Winnipeg Construction X

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by esquire

I'm thinking more in terms of our capacity to support the costs and to provide a flow of patrons through the museum. It wasn't that long ago that there was an aggressive fundraising campaign where many local heavy hitters made huge donations to a national museum here... are they ready to step up again? Consider that there are cities with a larger pool of wealthy donors.

Also, I don't know what the CMHR's attendance numbers are like but I don't get the impression that they're all that great. Winnipeg is not a huge tourism destination. If we spend a half billion on a museum, then are we OK with 50 or 100 people coming through to see it on the average day?

Due to the negative aspects of colonization on the Indigenous peoples my thinking is the upfront costs would more be covered by the government instead of private donors. As others have said such a museum is long overdue in Canada seeming to support there needs to be federal funding to support this.

In terms of attendance numbers, I suspect a national museum on Indigenous history will have similar issues to CMHR regardless of where it is located in the country. That said working in partnership which CMHR and WAG they could develop a three day package themed on Indigenous peoples of Canada.

Also having the museums bookend downtown may help generate activity on the street level if they bring in people from out of town as they would likely stay downtown and move between the different areas on foot.

Further, my grand vision for the national Indigenous Peoples Museum and School is just that it would be a national center of excellence for research and learning on those topics so it would have its own built in population similar to U of W or RRC in the Exchange.

[buzzg]

Does anyone know if the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation is going to be some sort of public component, or is it mostly just offices and meeting space? If it does have any sort of gallery, interpretive centre, etc.... really — it's at U of M. Can't imagine many visitors going to patronize it out there unless they came just for that.

Originally Posted by city_slicker

Hard to see but nope it's active uses behind the trees. I have very first hand information

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING
...

• Did not exceed a maximum density of ~400 sq. ft. of lot area per dwelling unit, in order to not compete with the two nearby rapid transit stations which are the areas in this vicinity targeted for highest densities.
  

I'm confused, why is there a maximum density if this is between two RT stations? How would a residential development "compete" with RT stations?

Also on that note, the amount of development in Fort Rouge Yards is incredible, really rolling along now. But every time I see it I just can't help but think – but where are they going to shop? Like there's so much density going in yet zero commercial space. Granted it seems like the lots closest to the stations are the last to be developed, but are there plans for some commercial in those close to the stations? I'd think some basic services like convenience, coffee, small retail would do quite well there considering its already a mature neighbourhood. Is it really proper TOD without commercial?

[bomberjet]

The Pemby thing, as to not compete. Seems odd. Maybe they're just going with a different size/style of apartment than what's slated by the stations?

The 2 lots at the south end of Fort Rouge near Jubilee station are supposed to be high density towers. Maybe they can work in some commercial space. Seems there is demand to live in that area.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Does anyone know if the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation is going to be some sort of public component, or is it mostly just offices and meeting space? If it does have any sort of gallery, interpretive centre, etc.... really — it's at U of M. Can't imagine many visitors going to patronize it out there unless they came just for that.

I'm confused, why is there a maximum density if this is between two RT stations? How would a residential development "compete" with RT stations?

Also on that note, the amount of development in Fort Rouge Yards is incredible, really rolling along now. But every time I see it I just can't help but think – but where are they going to shop? Like there's so much density going in yet zero commercial space. Granted it seems like the lots closest to the stations are the last to be developed, but are there plans for some commercial in those close to the stations? I'd think some basic services like convenience, coffee, small retail would do quite well there considering its already a mature neighbourhood. Is it really proper TOD without commercial?

I think if the Southwood Lands development goes according to plan (big if) then I don’t see a problem with having the Truth & Reconciliation Centre because that area could possibly be a secondary city core that would in theory be very urbanized.

Yea I really hope the Fort Rouge Yards gets that commercial. I took the Southwest Transitway yesterday and there wasn’t a very large pedestrian presence. Granted this was at 7 pm but yea add a few commercial and entertainment venues to really improve the street life. Might be tough to do with all the NIMBYs in that area tho.

[buzzg]

The city needs to get to work on rezoning to TOD around the RT stations. IIRC, Harkness is the only one with the actual TOD designation so far. Once that's in place, NIMBYs won't really have any say as that kind of thing will fall within zoning regs and not need variances.

[3de14eec6a]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

I took the Southwest Transitway yesterday and there wasn’t a very large pedestrian presence. Granted this was at 7 pm but yea add a few commercial and entertainment venues to really improve the street life. Might be tough to do with all the NIMBYs in that area tho.

I cycle the transitway a lot at various times of the day. And I hardly ever see anyone. 1 or 2 people at a bus stop. 1 or 2 people walking along the mixed use path where I'm cycling. Nobody walking from the new buildings at all.

For transit oriented development, it's kinda —. Too low density, and too many parking spaces.

But I'm still glad it's being developed. Hopefully it encourages further, bigger TODs.

[sleepyeyed]

Originally Posted by 3de14eec6a

I cycle the transitway a lot at various times of the day. And I hardly ever see anyone. 1 or 2 people at a bus stop. 1 or 2 people walking along the mixed use path where I'm cycling. Nobody walking from the new buildings at all.

For transit oriented development, it's kinda —. Too low density, and too many parking spaces.

But I'm still glad it's being developed. Hopefully it encourages further, bigger TODs.

it's more than double the time for my fiance to take the bus to U of M from West Broadway then it is to drive. terrible system.

[anthonyk]

Originally Posted by anthonyk

Lots of first responders at the construction site at the NW corner of Sherbrooke @ Wolseley

Pulsepoint says Technical Rescue, I hope everyone is okay.

Also, what I this project called?

21 year old female charged with mischief for breaking into the construction site and climbing the crane, it's estimated that she climbed about 150ft.

[lbnevs]

Originally Posted by sleepyeyed

it's more than double the time for my fiance to take the bus to U of M from West Broadway then it is to drive. terrible system.

I'm pretty much the best-served RT user going (I live a couple blocks from the RT station and my office has an RT stop directly in front of it), and it's 15 minutes drive or 30 minutes RT for me.

[Only The Lonely..]

Woman rescued after scaling construction crane in Winnipeg's West Broadway area

21-year-old charged with mischief after rescue team had to climb nearly 50 metres to help her down.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/construction-crane-climb-woman-rescued-winnipeg-1.6171529

[LilZebra]

Key part right here:

She was also alone, he said.

Maybe she misplaced her teddy bear and was on the hunt for it. When she got to the top of the crane, she was dismayed to find that her teddy bear was not there.

[thebasketballgeek]

Well here’s the plan for the final phase of Sage Creek (sigh)

https://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/DMIS/ViewPdf.asp?SectionId=613798&isMobile=yes

It’s expected to have 1,070 units within 145 acres of land (590 single family and 470 multi family units.) Density for this development is approx 4,550 people/sq km (3x the density of Winnipeg). It’s actually pretty impressive how they can make a relatively dense development so car-oriented this must be a Winnipeg specialty.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

It’s actually pretty impressive how they can make a relatively dense development so car-oriented this must be a Winnipeg specialty.

We are truly a special place.

[borkborkbork]

Originally Posted by esquire

We are truly a special place.

dense but totally unwalkable

if we fired every person in city planning, transportation engineering, etc., and just handed the keys to city design over to developers like qualico, would anyone even notice?

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by esquire

We are truly a special place.

Yeah, because the suburbs in Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, Mississauga, and Halifax are so much more dense than ours...

If you think Canadian cities are bad, has anybody here ever been to an American city? I know we're no Amsterdam or Stockholm, but a quick trip 8 hours south to a Minneapolis suburb like Plymouth or Eden Prairie would show you just how "dense" new Winnipeg suburbs like Bridgwater or Sage Creek are.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

Yeah, because the suburbs in Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, Mississauga, and Halifax are so much more dense than ours...

If you think Canadian cities are bad, has anybody here ever been to an American city? I know we're no Amsterdam or Stockholm, but a quick trip 8 hours south to a Minneapolis suburb like Plymouth or Eden Prairie would show you just how "dense" new Winnipeg suburbs like Bridgwater or Sage Creek are.

Oh no I completely understand that other cities also have very — suburban development. I mean Minneapolis prides itself on its “urbanization” when 90% of the surrounding cities around the Twin Cities arrived straight from suburban hell. Considering our density is higher then most of those cities you listed our suburbs aren’t the absolute worst in the world. Especially since we don’t have freeways zooming through them.

I just think that comparing horseshit with dogshit is not productive for our city. While yes it could be worse, we can do so much better. One positive about Winnipeg’s negativity is that we focus much more inwards then playing the comparison game and only compare when another city is doing something better then us. I think that mindset within the people of the city should help a little bit with our urbanization strategies going forward.

That’s not to say that we aren’t improving. For example Bridgwater Centre and the Sage Creek village are going to be quite walkable and pedestrian friendly once completed. Even the Court Avenue redevelopment has about 50% of its allotted land for medium-high density residential and is a closer example of a good suburban development. Then there’s Dawson Trail up at Fermor which will have double the multi-family units then single family units while incorporating mixed use development as well which I would even consider a great suburban development.

Progress is happening slow and steadily like usual. Whether it’s a good or bad thing is up to you. Personally I would love if we could speed up the progress!

This might be delusional homerism but I would like to believe we have more potential then any of the non-big 3 Canadian cities to create an enticing urban scene here.

[bomberjet]

Has anyone been to the suburbs in any other north american city? Winnipeg is not special haha

In terms of walkability. No Sage Creek is not what one would define as walkable neighbourhood. There's hardly any sidewalks for one lol And there is not much to walk to if you don't live near the town centre. Walking paths along retention ponds aren't what makes a neighbourhood walkable.

A walkable neighbourhood would have a high street, with shops and stuff within a 5 min walk from everyone. 10 mins max from the far corners. You have to get into old neighbourhoods to have anything close to that. And then being able to get to your friends house quickly is the next part of the walkable. Sage Creek is decent in that aspect with the catwalks and such. But you're mostly walking on the streets.

The last phase of Sage Creek will be decently close to the town cetnre if you live in the Multi-family along Warde.

[drew]

I know a few people that live in Sage Creek - and love it, and also consider it to be a very "walkable" neighbourhood.

They also wouldn't be caught dead living where I live (in Wolseley) - an actual walkable neighbourhood.

Different strokes for different folks.

People who live in Sage Creek, or similar areas, don't really care or want what some of us here consider to be necessary "urban" features of neighbourhoods.

I still remember when my sister in law came to our house in Wolseley for the first time with her small kids, and had a major panic attack because her kids had no idea what sidewalks were, and were running out on the street.

[Edmonchuk]

It's a weird concept to me. All neighbourhoods in Edmonton have sidewalks.

[esquire]

I generally don't have high expectations for new subdivisions, but would it kill them to at least try making something that resembles a high street without stringing everything around a giant parking lot near Lagimodiere?

For instance, could they not at least place a few commercial buildings along Sage Creek Blvd past Des Hivernants?