Winnipeg Construction IX

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

It's no coincidence the two major casinos in Winnipeg are located where they are - Transcona /East Kildonan and the North End...or at least near the North End. Both working class and lower income areas. There certainly aren't any casinos being built in the south end of the city...nor will there be in the future.

Club Regent is in Transcona not East Kildonan, in fact it is closer to St. Boniface than to E.K. Neither are lower income areas, both are pretty average and in any event Winnipeg is a very blue collar town anyways. McPhillips Station is in not near the North End. The south end really is not all that swanky. Lots of it is very dumpy, esp. latge portions of St. Vital, most of Fort Rouge west of Osborne St. and south of Corydon, River Heights south of Fleet and the whole western edge near Carpathia. Large parts of Fort Garry are nothing special either. Lots of run down apartments.

I agree that the casinos are where they are because when they were built in the early 90s there was large amounts of vacant and cheap land there, which in both cases are relatively central AND, at that time at least, removed from residential areas.

[bomberjet]

Historically East Kildonan west to Plessis. That's why Kildonan Place mall is in Transcona. But I digress.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Club Regent is in Transcona not East Kildonan, in fact it is closer to St. Boniface than to E.K. Neither are lower income areas, both are pretty average and in any event Winnipeg is a very blue collar town anyways. McPhillips Station is in not near the North End. The south end really is not all that swanky. Lots of it is very dumpy, esp. latge portions of St. Vital, most of Fort Rouge west of Osborne St. and south of Corydon, River Heights south of Fleet and the whole western edge near Carpathia. Large parts of Fort Garry are nothing special either. Lots of run down apartments.

I agree that the casinos are where they are because when they were built in the early 90s there was large amounts of vacant and cheap land there, which in both cases are relatively central AND, at that time at least, removed from residential areas.

lol what? McPhillips station is near (or in) the north end by every conceivable definition of the area.

[BigG]

Originally Posted by Biff

The Rec Room by Cineplex.

Thank you.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Historically East Kildonan west to Plessis. That's why Kildonan Place mall is in Transcona. But I digress.

No it didn't. The eastern boundary was Bird's Hill Road (now Panet).

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by cheswick

lol what? McPhillips station is near (or in) the north end by every conceivable definition of the area.

It is IN IN IN the North End, not NEAR it.

There's a difference between in and near. Bell MTS Centre is in the downtown area, not near it.

[rkspec]

Originally Posted by cheswick

lol what? McPhillips station is near (or in) the north end by every conceivable definition of the area.

kinda was thinking the same.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

No it didn't. The eastern boundary was Bird's Hill Road (now Panet).

Trying to find some of the maps online. This one doesn't name street. But you can see EK east boundary is aligned with St. Boniface boundary, which to this day is Plessis. They actually align with the jog in Plessis around Dugald Road. At some point eh City adjusted electoral wards and made the change.

Map: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/051154_e90bf2020d9248718cc174a4e454c31e.pdf
Website: https://www.newpghs.com/historical-maps

There are a number of maps that show Birds Hill Road as the boundary too. There was an article which I can't find now that talked about this.

[rkspec]

City set to sell Pantages Playhouse Theatre to local developer for $530,000

https://globalnews.ca/news/5000466/city-...e-theatre-to-local-developer-for-530000/

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Trying to find some of the maps online. This one doesn't name street. But you can see EK east boundary is aligned with St. Boniface boundary, which to this day is Plessis. They actually align with the jog in Plessis around Dugald Road. At some point eh City adjusted electoral wards and made the change....

From 1925, when North Kildonan separated from East Kildonan, E.K.'s boundaries were the Red River on the west, the lane between Harbison and Larsen on the south (except for the portion west of E. Kildonan Road (Henderson) north of that line that includes Elmwood Park which was part of the City of Winnipeg in its entirety), Bird's Hill Road (Panet) on the east, and then Oakland, Gateway and the line between Kimberly and Blantyre on the north. It did not border St. Boniface.

The Parish of Kildonan bordered St. Boniface until 1906 when Elmwood joined the City of Winnipeg. That's why Elmwood had different telephone exchanges and was served by a different hydro feed (Winnipeg Hydro) and to this day is in Winnipeg school division No. 1. East and West Kildonan became separate R.M.s in 1914.

[Curmudgeon]

For research purposes, Larsen was called Montrose until the street name rationalization that occurred in the 60s under the Metro government. Kimberly was called Sutherland and then later Melrose (hence Melrose CC) before it became Kimberly. Panet was renamed from Bird's Hill Road in the same time frame but into the 80s buses were signed Talbot-Bird's Hill. That confused a lot of people, similarly to how when Selkirk-Keewatin buses became 16 Selkirk-Manitoba, a lot of people who wanted to go to the city of Selkirk got on the wrong bus.

[wardlow]

Club Regent is within what were the old City of Transcona boundaries. North Kildonan was on the north side of Reenders; East Kildonan was west of Highway 59. Club Regent is now inside the Transcona ward.

Like the casino on McPhillips is basically in or on the boundary of most definitions of the North End, I don't think it really matters on which side of the line it falls: both casinos are both on the periphery of the 'hearts' of their respective areas (Transcona and the North End).

I think both casinos opened where they did because they were in cheap, arm-pit locations with fairly good access but far from a lot of residences. More broadly, they opened in these areas of the north and north-east because culturally -- and I feel like I'm wading into murky water here -- there wasn't much concern with a casino opening: they're modest neighbourhoods where demographics skew toward older folks who think casinos are not just morally a-okay but are their idea of time well spent. This doesn't necessarily have much to do with class or ethnicity.

The south/southwest end of the city has a lot of what were historically working class-ish neighbourhoods, and a good supply of cheap, arm-pit locations with access (and of course had way more 25 years ago). But there's a cultural differences: more people quietly don't approve of casinos and certainly have what they feel are far better things to do with their money and time.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by rkspec

City set to sell Pantages Playhouse Theatre to local developer for $530,000

https://globalnews.ca/news/5000466/city-...e-theatre-to-local-developer-for-530000/

So clearly the city is prepared to have the Pantages demolished, because that's what's going to happen when you sell to a small time developer for land value only.

Originally Posted by wardlow

I think both casinos opened where they did because they were in cheap, arm-pit locations with fairly good access but far from a lot of residences. More broadly, they opened in these areas of the north and north-east because culturally -- and I feel like I'm wading into murky water here -- there wasn't much concern with a casino opening: they're modest neighbourhoods where demographics skew toward older folks who think casinos are not just morally a-okay but are their idea of time well spent. This doesn't necessarily have much to do with class or ethnicity.

As I mentioned before, there is a history to those locations. In 1984, Manitoba Lotteries opened up bingo halls on McPhillips and Nairn (Pot o' Gold and Bonanza Bingo). Just plain jane bingo halls, and they were opened in response to concerns about corruption in the loosely regulated world of charity bingos. They were simply located in cheap space in strip malls, as I recall.

Then in the early 90s, Manitoba Lotteries wanted to expand the bingo halls and they pitched Club Regent and McPhillips Station as replacements. They were sold as nothing more than bigger, better bingo halls in pretty well the same location as the bingo halls. They weren't described as casinos. But sure enough when they opened in 1993, it was clear that bingo was a sideshow at best.

I don't think there is really as much of a geographic divide on this as some of you are suggesting... the southern side of the city definitely has its share of bingos. If there were a casino on Waverley or Fermor I'm sure it would be every bit as busy as the other two.

[Curmudgeon]

The modern ward boundaries are entirely different from the pre-Unicity legal boundaries of the cities, towns and R.M.s that made up Greater Winnipeg. They are political creations and are frequently gerrymandered. Nobody for instance would say that they live in Daniel McIntyre because no one would have a clue where that is. It's called the West End. My guess is that in the near future some of the wards may be renamed in any event. The land titles registry still uses the old parish boundaries for registration and description purposes.

Perhaps there was a political motivation to the location as both casinos were in traditionally NDP ridings at a time when Filmon and the PCs were in power (and that is only a hunch), but without evidence I can't agree that there is any significant "cultural" difference vis-a-vis the patronage of the casinos between residents of north and south Winnipeg. Although there are no bars or pubs to my knowledge in River Heights nor Tuxedo the rest of south Winnipeg seems not to have fewer VLTs than the northern parts of the city.

Anecdotally at least, if I have noticed anything from my occasional visits to the casinos, the most pronounced difference amongst the patrons is not one of class or ethnicity, but rather of gender (or what until recently was called —), particularly on the slot machines.

[CoryB]

Both casino locations were developed in spots where there was guaranteed to be almost zero change for legitimate NIMBY objections. Club Regent was developed on larger undeveloped farm land between Transconna and Winnipeg while McPhillips Station was strategically wedged between the Old Ex grounds and the CP rail shop. The adjoining hotel property on McPhillips stood to gain significantly so had no reason to object. Fort Garry Industries also had little few concerns over the site and would later receive a significant payout from the casino to relocate. The hotel was also later purchased and then demolished by the casino.

West Winnipeg being somewhat constrained in development due to the river and the airport didn't get a casino as the horse racing tracking was previously established. In theory south/southwest Winnipeg should have received a casino. It is unclear how that didn't happen, especially with the Kennaston and McGillivary area being heavily undeveloped at the time.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by CoryB

West Winnipeg being somewhat constrained in development due to the river and the airport didn't get a casino as the horse racing tracking was previously established. In theory south/southwest Winnipeg should have received a casino. It is unclear how that didn't happen, especially with the Kennaston and McGillivary area being heavily undeveloped at the time.

I suspect a south side casino would have happened by now if it weren't complicated so much by the First Nations gaming question. I'm sure if they knew 25 years ago how thorny the issue would become, the province probably would have rushed to throw something up in the southern end of town.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Trying to find some of the maps online. This one doesn't name street. But you can see EK east boundary is aligned with St. Boniface boundary, which to this day is Plessis. They actually align with the jog in Plessis around Dugald Road. At some point eh City adjusted electoral wards and made the change.

Map: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/051154_e90bf2020d9248718cc174a4e454c31e.pdf
Website: https://www.newpghs.com/historical-maps

There are a number of maps that show Birds Hill Road as the boundary too. There was an article which I can't find now that talked about this.

That's NK's boundary that aligns to St Boniface, not EK. It is along Plesis road, but you can also see in your map that there is a large section that Transcona goes west of this boundary. That section contains Regent Ave west as best as I can ascertain from an old highway map.

[wags_in_the_peg]

Originally Posted by esquire

So clearly the city is prepared to have the Pantages demolished, because that's what's going to happen when you sell to a small time developer for land value only.

continue to run as is, add office space for arts, explore developing the site, nothing about demo.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

continue to run as is, add office space for arts, explore developing the site, nothing about demo.

Like so many sweet nothings soothingly whispered in hesitant ears...

[optimusREIM]

^ I don't know. I think that we need to wait and see what the developer proposes. The lot to the north would make a perfect location for midrise mixed use. If they emphasized providing space for artists and did some work to preserve the theatre and restore other parts they might be able to achieve what the gas station folks failed. That one would have been great to have. Oh well. However if there are whisperings of demolition there had better be a full throated uproar from the community. Pantages is a local cultural treasure.