SkyCity Centre Winnipeg | 45F | 575 Ft | 175.26 M | Cancelled

[Urban recluse]

I used to question it too, but even with the downturn, there are so many new towers u/c, approved and proposed in Edmonton. I do not know what to make of it.

[jmt18325]

A lot of that was already in the pipeline.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

I don't know if Edmonton is a fair comparison, just as Calgary is not. Hamilton would be.

Hamilton is a shit town and I will not have it!

Jokes aside (though am I joking) there are great differences between all the cities. We don't have the same resources, but like Edmonton we are similar as a capital, population size, climate, mentality perhaps.

Calgary is nowhere near a comparable, I didn't intend to insinuate that.

We're now so depressed we compare ourselves to Hamilton and Halifax.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

A lot of that was already in the pipeline.

When the important people in your city have a can do, not "what the fuck am I doing who do we tax?" attitude, things can go a long way.

It's cheesy, but Edmonton has had visions of sorts. They saw the economic potential or oil and natural gas and seized opportunities to make things happen where possible.

The powers that be in Manitoba always MEDDLE, because power is the only way to make a living for them. Problem is they meddle to stay in power, to stay elected, and in doing so they pander to Winnipeg's small town rich-guy envy. Everything is about appearing to fight for "the average guy" or "the little guy" and none of those "guys" has figured out that6 limiting development, and limiting the economic differnce makers in this city does not put money in their pocket.

As I've said a lot in this forum, sometimes the best thing a politician can do (recently highlighted by Orlikow's stupidity) is just to stay the F out of the way. Quite often, they don't know shit about what's actually going on but since it falls within their jurisdiction they meddle. They call it taking ownership of their tasks and constiuency, to which I'd say you don't own shit. Make things happen or get out of the way. Don't stop economic progress... we've been waiting decades for that here.

[Jammon]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Hamilton is a shit town and I will not have it!

Jokes aside (though am I joking) there are great differences between all the cities. We don't have the same resources, but like Edmonton we are similar as a capital, population size, climate, mentality perhaps.

Calgary is nowhere near a comparable, I didn't intend to insinuate that.

We're now so depressed we compare ourselves to Hamilton and Halifax.

The prairie cities are really not all that different when you compare them. Edmonton, Saskatoon, Regina and Winnipeg all have similar landscapes, architecture, people- the only true differences are the sizes of each city. Calgary is the only city on the prairies that stands out in my mind as different.

[Urban recluse]

Regarding Edmonton, we can all see what is happening in the Ice District as an example (an impressive cluster of towers is being constructed), while downtown Winnipeg saw virtually nothing in comparison with regards to the MTS Centre. Edmonton's downtown mall is thriving and money is being spent on it, while PP is a shithole. The cities are very different.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Regarding Edmonton, we can all see what is happening in the Ice District as an example, while downtown Winnipeg saw virtually nothing in comparison with regards to the MTS Centre. Edmonton's downtown mall is thriving and money is being spent on it, while PP is a shithole. The cities are very different.

That is a micro rather than macro issue.

While most cities were migrating towards their downtowns for the last couple decades, Winnipeggers, due to poor city planning and very bad civic PR, were convinced downtown was dead and that we didn't need it. That the homeless and drug addicted population was an anomaly here and didn't exist in other cities. That investing in downtown was pointless.

As much as I rip on the millenials, it's part of their typified desire to "have it all" that's helped make an improvement to Winnipeg's downtown absolutely mandatory. The previous generations were convinced that they did not need downtown, nor restaurants, nor entertainment nor towers.

We had our suburban house, access to a lake and a snowmobile and were perfectly fine being "down-to-earth" and thankful, until we realized how much other cities have improved. It's like waking up an looking in the mirror one day and only realizing at that moment that we put on 50 lbs and our ex got way hotter.

TNS is happening right now and is a good sign of a lesson learned late, but it is happening. A lot of investment in Edmonton is happening from within, which is what Winnipeg needs to facilitate so people like TN and Artis can do this more often.

Point being, I think it was an attitude issue, and we just let it sit. Edmonton went to work.

[Urban recluse]

True. Edmonton's downtown renaissance is relatively recent, and the city took a back seat to Calgary for years. The mentality and attitudes finally changed in Edmonton. and as a result, action was taken. Downtown Winnipeg needs more leaders like Artis Reit, etc to transform it like we have never seen before. As we discuss a great deal, there are many parts of downtown in need of new life, but only now do I think revitalization has begun.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

We had our suburban house, access to a lake and a snowmobile and were perfectly fine being "down-to-earth" and thankful, until we realized how much other cities have improved. It's like waking up an looking in the mirror one day and only realizing at that moment that we put on 50 lbs and our ex got way hotter.

This is so bang on true. The boomers I've worked with over the years generally range from either tolerating downtown to outright hating it. Most of them bash it and go back to West St Paul or wherever home is as soon as they can after work. The younger generations look at downtown way more favourably, and are far more inclined to stay close to the centre even after they get the means to move out to a semi-rural acreage somewhere like the boomers.

I'm guessing the larger number of young professionals in a place like Edmonton made their downtown's rebirth happen a lot faster. Remember, downtown Ed was in the dumps back in the 90s too... but it turned around pretty quickly 10 years or so ago.

As to the ICE District, remember that MTS Centre was built in the early 00s when little was happening downtown, and the Moose just didn't have the drawing power to leverage the kind of investment happening now. TNS may not be as big as the ICE District, but it's still a great development for the city... anything bigger would have probably been very disruptive in terms of flooding the market with too much new space.

[drew]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

It's like waking up an looking in the mirror one day and only realizing at that moment that we put on 50 lbs and our ex got way hotter.

haha. Awesome.

Time to hit the treadmill Winnipeg!

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Regarding Edmonton, we can all see what is happening in the Ice District as an example (an impressive cluster of towers is being constructed), while downtown Winnipeg saw virtually nothing in comparison with regards to the MTS Centre. Edmonton's downtown mall is thriving and money is being spent on it, while PP is a shithole. The cities are very different.

This is also partly a reality because the city paid a lot to have this happen in Edmonton. Rightly or wrongly. Look at other cities that have built downtown arenas across North America and Edmonton is the exception for the scale of development happening. It look a good ten years for anything to happen in St. Louis and this is with a very successful baseball club and a spectacular stadium. Some things take time. Edmonton seems to have gotten past that million hurdle which for economic investment is a significant number. It is not that Edmonton is starkly different than Winnipeg, but investment comes in round numbers and based on the fact that Winnipeg is only 20% less population and a significant center in Canada. It is that.

[esquire]

We can't forget that the City of Edmonton is in for, once all is said and done, close to half a billion dollars in the ICE District. Not only are they paying for the lion's share of the arena, they're also helping in other ways like being the lead tenant in one of the towers going up in connection with it. So the ICE District is quite heavily subsidized... by contrast, MTSC and TNS benefit from a relatively minor TIF, some VLT kickbacks and approximately $40 million toward the construction cost of the arena.

So when you look at ICE District, you have to account for the substantial public contribution to it. City of Winnipeg (to its credit IMO) has kicked in nowhere near as much to MTSC/TNS.

[Urban recluse]

Downtown St. Louis is still struggling.

The private investment in the Ice District is $2.5 billion. The majority of public funds comes in the form of TIF or levy. Edmonton is a success story because so much private investment has poured into the downtown.

[esquire]

^ No question that government contributions have leveraged a lot of private investment in downtown Edmonton, but at the end of the day it's still a government contribution whether it's an outright subsidy, TIF or levy (CRL or otherwise).

Edmonton will at least have a bunch of new towers and a nice arena to show for the expense, but I'd rather not see the City of Winnipeg get involved in that kind of subsidy game even if it means a more modest SHED complex. Frankly, considering how Edmonton got burned in the 80s (as did Winnipeg, for that matter) I'm surprised that they bent over so willingly this time.

[Urban recluse]

And as we have seen, that is the only way Winnipeg will see its downtown transformed: financial incentives.

[esquire]

^ Big difference between small incentives to get a project over the top vs. paying the freight on private developments with hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions. The latter is a recipe for disaster, which is why we generally don't do them here anymore. There won't be any more Winnipeg Square-like developments here.

[bomberjet]

Ya it sucks that comparing ourselves to Edmonton may not be apples to apples as of now. But that's just how it is. A city double the size of Winnipeg has that much more power when it comes to finances. They can afford the huge developments, with City being on the hook for half a billion one way or another. They have more flexibility with all the extra people and the oil, even if it's in the dumps right now.

Around Winnipeg, everyone is up in arms over the <$20M the City is chipping into TNS. But expect all the public spaces, plaza, walkways to be 100% available all of the time for the public. Okay so who pays for that, You expect a private developer to just allow you unabated access to their property?

Anytime the public purse is opened in Winnipeg, it's like people feel slighted they are not getting any money back from it. "what the hockey team is getting money". then the next guy "damn the symphony, I never go there." "Why do I pay school taxes when I don't go to school."

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Big difference between small incentives to get a project over the top vs. paying the freight on private developments with hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions. The latter is a recipe for disaster, which is why we generally don't do them here anymore. There won't be any more Winnipeg Square-like developments here.

To see the resulting private investment, I am all for it. Too much piece meal, not enough wholesale change happens in Winnipeg. I would give a lot to see a massive redevelopment of the area between the HSC and Exchange, and the land around H20.

[esquire]

^ Large scale change usually fails... see Winnipeg Square, Portage Place, Centennial Centre... slow and steady (like what we're seeing in the Exchange) is not as sexy but it gets the job done.

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Large scale change usually fails... see Winnipeg Square, Portage Place, Centennial Centre... slow and steady (like what we're seeing in the Exchange) is not as sexy but it gets the job done.

Those are failures because they are not residential, and the residential included with Portage Place was never going to be enough. Slow and steady is not effective, and as we constantly discuss, there are so many dead zones in the downtown and surrounding areas. Building a few dozen low-rise condos along William, McDermot, Bannatyne, etc would create density, just as it would around Chinatown, etc which needs significant investment.