Winnipeg | Osborne Village & Fort Rouge | Developments & Discussions

[bomberjet]

The area surrounding confusion corner is zoned for high rises, I believe, based on recent project area plans.

[esquire]

You don't necessarily need towers to lead to sound urbanism. But towers are certainly compatible with urbanism. A few of them can certainly help boost the population numbers.

What a lot of people forget is that in European cities, there are often hundreds of blocks worth of the old 5 or 6 storey walkups built end-to-end which leads to the kind of density they have. We have nowhere near that much. It's mostly SFHs with smaller apartment blocks on the major streets. So a few towers can help make up the difference in that regard.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by esquire

You don't necessarily need towers to lead to sound urbanism. But towers are certainly compatible with urbanism. A few of them can certainly help boost the population numbers.

What a lot of people forget is that in European cities, there are often hundreds of blocks worth of the old 5 or 6 storey walkups built end-to-end which leads to the kind of density they have. We have nowhere near that much. It's mostly SFHs with smaller apartment blocks on the major streets. So a few towers can help make up the difference in that regard.

Too add to your point there are many areas in European cities that have some pretty impressive heights. The difference is that they are generally in the suburbs to act primarily as business centres whereas the City Centre is for tourists or for showcasing the urban design character and historic aspects of said city.

Areas like Sloterdijk in Amsterdam, La Defense in Paris, and Canary Wharf are some good examples of what I mean.

[xubiqtss]

Rather than build oversized towers to make up for OV's lack of density, the smart move would be for the city to eliminate single family zoning in the village/Corydon area and encourage smaller/mid-sized multifamily housing. Toronto has done something similar. It wouldn't have an immediate effect but you've got to start somewhere.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by xubiqtss

Rather than build oversized towers to make up for OV's lack of density, the smart move would be for the city to eliminate single family zoning in the village/Corydon area and encourage smaller/mid-sized multifamily housing. Toronto has done something similar. It wouldn't have an immediate effect but you've got to start somewhere.

Agreed this would be an optimal solution, but they already did a neighborhood plan for Osborne/Corydon and residents were about to throw pitchforks when they didn’t see any single-family zoning in the original rendition.

Our politicians are mostly gutless cowards who will scrap plans on the slightest pushback. The Toronto example was actually implemented by Ford & Co too allow 4 floors and 4 residential units to any lot, and besides Toronto virtually every other municipality is heavily fighting this. That’s because municipal politicians are some of the sleaziest scum on Earth in a lot of places who only care if they can squeeze the most money possible from their donors and try to get elected future elections rather then do what’s best for the community.

The answer too why we don’t do things in regards to zoning is always NIMBYism. That’s why it’s easier just to zone for a bunch of 25+ storey towers and call it a day, even when it wouldn’t make sense or fit the surrounding character.

[EdwardTH]

I'm not opposed to removing single family zoning in Osborne/Corydon areas but I really don't think it matters that much. There has been plenty of infill going into the residential streets around there as it is now. Why fix what isn't broken?

IMO the focus should really be on filling up the underutilized lots right along Corydon and Osborne, like all the confusion corner parking lots. Or that new Starbucks at Corydon & Stafford - they never should have grandfathered the drive-thru in like that. That lot should have a 6-storey residential building on it with a CRU at ground level so people can still have their precious grande frappe whatever.

[borkborkbork]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

Or that new Starbucks at Corydon & Stafford - they never should have grandfathered the drive-thru in like that. That lot should have a 6-storey residential building on it with a CRU at ground level so people can still have their precious grande frappe whatever.

Unfortunately that corner is only a Starbucks *because* of the grandfathered drive-thru. They wouldn't open there without it.

Starbucks' current strategy is to abandon the "third place" strategy (coffee shop as social hub and gathering place) and focus almost entirely on drive-thru and online pickup:

https://www.restaurantdive.com/news/new-starbucks-stores-drive-thrus/623162/

[EdwardTH]

Originally Posted by borkborkbork

Unfortunately that corner is only a Starbucks *because* of the grandfathered drive-thru. They wouldn't open there without it.

Starbucks' current strategy is to abandon the "third place" strategy (coffee shop as social hub and gathering place) and focus almost entirely on drive-thru and online pickup:

https://www.restaurantdive.com/news/new-starbucks-stores-drive-thrus/623162/

All the more reason they should have kiboshed it, I'm not attached to the Starbucks whatsoever. If I really want a corporate coffee there's already a Tim's across the street. It just hurts that much more thinking the site could have had a residential building AND a CRU with something better than a Starbucks there.

[pegster]

Saw what looked like a new liquor license application nailed to the former Segovia on Stradbrook.

[borkborkbork]

Originally Posted by pegster

Saw what looked like a new liquor license application nailed to the former Segovia on Stradbrook.

It's been long enough! It's such a great turnkey location for a restaurant.

[ColdRain&Snow]

The 4-plex at 761 McMillan Ave is just finishing construction. I ran into the owner while I was taking pictures. He said the building is mostly leased now and he's continuing to do showings. Sounds like the tenants will be moving in soon. I like the design of this one a lot and I think it's a good example of how to fit some missing-middle housing on a typical residential lot (the property assessment says the lot is 40 ft x 120 ft).

[WinCitySparky]

Wow a cornice!

[esquire]

I like it... it is a throwback to the days when multifamily housing fit neatly into the same blocks as single family homes.

[wags_in_the_peg]

^ this one had appeals against it from the neighbourhood, including a letter from Professor of Sociology from U of W on letterhead of U of W. In my opinion when someone submits it on their workplace letterhead, in essence they are representing the U of W. thankfully the City allowed it as it's a great replacement for a SFD.

https://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/DMIS/ViewDoc...&InitUrl=/DMIS/Documents/bac/2022/m21789

[ColdRain&Snow]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

^ this one had appeals against it from the neighbourhood, including a letter from Professor of Sociology from U of W on letterhead of U of W. In my opinion when someone submits it on their workplace letterhead, in essence they are representing the U of W. thankfully the City allowed it as it's a great replacement for a SFD.

https://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/DMIS/ViewDoc...&InitUrl=/DMIS/Documents/bac/2022/m21789

Of course it got appealed, Crescentwood is NIMBY central. Thankfully the City keeps approving these projects. It's obvious that housing near Corydon Ave is in high demand. Building a 4-plex one block over from Corydon Ave is completely reasonable.

[trueviking]

Its unbelievable someone would write a NIMBY letter to the city on his work letterhead...if I did that I would be in so much trouble.

This is what Toronto just made legal by right on every single residential property....it should be the same here...people need to get over the parking on the street thing.

One day I'm going to write a column about all the projects that everyone shat themselves over and look to see if any of the doomsday predictions came true....like that one-storey clinic on Academy that was going to kill all the neighbourhood children.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Its unbelievable someone would write a NIMBY letter to the city on his work letterhead...if I did that I would be in so much trouble.

Maybe you should become a tenured professor

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by trueviking

One day I'm going to write a column about all the projects that everyone shat themselves over and look to see if any of the doomsday predictions came true....like that one-storey clinic on Academy that was going to kill all the neighbourhood children.

An article like this is SO necessary. It could start with all the horror scenarios put forward about the downtown arena and expand from there.It could include examples of projects that were completed as well as those that were stalled because of Nimby nightmare scenarios.

[Unbending]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Its unbelievable someone would write a NIMBY letter to the city on his work letterhead...if I did that I would be in so much trouble.

This is what Toronto just made legal by right on every single residential property....it should be the same here...people need to get over the parking on the street thing.

One day I'm going to write a column about all the projects that everyone shat themselves over and look to see if any of the doomsday predictions came true....like that one-storey clinic on Academy that was going to kill all the neighbourhood children.

I love this idea. There seems to be a lack of accountability in the public hearing process. I’m all for a process that allows residents to provide feedback and share legitimate concerns in the hope of having stronger developments and better outcomes for the community. However, it seems that negative impacts and risks can be fabricated, exaggerated, and falsified in an effort to simply stop a project without any consequence. There needs to be some checks and balances in place to encourage an informed and meaningful discussion.

[ColdRain&Snow]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Its unbelievable someone would write a NIMBY letter to the city on his work letterhead...if I did that I would be in so much trouble.

This is what Toronto just made legal by right on every single residential property....it should be the same here...people need to get over the parking on the street thing.

One day I'm going to write a column about all the projects that everyone shat themselves over and look to see if any of the doomsday predictions came true....like that one-storey clinic on Academy that was going to kill all the neighbourhood children.

That would be a great topic for an article, especially if you could cover some of the Missing Middle projects in Corydon and Osborne. Stuff like 653 McMillan Ave, 584 Gertrude Ave, or 530 Stradbrook Ave. Clearly these projects haven't caused nearby property values to decline, on-street parking to be overwhelmed, or even a noticeable increase in traffic. The only NIMBY fear that has somewhat come true is a loss of trees. That is unfortunately part of the trade-off with doing infill developments, but I do think there's more that could be done by the City of Winnipeg to restore the tree canopy in older neighbourhoods.