HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 2:54 AM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,049
But the real question is who would take the bus when they already own a car? Even if I owned a car I would still use the bus as much as possible to save on gas. But I would still take my car to the mall.

I understand that you are trying to advocate how realistic the bus could be when doing casual shopping, as I personally take the bus to the mall currently. But that doesn't change the fact that it is a pain in the but to wait fifteen minutes for the bus to arrive, whilst holding your bags etc. etc.

I personally don't really find that to be an issue, but when compared to the amount of time driving a car to your back door would take. It is a no brainer.

That being said. I won't own a car, and will be using the bus for general transportation when I move to Winnipeg. However, if I am going to the suburbs or to a mall, I will ride with someone from my family or borrow a vehicle.

I will be living downtown, and will be using downtown malls as much as possible anyways. But it is obvious that they don't offer the amenities that Polo Park etc. provide. And waiting/walking for the bus to go to the mall doesn't seem worth it, which even confuses myself because I would take the bus to a football/hockey game, or a movie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 3:52 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
Cadillac Fairview announced an interesting redevelopment of Richmond Centre mall in suburban Vancouver.

They're going to be burying the parking lots surrounding the mall and building a forest of midrise residential towers with outdoor shopping at the base. It's an impressive project.



http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cf-ri...velopment-plan

Obviously Winnipeg can't support something on that scale, but I always thought it would be cool if the southern portion of Polo Park's parking lot, basically the part between the south end of the mall and Portage Avenue were redeveloped in that way, with a couple of residential towers and maybe some commercial space at the bottom.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 4:08 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 2,738
Winnipeg could definitely support something that size. It would take longer to fill and would therefore be phased on a longer timescale but it could definitely be done in the Peg.

As for parking at PP...well, obviously they'd simply build an elevated parking deck. They may even add a level to the existing parkade if that can be done. There's no sense in putting it underground considering the expense of doing so and especially in Winnipeg. Mb. Hydro only has one level of underground parking downtown so that tells you something about the cost.
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 8:30 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,273
Agreed, that would be great for Polo. But I don't think towers can be built at Polo Park because of the proximity to the airport. Seems to me this has been discussed in the past when there was a plan to develop mixed use on the old Stadium site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 8:35 PM
cheswick's Avatar
cheswick cheswick is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: South Kildonan
Posts: 1,812
But there's like a 16 storey apartment across st james.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 9:15 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,273
Yep, but that was built several decades ago. Also Kiltartan Towers and those highrises along Rte 90 near Ness. The Airport Vicinity Development Plan was brought in since then, and it seems to be largely to protect the airport from any new residential development that might generate complaints and threaten it's viability as a 24 hour operation. I'm pretty sure this is why the dream of mixed use near Polo Park has died.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 9:45 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,916
But that's basically any development. I knew full well when I moved in to my apt in St. James 10 years ago it was below the flight path. You get used to it pretty quick.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 11:24 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
^ I'm not sure what the height limits are there but presumably you can go at least a few storeys off the ground?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2018, 11:36 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
^ I'm not sure what the height limits are there but presumably you can go at least a few storeys off the ground?
At the time that housing was proposed as part of the stadium TIF lands, I recall reading that no new residential was permitted within the airport vicinity (including all of Polo Park) with the exception of replacing an existing house and that type of thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 12:08 AM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
^ The limit extends all the way to Portage? That seems excessive....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 12:55 AM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,273
See the map at this link. I believe the green shaded area is all within the protected area.

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/dmis/View...ctionId=278407
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 1:14 AM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
^ Thanks. That strikes me as a bit much, especially considering that there are already numerous midrises in that zone, not to mention the fact that aircraft have become much quieter over the last 30 years. Surely Portage doesn't need to be blocked from Omand's Creek almost right up to Moray.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 2:09 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 10,867
I think there is not just a height restriction but a ban on new residential development in that zone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 2:18 AM
The Jabroni's Avatar
The Jabroni The Jabroni is offline
Go kicky fast, okay!
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Winnipeg, Kingdom of Skeletor
Posts: 2,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Cadillac Fairview announced an interesting redevelopment of Richmond Centre mall in suburban Vancouver.

They're going to be burying the parking lots surrounding the mall and building a forest of midrise residential towers with outdoor shopping at the base. It's an impressive project.



http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cf-ri...velopment-plan

Obviously Winnipeg can't support something on that scale, but I always thought it would be cool if the southern portion of Polo Park's parking lot, basically the part between the south end of the mall and Portage Avenue were redeveloped in that way, with a couple of residential towers and maybe some commercial space at the bottom.
Now if only someone can take that idea and do the same with all the open parking lots downtown...

I mean, there's some already in the last several years. It's not a matter of applying it further.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 3:54 AM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
I think there is not just a height restriction but a ban on new residential development in that zone.
Really?! That strikes me as absurd. Portage Ave should definitely be excluded from that restricted area... I'm surprised WAA got away with convincing the City to do that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 4:03 AM
optimusREIM's Avatar
optimusREIM optimusREIM is offline
There is always a way
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Really?! That strikes me as absurd. Portage Ave should definitely be excluded from that restricted area... I'm surprised WAA got away with convincing the City to do that.
If the city managed to run a rapid transit line down Portage the polo park site would become a massive TOD opportunity
__________________
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm."

Federalist #10, James Madison
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 10:53 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cobourg, ON/Mesa, AZ
Posts: 3,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
... not to mention the fact that aircraft have become much quieter over the last 30 years.
And they are going to get a lot quieter.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 11:02 AM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
I strongly suspect that if CF ever unveiled renderings of a row of midrises for the Polo Park parking lot along Portage potentially generating millions each year in property tax revenues, that council would quietly trim the protected zone to exclude the outer fringes along Portage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 12:38 PM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
I strongly suspect that if CF ever unveiled renderings of a row of midrises for the Polo Park parking lot along Portage potentially generating millions each year in property tax revenues, that council would quietly trim the protected zone to exclude the outer fringes along Portage.
If I am not mistaken that move would also have to be approved by the WAA, Nav Canada and Transport Canada as they also have an interest in airport noise issues
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2018, 12:45 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by cllew View Post
If I am not mistaken that move would also have to be approved by the WAA, Nav Canada and Transport Canada as they also have an interest in airport noise issues
Maybe the feds would have the ability to chime in, but WAA only runs the airport... I'd be pretty surprised if they had any jurisdiction over what happens off their grounds.
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 1:31 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.