Winnipeg | Forks Redevelopment | Parcel 4 - Rail Side Initiative | Proposals

[WolselyMan]

Originally Posted by hexrae

The Forks has enough green space already. A park would be nice and will be used, but it wouldn't be the best use of the land.

Forget about whether the forks has enough greenspace, what about the downtown area in general? That's sort of like dismissing an expansion of Manhattan's Central Park with "Central Park has enough greenspace already".

You're probably imagining that what I mean by greenspace is simply rolling a carpet of freshly paved grass over the sites soil and then immediately congratulate ourselves for being "progressive thinkers driving Winnipeg forwards to new standards of excellence". If so then I agree. The forks, or the entire city for that matter (and basically all worldwide cities in general) do not need more bland uninspiring fields of grass that appear unremarkable to everyone but sun-starved Londoners of the Victorian era. I'm talking about a much more creative design for a park. What about an urban forest, or maybe even a small constructed wetland? And what about the already existing greenspace at the forks? I always like to imagine just how amazing the area would look like if we simply systematically filled the area out with new planted trees.

But this doesn't mean we shouldn't build any new developments on the site. Wouldn't you be interested in seeing a mini wildlife exhibit at the forks? It could showcase all of the natural wildlife that is found in the original environment of the forks i.e snapping and painted turtles, salamanders, frogs and snakes. Raccoons, porcupines, badgers, all something that I would loved to have seen as a kid at the forks.

[hexrae]

Originally Posted by WolselyMan

Forget about whether the forks has enough greenspace, what about the downtown area in general? That's sort of like dismissing an expansion of Manhattan's Central Park with "Central Park has enough greenspace already".

You're probably imagining that what I mean by greenspace is simply rolling a carpet of freshly paved grass over the sites soil and then immediately congratulate ourselves for being "progressive thinkers driving Winnipeg forwards to new standards of excellence". If so then I agree. The forks, or the entire city for that matter (and basically all worldwide cities in general) do not need more bland uninspiring fields of grass that appear unremarkable to everyone but sun-starved Londoners of the Victorian era. I'm talking about a much more creative design for a park. What about an urban forest, or maybe even a small constructed wetland? And what about the already existing greenspace at the forks? I always like to imagine just how amazing the area would look like if we simply systematically filled the area out with new planted trees.

But this doesn't mean we shouldn't build any new developments on the site. Wouldn't you be interested in seeing a mini wildlife exhibit at the forks? It could showcase all of the natural wildlife that is found in the original environment of the forks i.e snapping and painted turtles, salamanders, frogs and snakes. Raccoons, porcupines, badgers, all something that I would loved to have seen as a kid at the forks.

Well said, your original post just said green space which I responded to. But I like your thoughts. How about they explore your ideas on the east side of the Provencher/Waterfront intersection?

Edit: Google Maps link https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.89257.../data=!3m1!1e3

[trueviking]

I can think of many more appropriate places for mini wildlife exhibits. The zoo maybe.

The opportunity to redefine urban living in Winnipeg and add thousands of new residents to downtown is far more attractive than a wetland in the centre of the city to me. Downtown needs people. Urban parkspace of any kind is wasted without people to use it. The Forks open space (plus Bonycastle park, Stephen Juba Park and Upper Fort Garry Park) is more than sufficient.

[lilwayne]

Originally Posted by trueviking

I can think of many more appropriate places for mini wildlife exhibits. The zoo maybe.

The opportunity to redefine urban living in Winnipeg and add thousands of new residents to downtown is far more attractive than a wetland in the centre of the city to me. Downtown needs people. Urban parkspace of any kind is wasted without people to use it. The Forks open space (plus Bonycastle park, Stephen Juba Park and Upper Fort Garry Park) is more than sufficient.

i think it needs a good balance of green space and condos.. i dont mind a small little neighborhood at the forks but i hope that it blends in well with the rest of the area. and i too think that the demand will be higher than they expect.. i could imagine that whole lot may be filled within a 3- 5 years..

also with all the new residents in the core is there going to be increased demand for a new school to be built in the area. especially one that is attractive to more middle class and affluent ppl

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by trueviking

I can think of many more appropriate places for mini wildlife exhibits. The zoo maybe.

The opportunity to redefine urban living in Winnipeg and add thousands of new residents to downtown is far more attractive than a wetland in the centre of the city to me. Downtown needs people. Urban parkspace of any kind is wasted without people to use it. The Forks open space (plus Bonycastle park, Stephen Juba Park and Upper Fort Garry Park) is more than sufficient.

Exactly. We need to maximize all the space by filling it with buildings; narrow streets.

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by WolselyMan

But we already have a neighborhood just like that sitting around the forks area, and it's called THE EXCHANGE DISTRICT. Why would we wanna create a "european village" from scratch when we already have one the best preserved collections of these buildings in the country? Imagine if we launched a revitalization project for the exchange that was just as elaborate as the one that turned the forks from an abandoned rail yard into a national historical park? Heck, the neighborhood has already been granted status as a national heritage site for two decades now, so why aren't we taking it more seriously than we are now?

This is Winnipeg. You are bang on though.

[JM5]

I truly have high hopes for this project. In trueviking we trust. I'm also hoping that the 25 year build out schedule is pessimistic and demand will cause it to be speeded up. Can't wait to see actual site layouts showing the planned streets/paths inside the parcels along with actual building footprints. I think the interior feel of this development will make it or break it.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by WolselyMan

Forget about whether the forks has enough greenspace, what about the downtown area in general? That's sort of like dismissing an expansion of Manhattan's Central Park with "Central Park has enough greenspace already".

You're probably imagining that what I mean by greenspace is simply rolling a carpet of freshly paved grass over the sites soil and then immediately congratulate ourselves for being "progressive thinkers driving Winnipeg forwards to new standards of excellence". If so then I agree. The forks, or the entire city for that matter (and basically all worldwide cities in general) do not need more bland uninspiring fields of grass that appear unremarkable to everyone but sun-starved Londoners of the Victorian era. I'm talking about a much more creative design for a park. What about an urban forest, or maybe even a small constructed wetland? And what about the already existing greenspace at the forks? I always like to imagine just how amazing the area would look like if we simply systematically filled the area out with new planted trees.

But this doesn't mean we shouldn't build any new developments on the site. Wouldn't you be interested in seeing a mini wildlife exhibit at the forks? It could showcase all of the natural wildlife that is found in the original environment of the forks i.e snapping and painted turtles, salamanders, frogs and snakes. Raccoons, porcupines, badgers, all something that I would loved to have seen as a kid at the forks.

Those aren't really the greatest animals. Seriously, a badger? How about some zebras or giraffes.

[Curmudgeon]

[QUOTE=Urban recluse;7781857]Exactly. We need to maximize all the space by filling it with buildings; narrow streets.[/QUOTE

Each parcel is approximately two downtown blocks wide with the north parcel being slightly wider. The Forks is a national historic site and any development needs to be done in accordance with the City Beautiful movement.

Each parcel should be designed around a small well-treed central square which would contain a fountain (something like the Henry Wollman Bloch fountain in Kansas City would be beautiful in one of the squares), some small gardens with indigenous flora, benches, etc. Please do not think that fountains are not possible in Winnipeg due to the long winters. Many winter cities have fountains. Commercial space would exist on the ground-level floors of the buildings surrounding the square, while further away from the square the land use would be residential only. Residential construction could be mixed including some low rise rental apartment blocks and condominiums (ie. up to a maximum of 5 or 6 storeys so as not to detract from the CMHR or the rest of the Forks) and some four story Brownstone type townhouses with little to no setback. All buildings would be aesthetically pleasing and symmetrical to the built environment already at the Forks but also to the nearby Exchange District and to Union Station, and this means the use of lots of limestone and brick and more traditional building designs.

The streets should be two lanes only, like Waterfront Dr., and the only parking available in either parcel would either be on the street or underground. No surface parking lots, no exceptions. There would be rear lanes for service vehicles and garbage collection. If a parking spot within 25 feet is your raison d'être then this probably wouldn't be an ideal area for you.

Residential buildings should be designed for people of various income levels not simply those with high incomes. As the birthplace of the Prairies, the Forks should emphasize social inclusivity. In any event, culture and art emanate largely from the working and middle classes, affluent areas are more or less culturally sterile.

If the development is not going to be done right, then leave it as is. We dodged a bullet a few years ago when a bland 2 1/2 star hotel with a few waterslides was almost built on the site. It would be devastating to see the Forks packed with the typical condo/apartment buildings that have been built in Winnipeg in recent years. The development for the sake of development attitude so pevalent here should not apply at the Forks, nor in the Exchange either. If the project is done right, this will become a highly desirable area and the development spin-offs for the Exchange and SoPo would be immense.

[Urban recluse]

Excellent points. I love Kansas City, and dream of fountains in Winnipeg. Also, social housing can look great.

[chrisallard5454]

As long as there is not a single drop of stucco, it could be a really beautiful project.

[Hecate]

I really hope this "plan" is well thought out. At first I was excited about it but now I think introducing residential to the forks could be the beginning of the end. I can't see the buildings being much different than the "cutting edge" designs we see just down the road on waterfront... so I expect to see stucco and that shitty corrugated metal. That's if you want it to be affordable for everyone to be able to live there. Unless you want to sell $400,000 600 square foot condos for rich people... which is probably what will end up happening. This will lead to bitching about traffic and noise and not enough green space and parking as the lots continue to get developed. Would be nice to make the area of the forks a resident free zone. Add a couple boutique hotels and a theatre and some restaurants and shops and done. Then ring the forks with high rises mid rises and whatever you want. Just keep it on the other side of the tracks. Keep the forks as a destination.

[Urban recluse]

Even I think this development will be spared the nastiness that is H2O for example.

Again, social housing does not have to look like shit, and still be aesthetically pleasing without breaking the bank.

[biguc]

One part of the plan I do find questionable is the pedestrian bridge over the St. Mary entrance. Why? I was also under the impression that that entrance was supposed to get a car diet, so why treat it like a freeway that needs grade separation from pedestrians.

Originally Posted by tree

can you show an example of this in Philly or Boston? (google maps link maybe or name of neighbourhood to look up)

Sure, the fringes of center city in Philly have a lot of wonderfully dense colonial areas that predate government and the spacious right of ways that come with it. It's not exactly European, but it's pretty cool and rare in North America. I should add that I forgot to include Quebec City as a place that has this kind of space.


https://www.google.ca/maps/@39.94634...8i6656!6m1!1e1

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Tor...831843!6m1!1e1

Originally Posted by WolselyMan

But we already have a neighborhood just like that sitting around the forks area, and it's called THE EXCHANGE DISTRICT. Why would we wanna create a "european village" from scratch when we already have one the best preserved collections of these buildings in the country? Imagine if we launched a revitalization project for the exchange that was just as elaborate as the one that turned the forks from an abandoned rail yard into a national historical park? Heck, the neighborhood has already been granted status as a national heritage site for two decades now, so why aren't we taking it more seriously than we are now?

The Exchange district is not remotely like the neighborhoods I'm talking about. Just because the buildings are old doesn't mean it has the closeness or density of spontaneous development. I don't know why you think we aren't taking the Exchange seriously, anyway. Calvary Temple's bulldozers and ceaseless thirst for parking present far more of a threat to it than residential developments in a different neighborhood.



Anyway, I kind of like your idea of a mini nature park. The north east corner of Waterfront and Provencher is a great spot for improved green space at the Forks. Turning it over to First Nations and Metis people as a cultural space also strikes me as a fine use for the land. Anyway, the Forks doesn't really work as a downtown park; downtown is too spread out. Heaping more green space on its fringe isn't going to inspire better use from people who live far from it. A block-sized park somewhere in South Portage would go a lot further to improving urban life in downtown than more space at the Forks.

[Urban recluse]

Those areas Biguc are great, and the principles are what need to be followed.

[biguc]

Edit: ^ yeah, I'm really excited at the possibilities for this area. If we can pull off something really tight-knit, it'll make a great front door to our city, with the Forks being our front yard.

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Even I think this development will be spared the nastiness that is H2O for example.

Again, social housing does not have to look like shit, and still be aesthetically pleasing without breaking the bank.

Looks aside, social housing actually does break the bank. That's one reason why Manitoba Housing prefers to buy units in privately developed buildings, rather than build their own.

https://www.citylab.com/housing/2017...ensive/523707/

[Spocket]

So much complaining about the plan but what have they fucked up at the Forks since its inception?

I was a kid when the plans were first unveiled. I was only about 11 or 12 so I don't remember the public's reaction but the cynicism was as palpable then as it is now. I still remember walking through the yards when they were still dedicated to rail and what a wasteland it was. There was no way I would have believed it would become one of the most sought-after if not "the" destination in Winnipeg at any point in the future. It was a dump. Now it's gorgeous.

So the build out says 25 years but who says no to money ? If sales are better than forecast then buildings will go up faster. What's important is getting the plan right. Sure, I'd love to see more height, especially in the northern section, but in the end we'll all be happy to see a great, memorable neighborhood.

Give it a chance.

[Urban recluse]

True, but with the right mixture of materials and color, buildings do not have to look atrocious. For instance, 184 Sherbrook is a great example.

[Urban recluse]

Sprocket, we have all accepted the height restrictions. We want to ensure vehicles are not a priority, and the designs and materials used are urban.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by Spocket

So much complaining about the plan but what have they fucked up at the Forks since its inception?

Exactly this. Anytime they plan anything for the area people deride it or say it should be green space. Somehow, the place keeps improving. Given their track record, I have little reason to doubt them.