Winnipeg Construction VIII

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Yeah, it's fine. I really don't care.

I guess spocket knows the reality of Chinese cities, e.g.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by esquire

I guess spocket knows the reality of Chinese cities, e.g.

I hope the city would entertain a prettier version of something similar...

Ironic, however, that after taking all those extra steps up/down and walking around a circle you haven't spared any effort compared to going through the underground circus.

[Tacheguy]

Originally Posted by trueviking

bonnycastle is a beautiful park that serves the population of Broadway Assiniboine.
Stephen Juba serves the exchange district
Central Park serves Central Park.
The patch of grass where the Shanghai used to be serves Chinatown.
The Forks serves everyone.

Add the library, memorial boulevard and all the others pointed out here.

Now many parks do you need? What area of downtown is not served by a park?

I have done a very poor job of setting out my perspective on this.
There are indeed many green pockets in the greater downtown area. Can't dispute that. But to me the ufg park is essentially an extension of the Forks to the west of Main Street.

It triangulates the history at the cmhr with the history at the Forks, and with the history at ufg. If the connecting pieces described by centre venture ever move forward then you will have a contiguous public space that will rival any great city.

When you think of it this way it seems much more positive in my opinion.

[bomberjet]

^^Well there's really no difference between that and what we have underground. Maybe easier to navigate since you can see where you're supposed to be going.

[biguc]

I don't know why some of you are working with this false dilemma that it's UFG park or fuck history.

UFG gate was never in danger. The highrise plan for the site put the highrise at the far end of the block from the gate and included usable public space, including some park space.

UFG park is useless. It's a surface parking lot and some masturbatory landscaping. Maybe whenever they get around to building the interpretive centre, it'll be as great as you like to pretend. As it is, it's a dreary, vacant dump. And I won't be surprised if, over the years, it becomes a magnet for derelicts and crime, much like the ill-fated park that used to exist at Corydon and Osborn, which was also a pointless landscaping jerkoff.

[Urban recluse]

It is extremely underwhelming, and a waste.

[Tacheguy]

sorry God. I explained it to them just the way you told me...

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by dennis

Regarding the building proposed for the upper Fort Garry site. There was an initial plan that was significantly taller. The last posted image was the second scaled down design.

no that was a different proposal by another group

[1ajs]

and why did someone dig up the dead horse that is 100 main st debacle time to move on we got better stuff to get wound up over

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by esquire

I guess spocket knows the reality of Chinese cities, e.g.

And then in 20-30 years I'll still be alive and I'll be listening to another bunch of nancies telling us how great it was in 2016 before they forced you over top PnM to freeze in the open elements and how wonderful it was to be in the heated tunnels ( which have now been backfilled in ).

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by esquire

I guess spocket knows the reality of Chinese cities, e.g.

It's like you guys don't even understand what you read and write.

There are barricades all over the place in Chinese cities to stop pedestrians from crossing streets. See that little "fence" running down the middle of the street ? Well, FYI, in China those fences don't have breaks in them at every street. That's the point. They funnel people towards particular intersections so that you may have to walk two, three, or four blocks just to cross the street. And while they may open up at a large intersection, that doesn't mean that they open up so as to leave room for pedestrians to cross. They'll go right up to the line sometimes so that if you want to cross the street you literally have to get into the auto traffic to cross the street. The idea is that if you're walking then you're going to have to go around. So don't tell me that "it's only natural" that people in China don't know what a pedestrian barricade is on a major street or at a major intersection. Those little fences are on pretty much every major street because in China the driving is already atrocious and people don't even tend to look before they start crossing any given street.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by esquire

So now it's not the building itself but the shadow that is the problem?

The gate, the footprint or the idea of a park were never threatened by the apartment block. It's a loss for the urbanity of the area. We had an opportunity to have our cake and eat it too but we lost it due to some misguided notion that having no buildings next to a historic site somehow makes it grander.

You know I think you should go back and read all my posts, Drew's and others. The idea is to commemorate as much of the park's area as possible without tearing up Main Street. This isn't a big park we are talking about. And it's already been explained that the developer got a prime piece of property nearby. And there is no need to put a building on the footprint of potentially the most important historical area in the province when there are ample spots across and down the street to do that. Parks are nice. People like parks. And of course this is all moot since the park is there and will be there. I guess people can continue to live in the past on this one and wring their hands about it but it's probably best just to move on.

[esquire]

^ Sure haven't heard much about fundraising for that interpretive centre lately. Maybe once the FoUFG finally gives up the ghost on that idea the site can be used to build the residential tower that should have gone there in the first place!

[Ando]

Originally Posted by biguc

I don't know why some of you are working with this false dilemma that it's UFG park or fuck history.

UFG gate was never in danger. The highrise plan for the site put the highrise at the far end of the block from the gate and included usable public space, including some park space.

UFG park is useless. It's a surface parking lot and some masturbatory landscaping. Maybe whenever they get around to building the interpretive centre, it'll be as great as you like to pretend. As it is, it's a dreary, vacant dump. And I won't be surprised if, over the years, it becomes a magnet for derelicts and crime, much like the ill-fated park that used to exist at Corydon and Osborn, which was also a pointless landscaping jerkoff.

Congrats, you've managed to incorporate "fuck history", "masturbatory", and "jerkoff" into your reasoned arguments that basically ignore the fact the park is not finished yet. I'm sure an intellectual like you who can use such colourful language has the grey matter to figure out that's it's probably a good idea to wait until the park is finished until commenting on what it looks like. No one ever said the gate was in danger. This was about creating a park that extends into the footprint of the original fort. You have created your own false dilemma.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Sure haven't heard much about fundraising for that interpretive centre lately. Maybe once the FoUFG finally gives up the ghost on that idea the site can be used to build the residential tower that should have gone there in the first place!

I'm thinking you should start a thread about the new highrise that is going on the site of the park. Why not?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Ando

I'm thinking you should start a thread about the new highrise that is going on the site of the park. Why not?

No rush, it can wait until FoUFG officially gives up on the interpretive centre. Another 3 or 4 years, maybe?

Note that I'm not cheering against it, I'd actually like to see the interpretive centre go up now that nearly the entire block has been set aside for this park. It would be a significant improvement. However, my inner realist says that the group was really not interested in building it in the first place... their only goal was to get as much space as possible for the park, which they've accomplished without having to put up any big money to build the interpretive centre.

[Biff]

^^^The Interpretive Centre should start in Jul or Aug this summer. They are just finishing up the design.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

^^^The Interpretive Centre should start in Jul or Aug this summer. They are just finishing up the design.

That's positive. There was so little said about it lately I figured it was just part of the ol' Winnipeg bait and switch.

[drew]

I think we all need to agree to disagree on this Park - and move on.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

^^Well there's really no difference between that and what we have underground. Maybe easier to navigate since you can see where you're supposed to be going.

If you look closely there are still at-grade crosswalks there — the above grade are more for if you want to go cross-traffic or kitty corner instead of waiting at the light.

And those aren't really barricades on the street, it's just to make sure ppl crossing actually do it at the intersection, and not through traffic.