. The only obvious legacy residential I can think of is the Woodbine, Royal Albert, and St. Charles hotels.

[GreyGarden]

Originally Posted by ue

I would also argue that developments in the Exchange have displaced marginalized BIPOC communities in particular. Stephen Juba Park was redone so as to deter homeless encampments. Main Street's Indigenous community was dismantled for institutional centres that often do more harm than good. Routinely throughout the decades of downtown revitalization schemes, the desires of those who actually live in or adjacent to the downtown are ignored, and the desires of capital accumulation are front and centre.

What I would also argue is that those 'middle ground' vibrant urban neighbourhoods you desire already exist in Winnipeg. The West End is one of the most vibrant neighbourhoods in the city. It may not fit the 'vibe' you're after, but it isn't a desolate place. For different urban experiences, there's already Osborne Village, Corydon, Wolseley, and West Broadway. None of these places are exactly Trinity-Bellwoods, but they do offer something for the tastes of more middle and upper income folks who desire a non-downtown urban experience. So why do we need to expand that to places like the West End? West Broadway has already been gentrified. There's enough space for other classes of people in the central city. Instead, we should focus on improving the livelihoods of those in lower income central neighbourhoods in a way that reduces the potential for displacement and ongoing structural harm.

Interesting, I didn't know that about Stephen Juba Park.

I definitely did not intend to make it sound like I thought the West End is a desolate place. I think it's a special spot and like someone previously said, it's the go-to for food from around the world. Further, you always hear about already gentrified cities missing those great small businesses that aren't all designed around appealing to upper income people and Instagram. I'd be bummed if I found out my favourite pho spot on Ellice was replaced by a brewery or something like that.

I think I agree that areas like Wolseley, West Broadway and Osborne are already occupied by middle-upper income people and in my opinion even those areas have a ways to go in terms of offering a good walkable urban experience on par with other Canadian cities. So I think there's no need for that trend to expand into the West End. However, to the extent that gentrification exists in Winnipeg, I do foresee the area slowly becoming more like Wolseley from the south up given it's proximity to Wolseley and downtown, housing stock and road layout. But in the long term. I'm no expert in managing gentrification and offsetting it's impacts, but it seems like given it's slow pace here, there is the potential to manage it to a certain extent and protect people.

[damnedmenno]

Hi All, Long time lurker and West Ender

I have been living in the West End for over 16 yearsm just a couple blocks away from the boarded up 7-11
and apartments so this thread hits close to home quite literally.
Overall I have seen bits of progress by the evidence of younger families and university students (pre pandemic) moving into the area. I work in the exchange and usually walk to work every day.
One of the big problems I see is a provincial government that really has a hate on for Winnipeg urban issues (defunding organizations like Spence Neighbourhood) and its Mayor. A safe injection site or 2 would go along way to help those in need and make it safer for everyone. I have done a few bear clan walks and have friends that do it regularly, there main thing is to clean up all the discarded needles.

As a home owner I have witnessed both good and bad (slum) lords on my block. The good landlord couldn't evict a tenant even though the SWAT team showed up twice and one of the tenants was shot through his window and eventually died. He ended up getting a some neighbourhood surveillance group to record and monitor the place as proof of the drug dealings and was eventually able to evict them.

Now for the slumlord that has rooming house less than 1,500 sq ft. Originally when bought a few years ago it was 7 rooms with one bathroom, they then subdivided a couple of rooms to max it out at 10 rooms with one bathroom and has been a living nightmare ever since. The rooming house by all accounts is legal and trying to get anything done about it is next to impossible (311, city councilors, Spence Neighbourhood, police, zoning etc nothing). Even the slumlord couldn't deal with his own mess and am sure he ended up sabotaging the fire system so that the house would be declared inhabitable and he could evict the problem tenants.

With all that being said, Ellice now has several boarded up apartments and buildings in a couple of blocks. Both the boarded up apartments had the police and emergency services show up several times a week. So now many of the problem tenants are now displaced and dealing with their meth issues out in the open. Any of the good tenants that were in these buildings were forced to leave.

The issues are many and really needs a hard look at in so many ways, I see good landlords and tenants frustrated they can't do anything to make it better, and I see slumlords getting away with so much and bad tenants that can't be evicted. Pre-pandemic times saw things a bit better, the pandemic has really done a number on the West End.

With all that said, I hope to see more housing first initiatives happen in this city, like the one just announced and the Bell hotel. They work and should be an easy sell to any fiscal conservative. I also hope to see more things like a safe injection site or 2, Manitoba is the only province west of Quebec without!

Have much more to say, and some of it good and why I am staying in the West End but will leave it at that for now.

Cheers

[esquire]

^ Thank you for that illuminating perspective. The housing issue is a tough one... landlord/tenant laws tend to presume some measure of good faith on the part of both sides, but as we can see from your post, that isn't always the case. And in the long run, that ends up diminishing the supply of safe, decent housing.

[ue]

^ Good job dodging my call to action yet again!

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

Main & Logan is not the Exchange though. If we're talking about the actual Exchange District rather than the entire north side of downtown, was there really a population there before the current residential redevelopment? I'm not a long-time Winnipegger but my understanding is that it was mostly commercial buildings. The only obvious legacy residential I can think of is the Woodbine, Royal Albert, and St. Charles hotels.

Sure, one of my examples is not in the Exchange. That does not negate the other example and does not negate the fact that those who live in and adjacent to these areas are routinely ignored in revitalization schemes which prioritize the needs of the yuppies and the wider business community. Waterfront Drive's condos essentially exist for people who previously lived in well-off South End communities that fetishize a kind of "urban lifestyle" without actually wanting to deal with the extant urban populace.

[ue]

Originally Posted by GreyGarden

Interesting, I didn't know that about Stephen Juba Park.

I definitely did not intend to make it sound like I thought the West End is a desolate place. I think it's a special spot and like someone previously said, it's the go-to for food from around the world. Further, you always hear about already gentrified cities missing those great small businesses that aren't all designed around appealing to upper income people and Instagram. I'd be bummed if I found out my favourite pho spot on Ellice was replaced by a brewery or something like that.

I think I agree that areas like Wolseley, West Broadway and Osborne are already occupied by middle-upper income people and in my opinion even those areas have a ways to go in terms of offering a good walkable urban experience on par with other Canadian cities. So I think there's no need for that trend to expand into the West End. However, to the extent that gentrification exists in Winnipeg, I do foresee the area slowly becoming more like Wolseley from the south up given it's proximity to Wolseley and downtown, housing stock and road layout. But in the long term. I'm no expert in managing gentrification and offsetting it's impacts, but it seems like given it's slow pace here, there is the potential to manage it to a certain extent and protect people.

I agree with everything you're saying. There's already a push northward in parts of the West End of what appears to be people who'd normally end up in Wolseley but couldn't afford it. That trend will unfortunately be likely to continue.

I would also love to see certain improvements to the West End. For example, the sidewalks often feel narrow during busy times. Given the number of cyclists in the area who don't feel comfortable riding on the road, either Ellice, Sargent, and/or St Matthews should get a bike lane, at least east of Wall/Erin. Safe injection sites and other support facilities are in high need as well. There's also some vacant lots that would be great to see some nice, new fine-grained urbanism, perhaps some small businesses and organizations catering to local needs with some affordable apartments above. There are many housing sites too that are dilapidated that would benefit from a sort of municipally or provincially funded renewal grant, provided protections were in place to control rising rent/property values that would then price people out of their block. I just worry any improvement to the West End will help spur gentrification (which is already occurring south of St Matthews in particular) and therefore improvements need to be coupled with extremely tight protections for the low-income population.

And for sure, places like Osborne and West Broadway still have a ways to go before becoming very good walkable urban neighbourhoods. Wolseley I'd say is already there. It's not bustling per se, but it works as a quaint and cutesy neighbourhood that is very walkable. Osborne as the city's premier urban drag is kind of mediocre compared with Edmonton's Whyte or Calgary's 17th, especially when you consider how much better the legacy built form is in Winnipeg. Similarly sized Hamilton and Quebec City also have far better main streets. I think Osborne struggles from being one of the few key arteries into downtown from the south end. It's something akin to Edmonton's Whyte Ave, which is the only major east-west artery on the southside for a considerable geographic area. But Osborne could really use a road diet as its pedestrian realm is abhorrent. West Broadway is better for the streetscapes, although less vibrant than Osborne or Corydon. It appears that Sherbrook is where the bulk of main street improvements are happening, as opposed to Broadway, which is fine, I think.

[ue]

Originally Posted by damnedmenno

Hi All, Long time lurker and West Ender

I have been living in the West End for over 16 yearsm just a couple blocks away from the boarded up 7-11
and apartments so this thread hits close to home quite literally.
Overall I have seen bits of progress by the evidence of younger families and university students (pre pandemic) moving into the area. I work in the exchange and usually walk to work every day.
One of the big problems I see is a provincial government that really has a hate on for Winnipeg urban issues (defunding organizations like Spence Neighbourhood) and its Mayor. A safe injection site or 2 would go along way to help those in need and make it safer for everyone. I have done a few bear clan walks and have friends that do it regularly, there main thing is to clean up all the discarded needles.

As a home owner I have witnessed both good and bad (slum) lords on my block. The good landlord couldn't evict a tenant even though the SWAT team showed up twice and one of the tenants was shot through his window and eventually died. He ended up getting a some neighbourhood surveillance group to record and monitor the place as proof of the drug dealings and was eventually able to evict them.

Now for the slumlord that has rooming house less than 1,500 sq ft. Originally when bought a few years ago it was 7 rooms with one bathroom, they then subdivided a couple of rooms to max it out at 10 rooms with one bathroom and has been a living nightmare ever since. The rooming house by all accounts is legal and trying to get anything done about it is next to impossible (311, city councilors, Spence Neighbourhood, police, zoning etc nothing). Even the slumlord couldn't deal with his own mess and am sure he ended up sabotaging the fire system so that the house would be declared inhabitable and he could evict the problem tenants.

With all that being said, Ellice now has several boarded up apartments and buildings in a couple of blocks. Both the boarded up apartments had the police and emergency services show up several times a week. So now many of the problem tenants are now displaced and dealing with their meth issues out in the open. Any of the good tenants that were in these buildings were forced to leave.

The issues are many and really needs a hard look at in so many ways, I see good landlords and tenants frustrated they can't do anything to make it better, and I see slumlords getting away with so much and bad tenants that can't be evicted. Pre-pandemic times saw things a bit better, the pandemic has really done a number on the West End.

With all that said, I hope to see more housing first initiatives happen in this city, like the one just announced and the Bell hotel. They work and should be an easy sell to any fiscal conservative. I also hope to see more things like a safe injection site or 2, Manitoba is the only province west of Quebec without!

Have much more to say, and some of it good and why I am staying in the West End but will leave it at that for now.

Cheers

I appreciate your insights and experience and think you bring up a number of solid points with regards to the state of the neighbourhood and some of its issues without dramatizing it. I do agree safe injection sites are sorely needed and it's appalling they don't already exist. It shows a real lack of care on the part of both the city and province, but it is at the same time not surprising.

I just wanted to add that the affordable housing in the Bell Hotel, while better than nothing, is far from ideal. It is an extremely securitized space and tenants have a lot of restrictions placed upon them. Many of its tenants are Indigenous, and it furthers a history of the state infantilizing them. Really the proliferation of institutions over top of the old Main St strip in general is a continuation of this nannying.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by ue

I just wanted to add that the affordable housing in the Bell Hotel, while better than nothing, is far from ideal. It is an extremely securitized space and tenants have a lot of restrictions placed upon them. Many of its tenants are Indigenous, and it furthers a history of the state infantilizing them. Really the proliferation of institutions over top of the old Main St strip in general is a continuation of this nannying.

I thought the point of the Bell Hotel's programs was to provide supportive housing with programs aimed at helping residents transition to more permanent forms of housing? In other words, it is there to provide help to those who want it.

https://www.mainstreetproject.ca/pro...rtive-housing/

[damnedmenno]

Originally Posted by ue

I just wanted to add that the affordable housing in the Bell Hotel, while better than nothing, is far from ideal. It is an extremely securitized space and tenants have a lot of restrictions placed upon them. Many of its tenants are Indigenous, and it furthers a history of the state infantilizing them. Really the proliferation of institutions over top of the old Main St strip in general is a continuation of this nannying.

Though the Bell hotel may not be ideal, my understanding is this was the first and only of its kind in Winnipeg and does look like the Pollard proposal is a big step in the right direction including design elements for Indigenous tenants. With regard to the extremely securitized space and restrictions (and can't say I know to the degree they are implemented) the area would in some degrees necessitate it. We all have rules that demand we play nicely in our settings; whether it apartment security, parties and noise, condo restrictions or even neighbourhood associations telling you what colour you can paint your house.

[ue]

Originally Posted by esquire

I thought the point of the Bell Hotel's programs was to provide supportive housing with programs aimed at helping residents transition to more permanent forms of housing? In other words, it is there to provide help to those who want it.

https://www.mainstreetproject.ca/pro...rtive-housing/

Originally Posted by damnedmenno

Though the Bell hotel may not be ideal, my understanding is this was the first and only of its kind in Winnipeg and does look like the Pollard proposal is a big step in the right direction including design elements for Indigenous tenants. With regard to the extremely securitized space and restrictions (and can't say I know to the degree they are implemented) the area would in some degrees necessitate it. We all have rules that demand we play nicely in our settings; whether it apartment security, parties and noise, condo restrictions or even neighbourhood associations telling you what colour you can paint your house.

The Bell Hotel previously existed as a form of low-income housing before CentreVenture evicted its tenants. This is something that the company has a long history of doing, both on Main Street and around the "SHED" to the southwest. After shutting down the hotel and bar, CentreVenture envisioned a grand redevelopment of Main Street by attracting business development. CentreVenture didn't help relocate evicted tenants, either. The Bell was boarded up for years and failed to attract the kind of investment CentreVenture wanted followed in a history of the city ignoring the Indigenous community's Neeginan plan for the Main St strip. Due to the inability to get a suitable buyer to gentrify the space, CentreVenture agreed to make the hotel an affordable housing space, although none of the previous tenants were given homes and there was a reduction in tenants.

The new Bell has been described as authoritarian and paternalistic, an extension of what had already been brought to Main Street through CentreVenture's other endeavours. CentreVenture saw the root cause of those living in poverty in the area as their own individual struggles, rather than the result of a manifestation of successive waves of redevelopment, going back to initial colonization, that have caused harm to Indigenous peoples. While the hotel does try to meet many of the needs of the community, it still isn't the most ideal form of affordable housing. It is heavily policed (something many in the community dislike and have had to deal with abuse and violence from), and governed by a staff that impose strict rules, such as on the amount of times a guest can stay over, having Wednesdays kept for "tenant and staff" day (meaning no guests allowed), and being quick to evict people if there is an issue that arises. It is essentially a controlled environment used to house Indigenous people in tiny apartments.

[GreyGarden]

Originally Posted by ue

I just worry any improvement to the West End will help spur gentrification (which is already occurring south of St Matthews in particular) and therefore improvements need to be coupled with extremely tight protections for the low-income population.

And for sure, places like Osborne and West Broadway still have a ways to go before becoming very good walkable urban neighbourhoods. Wolseley I'd say is already there. It's not bustling per se, but it works as a quaint and cutesy neighbourhood that is very walkable. Osborne as the city's premier urban drag is kind of mediocre compared with Edmonton's Whyte or Calgary's 17th, especially when you consider how much better the legacy built form is in Winnipeg. Similarly sized Hamilton and Quebec City also have far better main streets. I think Osborne struggles from being one of the few key arteries into downtown from the south end. It's something akin to Edmonton's Whyte Ave, which is the only major east-west artery on the southside for a considerable geographic area. But Osborne could really use a road diet as its pedestrian realm is abhorrent. West Broadway is better for the streetscapes, although less vibrant than Osborne or Corydon. It appears that Sherbrook is where the bulk of main street improvements are happening, as opposed to Broadway, which is fine, I think.

Agreed about improvements to the West End. It'd be unfair to the residents there not to invest in the infrastructure out of fears that it'll attract investment. It strikes me as a really difficult balance because certain improvements like bikelanes along Ellice and improved sidewalks would encourage people like me to possibly buy in the area.

I don't know anything about Alberta cities but agreed West Broadway and OV leave a lot to be desired compared to similarly situated areas in other smaller Canadian cities like Hamilton, Halifax and QC. Sherbrook and the surrounding streets have been getting some nice businesses, but its such a weird street given the mix of storefronts and houses. And for Broadway, even though it seems like a well situated and nicely scaled high street leading into downtown, unfortunately it has very few opportunities for storefronts like this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2549...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6514...4!8i8192?hl=en

It's a shame, Winnipeg in general seems to have a real lack of these types of streets where small and old storefronts are clustered together. The places where these types of strips exist tend to be lower income areas as well.

I agree 100% on Osborne needing a road diet. I can't stand walking along Osborne and being splashed by cars whipping by in the spring.