HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 7:28 AM
armorand93's Avatar
armorand93 armorand93 is offline
Winnipeg Transit Nerd
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mininari View Post
Quoting a survey from the late 80's???? I'd say there are a lot of new people, young 'uns grown up who might have a different opinion on the subject. Update the survey; that is simply expired.

The responses that are being received to our various suggestions / complaints strongly indicates that this city needs to clean house at city hall. I'm not talking about the council, but rather, the public servants. Their thinking is still stuck in the 80's... with yet another 80's urban renewal 'mega project' being served up.
Speaking of 80s renewal:

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 1:35 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by headhorse View Post
I received the same vague reply as Chris from Fielding. Here's one from Eadie that's probably worse.



I don't think a survey from the 80s is relevant and I don't think our 50,000 sq/ft waterpark will ever draw crowds of 30,000.
That pushed me too far, I flipped shit on him here is what I sent him.

Also I have heard the responses you have put out about placing a water park in suburban neighborhoods. I too am not an advocate for sprawl. But there are some projects that do not belong downtown. Especially when they are on par with towns that are only 10 000 in population.
Ross, please... using a poll that was taken 30 years ago to determine what should occur today? LUDICROUS!!!! A sentence can't even be used to describe my frustration at finding this out!!!! Let me inform you that I -along with a large portion of the people you are trying to bring to this city- wasn't alive then, and policies and desires have changed drastically in the last 30 years. You sincerely believe that the world hasn't changed since 1980. If you don't then pardon my language, but you need to get a clue.
It is a wonder why people think Winnipeg is so backwards, when these kind of arguments spring up. I might as well be an advocate to go to war with Russia with your logic. I will inform the Prime Minister that the Nuclear Warheads are without a doubt about to be launched. Oh, and one last thing... Who is this Bush of which you speak? Oh that's right HE ISN"T EVEN PRESIDENT YET!!!!!
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 1:46 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Water Park, Hotel Plan has Critics

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/loc...147282955.html

Winnipeg's plan to sell a prime parcel of downtown land to a water-park developer has raised more concerns about the city's priorities, as well as the piecemeal development of the region around The Forks.

This morning, council's downtown and riverbank committee will consider a proposal to sell a Waterfront Drive surface lot known as Parcel Four to Alberta's Canalta hotel chain, which hopes to build a water park, hotel and parkade on the 2.2-hectare site. Canalta would pay $6 million for the land and would receive a $7-million city grant that would ensure $700,000 worth of admission credits every year for the next 25 years.
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 2:21 PM
h0twired's Avatar
h0twired h0twired is offline
Dynamic Positivity!
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebor204 View Post
Looking at the lot photograph and layout.

What exactly is the area labelled "22557" that runs through the lot? Is it a transit right of way or something? Seems to line up with St. Mary Ave.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 2:36 PM
roccerfeller's Avatar
roccerfeller roccerfeller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,694
I really hope this proposal does not go through.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 2:46 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Chris

Again thanks for your thoughts on the subject.

I respectfully disagree with you opinion. I think the water park is a very good thing for the city and very much like the location. Through the EOI we built in extra points for a downtown location.

In terms of the size of the water park, this is what the market has come forward with. There was 't a proposal for a larger park and thus we have to make a decision based on what has come in. This process has been over 4 years and even with a 7 million dollars subsidy to build it, this is the best proposal. If the city built and ran it, the cost would be 25m plus the operating costs which I can tell you as Chair of Finance would cost us more to operate than anticipated revenue

I am excited and very much support it.

Again, thanks for your comments.

Regards,
Scott Fielding
City Councillor St James-Brooklands
Chair of Finance
City of Winnipeg
(204) 986 5848


Sent from my iPhone

On 2012-04-13, at 8:27 AM, "Chris Allard" <chris.allard54@gmail.com<mailto:chris.allard54@gmail.com>> wrote:

Mr Fielding,

Please reply with a few remarks that inform me that you are more than an automation. Otherwise I will continue to press you with my concerns. I am also not naive enough to think you won't block me, so let me remind you that I can get around that. Thank you.
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 2:48 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
I replied with this

So essentially what you are saying is because there is no vested interest in this location you are willing to settle for this location with a sub-par development. That concerns me, as it should. Especially since the mayor, as always, is claiming that this development will be world class. If the majority of the population would rather this park not be developed than tell me what reason is it that council should push this forward. Please provide me with a good reason.
My second question is why would the city build and run it? There is no desperate call for a Water Park, despite what the Mayor thinks. There is however a desperate call for Rapid Transit (Which is where this money was already slated).
Do not get me wrong, this is not a case of Nimbyism. I just believe (along with the majority of the city planners in this city) that this is poorly thought out, rushed, and more suited to be classified as serving the purpose of the mayor as a pet project, than the citizens of this city.
Please tell me, do you to the best of your knowledge, know if there is a glorified pool (which at 50 000 square feet is exactly that) beside BILBAO? The CMHR is a world Class facility, you should treat it as such, and really think twice before putting a highway chain beside it.
My former warning in regards to response still stands.

Thank you, however for finally getting back to me. And I eagerly await your reply.

Sincerely Chris
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 2:54 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,473
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0twired View Post
Looking at the lot photograph and layout.

What exactly is the area labelled "22557" that runs through the lot? Is it a transit right of way or something? Seems to line up with St. Mary Ave.
In the 70s and 80s there were plans to extend York and St. Mary Aves. to link up directly with what was then the Provencher Bridge. At some point in the 1990s that idea was scrapped in favour of maintaining the existing street layout, with the bridge connecting to William Stephenson and Pioneer.

The parcel of land on Main Street which was originally reserved for the extended St. Mary Avenue is the one that's currently up for sale.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:00 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,308
Wow.
I'm tempted to write an email to the Urban Planning Department in Vancouver and ask them if they would permit this waterpark project to be built at Granville Island when the old cement plant there (last industrial tenant) finally shuts down.

If they were to grace my ridiculous suggestion with an answer, I'm sure it would simply be:

"..."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:02 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,308
Double post.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:12 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Scott Fielding has requested that I call him.

Please provide me with suggestions and arguments that I could use to persuade him to change his mind, and take into account what he has said to me in the letter I posted
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:20 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisallard5454 View Post
Scott Fielding has requested that I call him.

Please provide me with suggestions and arguments that I could use to persuade him to change his mind, and take into account what he has said to me in the letter I posted
Stick the facts, and try not to get emotional. Ask Fielding why he has made up his mind already without hearing full input from the taxpayers, planning professionals, and others with expertise in urban design. Ask Fielding if he would change his mind if presented with more information or a strong public reaction against the project. If the answer is no, you are probably wasting your time. If he says yes, suggest that he call for more public consultation before any vote of council is taken.

I've dealt with Fielding before. He doesn't usually change his mind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:39 PM
JamieDavid Exchange JamieDavid Exchange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 546
I'm sorry. Although all the e-mails that some of you are sending to your local counselors are valid opinions that are meant within free speech, I don't blame the counselors sending out 'robo-responses' back to you all. You know why? CAUSE THE DAMN PROPSAL HASN'T EVEN BEEN VOTED ON YET AND RENDERINGS HAVEN'T BEEN MADE PUBLIC!!!

You guys just need to calm down. People at city hall WILL NOT put through a proposals that are meant off the side of a highway or on a strip down Pembina. Have some faith.



For up to the date posts of the 311 At Centre Point Winnipeg, PLEASE visit my form here at -----> http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=197745
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:45 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,308
Stay professional.
You made a good point about the CMHR being a 'world class' tourist attraction. It certainly has the potential to be a destination.

I think the main point is that while we are a little dissapointed with the scope of the project (i.e. size), we are mainly displeased with the location that they have chosen as this land is prime land for linking the Forks to other neighbourhoods with vibrant, mixed-use development. Furthermore, large parcels of available land near the forks should not be developed without some kind of official community plan, which properly assesses what capacity of residential / retail could be supported by the area, as well as how this neighbourhood relates to its adjacent neighbourhoods. The whole Forks - Waterfront - Exchange - St. Boniface area has massive potential to be a pedestrian oriented URBAN neighbourhood (think Minneapolis and their riverfront's new lease on life).

I would follow up the 'waterpark at seasons in tuxedo' concept by pointing out that it would be beneficial for the city to have several 'attraction nodes' for visiting families to come to, and seasons / IKEA would be the suburban shopping node where the Forks & Museum would be an urban node. Yes, the waterpark would bring more people to the Forks area, but there is far greater benefit to all of the area by having people LIVE here.

With respect to demand for condos, one of the big drawbacks with Waterfront and the Exchange (to this day) is there still is a dearth of businesses & cafes, especially on weekends. Since the forks is actually alive every day of the year, I think that existing vitality would strongly promote (and sell) mixed redevelopments at the forks. Why hasn't the city attempted to draw on the potential of livability around the forks?

I don't know; the way I see it, once the Forks has a strong, healthy, liveable neighbourhood, it will continue to expand outward to all the adjacent neighbourhoods, and finally give Winnipeg that fresh, vibrant urban experience that one could except, especially along these prime riverfront areas.

I dunno; pick and chose from my rant if you wish.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:51 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Brian Mayes just informed me that he will be voting against the proposal.
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:53 PM
bryanscott's Avatar
bryanscott bryanscott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 283
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisallard5454 View Post
Scott Fielding has requested that I call him.

Please provide me with suggestions and arguments that I could use to persuade him to change his mind, and take into account what he has said to me in the letter I posted
Tell him I plan on peeing in the pool if it's built.
__________________
Bryan Scott
http://winnipeglovehate.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 3:58 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
I'm sorry. Although all the e-mails that some of you are sending to your local counselors are valid opinions that are meant within free speech, I don't blame the counselors sending out 'robo-responses' back to you all. You know why? CAUSE THE DAMN PROPSAL HASN'T EVEN BEEN VOTED ON YET AND RENDERINGS HAVEN'T BEEN MADE PUBLIC!!!
Actually, there is a committee vote on this proposal today. So apparently, a committee of City Council CAN approve this proposal without detailed plans or renderings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
You guys just need to calm down. People at city hall WILL NOT put through a proposals that are meant off the side of a highway or on a strip down Pembina. Have some faith.
No thanks, I 'll have faith when Katz and his yes men demonstrate a pattern of responsible and rational decision-making. So far, Katz has been a disaster and has mismanaged every key urban initiative that has come up during his tenure at city hall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 4:13 PM
rypinion's Avatar
rypinion rypinion is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: East Exchange, Winnipeg
Posts: 1,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
People at city hall WILL NOT put through a proposals that are meant off the side of a highway or on a strip down Pembina.
Are you new to the city or something?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 4:18 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,253
Winnipeg Free Press - ONLINE EDITION
City committee amends, approves water park plan


By: Staff Writer

"A plan to build a water park on prime piece of downtown land has passed its first hurdle at city hall.

This morning, council's downtown development committee voted in favour of plan to give a $7-million grant to a private developer to build a water park."

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/loc...147322215.html

Gerbassi voted against, Swandel and Havixbeck voted in favor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2012, 4:23 PM
Wigglez's Avatar
Wigglez Wigglez is offline
Source?
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 421
Well... Guess we can hope that this is just another approved project that never actually happens.
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 9:19 AM.

     

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