HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 2:37 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by oftheMoon View Post
Thanks Biff. I suppose it's just coming to light in the news now as it sort of ties in with the condo incentive story.

I was down on James last night and the line-ups at the parking pay stations where dozens deep. With the Fringe, Goldeyes and Les Mis going on at the same time, there were not many parking spots left to be had.
I agree. I realize that a parkade is no one's idea of an awesome development, I think it's fairly clear that this area is reaching a bit of a breaking point when it comes to parking. It has always been busy around the East Exchange on event nights, and with a growing residential population and now a hotel on the way, it's only getting busier. And the kicker is that private lots tend to fill right up on event nights... the "LOT FULL" sign is pretty common when there are events taking place. The fact that people are willing to pay for parking in large numbers tells me the demand is real.

Another point to bear in mind is that a lot of the parking capacity in the East Exchange is in the form of surface parking lots. If the goal is to make those continue disappearing as a result of new development, they will have to be at least partially replaced with some other parking spaces, and a parkade can do that.

(As a sidenote, I think that a dedicated effort by the City to get rid of unused loading zones could open up at least another 50 street parking spaces in the East Exchange. You would think it was still 1920 where teams of horses making deliveries are clogging the streets with the way there are loading zones everywhere, including in front of buildings that haven't been warehouses in 30 years.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 2:52 PM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is online now
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 10,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrodill View Post
Is not the 5$ Million for the parkade not going to help Downtown residential (portage ave.) growth in the way of the Glass House Condo tower?
Paying for the parking of a single project is somehow less palatable than supporting residential development of a growing neighbourhood, with several private developers relying on it.

There is no shortage of parking in that area of downtown....it is certainly not an issue holding back residential development like it is in the exchange.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 2:55 PM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is online now
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 10,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Another point to bear in mind is that a lot of the parking capacity in the East Exchange is in the form of surface parking lots. If the goal is to make those continue disappearing as a result of new development, they will have to be at least partially replaced with some other parking spaces, and a parkade can do that.
also - I would think that people who live in the exchange don't want their cars parked on open surface lots all night every night. Certainly they are looking for more security than that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:08 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
Paying for the parking of a single project is somehow less palatable than supporting residential development of a growing neighbourhood, with several private developers relying on it.

There is no shortage of parking in that area of downtown....it is certainly not an issue holding back residential development like it is in the exchange.
I don't disagree with you reg: the Exchange and the parking problems that are now coming to a head. Of course the Exchange area is in dire need of a solution.

Although though less palatable, a 20+ story Condo tower does need parking facilities?

Half of the funds were alloted to Glass and the other to James St. There were no developers willing to build a mixed use facility on James St. But I digress. Yes the exchange needs solutions but even though there is some parking in the area of the the Glass House project, It too needed a parkade, with stantec, resturants, and a resedential component.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:12 PM
oftheMoon's Avatar
oftheMoon oftheMoon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: East Exchanger
Posts: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
also - I would think that people who live in the exchange also don't want their cars parked on open surface lots all night every night. Certainly they are looking for more security than that.
Agreed. I'm seriously thinking of making a move to the East Exchange, but like many others parking is my concern. While I could concede to park on a open surface lot for a period of time, it would be a bit easier to swallow knowing a more secure parkade was on the way. I'm fully prepared to pay for parking, that's not the issue - the issue is not knowing if/when there will be a decent facility to park in.

It's a tough decision to make - on one hand, I really believe in the area and where it will be in 3 -5 years, but on the other hand is underlying concern that some things may not change the way I think they ought to like parking, streetscaping, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:12 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
also - I would think that people who live in the exchange don't want their cars parked on open surface lots all night every night. Certainly they are looking for more security than that.

This is a good point, but then again I wouldn't want to park my vehicle overnight in an open unsecured lot north of Ellice either. Would you?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:16 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
the cost of parking is still not high enough to be profitable in the exchange....would be great to allow free market to reign but that's simply not the reality yet...
Perhaps if the City of Winnipeg increased the price of on-street parking in this area, much like they did around the MTS Centre, it would smash the glass ceiling that we have on prices in this area for evenings and weekends. People who use will have to pay for it and those who bike/transit don't.

Why should $5 million of my tax money go to a parkade when I don't own a car?

I have heard the argument about "people paying for things they don't use all the time," mostly about school taxes, but it creates a better society. Parking lots and parkades create all sorts of negitive externalities -- they are not good things.

I also know that the $5 million isn't actually tax money, it's proceeds from the sale of the other parkade, but it still could be used some other more productive way.

I'm fairly certain that City Council doesn't have the words "opportunity cost" in their vocabulary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:36 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by oftheMoon View Post
Agreed. I'm seriously thinking of making a move to the East Exchange, but like many others parking is my concern. While I could concede to park on a open surface lot for a period of time, it would be a bit easier to swallow knowing a more secure parkade was on the way. I'm fully prepared to pay for parking, that's not the issue - the issue is not knowing if/when there will be a decent facility to park in.

It's a tough decision to make - on one hand, I really believe in the area and where it will be in 3 -5 years, but on the other hand is underlying concern that some things may not change the way I think they ought to like parking, streetscaping, etc.
It depends on a few things. the area has a few fenced secure, camera monitored lots.

My only concern is the farther you move down princess st, for example the stigma and perceptions of the area grow. It has dramatically improved over the years but thier are very troubling social issues that are only a few blocks away that need to be addressed.

I do spend much time with relatives who are renting, couldn't sell the condos, in this area.
Thier vehicles are very secure, but that's not what I worry about taking my kids for a visit Friday night.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:37 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 steveosnyder View Post
Perhaps if the City of Winnipeg increased the price of on-street parking in this area, much like they did around the MTS Centre, it would smash the glass ceiling that we have on prices in this area for evenings and weekends. People who use will have to pay for it and those who bike/transit don't.

Why should $5 million of my tax money go to a parkade when I don't own a car?

I have heard the argument about "people paying for things they don't use all the time," mostly about school taxes, but it creates a better society. Parking lots and parkades create all sorts of negitive externalities -- they are not good things.

I also know that the $5 million isn't actually tax money, it's proceeds from the sale of the other parkade, but it still could be used some other more productive way.

I'm fairly certain that City Council doesn't have the words "opportunity cost" in their vocabulary.
I don't think stagnating the growth of residential in the exchange is a 'good thing' in order to wait for those willing to buy a condo and immediately go entirely car free.

I'm of the opinion that this parkade in the exchange can accelerate the residential growth, which in turn will reduce car dependence on those that choose to move there (even if they still own a car). Hopefully then we reach that 'critical mass' that everyone always talks about allowing the required services to establish themselves in the exchange - reducing the reliance on cars even more for those existing (and future) residents.

We need to walk before we can run, so to speak.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 3:59 PM
JamieDavid Exchange JamieDavid Exchange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 546
If the James Street Parkade slashes the residential component, they should at least aim for ground level retail, perhaps in some form of a grocery tenant. A coffee shop would be nice too. Folks like to go for coffee after events.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 4:16 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by rypinion View Post
I don't think stagnating the growth of residential in the exchange is a 'good thing' in order to wait for those willing to buy a condo and immediately go entirely car free.

I'm of the opinion that this parkade in the exchange can accelerate the residential growth, which in turn will reduce car dependence on those that choose to move there (even if they still own a car). Hopefully then we reach that 'critical mass' that everyone always talks about allowing the required services to establish themselves in the exchange - reducing the reliance on cars even more for those existing (and future) residents.

We need to walk before we can run, so to speak.
I never said I don't want to see more parking downtown, I want the City to address the fact that it creates inefficient and unproductive (from a tax-base sense) land use. I also want the government to not spend money on it, I want them to make money from it -- it's in demand, charge for it.

I want the City to actually operate on market forces. If there is a demand the City should raise their prices. With on-street parking at its current price during events (read: free) they are creating price ceilings on the off-street price, making a parking structure less profitable.

PS: I thought the WPA was changing the time you had to pay for parking to later in the evening for "high demand" zones... it seems that has changed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 4:34 PM
JamieDavid Exchange JamieDavid Exchange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 546
Why are all the "naysayers" over the grant to lure residential growth around the Downtown so up in arms about? This is not a new idea. Regina is offering a five year tax break to their residents who chose to move to their new iconic development by Fortress.

Does a five year tax break sound better than a one lump sum? A five year tax break here would be on average $17,000-$19,000 per unit. Much better than a onetime payment of $10,000, IMO. Plus, the city of Winnipeg will be collecting property tax over those five years from those who collected the $10,000! Sounds like a great offer to ALL the citizens of this city. $2.1 million up front for roughly $4 million in revenue after five years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 4:44 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
Why are all the "naysayers" over the grant to lure residential growth around the Downtown so up in arms about? This is not a new idea. Regina is offering a five year tax break to their residents who chose to move to their new iconic development by Fortress.

Does a five year tax break sound better than a one lump sum? A five year tax break here would be on average $17,000-$19,000 per unit. Much better than a onetime payment of $10,000, IMO. Plus, the city of Winnipeg will be collecting property tax over those five years from those who collected the $10,000! Sounds like a great offer to ALL the citizens of this city. $2.1 million up front for roughly $4 million in revenue after five years.
For 2 reasons, mainly. Mostly because the burbs don't get this benefit (but they won't talk about the benefits they do get that don't come with living downtown). The other reason that people may or may not understand is that the City will still receive taxes for the condos already built, it will just be paid for by the current owner (the developer) rather than the occupant.

EDIT: I suppose that is one reason why I would be for the subsidy; if the City doesn't help the developers get rid of these condos they would need even more justification in the future to build downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 4:54 PM
JamieDavid Exchange JamieDavid Exchange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveosnyder View Post
For 2 reasons, mainly. Mostly because the burbs don't get this benefit (but they won't talk about the benefits they do get that don't come with living downtown). The other reason that people may or may not understand is that the City will still receive taxes for the condos already built, it will just be paid for by the current owner (the developer) rather than the occupant.
Your first reason is pretty weak. I live downtown, and have been for many years. So, why are MY tax dollars being funneled to new infrastructure in the burbs? Why are MY tax dollars going to build schools in the burbs? (When I say "MY", I'm refering to all who pay taxes and live downtown) The new subburb in the SW is costing the city over $50 million in infrastructure costs. Why are all the downtown residents not complaining?

A vibrant subburb has little effect to a city as a whole compared to a vibrant downtown. Every single person living within the City of Winnipeg boarders ALL benefit from a vibrant downtown. It's like a living body. A healthy heart equals a healthy whole body. What would happen if you had a heart that was weak and dying???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 5:19 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
Your first reason is pretty weak. I live downtown, and have been for many years. So, why are MY tax dollars being funneled to new infrastructure in the burbs? Why are MY tax dollars going to build schools in the burbs? (When I say "MY", I'm refering to all who pay taxes and live downtown) The new subburb in the SW is costing the city over $50 million in infrastructure costs. Why are all the downtown residents not complaining?

A vibrant subburb has little effect to a city as a whole compared to a vibrant downtown. Every single person living within the City of Winnipeg boarders ALL benefit from a vibrant downtown. It's like a living body. A healthy heart equals a healthy whole body. What would happen if you had a heart that was weak and dying???
I'm not saying those are good reasons; you asked why people are against it, and I told you why.

If you are asking why I am against it I would say subsidizing downtown to get people to live there isn't as effective as making it cost more to live in the burbs. If we charged market rates for peoples locational choices (ie. made people in the burbs pay an actual market cost for living there) then downtown would be more attractive.

Trying to solve the problem with even more subsidies is stupid. Don't subsidize anyone, charge market prices, things get solved on their own.

EDIT: If you want the reason why I believe this would be more effective, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion

Last edited by steveosnyder; Jul 24, 2013 at 5:28 PM. Reason: Added reason why it would be more effective
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 5:22 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post

A vibrant subburb has little effect to a city as a whole compared to a vibrant downtown. Every single person living within the City of Winnipeg boarders ALL benefit from a vibrant downtown. It's like a living body. A healthy heart equals a healthy whole body. What would happen if you had a heart that was weak and dying???
Very well written. A thriving core would be felt by all areas bordering it. Decreasing sprawl and the costs of suburban development to all tax payers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 5:26 PM
red_179 red_179 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
Why are all the "naysayers" over the grant to lure residential growth around the Downtown so up in arms about? This is not a new idea. Regina is offering a five year tax break to their residents who chose to move to their new iconic development by Fortress.

Does a five year tax break sound better than a one lump sum? A five year tax break here would be on average $17,000-$19,000 per unit. Much better than a onetime payment of $10,000, IMO. Plus, the city of Winnipeg will be collecting property tax over those five years from those who collected the $10,000! Sounds like a great offer to ALL the citizens of this city. $2.1 million up front for roughly $4 million in revenue after five years.
The main reason for the opposition is that the incentive is basically a handout to the developers so that they don't have to reduce their prices on the new condos. Why not let the market dictate the price and the developers take the loss instead of subsidizing them with public funds? The developers operate a business like any other and if their units are not selling that is on them for not bringing the public the units they desire and can afford. If they made mistakes in their market analysis that is the developers problem in my opinion.

Also with regards to the parking availability, it sounds like Streetside and Sunstone themselves were the ones that pulled out of the James Avenue Parkade, so it would be pretty disingenuous of them to blame the City for not providing parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 5:42 PM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange View Post
Why are all the "naysayers" over the grant to lure residential growth around the Downtown so up in arms about? This is not a new idea. Regina is offering a five year tax break to their residents who chose to move to their new iconic development by Fortress.

Does a five year tax break sound better than a one lump sum? A five year tax break here would be on average $17,000-$19,000 per unit. Much better than a onetime payment of $10,000, IMO. Plus, the city of Winnipeg will be collecting property tax over those five years from those who collected the $10,000! Sounds like a great offer to ALL the citizens of this city. $2.1 million up front for roughly $4 million in revenue after five years.
A tax break doesn't get directed back to the condo developer unlike this lame brain idea our city council came up with (the same city council whose members are now backtracking due to the huge public backlash) Want to sell condos in the exchange, price them according to what the market will bear, provide on site parking and provide condo configurations people actually want to buy!
__________________
I'm sober enough to know what I'm doing, and drunk enough to really enjoy it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 6:03 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
I'm just curious why posters have not addressed this portion of the the posters quote?

Is it ok for ie: Regina, to offer subsidies for downtown living, that at this time surpass our city councils initial proposal in tax payers "contributions",(now probably to be amended), to make downtown Regina more attractive and livable?

Is not Regina/Sask. a powerhouse of development un-rivaled by many provinces? Why would thier progressive civic body allow such a travesty with such a robust and booming economy?
Giving Private developers an incentive?
Quote:
Originally Posted JamieDavid Exchange

Does a five year tax break sound better than a one lump sum? A five year tax break here would be on average $17,000-$19,000 per unit. Much better than a onetime payment of $10,000, IMO. Plus, the city of Winnipeg will be collecting property tax over those five years from those who collected the $10,000! Sounds like a great offer to ALL the citizens of this city. $2.1 million up front for roughly $4 million in revenue after five years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2013, 6:36 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 5,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by red_179 View Post
Also with regards to the parking availability, it sounds like Streetside and Sunstone themselves were the ones that pulled out of the James Avenue Parkade, so it would be pretty disingenuous of them to blame the City for not providing parking.
There is likely more to the story than that.

The one main thing to consider is that after 132 James is completed and the condos go for sale, further residential development in the immediate area will effectively stall until the parking situation is addressed.

For better or for worse, the developers in the area plowed ahead with condo conversions in and around James Avenue based on development incentives (on the short term) and the promise for additional parking (in the long term).

Any point to consider is that converting 100 year old warehouses is an extremely costly undertaking. The market prices for condos are not at the level in Winnipeg where these developments can happen without some sort of financial stimulus. If we want the Exchange to grow and prosper, it is going to cost all taxpayers a bit of money to make it happen.
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 6:10 AM.

     

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