Winnipeg Construction

[Spocket]

Ironically , I was going to mention that whole aspect of the "Freeways are bad" argument but decided against it. Since even people who live in the vicinity can see that there is nothing particularly divisive about Disraeli then I might as well add to my earlier comments.

Freeways that destroy neighbourhoods do so because they divide established residential areas and make retail pointless. In Disraeli's case, that's not a problem. In SPD there is no residential neighbourhood to divide. Rather, what we have is a traffic thoroughfare going above what amounts mostly to industrial decay. There's also the fact that even if we decide to make it an at-grade artery we still have to provide for some seperation at the rail line. For all the difference this would make in the end I don't know that it makes all that much sense to bother trying to keep Disraeli level.

Anyway, if we had an established neighbourhood then no, building a freeway over top of it would obviously be the worst thing we could do. That's not the case here though. Higgins would serve very nicely as the main commercial strip provided we embarked on a plan to build enough housing to support any retail that tried to set up along the avenue. Actually, Disraeli wouldn't be of much use as a feeder route for commercial along Higgins anyway because by the time most of the people using that overpass get to Higgins it's fair to assume they're just commuting from their home to work and Higgins would be an inconvenient side trip.

Still, as I said earlier, I'm not against a level Disraeli but the usual arguments against freeways really don't apply very well here. There's plenty of access from one side of Disraeli to the other and even if there wasn't, there's no residential neighbourhood to keep intact anyway. To simply say that elevated freeways destroy neighbourhoods doesn't wash here. It IS almost always true but not in this case. Any new residential development in SPD is not going to be hurt by the presence of the Disraeli either since , unlike say, Wolseley, there wouldn't be any reliance on the traffic Disraeli would bring to the neighbourhood businesses.

The only sticking point , in my opinion (and that's all this is) is that it would be worth the money spent to make the overpass aesthetically pleasing. It doesn't have to cost much either...it's amazing what a difference a mural can make.

[1ajs]

something people don't relize is pointdouglas was alread split up through that coridoor... on the north side if u notice theres centra gas's workshop and offices there... that used to be a coal to gas plant.... that thing musta been noisy and dirty it was probly what killed the area and led to the red light distric designation of anibela since that street was very much industrial and no one wanted to live on it..

[jimsabo21]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Ironically , I was going to mention that whole aspect of the "Freeways are bad" argument but decided against it. Since even people who live in the vicinity can see that there is nothing particularly divisive about Disraeli then I might as well add to my earlier comments.

Freeways that destroy neighbourhoods do so because they divide established residential areas and make retail pointless. In Disraeli's case, that's not a problem. In SPD there is no residential neighbourhood to divide. Rather, what we have is a traffic thoroughfare going above what amounts mostly to industrial decay. There's also the fact that even if we decide to make it an at-grade artery we still have to provide for some seperation at the rail line. For all the difference this would make in the end I don't know that it makes all that much sense to bother trying to keep Disraeli level.

Anyway, if we had an established neighbourhood then no, building a freeway over top of it would obviously be the worst thing we could do. That's not the case here though. Higgins would serve very nicely as the main commercial strip provided we embarked on a plan to build enough housing to support any retail that tried to set up along the avenue. Actually, Disraeli wouldn't be of much use as a feeder route for commercial along Higgins anyway because by the time most of the people using that overpass get to Higgins it's fair to assume they're just commuting from their home to work and Higgins would be an inconvenient side trip.

Still, as I said earlier, I'm not against a level Disraeli but the usual arguments against freeways really don't apply very well here. There's plenty of access from one side of Disraeli to the other and even if there wasn't, there's no residential neighbourhood to keep intact anyway. To simply say that elevated freeways destroy neighbourhoods doesn't wash here. It IS almost always true but not in this case. Any new residential development in SPD is not going to be hurt by the presence of the Disraeli either since , unlike say, Wolseley, there wouldn't be any reliance on the traffic Disraeli would bring to the neighbourhood businesses.

The only sticking point , in my opinion (and that's all this is) is that it would be worth the money spent to make the overpass aesthetically pleasing. It doesn't have to cost much either...it's amazing what a difference a mural can make.

This is what I was trying to say a few pages ago ...

To think that PD would somehow be better off if Disraeli had never been built is speculation at best. None of the other neighborhoods of North Main have a freeway built over them, and ALL of them have decayed anyways.

Also, I have a question: People cause decaying neighborhoods. Now, these "people" that don't care mostly migrate to the West End, Centenial, North End, Point Douglas, parts of Elmwood. Crime goes up, property values go down. Some lawns are uncut, some house boarded up, ect ...

Then, the gov't infuses money in an area ... let's say Point Douglas. Beautiful Waterfront Drive gets extended to Higgins. Property values skyrocket, houses get renovated. Where do the "people who don't care" go? Doesn't this just shift the problem to an adjacent neighborhood??

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by jimsabo21

This is what I was trying to say a few pages ago ...

To think that PD would somehow be better off if Disraeli had never been built is speculation at best. None of the other neighborhoods of North Main have a freeway built over them, and ALL of them have decayed anyways.

Also, I have a question: People cause decaying neighborhoods. Now, these "people" that don't care mostly migrate to the West End, Centenial, North End, Point Douglas, parts of Elmwood. Crime goes up, property values go down. Some lawns are uncut, some house boarded up, ect ...

Then, the gov't infuses money in an area ... let's say Point Douglas. Beautiful Waterfront Drive gets extended to Higgins. Property values skyrocket, houses get renovated. Where do the "people who don't care" go? Doesn't this just shift the problem to an adjacent neighborhood??

The problem isn't necessarily the people who live in a neighbourhood per se. Absentee landlords are probably one of the biggest factors that gets overlooked.
If you own a house in some dilapidated area but you would rather just rent it out as opposed to living in it , what tends to happen is that the welfare of the neighbourhood just isn't something that you're thinking about. What absentee landlords want is a monthly cheque and they don't usually care where they get it from. So if a couple of thugs decide to rent the place out and use it as a grow-op , an unscrupulous absentee landlord won't bother doing a little research every now and then. With the grow-op comes crime and pretty soon property values are dropping which, in turn , begins a vicious circle. Nobody wants to invest money into a place that's situated in the middle of a neighbourhood going to hell. By the time the cops do something about the initial problem house, five more have sprung up that nobody is dealing with.

People who actually live in the homes they own don't let them go down the crapper. It's true that booting the criminal element out of the neighbourhood just moves the problem to another area but to combat that requires us to get into social services issues more than anything else. As far as any neighbourhood is concerned, the real issue is the concentration of unsavory types and how we can keep them from getting a "critical mass" if you will.

So basically, we can't control what people do with their lives but we can control how they affect others. There's no reason to give them opportunities such as low rents coupled with a lack of what I suppose could be called supervision by landlords that don't care as long as the cheque arrives.

By way of example, look at the Hell's Angels and their clubhouse. Ironic isn't it ? The worst gang in this city flies under everybody's radar including that of their neighbours. Why ? Because they take care of the place and essentially have a policy of being "good neighbours". In other words, the neighbourhood doesn't necessarily have to go to pot just because criminals have moved in. It's two different issues that get confused with each other all the time.

[1ajs]

the feds and provincial governemts have been infussing money into point douglas and north end... for the last aww 8 yrs maybe longer with grants to fix up homes exterior and some speacial grants for people with low income to et roofs or any other things replaced like kitchens that are falling apart ect

theres also grants even for the rental properties to fix them up... but anyways the bigest problem is the land loards that don't give a — about their properties and just rent to who ever pays them and have the heat set to 65 all winter and blah blah blah.......


as for problems being moved yea thats whats happening go take a drive over the liouse bridge and wonder around back in the area around talbot... its geting prity sketchy back there...

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

no viking theres no main st acces for cars


if u look closely u will see the parkade levels going up ... witch is how its built go take a drive and see
but looking at it that's about where the bus stop is.

as for the trees its just for looks lol

what are those two openings right in the middle?...looks like a vehicular entrance and exit to me...i hope i am wrong.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by trueviking

what are those two openings right in the middle?...looks like a vehicular entrance and exit to me...i hope i am wrong.

thts what i was talking about go take a look u will see theres no way one could drive a car in that spot the way its built

[flatlander]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

The damage was done a half century ago. Unless your planning on building a DeLorean to go back to 1956 there isn't much you can do about it.



Ohh pleassee.. How can you take yourself seriously?

If I were to look up the definition of a bleeding heart i'd probably find your avatar in my dictionary.

Are you sure you're not secretly Gordon Sinclair?

Unfortunately real life doesn't always fit so nicely into the pages of the mouldy urban planning text you read back in grad school.

PD will be no different after the new Disraeli and Louise bridges open than it is now.

So tempting, but I won't bite.

Except that, you are absolutely right. PD won't be any different. But why don't we demand better?

[flatlander]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Any new residential development in SPD is not going to be hurt by the presence of the Disraeli either since , unlike say, Wolseley, there wouldn't be any reliance on the traffic Disraeli would bring to the neighbourhood businesses.

The only sticking point , in my opinion (and that's all this is) is that it would be worth the money spent to make the overpass aesthetically pleasing. It doesn't have to cost much either...it's amazing what a difference a mural can make.

I deal with realtors on a daily basis (for what that's worth) and they will tell you there is a reason that Waterfront Drive dead-ends at Higgins. Right underneath the Disraeli. Now obviously the CP line predated the Disraeli and was responsible for the transition from residential to industrial in the first place. Who knows what the fate of the neighbourhood would have been had the CP line not gone through. Perhaps it would have been more like Crescentwood, perhaps more like West Broadway. But at least there would have been something to start with, and not an obstacle to try and resolve.

I'm not sure about the mural stuff. Murals are helpful in that they discourage tagging, but it won't mitigate the effects of a freeway. You can dress up the Disraeli, but you still can't take it out.

[drew]

Originally Posted by flatlander

You can dress up the Disraeli, but you still can't take it out.

I don't know about you, but I like my bridges tall and curvy...

...awkward

[wags_in_the_peg]

Multi-family housing starts increase

Work got underway on 90 new apartments last month as the Winnipeg CMA recorded its highest number of multi-family housing starts of any November since 1985.

New Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation figures released today show there were 271 housing starts recorded last month in the Winnipeg Census Metropolitan Area (CMA), which includes the City of Winnipeg and 10 surrounding bedroom communities such as East and West St. Paul and Headingley.

That was a 23- per -cent increase from the 221 starts recorded in November of last year, and it included 135 multi-family units and 136 single-family homes.

CMHC said November’s multi-family starts total was more than double November 2007’s tally of 67 units, and marked the first time in seven months that the multi-family sector took centre stage.

“The unusually strong November results mean that multi-family starts have already surpassed CMHC’s forecast of 850 units by 15 per cent,” the housing agency said, although it noted this year’s total was still well off the pace set in 2007.

Last month’s single-family-starts total were down 12 per cent from November 2007’s tally of 154 units. It left single-detached starts running two- per -cent ahead of last year’s pace after the first 11 months — 1,781 units compared to 1,745.

[rgalston]

Originally Posted by Spocket

In SPD there is no residential neighbourhood to divide...

Anyway, if we had an established neighbourhood then no, building a freeway over top of it would obviously be the worst thing we could do. That's not the case here though...

You don't think South Point Douglas was an established neighborhood when the City blasted the Disraeli through?


By the way, Do you freeway apologists think that Lower Manhattan would be what it is today if the Lower Manhattan Expressway was built in the late '60s?

[rgalston]

Originally Posted by jimsabo21

Then, the gov't infuses money in an area ... let's say Point Douglas. Beautiful Waterfront Drive gets extended to Higgins. Property values skyrocket, houses get renovated. Where do the "people who don't care" go? Doesn't this just shift the problem to an adjacent neighborhood??

Worse than having the problem "shift" from neighborhood to neighborhood is having it remain in all core neighborhood, while spreading further and further north, west, and east.

Frankly, that is a problem I will let suburban and south end altruists worry about. For me, I have kids to raise, and an investment that I would like to one day get a return on.

[1ajs]

good god 2 hrs to get in the house after locking my self out blah

[rrskylar]

"You don't think South Point Douglas was an established neighborhood when the City blasted the Disraeli through?"


Love the melodrama, at the time I'm sure the city thought that the best way to move traffic from the growing suburbs in East and north Kildonan was to put a roadway (I'll refrain from the official name because it isn't) through the point. What were the alternatives?

[sledhead35]

sorry, this may be off topic but i was driving down river last night and noticed the pulse has "lease" signs all along the retail section. does anyone know if they are having trouble finding tenants? i was just surprised its not all leased out already.

[wags_in_the_peg]

Originally Posted by sledhead35

sorry, this may be off topic but i was driving down river last night and noticed the pulse has "lease" signs all along the retail section. does anyone know if they are having trouble finding tenants? i was just surprised its not all leased out already.

are you surprised? i'v ementioned this before and will again. many on this forum preach and demand street level retail, but it just doesn't seem to be viable. waterfront drive, provencher and now river. the rent and/or condo cost are crazy and very few retailers can afford the new construction costs. typically the spaces are small and suitable to a tan / nail / coffee shop, etc, but they can't afford those rents they want.

provencher has so much potential but only 1 place is taken (skin guy i believe). waterfront drive has a body sugaring place and that is it. personally id love to see a deli or coffee shop or something but it's not viable. convert them to residential and let the retail go up next door or down the street.

[rgalston]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

are you surprised? i'v ementioned this before and will again. many on this forum preach and demand street level retail, but it just doesn't seem to be viable. waterfront drive, provencher and now river. the rent and/or condo cost are crazy and very few retailers can afford the new construction costs. typically the spaces are small and suitable to a tan / nail / coffee shop, etc, but they can't afford those rents they want.

provencher has so much potential but only 1 place is taken (skin guy i believe). waterfront drive has a body sugaring place and that is it. personally id love to see a deli or coffee shop or something but it's not viable. convert them to residential and let the retail go up next door or down the street.

New condo buildings shouldn't be designed to anticipate eternal commercial stagnation, and ground floor retail should always be a component of any residential project on commercial streets (Ie- Provencher, anywhere downtown), but the benefits of this won't come right away. It is hard to find tenants who will pay the higher rents in fledgling districts of slow-growth cities. More often, they will find cheaper places in cheaper spaces--smaller, older, less prime buildings that haven't undergone costly restorations. This is why a good supply of these kinds of buildings are always important if one wants to see neighborhoods revitalized, and is the single-greatest reason for keeping "eyesores" like the Albert Street Business Block standing.

[Archiseek]

the old u of w place on portage (near mts centre) has a sign on it now for Childrens Advocate

[theruler462]

Tommy Hilfiger store leaving Polo Park

ONE of the biggest names in clothing is pulling out of Polo Park Shopping Centre.
Tommy Hilfiger's store in Winnipeg's biggest mall will close Dec. 31 putting 30 employees out of work.

Store manager Trish Paterson said the clothier will maintain its big box outlet on South Kenaston Boulevard and will look for other retail opportunities in Winnipeg.

"We're not renewing our lease at the mall," she said. One possibility is opening up a stand-alone location, she said.

"With a free-standing store, the people walking in your doors are there specifically for your merchandise. At the mall, you never know what store people are going to go into. A lot of them are just wandering around," she said.

Deborah Green, general manager at Polo Park, said Tommy Hilfiger clothing is available at The Bay at Polo Park.

"They were working well here, they're a strong retailer," she said.

Green said the 5,000-square-foot space on the mall's second floor won't be empty for long. Negotiations are ongoing with a major retailer and an announcement will be made soon.

[email protected]


Anyone think there's a chance we see a downtown store?