Winnipeg Construction IX

[Wolf13]

I was at an East St Paul community meeting, the prupose of which was to determine whether or not to let the developer add increased density condos and nice townhomes, 300k-400k+...

Boy, I ain't never seen greater NIMBY-ism and rotten privilege haha! They were flat out saying "You have to earn your right to be in East St Paul, not pay a lower price for a reasonably priced product"... for which there clearly is a demand lol.

Rage ruled the day, and the application was denied.

[esquire]

^ Fine with me, keep the multi-family tax base in Winnipeg.

The funny thing is that apart from the strip along the river and much of Pritchard Farms, ESP has its share of junky old farmhouses. It's not exactly Beverly Hills. Sounds like some residents are experiencing delusions of grandeur.

[Riverman]

It is a very well run muni. I think it is the only one that has full sewer and water. Maybe Headingly does too?

[esquire]

^ The disbanding of their police force was a bit of a black eye, but since then it's been pretty quiet on the East St. Paul front.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by Riverman

It is a very well run muni. I think it is the only one that has full sewer and water. Maybe Headingly does too?

I don't know, I've been told that ESP is dependent on development fees to pay the day-to-day expenses. IF this is true then their budget relies on the housing market.

For the Capital Region, it seems like most RMs have full municipal water service, except for maybe the far reaches of Springfield, Tache, St Clements and St Andrews?. Sewer service is patchy though and residential development depends on sewer provision. In Headingley, I think those four streets south of Hatfield don't have sewer service but everywhere else does.

In WSP and St Andrews sewer construction is ongoing to tie into the North End Winnipeg plant. So I agree, maybe Headingley does too.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Fine with me, keep the multi-family tax base in Winnipeg.

That's going to get harder and harder if public hearings in say, River Heights, continue to move towards what Wolf saw that night in East St Paul.

As an aside, shouldn't we be applauding the exurbs for trying to increase their density? For all the complaints about low density "sprawl", I thought this would be welcomed.

[esquire]

^ ESP can be 5 acre lots all around... What interest would a Winnipeg taxpayer have in seeing the exurbs eat into dense multifamily developments that would otherwise be built here?

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by plrh

For the Capital Region, it seems like most RMs have full municipal water service, except for maybe the far reaches of Springfield, Tache, St Clements and St Andrews?. Sewer service is patchy though and residential development depends on sewer provision. In Headingley, I think those four streets south of Hatfield don't have sewer service but everywhere else does.

In WSP and St Andrews sewer construction is ongoing to tie into the North End Winnipeg plant. So I agree, maybe Headingley does too.

No there is no water in WStP. All wells, and sewer is not yet connected. St. Clements is the same.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by Riverman

No there is no water in WStP. All wells, and sewer is not yet connected. St. Clements is the same.

I was surprised but even the 1/4 acre lots inside the perimeter in Riverdale don't have hydrants, I just noticed.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Fine with me, keep the multi-family tax base in Winnipeg.

The funny thing is that apart from the strip along the river and much of Pritchard Farms, ESP has its share of junky old farmhouses. It's not exactly Beverly Hills. Sounds like some residents are experiencing delusions of grandeur.

Haha, as a resident of east st paul who aside from taxes spends all his time and money in the city, I wouldn't mind seeing the tax base jump up.

East St Paul is a beautiful place to be, but stagnant. I wish it would aspire to more than just staying the same. I don't want a metropolis, just don't want people to fear economic/development progress!

Originally Posted by plrh

I don't know, I've been told that ESP is dependent on development fees to pay the day-to-day expenses. IF this is true then their budget relies on the housing market.

This right here... They need these fees. I gathered the council wanted to be in favour but couldn't... such was the backlash. You can't reason with residents who quite literally were saying that others "don't deserve to be here" below a certain price point.

Originally Posted by esquire

^ ESP can be 5 acre lots all around... What interest would a Winnipeg taxpayer have in seeing the exurbs eat into dense multifamily developments that would otherwise be built here?

True, but to some extent it's practically an extension of Winnipeg... this proposal was still within the perimeter, so all the daily effects of added density would be more felt by North Kildonan than ESP north of the perimiter, taxes aside.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

True, but to some extent it's practically an extension of Winnipeg... this proposal was still within the perimeter, so all the daily effects of added density would be more felt by North Kildonan than ESP north of the perimiter, taxes aside.

Not that a couple of low rise buildings would make a huge difference one way or the other, but what benefit would it bring to Winnipeg? In all likelihood it would house people who'd commute to Winnipeg and use Winnipeg roads/facilities but without contributing any money to the tax base.

From a Winnipeg-centric standpoint, if development can't be stopped at city limits then it would be best if it were minimized. The current ESP trend of houses on big lots is better than a bunch of dense MURBs.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Haha, as a resident of east st paul who aside from taxes spends all his time and money in the city, I wouldn't mind seeing the tax base jump up.

East St Paul is a beautiful place to be, but stagnant. I wish it would aspire to more than just staying the same. I don't want a metropolis, just don't want people to fear economic/development progress!


This right here... They need these fees. I gathered the council wanted to be in favour but couldn't... such was the backlash. You can't reason with residents who quite literally were saying that others "don't deserve to be here" below a certain price point.

Those living/movingt to East St. Paul want all the benefits Winnipeg has to offer but

True, but to some extent it's practically an extension of Winnipeg... this proposal was still within the perimeter, so all the daily effects of added density would be more felt by North Kildonan than ESP north of the perimiter, taxes aside.

Those living/ moving to East St. Paul want all the benefits Winnipeg has to offer without any of the obligations the sweetheart deal that residents of E. St. Paul got for some city services really doesn’t benefit Winnipeg. The municipality saves it’s residents on their municipal taxes by not having to pay fire fighter salaries and benefits, contracting out policing to the RCMP and keeping services to a minimum and keeping the municipality in a semi rural state in terms of infrastructure.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by esquire

Not that a couple of low rise buildings would make a huge difference one way or the other, but what benefit would it bring to Winnipeg? In all likelihood it would house people who'd commute to Winnipeg and use Winnipeg roads/facilities but without contributing any money to the tax base.

From a Winnipeg-centric standpoint, if development can't be stopped at city limits then it would be best if it were minimized. The current ESP trend of houses on big lots is better than a bunch of dense MURBs.

I'm not talking about the city as an arm of government... I think that the added density should help spruce up some of the commercial development planned along Henderson before the perimiter right by the entrance to the new neighbourhood, as well as Henderson in NK in general. This added density wouldn't have any effect on the roads and Winnipeg won't miss much in the form of taxes... in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of tenants move from elswhere in East St Paul to either downsize, free up capital, or be closer to the city.

Lastly, the big lots in East St Paul aren't being replaced, that will always be a thing. But right now, they're selling at a snail's pace, ergo lower demand. Demand is instead shifting towards a slightly lower but still high quality price point, and quality density usually begets further demand and pushes prices up in the medium/long term. That, and 4 storey is only part of the plan, as most of the space is being taken by 2-3 storey townhome condos. Might only be condos now that the initial proposal was shot down.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

I'm not talking about the city as an arm of government... I think that the added density should help spruce up some of the commercial development planned along Henderson before the perimiter right by the entrance to the new neighbourhood, as well as Henderson in NK in general. This added density wouldn't have any effect on the roads and Winnipeg won't miss much in the form of taxes... in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of tenants move from elswhere in East St Paul to either downsize, free up capital, or be closer to the city.

Lastly, the big lots in East St Paul aren't being replaced, that will always be a thing. But right now, they're selling at a snail's pace, ergo lower demand. Demand is instead shifting towards a slightly lower but still high quality price point, and quality density usually begets further demand and pushes prices up in the medium/long term. That, and 4 storey is only part of the plan, as most of the space is being taken by 2-3 storey townhome condos. Might only be condos now that the initial proposal was shot down.

How does more people living in East St. Paul and travelling on city roadways like Henderson Highway benefit Winnipeg residents again?

[esquire]

^ It won't. I think there is some cognitive dissonance going on because this forum tends to push the idea that more density = more better. But when you're talking the exurbs, I heartily welcome less density. I'd be thrilled if Peter Nygard bought up all of ESP and turned it into a giant South Fork Ranch knockoff with one residence on it.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

How does more people living in East St. Paul and travelling on city roadways like Henderson Highway benefit Winnipeg residents again?

Winnipeg has less of this "problem" than almost any large city in North America. If having a very large percentage of your population inside the core municipality were some sort of advantage, post-Unicity Winnipeg should be evincing that advantage in a pretty spectacular way by now.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Winnipeg has less of this "problem" than almost any large city in North America. If having a very large percentage of your population inside the core municipality were some sort of advantage, post-Unicity Winnipeg should be evincing that advantage in a pretty spectacular way by now.

Won't comment on US cities but in large Canadian cities those living outside the core municipality are doing it because homes are more affordable than inside the core generally, in Winnipeg the reverse is true.

[esquire]

^ New homes outside of Winnipeg are generally cheaper on a PSF basis, same as anywhere else in Canada. That's the main draw. Just look at what the same price point buys you in West St. Paul or La Salle or wherever vs. what it buys in the city.

I bought a home in Winnipeg last year and there is no question I could have had more home for the same money out in a semi-rural area, but I just wasn't interested in that lifestyle.

[esquire]

Here's an interesting factoid from the Regina construction thread, which goes further to my earlier point that it's not doom and gloom on the office space front, and there is a solid reason as to why TNS exists:

Originally Posted by thefourthtower

http://www.exchangemagazine.com/2018/week3/Tuesday/18011610.htm
Commercial Office Space 2018

2018 North America and Europe commercial real estate forecast

. Four Canadian markets are projected to be among the 10 lowest overall office vacancy rates in North America by year-end 2018: Winnipeg, Toronto, Regina and Vancouver. Great news

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Winnipeg has less of this "problem" than almost any large city in North America. If having a very large percentage of your population inside the core municipality were some sort of advantage, post-Unicity Winnipeg should be evincing that advantage in a pretty spectacular way by now.

Thank you for saying this. One need only travel as far as Minneapolis/St. Paul to see what this looks like. The City of Minneapolis proper is a city of only ~350,000 people, which I would guess was all built up by 1960. Yet I don't think it's citizens bemoan the hundreds thousands of people who live in St. Louis Park, Bloomington, St. Anthony, etc. as avaricious freeloaders the same way we do here.

And aside from drive on city roads, what other municipal services do capital region dwellers "take advantage" of? Unless they are living in parts of East or West St. Paul that pay for City water/sewer, I can't think of any.