HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #221  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2015, 3:29 AM
Bluenote Bluenote is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg / St Vital
Posts: 1,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by biguc View Post
It doesn't help that the first development in Bridgwater Centre is a truck stop. .
It's far from a truck stop. I use it every single day and it mostly cars and light trucks. No big rigs use it or is it even big rig friendly. It's not the best lots to approach with a big rig.

Almost all big rigs use oak bluff esso.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #222  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2015, 1:33 AM
Ando Ando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreal View Post
As a comment of balance, I generally very much appreciate Simplicity's contributions. There is an obvious group of posters that drive intelligent content and discourse on this site, making it a wonderful place to visit and glean insight into the development world in Winnipeg. Simplicity is certainly one of them. Thanks for your inputs relating to development, finance and economics. It's some of my favourite reading.
So you enjoy it when he condescends to people and calls them names for daring to express their own opinions? Answer this for me. Why can't he grace us with his tremendous advice without being a dick, as someone else described him? Other people do.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #223  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2015, 1:36 AM
Ando Ando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
Until yours came along, I'll presume.

Why don't you tell us why? Tell us why, in your opinion, that this is 'the stupidest post [you've] read in a long time'. There's no debating that a huge proportion of these services are dedicated to a couple of inner city wards. Any of these professions will tell you that. Crime stat will verify it. If it's so stupid - and you're so confident of that - enlighten us as to how we can ever get to point where being as flippant on the issue as you comes with such certitude. Okay? Let's hear it...
He wasn't commenting on your post. Why so sensitive?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #224  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2015, 1:54 AM
Ando Ando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
That was altogether way too much to rebut without taking a week off of work, but I don't really think it's that necessary anyway. The urbanist line about 'free' is tired. It doesn't apply and it ruins what's otherwise an argument made up of decent points.

The city sees huge amounts of taxation from the developments that abut Kenaston. Bridgwater (all four of them eventually), Lindenwoods, Whyte Ridge, Linden Ridge (mostly), and I suppose Southpointe, Richmond West, Ft. Richmond, and a lot of South St. Vital as well; all of these places have property values that outstrip the city's average by quite a bit. They are all paying into the taxation kitty at that clip. And leaving aside the rare instance of a cul-de-sac lots, those lots are taxed as a percentage of frontage and value. So when a home in Bridgewater - one you'd deem efficient comparatively - sits on a 40' lot and generates a $7k+ annual tax bill, it leaves itself more than twice as efficient as a home in, say, the West End that sits on a 33' lot and is worth less than half. Which is why I remarked the other day that these suburbs are becoming far more efficient than they have in the past. It's not uncommon to find 25' and 30' lots anymore with homes that are worth ~$375K. And that's a function of costs, not the least of which are affected by taxation. This argument about free is simply not true. You have to ask yourself why these places keep values at where they do. If nobody wanted this - if they were so frustrated by their lives in cars and much preferred to walk and ride their bike - we wouldn't see sustained and climbing values of single family homes in the suburbs, the one thing that keeps the taxes where they are.

And I'm not including every part of every suburb in my argument because it doesn't apply. A lot of the suburbs built in the 80s and 90s were built with huge lots in inefficient ways because you couldn't give the land way. But as a consequence, the infrastructure in the area was the shits. There were no services, the roads network was terrible, and people still flocked to these areas. Now that the areas have seen investment and the taxation base has increased to reflect that, there's commercial development and the infrastructure to support it. And a 50' or 60' lot is now sitting with a home in the $500-600k range.

But I could just as easily rail on about most of the inner city that has depressed real estate prices, huge vacancies, and dilapidated old stock that keeps the areas from returning too much of value where the city is concerned. The areas that have the urban design you speak of - while they don't need large arterials to access - don't have anybody interested in accessing them anyway. One could just as easily say that the inner city is subsidized by virtue of a requirement for more emergency services, or slumlords who drag down the value of entire blocks with total impunity, or just a generalized inefficient tax base. And the 'subsidy' (term used extremely loosely) might not be entirely true given that we haven't seen any real growth in those areas mitigating the need to spend money by upgrading services, but I wouldn't make an argument indicating prosperity by showing how little follow-on investment something requires.

Whatever it is, and CityLab can say what it wants, urban design and the affect on people's habits here are just not aligned in any way. At least not where it comes to actually living and not just partying. The lion's share of lots in the City of Winnipeg are 40' and up. Outside of a few areas, it's extremely unusual to find lots below that. And if we were having this discussion 70 years ago, we'd be talking about how detrimental it is to the city that they're going to pave Pembina past Jubilee because people don't need 50' or 60' lots and the city can't sustain them and why can't they live on a 25' in Crescentwood? So, again, nothing is new. If this city is in fact growing, it's not unrealistic or completely unsustainable to assume that land within the city limits is going to be developed. If people want a primarily urban landscape where they can walk to their services and pay $2800/year in property taxes on their 25' lot or their condo, they can have that; that world exists here too. But if they decide they want that 'free lunch', it's going to cost them 2.5 times every single year for that right and they can complain about a bus service few of them ever intend to use.
Oh c'mon. You have lots of time on your hands. You comment on here 24/7 and have something to say about everything and everyone. Don't shortchange yourself. I have faith in you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #225  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2015, 10:13 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 10,588
For the record, I've never seen Ando post anything but complaints about Simplicity. It's just the internet, guys. Who cares what people say about you?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
If subsidy isn't the point, then what is? Where is the problem here and how has it so direly manifested? Should the citizen who pays their property taxes be less entitled to their transportation network so they can pad the margins of the trucking company who's only 'moving goods'? Should somebody living in a small condo in the inner city be entitled to use the road network once per week? because they paid 1/6 of the property taxes as somebody living in River Park South? What kind of arguments are these?

The road system is not a 'free good'. It has a price. It's paid for by taxes stretching all the way from property taxes to provincial and federal income taxes and consumption taxes. It's paid for by nearly everybody. What you probably mean to say is that it has no variable component, but even that's not true given that taxation can be adjusted. I have no idea what you might call 'overuse' given that there are no roads in this city that are absolutely impassable at all times of the day and where traffic of any material nature is confined to more than an hour or so twice a day, so you're getting carried away with the point.

These arguments are fine if you want to speak strictly hypothetically. For one, you aren't going to walk back car culture at this stage of the game in winter cities, so let's dismiss that out of hand. But secondly, think of the logistics of this if productivity is so important. For starters, if you set up tolls, you'll end up with the collective action problem of people intentionally avoiding them putting more pressure on roads not designed for that traffic. But more importantly, how can anybody possible administer a user fee for a road system in any way other than what they're already done which is institute a consumption tax (the gas tax)?

The leftist economist at this point would tell you that you educate people. The right-leaning economist will tell you that people do whatever is most convenient and that you're wasting your time. I would take my cues from history and that tells me your ideas, while having merit, are theoretically a waste of your time and mine.
The taxes we pay aren't for using the roads. They're for building and maintaining them.

User fees for using roads have existed for a long time as tolls. Historically, they've had limited use because they slow traffic down. But many highways already use automated tolling systems. I-90 in Illinois is the closest example I know of. That is a limited access roadway--something we all agree our ring road ought to be--but the City of London is not, and they've successfully implemented congestion charges. Other cities have followed suit. The technology exists to easily charge drivers directly for using roads--a GPS unit in the car is all it takes--and could even sync with traffic data to charge variable rates based on demand.

I should also point out that road use isn't free, it's only presumed to be, and desired to be. The current cost of using roads is congestion. If everyone were satisfied with that reality, as even you seem to suggest they should be, then we wouldn't have this discussion. But people aren't willing to pay that price. So, implementing a monetary price is one way to replace congestion.

Of course, it's not the only way. Giving people a choice of whether to use roads lets them choose whether to pay that price. You write that off with a patently ignorant argument that Winnipeg has winter and therefore must have car culture. Other winter cities from Stockholm to Saporro do not depend on a car culture and car culture even fades here. We're a long way from the cruise nights of 2002, and that kind of behavior has become the transgressive and strange hallmark of assholes. But as even Winnipeg comes around on the benefits of giving people choice, we persist in building subdivisions that don't. And that leaves us collectively throwing good money after bad, whether it's building more road capacity, or pointless Bridgwater-style bicycle paths to nowhere.

For the point of this argument, I'm not talking about building suburbs as urbanist dreams--that is not necessary. But since the '80s--like you pointed out in an earlier post--suburbs have been terribly designed for getting around, featuring swaths of single-use development accessible only by car. Simply allowing convenience stores and coffee shops to exist inside these subdivisions would grant people a choice of whether to drive and whether to pay the price of congestion. That's not a radical change, not hypothetical, and not even an example of something smart other cities do. It's a reversion to what Winnipeg did as recently as the '70s.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #226  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2015, 10:53 PM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 10,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Biguc, while I don't disagree with some of your points, a quick sidenote: 400m is a 5 minute walk, not 10 minutes.

Here's a video posted in one of these threads a while back, of what Bridgwater Centre could be.

Video Link


I doubt it will develop exactly like this for lots of reasons (market demand, economics, retail trends, etc.). However, it's tough to argue that the idea behind it isn't a good first step. I mean, I'm not sure if you've ever been to Bridgwater (I doubt many have by the way they talk about it), but it's miles ahead of our 80s suburbs. I mean, this isn't Royalwood. It's a lot denser than anything we've seen in probably 50 years (in terms of lot sizes, patterns, and inclusion of pockets of 4-storey condos and townhouses) - density that may surprisingly come close to some of the oft-cited "inner-suburbs" lauded here. There are backlanes along some streets, and in many ways, it's the fused-grid that planners love. Connectivity in the grid isn't an issue, because there are tonnes of egresses that connect bays/streets - this isn't the cliche'd Florida example where a kid needs to drive 15 miles to his friend's cul-de-sac which he backs onto. Lots of pathways and cycling trails too.

As for the Centre shown in the video, isn't this what we're striving for in our new communities? Built to the street, higher density, mixed-use? It's basically as close as we can get to Osborne without building a community using 1900s standards.
Like you, I think that plan is pie in the sky.

I just don't think Manitoba Housing is up to building the density in Bridgwater Centre to support the kind of services they want. Winnipeg's good neighborhood streets like Osborne, Marion, and Sherbrook are buttressed by an immediate population of about ten thousand people. Manitoba Housing has started by building side by sides, which aren't going to cut it. And I have no idea what kind of demand there is for urban living in Bridgwater when it's a non-existent neighborhood and there are established neighborhoods.

We're also counting on Manitoba Housing to play developer here. I have no idea how that's going to work out. Worst case scenario, the area doesn't work out like they want and Housing just says fuck it and turns it into a massive suburban PJ. That's not something I see suburbanites buying market-rate condos being down with.

There's also the problem of its connections to Bridgwater Forest and Lake. Take Bison Drive--it's the central street that'll connect the Bridgwater subdivisions to Centre. If it were lined with condos and townhouses it could pull people in. But it's lined with a stockade fence.

I actually have been to Bridgwater quite a bit for work. I've seen the place develop. I get why you guys see things like alleys and fused grids and sidewalks and take it as an improvement, but it's all artifice unless any of it leads anywhere. That's cool that people can gambol around the retention ponds but for walking and cycling to be more than leisure time, those sidewalks need to go somewhere, and they don't.

Density is actually a big question I have about greater Bridgwater. I'm hopeful our next census can shed some light on that. I don't think its built form is as dense as you suggest. Its smaller lots are offset by over-wide streets and easements. Its smattering of condos are offset by retention ponds. But its demographics are different from '80s subdivisions. Instead of homes housing a statistically typical four person family, many houses are filled with newcomers and their large extended families. That's something that makes me optimistic about future suburban development. It's also something that makes the cruddy design of Bridgwater extra frustrating.
__________________
no
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #227  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2015, 3:12 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 11,654
that video gives hives.

notice the swaths of surface parking behind that single row of buildings, draped in timeless neo-classical architecture....built for the active urbanite.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #228  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2015, 4:49 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
that video gives hives.

notice the swaths of surface parking behind that single row of buildings, draped in timeless neo-classical architecture....built for the active urbanite.
To get a good look at how well this sort of "urbanism" works, just take a quick drive (or if you're really adventerous, walk) down Sage Creek Boulevard. That is what you will get when you try to add "urbanism" to an automobile oriented suburb.

This isn't a criticism of their walking paths, both Sage Creek and Bridgwater have great parks and paths, but they are still 100% automobile oriented for everything other than recreational biking/walking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #229  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2015, 11:57 AM
RLS_rls's Avatar
RLS_rls RLS_rls is offline
▓▒░
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 1,601
.
__________________
ಠ_ಠ

Last edited by RLS_rls; Oct 17, 2015 at 11:00 AM. Reason: off topic
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #230  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2015, 5:43 PM
optimusREIM's Avatar
optimusREIM optimusREIM is offline
There is always a way
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,939
There's another one. http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/canada/mani...2015-1.3274248

How many is that now on that stretch of kenaston?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #231  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2015, 6:02 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 28,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimusREIM View Post
There's another one. http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/canada/mani...2015-1.3274248

How many is that now on that stretch of kenaston?
Winnipeg is so used to substandard Frankenstein roads that we can't even avoid putting them into greenfields.

A one-way pair of high speed, high volume traffic through a residential area... what could go wrong?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #232  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2015, 5:39 AM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
Seriously, since you have strong issues on this matter, please explain to us here how the nuances of the SHED TIF and various taxation subsidies used to facilitate these developments contribute to the city's bottom line and the betterment of the local economy.

Please cite resources and facts when making your case. I think that will help us get to the crux of your point about how all of this is so beneficial. I might encourage the Unknown Poster to do the same. I'm certainly open to a case to the contrary if one can be made.

I'm quite looking forward to this. Thanks.
Hey, Bluenote and Unknown Poster. I had asked you a little while back to make your points in defense of your positions given how adamantly in favour of certain policy you were. I don't recall having heard anything. I'll just ask once more that you guys contribute something intelligent on the matter since you almost literally can't stop yourselves from rushing to its defense. I look forward to it.

And while we're at it, where's that little crybaby Ando? He'll have something equally as meaningful to say on the matter given his very worthwhile commentary on everything else.

Here's chance number 2, guys. Don't let the board down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #233  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2015, 3:23 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,197
For those that would like to read up or view what a SHED district and TIF are all about and created to do when implemented in any particular area or jurisdiction by municipal and provincial government.

Barts Simplified Version 101 ( for those interested) 2011

Video Link


SHED (Sports, hospitality and entertainment district): An 11-block section of downtown Winnipeg that may be designated as a redevelopment zone, with some form of TIF mechanism (see below). This zone would include the Winnipeg Convention Centre, MTS Centre, Metropolitan Theatre and Burton Cummings Theatre.

TIF (tax-increment financing): A funding mechanism that allows property-tax revenue that flows from improvements made to properties in blighted or otherwise underdeveloped areas to be reinvested in the same areas, rather than penalizing the developers who make the improvements. Governments are fond of TIFs because they don't have to give up any existing tax revenue.

-- Kives

~~~~~~~~~

Transforming Winnipeg’s Downtown using TIF
Strategy, Implementation and Outcomes

Colorful PDF format with graphs etc..(38 pages)

https://www.cip-icu.ca/Files/Confere...-Downtown.aspx

~~~~~

Drilling down - Council Minutes (23 pages)

Report – Executive Policy Committee – April 18, 2012
Establishment of a Tax Increment Financing zone to support strategic public investments consistent with the Portage Avenue Development
Strategy and Sports Hospitality and Entertainment District

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/dmis/docu...cp-ar-5821.pdf

.............Gives you a good idea in general on what is trying to be accomplished..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #234  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2015, 7:04 PM
The Unknown Poster The Unknown Poster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
Hey, Bluenote and Unknown Poster. I had asked you a little while back to make your points in defense of your positions given how adamantly in favour of certain policy you were. I don't recall having heard anything. I'll just ask once more that you guys contribute something intelligent on the matter since you almost literally can't stop yourselves from rushing to its defense. I look forward to it.

And while we're at it, where's that little crybaby Ando? He'll have something equally as meaningful to say on the matter given his very worthwhile commentary on everything else.

Here's chance number 2, guys. Don't let the board down.
I didnt realise you were the boss around here. Fortunately I dont answer to you. I can give my opinion without needing to meet your approval.

its a shame you have such mental or self esteem issues you need to continually insult and mock people here. There is a saying that doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result is a sign of insanity. Given how many times you've been banned and didnt learn, I'd suggest you might be insane.

You should set up your own forum and then you can make the rules about who posts what and when. You might be a lot happier.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #235  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2015, 7:50 PM
Ando Ando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster View Post
I didnt realise you were the boss around here. Fortunately I dont answer to you. I can give my opinion without needing to meet your approval.

its a shame you have such mental or self esteem issues you need to continually insult and mock people here. There is a saying that doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result is a sign of insanity. Given how many times you've been banned and didnt learn, I'd suggest you might be insane.

You should set up your own forum and then you can make the rules about who posts what and when. You might be a lot happier.
To help out in the assessment, here is the link for the Insanity Test:
http://penddraig.co.uk/online-tests/the-insanity-test/

I think questions 112. and 113. might be particularly instructive:

112. Do people not understand what you are talking about most of the time?
113. If so, is this because you are many times more intelligent than they are?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #236  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2015, 8:18 PM
DonaldSmith's Avatar
DonaldSmith DonaldSmith is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Wpg, Mb
Posts: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ando View Post
To help out in the assessment, here is the link for the Insanity Test:
http://penddraig.co.uk/online-tests/the-insanity-test/

I think questions 112. and 113. might be particularly instructive:

112. Do people not understand what you are talking about most of the time?
113. If so, is this because you are many times more intelligent than they are?
In all likelihood Simplicity does have a mental illness ; be the bigger person and stop mocking his condition. Stop stigmatizing the mentally ill.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #237  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2015, 8:42 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,774
^^^ LOL. That's what I thought. This board will wither without your collective input to be sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #238  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2015, 12:08 AM
Bluenote Bluenote is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg / St Vital
Posts: 1,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
^^^ LOL. That's what I thought. This board will wither without your collective input to be sure.
Three posters just gave you exactly what you dish out and this is your reply.

Btw. When are you going to join your useless banter back on skycity? I am amazed how you shut up after the sales have been so good and the exact opposite of what your fingers have been typing for over a year.

I won't resort to your name calling. But seriously you need to get a real hobby or job that keeps you busy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #239  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2015, 1:53 AM
Wigglez's Avatar
Wigglez Wigglez is online now
Source?
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 553
If you take this forum as a picture of culture in each city I think it starts to paint an accurate picture.

While other cities have logical, interesting, and constructive conversation about new and exciting developments we get to enjoy the same quality of conversation as your average portage place food court debate about where to buy meth...

Seriously is the Winnipeg section of this forum moderated at all any more? I mean.. If it's not I'm all for a 4chan level of debate where I get to call everyone autistic retards too....... Which is what this has turned into.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #240  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2015, 2:00 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigglez View Post
If you take this forum as a picture of culture in each city I think it starts to paint an accurate picture.

While other cities have logical, interesting, and constructive conversation about new and exciting developments we get to enjoy the same quality of conversation as your average portage place food court debate about where to buy meth...

Seriously is the Winnipeg section of this forum moderated at all any more? I mean.. If it's not I'm all for a 4chan level of debate where I get to call everyone autistic retards too....... Which is what this has turned into.
In reality, these threads are in no way an accurate portrayal of our city's culture; we all know this. You can basically thank two or three individuals, plus the lack of moderation, for the quality of conversation in the Winnipeg threads. It's pretty bad in comparison to the rest of the other Canadian city threads; probably the worst. Our threads need moderation in a bad way, then things will get a little more on-track and civil around here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:03 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.