Winnipeg - Surface Lots Downtown

[Bdog]

They're creepy, weedy, windy wastelands that contribute to the sense of permanent decay downtown.

They were a major issue in this fall's civic election and now the city's plethora of surface parking lots are the subject of some messy internal politics at city hall.

According to a Free Press analysis, downtown Winnipeg has at least 154 lots with a combined value of well over $78 million -- a lowball estimate, but a starting point. Those lots cover more than 22 hectares, about the size of 38 Canadian football fields.

That's enough parking for almost 20,000 vehicles, a tidbit to remember next time you complain you can't find a spot.

In North American cities from Milwaukee to Denver, surface lots are both a vital service and an urban planning plague, a cause and a symptom of struggling downtowns...

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bre...111312094.html

I can't remember if there was already a thread dedicated to this, but we seem to discuss this topic a lot: What to do with the surface lots downtown?

Is it economically feasible to redevelop them at this point? Are parkades profitable without a sharp reduction in surface lots? Are Winnipeggers willing to go downtown if there is more expensive parking?

Discuss...

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by Bdog

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bre...111312094.html

I can't remember if there was already a thread dedicated to this, but we seem to discuss this topic a lot: What to do with the surface lots downtown?

Is it economically feasible to redevelop them at this point? Are parkades profitable without a sharp reduction in surface lots? Are Winnipeggers willing to go downtown if there is more expensive parking?

Discuss...

I think the truth is that someone makes a lot of money off of surface parking lots. They are a guaranteed source of income. If you think about it, Winnipeg is a cold city, and lots of people work downtown. There will always be a demand for parking, and since surface lots cost next to nothing to maintain (or so I would assume judging from their appearance), they are cash cows.

My guess would be that if we turned them all into three storey parkades, we would have 2/3 less parking lots, no? But building and maintaining parking lots are much cheaper than building parkades. And say we did reduce the number of surface parking lots downtown by 66%, I doubt all those extra lots would get filled in immediately. Upon seeing that, many downtown workers would say "see, I told you so." because we would just have a bunch of empty lots downtown with no parking nor building on them.

Of course, the most logical solution to that would be to put some sort of priority on redevelopment of those lots, but then again, every time you redevelop a lot, a couple hundred downtown workers lose their parking spot and it makes their day just that much more stressful.

We could also move the lots underground and build on top of them, but again, that is much more expensive than an open surface lot.

My non-totalitarian suggestion would be cap the amount of surface lots right now and don't allow anymore to be built. As time goes own and downtown develops, the increased demand for parking would put pressure on current stall prices, raising their costs until the point where a lot of people could not afford to park there anymore and would switch to an alternative such as transit, or it becomes profitable for developers to build parkades/underground lots. With enough pressure and demand, we could even see an improved transportation system reach downtown.

Just my two cents though.

[JayM]

I briefly read this WFP article its disgusting.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

I think the truth is that someone makes a lot of money off of surface parking lots. They are a guaranteed source of income. If you think about it, Winnipeg is a cold city, and lots of people work downtown. There will always be a demand for parking, and since surface lots cost next to nothing to maintain (or so I would assume judging from their appearance), they are cash cows.

My guess would be that if we turned them all into three storey parkades, we would have 2/3 less parking lots, no? But building and maintaining parking lots are much cheaper than building parkades. And say we did reduce the number of surface parking lots downtown by 66%, I doubt all those extra lots would get filled in immediately. Upon seeing that, many downtown workers would say "see, I told you so." because we would just have a bunch of empty lots downtown with no parking nor building on them.

Of course, the most logical solution to that would be to put some sort of priority on redevelopment of those lots, but then again, every time you redevelop a lot, a couple hundred downtown workers lose their parking spot and it makes their day just that much more stressful.

We could also move the lots underground and build on top of them, but again, that is much more expensive than an open surface lot.

My non-totalitarian suggestion would be cap the amount of surface lots right now and don't allow anymore to be built. As time goes own and downtown develops, the increased demand for parking would put pressure on current stall prices, raising their costs until the point where a lot of people could not afford to park there anymore and would switch to an alternative such as transit, or it becomes profitable for developers to build parkades/underground lots. With enough pressure and demand, we could even see an improved transportation system reach downtown.

Just my two cents though.

great read, great post man!

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by JayM

I briefly read this WFP article its disgusting.

I concur.

Especially how the article points out Main street....Main has soooo much more potential.

[thurmas]

The 3 worst one's that need to be a target is on york across from the convention centre. Hopefully the centre will expand there soon across the street. At portage and main next to canwest, TD or is it shaw now oh whatever it's name is now tower that ugly gravel lot that makes downtown look abandoned and like Detroit. Finally that ugly stretch on Graham needs either commercial or condos developed. The area around the ballpark will probably develop itself because of demand for that area in the future and the forks desire to expand itself.

[armorand93]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

I think the truth is that someone makes a lot of money off of surface parking lots. They are a guaranteed source of income. If you think about it, Winnipeg is a cold city, and lots of people work downtown. There will always be a demand for parking, and since surface lots cost next to nothing to maintain (or so I would assume judging from their appearance), they are cash cows.

My guess would be that if we turned them all into three storey parkades, we would have 2/3 less parking lots, no? But building and maintaining parking lots are much cheaper than building parkades. And say we did reduce the number of surface parking lots downtown by 66%, I doubt all those extra lots would get filled in immediately. Upon seeing that, many downtown workers would say "see, I told you so." because we would just have a bunch of empty lots downtown with no parking nor building on them.

Of course, the most logical solution to that would be to put some sort of priority on redevelopment of those lots, but then again, every time you redevelop a lot, a couple hundred downtown workers lose their parking spot and it makes their day just that much more stressful.

We could also move the lots underground and build on top of them, but again, that is much more expensive than an open surface lot.

My non-totalitarian suggestion would be cap the amount of surface lots right now and don't allow anymore to be built. As time goes own and downtown develops, the increased demand for parking would put pressure on current stall prices, raising their costs until the point where a lot of people could not afford to park there anymore and would switch to an alternative such as transit, or it becomes profitable for developers to build parkades/underground lots. With enough pressure and demand, we could even see an improved transportation system reach downtown.

Just my two cents though.

LIGHT RAPID TRANSIT WITH PARK AND RIDE! problem solved.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by armorand93

LIGHT RAPID TRANSIT WITH PARK AND RIDE! problem solved.

The parking lots are supposed to be in the suburbs. Why would anyone park and ride FROM their destination.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by thurmas

The 3 worst one's that need to be a target is on york across from the convention centre. Hopefully the centre will expand there soon across the street. At portage and main next to canwest, TD or is it shaw now oh whatever it's name is now tower that ugly gravel lot that makes downtown look abandoned and like Detroit. Finally that ugly stretch on Graham needs either commercial or condos developed. The area around the ballpark will probably develop itself because of demand for that area in the future and the forks desire to expand itself.

Hopefully indeed...according to their website http://www.wcc.mb.ca/expandingforsuccess.php they still have the current plan

page 13 of their plan http://www.wcc.mb.ca/pdf/expandingfo...an-cct2008.pdf

suggests that by the end of this year they will have some working drawings, with construction not starting till April of next year (!) and finishing until March 2013 (estimated).

Also from page 13 "The planned expansion envisions increasing the rentable space from 160,000 sq. ft.
to 306,881 sq. ft., an increase of 146,881 sq. ft. In total the square footage of the
Winnipeg Convention Centre would be increased by 467,193 sq. ft. (from 523,776 sq. ft.
to 990,969 sq. ft.)."

I dont think that includes the hotel either, which would be built on top of the extension

either way, its a parking lot put to good use!

[Riverman]

^^^ Is there funding in place for this? It appears to be a proposal, nothing more.

[armorand93]

Originally Posted by h0twired

The parking lots are supposed to be in the suburbs. Why would anyone park and ride FROM their destination.

should've defined that clearly lmfao. park and ride IN THE SUBURBS, which will free up parking downtown, which will THEN allow buildings to be constructed (such as the convention centre expansion)

for example, could get LRT down Portage (or St. Matthews) to Polo Park, and build another parkade near the Bay for Park n Ride. That or use the existing parkades at Polo

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by armorand93

should've defined that clearly lmfao. park and ride IN THE SUBURBS, which will free up parking downtown, which will THEN allow buildings to be constructed (such as the convention centre expansion)

for example, could get LRT down Portage (or St. Matthews) to Polo Park, and build another parkade near the Bay for Park n Ride. That or use the existing parkades at Polo

Parking lots aren't stopping buildings from being built.

[bicycles]

Originally Posted by h0twired

Parking lots aren't stopping buildings from being built.

if people don't use them, whoever owns them won't be making money, thus they'll do something else with the property (build something)

[viperred88]

in true Winnipeg style all we are going to see more parking in form of parkades not even mix-use. Pathetic!!! So there you go more parking for suburbanites.

All we need is to lower taxes on lots for residential development thats if that can be done on those parking lots

I wonder if the Delta and the Fairmont would build new hotels downtown and sell off the existing ones for condo redevelopment. Since the delta and fairmont may want to compete with True North hotel soon to be, thats if that happens.

[armorand93]

Originally Posted by viperred88

in true Winnipeg style all we are going to see more parking in form of parkades not even mix-use. Pathetic!!! So there you go more parking for suburbanites.

All we need is to lower taxes on lots for residential development thats if that can be done on those parking lots

I wonder if the Delta and the Fairmont would build new hotels downtown and sell off the existing ones for condo redevelopment. Since the delta and fairmont may want to compete with True North hotel soon to be, thats if that happens.

Wait what? True North Hotel? Sorry, I havent heard of this and I read the papers everyday haha

Use the parking lot across from whats now the CTV Studios as residential. A huge-ass 40 floor apartment complex or condo tower would bring more people in, reducing the need for commutin. Also, thanks to Zellers moving in to the Bay, those people can actually buy groceries in Downtown

And after that, finally complete Phase 1 and 2 of BRT or LRT. Major source of traffic problems solved.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by bicycles

if people don't use them, whoever owns them won't be making money, thus they'll do something else with the property (build something)

It would more likely remain a vacant lot.

The idea of people not using parking lots would indicate a dead downtown core with even less potential of new development.

Parking prices have a LONG way to go before people stop paying for parking and switch to transit. Calgary parking is still well over $20/day for a surface spot and people keep filling lots.

Winnipeg's problem is that commercial lease rates are too low to justify the construction costs of a new office tower. Just because a lot is not being used does not magically make it prime space for constructing an office building.

[Winnipegger@Heart]

The problem is that government owns many lots, and that is contrary to the effort to increase housing downtown. All levels of government should sell the lots they own. In fact, I would give a developer a sweet deal if the lot would be replaced by rental units; with so many more people moving to the city, they need places to live.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger@Heart

The problem is that government owns many lots, and that is contrary to the effort to increase housing downtown. All levels of government should sell the lots they own. In fact, I would give a developer a sweet deal if the lot would be replaced by rental units; with so many more people moving to the city, they need places to live.

Two problems with that.

- If the government was to give away land to a developer the entire populous would be up in arms for ultimately handing over "their" land to a private company. Besides, most of the government owned lots are adjacent to train tracks, historic sites (e.g. The Forks), or other government buildings (Winnipeg Convention Centre, Federal Building, Union Station etc). These properties are far too valuable to toss up an ugly box apartment for low income renters.

- The cost of the land is a drop in the bucket when it comes to building residential buildings. The cost of land isn't holding back developers in Winnipeg, its the cost of construction coupled with the expectation for cheap condos or artificially low rents.

[viperred88]

Originally Posted by armorand93

Wait what? True North Hotel? Sorry, I havent heard of this and I read the papers everyday haha

Use the parking lot across from whats now the CTV Studios as residential. A huge-ass 40 floor apartment complex or condo tower would bring more people in, reducing the need for commutin. Also, thanks to Zellers moving in to the Bay, those people can actually buy groceries in Downtown

And after that, finally complete Phase 1 and 2 of BRT or LRT. Major source of traffic problems solved.

true north is in the midst acquiring the lot that A & B Sound is sitting on, or is it all the buildings that sitting on the lot. The plan is for a boutique hotel and office spaces.

Katz sorta mentioned it in the downtown debate...

Anyway I hope this happens, alot of recent arena in north america have built up the surrounding area with commercial and residential development. I just hope we get condos included true north vision for the entertainment district.

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by armorand93

Also, thanks to Zellers moving in to the Bay, those people can actually buy groceries in Downtown

The Bay has long had a grocery store in the basement, long before Zellers was even an idea.