Winnipeg Construction X

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

When ALL the buses used to be on Portage there were always way more people about. Once they built those bump outs and put half the buses on Graham it seemed like everything started to die.

Going back at least to end of trolleybuses in 1970, the only main route that has been switched from Portage to Graham is 18 Corydon - North Main.

Some routes now use Portage that didn't use to. 38 Salter used to use Graham, at least eastbound, as it ran counter-clockwise via Balmoral, Ellice, Kennedy, Graham, Fort and Notre Dame back to Isabel. Notre Dame and Logan used Portage westbound only between Garry and Hargrave, so one stop on Portage only. Eastbound they used Ellice between Carlton and Garry.

Portage was declining already in the 70s, but the decline really became more rapid after St. Vital opened in '79 and Kildonan Place in '80. Also very detrimental is that pre-Unicity Winnipeg has lost about 1/3 of its population since the 60s, and starting in the 80s those remaining with disposable income started doing most of their shopping at the suburban malls due safety concerns. The north side of Portage before Portage Place was an eyesore, although it was more or less fully occupied by independent businesses, though very low-end ones. Portage Place and the overhead walkways were huge mistakes. Many cities in North America tried downtown malls to revitalize their downtowns and most failed.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Going back at least to end of trolleybuses in 1970, the only main route that has been switched from Portage to Graham is 18 Corydon - North Main.

Some routes now use Portage that didn't use to. 38 Salter used to use Graham, at least eastbound, as it ran counter-clockwise via Balmoral, Ellice, Kennedy, Graham, Fort and Notre Dame back to Isabel. Notre Dame and Logan used Portage westbound only between Garry and Hargrave, so one stop on Portage only. Eastbound they used Ellice between Carlton and Garry.

Portage was declining already in the 70s, but the decline really became more rapid after St. Vital opened in '79 and Kildonan Place in '80. Also very detrimental is that pre-Unicity Winnipeg has lost about 1/3 of its population since the 60s, and starting in the 80s those remaining with disposable income started doing most of their shopping at the suburban malls due safety concerns. The north side of Portage before Portage Place was an eyesore, although it was more or less fully occupied by independent businesses, though very low-end ones. Portage Place and the overhead walkways were huge mistakes. Many cities in North America tried downtown malls to revitalize their downtowns and most failed.

I totally agree that Portage Place was a mistake but the city still hadn't learned the lesson that retail doesn't survive downtown (as it is) until very recently. This renovation is what should have been built in the first place but I suppose planning practices of the time wouldn't have allowed for it anyway (I don't think the concept had really been worked out by the mid 80's.

In any case, the only way forward for a lot of retail businesses in the core is more residential. Update the stock and move them in en masse.

[Authentic_City]

Of course, the North Portage redevelopment in hindsight was a mistake for a number of reasons. However, it also introduced hundreds of market and affordable housing units to the north of the mall. Nevertheless, the mall itself and skywalks certainly killed off a lot of the street life.

Not sure where you are getting the figure for the decline of pre-Unicity Winnipeg. There has been a population decline in the inner city for sure, but I don' believe old Winnipeg has declined by 1/3. A few years ago a fellow forumer put together some population statistics that showed old Winnipeg declined by about 11% since amalgamation.

Originally Posted by balletomane

Population of former municipalities currently in Winnipeg (1971, 2016, % change):

1. Old Winnipeg 246,246 to 218,525 -11.3%
2. Fort Garry 26,127 to 76,205 +191.7%
3. St. Vital 32,963 to 69,027 +109.4%
4. St. James 71,431 to 63,061 -11.7%
5. St. Boniface 46,714 to 59,823 +28.1%
6. North Kildonan 17,713 to 48,987 +176.6%
7. Old Kildonan 1,984 to 44,420 +2138.9%
8. Transcona 22,506 to 32,352 +43.7%
9. East Kildonan 30,152 to 26,623 -11.7%
10. Charleswood 12,180 to 25,347 +108.1%
11. West Kildonan 23,959 to 22,391 -6.5%
12. Tuxedo 3,258 to 18,483 +467.3%

Total 535,233 to 705,244 +31.8%

Census tracts in Winnipeg follow the boundaries of these former municipalities, which is how these numbers were determined.

Of course, a healthy and vibrant downtown should draw from well beyond the boundaries of the central city and not just the immediate neighbourhoods. Before its decline, many shoppers came downtown from the former suburban municipalities beyond the old city boundaries. On the other hand, the downtown population of Winnipeg has increased in the past two decades since PP Mall was built - from about 11,000 in 1986 to 16,000 in 2016 according to an Institute of Urban Studies report.

More people living downtown has to be a big part of the answer to downtown Winnipeg's woes - not more retail or malls, or mega projects. We have a long way to go.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Going back at least to end of trolleybuses in 1970, the only main route that has been switched from Portage to Graham is 18 Corydon - North Main.

Some routes now use Portage that didn't use to. 38 Salter used to use Graham, at least eastbound, as it ran counter-clockwise via Balmoral, Ellice, Kennedy, Graham, Fort and Notre Dame back to Isabel. Notre Dame and Logan used Portage westbound only between Garry and Hargrave, so one stop on Portage only. Eastbound they used Ellice between Carlton and Garry.

Portage was declining already in the 70s, but the decline really became more rapid after St. Vital opened in '79 and Kildonan Place in '80. Also very detrimental is that pre-Unicity Winnipeg has lost about 1/3 of its population since the 60s, and starting in the 80s those remaining with disposable income started doing most of their shopping at the suburban malls due safety concerns. The north side of Portage before Portage Place was an eyesore, although it was more or less fully occupied by independent businesses, though very low-end ones. Portage Place and the overhead walkways were huge mistakes. Many cities in North America tried downtown malls to revitalize their downtowns and most failed.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Of course, the North Portage redevelopment in hindsight was a mistake for a number of reasons. However, it also introduced hundreds of market and affordable housing units to the north of the mall. Nevertheless, the mall itself and skywalks certainly killed off a lot of the street life.

Not sure where you are getting the figure for the decline of pre-Unicity Winnipeg. There has been a population decline in the inner city for sure, but I don' believe old Winnipeg has declined by 1/3. A few years ago a fellow forumer put together some population statistics that showed old Winnipeg declined by about 11% since amalgamation.



Of course, a healthy and vibrant downtown should draw from well beyond the boundaries of the central city and not just the immediate neighbourhoods. Before its decline, many shoppers came downtown from the former suburban municipalities beyond the old city boundaries. On the other hand, the downtown population of Winnipeg has increased in the past two decades since PP Mall was built - from about 11,000 in 1986 to 16,000 in 2016 according to an Institute of Urban Studies report.

More people living downtown has to be a big part of the answer to downtown Winnipeg's woes - not more retail or malls, or mega projects. We have a long way to go.

1961 population - 265,420. I referred to the 1960s, peak population.

For the 2016 census I get:

South End 60,661
Downtown 17,823
West End (incl. Weston) 58,668
North End 48,311
Elmwood 14,704

Total 200,167 (change: -24.6%), so yes, not 1/3, but 1/4.

I did some calculations quite a few years ago, and I think at that time the old City's population had declined to somewhere in the 185,000 to 190,000 range, Its quite a while back so I was likely using 2011 or even 2006 numbers, but you're right that the population has increased in recent years in many of the inner city census tracts which is very good news.

I agree entirely. More people is key not only in the core itself, but also in adjacent neighbourhoods like the West End, the North End, old St. Boniface, etc. There has certainly been an improvement since the nadir of the downtown, indeed this entire city, in the 90s. Up to the 70s there was only Downtown, a much smaller Polo Park (just the mall and nothing else, was all pretty industrial north of the stadium/arena) and a few local shopping areas like Crossroads, Northgate, Northdale, etc.. So yes, most people in Greater Winnipeg still shopped downtown. Eaton's and The Bay used to be packed every day in the 70s, but by the 80s things had drastically changed.

[Authentic_City]

^I have not studied the entirety of old pre unicity Winnipeg, but I have examined some of the areas (e.g. census tracts, NCAs) that made up the old city. Many areas in the West End, for example, declined in population from the 1960s to the 90s, but many have since started to rebound, not to 1960s levels, but certainly seem to be heading back up.

I imagine that if you compiled the census tract data for the area comprising old Winnipeg, the low point would have been the 90s. Even with the recent uptick in some areas, I don't think we'll see pre unicity population levels within the old city boundaries again, largely due to smaller average household sizes now compared to the 1960s. Heck, there might even be more households now than in the 60s in old Winnipeg. For example, the average household size in the West Broadway and Spence census tracts is 2.0, while the city average is 3.0. Household sizes could even be lower in other parts of downtown where apartments and condos are the main dwelling type. Lots of single person households. We will need lots of apartments and condos downtown to generate the kind of population increase we all want to see.

[CoryB]

Portage Place was still a better idea that putting a roof over Portage Ave and closing the street to traffic. That was seriously something that was being looked at. I also recall before Portage Place there might have been discussions on Portage redevelopment including a downtown arena...

[esquire]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Portage Place was still a better idea that putting a roof over Portage Ave and closing the street to traffic. That was seriously something that was being looked at. I also recall before Portage Place there might have been discussions on Portage redevelopment including a downtown arena...

I remember seeing renderings of the Portage Avenue plan... the idea was to turn Portage Ave itself into Portage Place, with the street rerouted around the mall to the north. It was super awkward and it's a good thing it never happened.

In hindsight, building an arena on the North Portage site in the mid 80s would have been a better bet than Portage Place as a redevelopment play. It would have given downtown a major shot in the arm at a time when it was really starting to decline (unlike Portage Place which merely duplicated what all the suburban malls were doing), and it would have kept the Jets here which would have prevented the terrible publicity from when the team left. The Jets would probably still be playing there today had a new rink been built in the mid to late 80s.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by esquire

I remember seeing renderings of the Portage Avenue plan... the idea was to turn Portage Ave itself into Portage Place, with the street rerouted around the mall to the north. It was super awkward and it's a good thing it never happened.

In hindsight, building an arena on the North Portage site in the mid 80s would have been a better bet than Portage Place as a redevelopment play. It would have given downtown a major shot in the arm at a time when it was really starting to decline (unlike Portage Place which merely duplicated what all the suburban malls were doing), and it would have kept the Jets here which would have prevented the terrible publicity from when the team left. The Jets would probably still be playing there today had a new rink been built in the mid to late 80s.

If this new arena was still going to be owned by Winnipeg Enterprises (or anyone other than the team) it likely would have done nothing to keep the team here. The quality and location of the arena had nothing to do with them leaving, it was the dollar/economy combined with not making any money from arena ops.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by buzzg

If this new arena was still going to be owned by Winnipeg Enterprises (or anyone other than the team) it likely would have done nothing to keep the team here. The quality and location of the arena had nothing to do with them leaving, it was the dollar/economy combined with not making any money from arena ops.

The old arena still didn't have the skyboxes, club seats and all that other stuff. It clearly had to be replaced.

I'm sure a new rink here would have gone the same way as Northlands Coliseum... it would have started out with the Jets as a tenant the way the Oilers were at Northlands, only to have the team ultimately negotiate control over revenue coming in from the arena the way Peter Pocklington did in the 90s.

As I recall, what ultimately did the Jets in back in the 90s was the inability of the prospective ownership group to get a government guarantee to cover operating losses the way that it did during the Interim Operating Agreement years. I guess in hindsight the Sprit of Manitoba group should have taken the deal anyway since the massive gains in the value of the franchise would have made annual operating losses insignificant in the long run. They would have made out like bandits had they held the franchise from 1995 to 2015.

[buzzg]

Café going into one off the Fortune Block units.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Not sure where you are getting the figure for the decline of pre-Unicity Winnipeg. There has been a population decline in the inner city for sure, but I don' believe old Winnipeg has declined by 1/3. A few years ago a fellow forumer put together some population statistics that showed old Winnipeg declined by about 11% since amalgamation.

I never made that claim.

[Authentic_City]

^I was quoting Curmudgeon.

[wags_in_the_peg]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Café going into one off the Fortune Block units.

that's fantastic to hear, hope it's a yummy less than $15 person place

[The Unknown Poster]

Originally Posted by esquire

The old arena still didn't have the skyboxes, club seats and all that other stuff. It clearly had to be replaced.

I'm sure a new rink here would have gone the same way as Northlands Coliseum... it would have started out with the Jets as a tenant the way the Oilers were at Northlands, only to have the team ultimately negotiate control over revenue coming in from the arena the way Peter Pocklington did in the 90s.

As I recall, what ultimately did the Jets in back in the 90s was the inability of the prospective ownership group to get a government guarantee to cover operating losses the way that it did during the Interim Operating Agreement years. I guess in hindsight the Sprit of Manitoba group should have taken the deal anyway since the massive gains in the value of the franchise would have made annual operating losses insignificant in the long run. They would have made out like bandits had they held the franchise from 1995 to 2015.

Yes it was the losses until the new arena was completed that was the issue. I also recall the NHL disallowed the plan (Izzy's I believe) to have a large group ownership. NHL wanted a primary owner. They amended that for the Oilers a couple years later. The NHL certainly preferred the Jets to be relocated. But ultimately it was the fact no one wanted to absorb losses for 3 years until a new arena was open.

[DonaldSmith]

380 Osborne Street

[LilZebra]

Where would that be?

[plrh]

Nice. Right to the street. Another precast building.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by LilZebra

Where would that be?

I believe that is where Fort Rouge Glass was; across from the transit garage.

[eman]

Originally Posted by DonaldSmith

380 Osborne Street

Why can't they build it without disrupting the business next door. The mobile crane takes up so much space the ice cream shop will remain closed till august.

Tower crane or mini tower crane?

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by eman

Why can't they build it without disrupting the business next door. The mobile crane takes up so much space the ice cream shop will remain closed till august.

Tower crane or mini tower crane?

That’s actually only one small part of why they’re not open yet, sounds like the most insignificant part too. Their new delivery club is going well and taking up lots of time. The post mentions that the lot is still accessible, just some traffic disrupts - which could happen from anything in construction season.

“We have found a way to survive that does not require us to rush to open the store yet, and our new thing still needs work, so why risk spreading ourselves too thin?”

https://www.chaebanicecream.com/our-blog/when-are-you-going-to-open-the-store