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

[esquire]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Yeah they started last year. A few (old) people freaked out and said they'd never come back – good riddance. In talking to the staff there though, they said they were actually shocked how little pushback there was, and that many people (especially younger) supported it, knowing that the money goes right back into The Forks for improvements, and not just to the city coffers.

To me that speaks volumes to the great work their doing, because in the past even the slightest change had the whole city up in arms. People see the vision now, and they get it.

Yes, it really speaks to the trust that The Forks has earned. They've done great things with that site, and charging a nominal amount for parking to improve it even further is a reasonable ask. Like any Winnipegger, I normally hate paying for parking but I certainly don't hesitate to drop a few bucks into the meter there.

Totally true that 20 years ago charging for parking at The Forks would have led to a public freakout. Like 2 hour long Peter Warren open line radio marathons with senior after senior calling in to castigate management and threatening to never return there.

[bomberjet]

Typical Winnipeg lol What I can't park for free at the front door!!!??? Not going..

There is/was a plan to reduce whatever the road leading into the forks is called from 4 to 2 lanes. The Forks is trying to reduce vehicle access and encourage public transit from my understanding.

As Esquire said, parking can be tough when it's really busy. tough meaning you just have to park on the surface lots further away.

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by esquire

Yes, it really speaks to the trust that The Forks has earned. They've done great things with that site, and charging a nominal amount for parking to improve it even further is a reasonable ask. Like any Winnipegger, I normally hate paying for parking but I certainly don't hesitate to drop a few bucks into the meter there.

Totally true that 20 years ago charging for parking at The Forks would have led to a public freakout. Like 2 hour long Peter Warren open line radio marathons with senior after senior calling in to castigate management and threatening to never return there.

Yeah, there's a real shift in expectations when it comes to finding cheap/free parking close by at The Forks (and I would think the Exchange, also) in the last few years. It used to be a given: a free spot close to the market, or at least the choice of acres and acres of mostly empty lots on the Railside site. This doesn't mean that Winnipeggers are suddenly relying on their cars less, or are becoming less cheap, but I think they're becoming more realistic about what popular urban destinations look like, which means that parking is not cheap and readily available. Clearly this isn't keeping people away.

***
The first phase of Railside (the southern half of the site) is still in the design concept stage. I don't believe any parking structures are being planned, at least not for non-residents. It's unfortunately still looking like a Danish suburban housing project that turns it's back on the main street and public pathways.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Typical Winnipeg lol What I can't park for free at the front door!!!??? Not going..

There is/was a plan to reduce whatever the road leading into the forks is called from 4 to 2 lanes. The Forks is trying to reduce vehicle access and encourage public transit from my understanding.

As Esquire said, parking can be tough when it's really busy. tough meaning you just have to park on the surface lots further away.

I don't think you really need 4 lanes south of Israel Asper Way but the it is used as a major thoroughfare at rush hour to get to Provenche. I think the city would need to look at the effects of forcing that traffic to main before making the whole portion 2 lanes.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Typical Winnipeg lol What I can't park for free at the front door!!!??? Not going..

There is/was a plan to reduce whatever the road leading into the forks is called from 4 to 2 lanes. The Forks is trying to reduce vehicle access and encourage public transit from my understanding.

As Esquire said, parking can be tough when it's really busy. tough meaning you just have to park on the surface lots further away.

Nailed it. Except maybe for Canada Day, the lots are never full.

And yeah they will be eliminating the current southbound lanes in a few years. Hopefully as things start developing and site gets busier, it really just forces the city's hand to do the Union Station connections sooner.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Nailed it. Except maybe for Canada Day, the lots are never full.

I was there on Louis Riel Day and it was a bit of a shitshow. All the spots are marked as reserved M-F with no exception carved out for holidays... so you had all of people driving around the site looking for a place to park with the spots supposedly unavailable. Even driving to St. B or toward downtown didn't help as it's all restricted parking M-F.

In the end I went to the VIA Rail lot on Main and plunked down my money for all day parking. But it was much more difficult than it had to be. I'm surprised it wasn't a smoother process.

[buzzg]

I was there on LRD also, Goldeyes lots (Parcel 4) were all half empty.

[Tacheguy]

one thing I have long puzzled over is the north portage parking situation. if the Forks is generating a clear profit of say 5 million a year, what is the amount they should sell it for to a developer? presumably they would ask 80 to 100 million cash, in order to generate 4 or 5 million a year through investments. but what is that parkade worth to a property developer who sees it as parking for condos or apartments? I am no expert on property development but I would think that they would want to pay a lot less than that. and i dont think the frc would want to sell it to someone who is going to continue operating it as a public parkade. so basically FRC would be shrinking its asset base, although for a public good. not saying it cant or wont be done but it will be interesting to see how the board deals with it.

[bomberjet]

What I think should happen is York aligned with waterfront as the 4 lane road. Then have izzy asper come off as a two lane road. Like this. I show slip lanes for Izzy Asper, but could probably not have those installed.

That whole area has bad traffic flow in general. As York is a main exit from downtown that gets bunged up in both directions all the time. Too bad the main route to east Winnipeg is through the Forks and provencher.

[esquire]

^ That is a great idea. I could get behind that.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

one thing I have long puzzled over is the north portage parking situation. if the Forks is generating a clear profit of say 5 million a year, what is the amount they should sell it for to a developer? presumably they would ask 80 to 100 million cash, in order to generate 4 or 5 million a year through investments. but what is that parkade worth to a property developer who sees it as parking for condos or apartments? I am no expert on property development but I would think that they would want to pay a lot less than that. and i dont think the frc would want to sell it to someone who is going to continue operating it as a public parkade. so basically FRC would be shrinking its asset base, although for a public good. not saying it cant or wont be done but it will be interesting to see how the board deals with it.

The Forks isn't a for-profit business. Of course they'll want to make money and sell it at or above market value, but they kind of would be selling it "for the public good" as you say. They don't want to be in the parking business – they only are right now because of necessity. As soon as they can offset that $5m with new revenue from The Forks, they'll divest.

They operate just like CentreVenture in a way – their non-profit neighbourhood renewal organization. Once they can afford to get out of North Portage, they'll be more than happy just stepping aside to allow further private development there.

Originally Posted by bomberjet

What I think should happen is York aligned with waterfront as the 4 lane road. Then have izzy asper come off as a two lane road. Like this. I show slip lanes for Izzy Asper, but could probably not have those installed.

That whole area has bad traffic flow in general. As York is a main exit from downtown that gets bunged up in both directions all the time. Too bad the main route to east Winnipeg is through the Forks and provencher.

I don't mind this idea, but would much prefer to see York shrink to 2 lanes and not be so easily connected to Waterfront/Provencher. Because it actually isn't/shouldn't be the big connector you think of, right through The Forks/Railside. That's what William Stephenson & Pioneer/Portage are for, and actually aligned with Provencher. The city just needs to do a better job through design and signage of making that the main route.

My preference would be to see York down to 2 lanes going into The Forks (or 1 in, 2 out) with a 2-way cycle track, then west of Portage, York is 3 lanes + 2-way cycle track all the way to Colony. I really don't think there's any need for York to be 4 lanes of through traffic at any point. Put in a 2-way cycle track the whole way from Colony to Asper, and you've just connected U of W to The Forks, and Broadway to The Exchange, meeting at York & Fort/Graham.

If you're worried about flow, you could even make York continue as a 1-way into The Forks to allow lots of left turning onto Main then right on William Stephenson. Then you have Forks Market Road & Pioneer/Portage as exits.

[esquire]

^ I'd be concerned that this would choke off The Forks too much. There's nothing wrong with the traffic flow down York as it currently is (and having it will be important to growth of the the Railside development), it's just that it could be made a bit more efficient as seen in bomberjet's map.

[buzzg]

Choke off The Forks from what? That map just turns York into more of a thoroughfare to St. Boniface than anything else. If it's going to be one lane each way on Asper, don't really need 2 in and 2 out. I'd much perfect to be able to put in a proper cycle track all the way down York as mentioned. I'd actually be fine eliminating left turns from York > Waterfront and forcing through traffic to use William Stephenson.

Stephenson/Pioneer & Waterfront is already a massive (overbuilt) intersection, so lets just keep all heavy traffic going through there and reserve York as an entrance/exit to The Forks.

[esquire]

^ Fair enough.

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Choke off The Forks from what? That map just turns York into more of a thoroughfare to St. Boniface than anything else. If it's going to be one lane each way on Asper, don't really need 2 in and 2 out. I'd much perfect to be able to put in a proper cycle track all the way down York as mentioned. I'd actually be fine eliminating left turns from York > Waterfront and forcing through traffic to use William Stephenson.

Stephenson/Pioneer & Waterfront is already a massive (overbuilt) intersection, so lets just keep all heavy traffic going through there and reserve York as an entrance/exit to The Forks.

Absolutely Stephenson and Waterfront is a massive and massively hostile intersection. Make that intersection significantly more friendly to pedestrians and cyclists, and it would be a game-changer for downtown, the Forks, the Exchange, and old St. Boniface.

As much as I don’t want to bring a pedestrianized Portage and Main intersection into this discussion, I think directing more traffic through Portage and Main (and Pioneer/Water and Main) could make keeping the intersection closed more important from a traffic flow perspective.

I don’t like Waterfront being a shortcut for east Winnipeg motorists, and narrowing York could help mitigate that. But maybe not entirely—look at how Waterfront Drive north of Pioneer is becoming a clogged shortcut. And to play the devil’s advocate, I don’t see such capacity of a large underpass like the one on York 'going to waste' as simply as an entrance for Forks visitors. Now, if the Eastern Rapid Transit Corridor were to go down Provencher to downtown via York, taking two lanes on York and making them transit-only could be an option.

[bomberjet]

See how there's an overall dysfunction downtown for pedestrians and vehicles? Mostly in the area of P&M, railway and the Forks.

I'd tend to agree that using Pioneer and William Stephenson would be the best approach. But then you get into the shit show of Westbrook, Portage E, Pioneer. Again, no real clear path through. It's traffic lights and S curves.

Regardless of opinions, vehicles must be dealt with. Right now York is pushed through the Forks area and I don't really see that changing anytime soon unless something drastic happens to change traffic flows.

[buzzg]

I'd be willing to bet that York east of Main will be reduced – The Forks will push the city to cut down the traffic there, and I'm sure the city will listen.

I think what's clear is a major, holistic look at ALL forms of traffic (vehicle, transit, bike, ped) for the eastern half of downtown needs to happen. None of these pieces like P&M, Graham transit, Forks traffic, and connections to St. B all need to be considered together. These decisions simply will not work if considered in isolation.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by buzzg

I'd be willing to bet that York east of Main will be reduced – The Forks will push the city to cut down the traffic there, and I'm sure the city will listen.

I think what's clear is a major, holistic look at ALL forms of traffic (vehicle, transit, bike, ped) for the eastern half of downtown needs to happen. None of these pieces like P&M, Graham transit, Forks traffic, and connections to St. B all need to be considered together. These decisions simply will not work if considered in isolation.

Agreed. And more traffic will imo lower property values and investment in those remaining empty lots we all want filled up.

The city and the forks has an opportunity to really change that area as it’s all just parking lots right now.
However keeping it the way it is will just create a headache for everyone no matter what form of transportation you use.

Turning that section from main to provencher into what water front drive is now would be a lot better. Roundabouts and all. Get rid of the lights in the forks lots altogether.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

What I think should happen is York aligned with waterfront as the 4 lane road. Then have izzy asper come off as a two lane road. Like this. I show slip lanes for Izzy Asper, but could probably not have those installed.

That whole area has bad traffic flow in general. As York is a main exit from downtown that gets bunged up in both directions all the time. Too bad the main route to east Winnipeg is through the Forks and provencher.

I'm in favour. Neat idea!

[Wpg_Guy]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...ipeg-1.4088730

According to the forks on twitter regarding promenade and linear park:
@TheForks
Replying to @cirque_du_bagel
This was a call for submissions for this project design (not something that was going to be constructed this year!) We didn’t receive anything that met our requirements, but it will go ahead when we secure a design that checks all the boxes.

I wonder how well received the call for submissions were from the development community for the first phase of railside, or is it back to the drawing board?