Winnipeg Construction X

[esquire]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Which means the architects and developers are 100% to blame here – they clearly took into account absolutely zero context, not only to the area but to the people that would be living inside it.

I suppose, but on the other hand... had the area kept improving gradually at the same rate that it was from around 2004-2009 the complex might have worked. I don't know that 546 could have predicted the steep drop in local social conditions?

At the time the building was going up, no one (that I can recall at least) was criticizing the lack of CPTED elements built into it or whatever. Obviously if it was built that way today people would be sounding the alarm at the design stage.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by esquire

I suppose, but on the other hand... had the area kept improving gradually at the same rate that it was from around 2004-2009 the complex might have worked. I don't know that 546 could have predicted the steep drop in local social conditions?

At the time the building was going up, no one (that I can recall at least) was criticizing the lack of CPTED elements built into it or whatever. Obviously if it was built that way today people would be sounding the alarm at the design stage.

I don't really understand this improvement you're talking about, even if it got marginally better, it has still always been one of the most dangerous strips. There has been a cop car almost permanently parked at that corner every night for as long as I can remember. I don't think anyone thought it was getting better anytime soon – hence why they built subsidized housing.

And even if someone lived in a utopia bubble, doesn't change the fact that there would obviously be disabled people and large families going in, so putting a kitchen on one floor with the bedroom two floors up was clearly a horrible idea. The concrete wasteland of a courtyard didn't seem too well thought out either.

[esquire]

^ Things were trending positively at the time. It's easy to forget, but it wasn't as dire as it is now. Obviously there were still issues, but it was felt that the area was a bit like West Broadway, somewhat on the upswing. I recall one the more notorious forum members optimistically bought a house nearby at the time expecting the area to keep improving - Hotelier and his many other identities - but it didn't take long for the bloom to come off that rose. Hell, I came close to buying a house myself on Spence near the former 7-Eleven on Sargent... to be honest, I'm glad I didn't. I don't need the stress in my life.

I'm not saying the complex was perfect or somehow beyond question or anything like that, but at the time it was planned and built there was little criticism regarding design or location. It was seen as a pretty bold and exciting step forward for a tired strip.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

Manitoba Housing high-rises surround Central Park. That area will be a blight for decades to come.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

Manitoba Housing high-rises surround Central Park. That area will be a blight for decades to come.

From what I can tell, the highrises surrounding Central Park are not really the crux of the problem. Many of those buildings are rental apartments and condos occupied by new immigrants and seniors. The problem is probably stemming more from the rooming houses and sketchy apartments located west of Central Park.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

It's both. And yeah, that Spence neighbourhood is rooming house central.

[buzzg]

And that's been that way for decades

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

Manitoba Housing high-rises surround Central Park. That area will be a blight for decades to come.

The sad thing is that in most cities, especially in Canada, our Central park area would and should be a prime area to live.
It is a beautiful park with mature trees and a great uptown urban feel.
Instead looks are deceiving and it is moderately unsafe area.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by esquire

From what I can tell, the highrises surrounding Central Park are not really the crux of the problem. Many of those buildings are rental apartments and condos occupied by new immigrants and seniors. The problem is probably stemming more from the rooming houses and sketchy apartments located west of Central Park.

Yeah, Central Park itself is actually pretty decent these days, so I'm not sure that demonizing public housing is called for here. The epicentre of sketchiness is a smidge farther west, around the beer vendor and the Balmoral Hotel. As esquire says, the slumlord housing in the inner West End seems like the bigger problem.

[GreyGarden]

Originally Posted by BAKGUY

The sad thing is that in most cities, especially in Canada, our Central park area would and should be a prime area to live.
It is a beautiful park with mature trees and a great uptown urban feel.
Instead looks are deceiving and it is moderately unsafe area.

I remember having a conversation on twitter about this - the person I was chatting with assumed that, like other Canadian cities, the value of property in Winnipeg gets higher and higher the closer you get to the city and that being close to downtown is desirable. I had to explain that actually in Winnipeg, generally it seems like property gains value the farther away from the downtown it is.

[buzzg]

Well we're more of a donut here. The donut hole (downtown proper/Exchange) has pretty high value, rental/condo prices are def highest there on average. But the areas immediately surrounding downtown with the exception of the Village (and soon North St. B) are some of the lowest income/value in the areas city. Then from there it goes up again.

[GreyGarden]

That's a good point.

I think the map in this article is the visualization I was going off of:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...lars-1.4905984

[davequanbury]

Interesting discussion about real estate values in Winnipeg. Reminds me of the two main conceptual models for North American cities.
In the 1920s Burgess proposed that cities are organized in concentric rings around a central CBD. He was basing this on observations, especially around Chicago.
Directly around the CBD in what Burgess refers to as zone 2, you should get factories and transport terminals such as rail yards. Zone 3 was supposed to be a transition area with mix of commercial and residential, notably containing the poorest segment of population as well as new immigrants. Zone 4 was a ring of working class residential and second-generation immigrants. As you move further out, zone 5 contains more middle class commuter homes, and finally zone 6 was high class.

In contrast to Burgess, you have Hoyt who in 1939 proposed the sector model in which different land uses are more like pieces of a pie with their narrow tips touching the CBD. Per Hoyt, places the lowest value real estate around the CBD but also in corridors on either side of the industrial segments. Hoyt envisioned middle class homes in a zone separated from both the CBD and industry. He placed the highest real estate in a narrow wedge buffered on both sides by middle class real estate.

Both models are simplistic obviously, but interesting to see that geographers have recognized patterns of land use in north American cities and tried to characterize them with models. Winnipeg has some aspects of each model, but because as buzzg points out, higher end residential sectors like Osborne Village come right up to downtown, this follows the wedge model more than the donut or concentric ring model.

In contrast, models for South American cities have the poorest residents living furthest away from the CBD and wealthiest living in the central city. This is kind of the reverse of the North American pattern and in theory has a lot to do with the colonial nature of these cities and the rapid urbanization they underwent in the second half of the 20th century.

Here is a link that shows what the models look like: https://tblanchardaphg.weebly.com/up...s_activity.pdf

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by davequanbury

Interesting discussion about real estate values in Winnipeg. Reminds me of the two main conceptual models for North American cities.
In the 1920s Burgess proposed that cities are organized in concentric rings around a central CBD. He was basing this on observations, especially around Chicago.
Directly around the CBD in what Burgess refers to as zone 2, you should get factories and transport terminals such as rail yards. Zone 3 was supposed to be a transition area with mix of commercial and residential, notably containing the poorest segment of population as well as new immigrants. Zone 4 was a ring of working class residential and second-generation immigrants. As you move further out, zone 5 contains more middle class commuter homes, and finally zone 6 was high class.

In contrast to Burgess, you have Hoyt who in 1939 proposed the sector model in which different land uses are more like pieces of a pie with their narrow tips touching the CBD. Per Hoyt, places the lowest value real estate around the CBD but also in corridors on either side of the industrial segments. Hoyt envisioned middle class homes in a zone separated from both the CBD and industry. He placed the highest real estate in a narrow wedge buffered on both sides by middle class real estate.

Both models are simplistic obviously, but interesting to see that geographers have recognized patterns of land use in north American cities and tried to characterize them with models. Winnipeg has some aspects of each model, but because as buzzg points out, higher end residential sectors like Osborne Village come right up to downtown, this follows the wedge model more than the donut or concentric ring model.

In contrast, models for South American cities have the poorest residents living furthest away from the CBD and wealthiest living in the central city. This is kind of the reverse of the North American pattern and in theory has a lot to do with the colonial nature of these cities and the rapid urbanization they underwent in the second half of the 20th century.

Here is a link that shows what the models look like: https://tblanchardaphg.weebly.com/up...s_activity.pdf

Interesting, thanks for sharing~!

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by davequanbury

Interesting discussion about real estate values in Winnipeg. Reminds me of the two main conceptual models for North American cities.
In the 1920s Burgess proposed that cities are organized in concentric rings around a central CBD. He was basing this on observations, especially around Chicago.
Directly around the CBD in what Burgess refers to as zone 2, you should get factories and transport terminals such as rail yards. Zone 3 was supposed to be a transition area with mix of commercial and residential, notably containing the poorest segment of population as well as new immigrants. Zone 4 was a ring of working class residential and second-generation immigrants. As you move further out, zone 5 contains more middle class commuter homes, and finally zone 6 was high class.

In contrast to Burgess, you have Hoyt who in 1939 proposed the sector model in which different land uses are more like pieces of a pie with their narrow tips touching the CBD. Per Hoyt, places the lowest value real estate around the CBD but also in corridors on either side of the industrial segments. Hoyt envisioned middle class homes in a zone separated from both the CBD and industry. He placed the highest real estate in a narrow wedge buffered on both sides by middle class real estate.

Both models are simplistic obviously, but interesting to see that geographers have recognized patterns of land use in north American cities and tried to characterize them with models. Winnipeg has some aspects of each model, but because as buzzg points out, higher end residential sectors like Osborne Village come right up to downtown, this follows the wedge model more than the donut or concentric ring model.

In contrast, models for South American cities have the poorest residents living furthest away from the CBD and wealthiest living in the central city. This is kind of the reverse of the North American pattern and in theory has a lot to do with the colonial nature of these cities and the rapid urbanization they underwent in the second half of the 20th century.

Here is a link that shows what the models look like: https://tblanchardaphg.weebly.com/up...s_activity.pdf

I think northern North America and Australia/New Zealand are the true outliers globally. It seems that pretty much the entire world outside of the previously mentioned areas values urban living far more than we do. I would think it's an artifact left over from colonial, emptier times. Or maybe it's our desire to live as close to a rural, provincial existence as possible without giving up the amenities of the city.

It would seem that the around the world, most of the time, the further away from the center, the lower the property values. For us, it's reversed and it actually is rather puzzling.

[ue]

Originally Posted by post_man

So, Barcode's controversial low income housing project Centre Village has almost all the ground floor entries and windows boarded up.

What's its future?

This past summer it seemed to have become a hangout for people to sell drugs and wash down a slice from Jumbo with a Stone Cold from the vendor before passing out somewhere. A far cry from the family-friendly utopia they pictured.

In fact, with this boarded up, the small stretch from Cumberland to the strip mall is now completely dead, and most of what's across the street is owned either by slum lords or people who've lost the ability to maintain their home, which is a shame because those are (were) some very nice old homes.

What kind of housing is this, exactly? That link says it's a co-op, but articles like this state that it is no longer a co-op. Is it operated directly by Manitoba Housing as public housing or are there landlords and the tenants have rent subsidies or controls to maintain its affordability?

Also was by it this evening and surprised by how few lights were on. Wondering how many units are occupied (could just have been a bad time). It's also weird how such a new building already looks so dingy and tattered.

[trueviking]

https://ici-radio--canada-ca.cdn.amp...t-consultation
Very exciting.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

It's both. And yeah, that Spence neighbourhood is rooming house central.

Well it just depends on the type of people inhabiting the rooming homes. If the majority of residents are international students, then it would not be much of a problem. Technically Fort Richmond has far more rooming houses than the Spence neighborhood area.

Property owners have to do a better job of vetting potential tenants, so that they don't devalue the property by engaging in shady activities (drugs, gangs, prostitution, etc).

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by trueviking

https://ici-radio--canada-ca.cdn.amp...t-consultation
Very exciting.

That looks incredible and is exactly what Provencher needs more of. Just like Place Joseph Royal (even though some don't like it cosmetically), takes full advantage of the environment – but much nicer.

Does this actually stand a chance of happening with how things go around there generally?

Also, is there an English version somewhere? Haha

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by BAKGUY

The sad thing is that in most cities, especially in Canada, our Central park area would and should be a prime area to live.
It is a beautiful park with mature trees and a great uptown urban feel.
Instead looks are deceiving and it is moderately unsafe area.

Gentrifying the Centennial area of Winnipeg, especially between Logan and Notre Dame, and between RRC Campus and Isabel would be ideal, but unfortunately, I can't see it happening anytime soon, without major investment by the community.

That area would be ideal for students from U of W and RRC. It would also be great for people who work downtown.