unbuilt winnipeg

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Wilson Subway plan 1959

What an odd design. I guess it reflects Winnipeg's boundaries pre-Unicity.

[optimusREIM]

Could've been great!

[Curmudgeon]

^^^ The Wilson Plan may have been a very expensive mistake. During the 1950s Greater Winnipeg grew from about 350,000 to about 475,000 or 35% in one decade. The Plan forecast Winnipeg's population to grow to about 850,000 by 1980, which is slightly higher than today's population almost 45 years later. These figures are within the boundaries of today's City of Winnipeg plus Headingley, and E. and W. St. Paul, but not the distant exurbs such as Niverville or Stonewall that are included in today's Winnipeg Metropolitan Region. Had 1950s growth rates have continued, Winnipeg would today be a city of 3 million.

That is not what did happen though. Population growth slowed dramatically in the 1960s, increasing to 540,000 by 1971 and 570,000 by 1981 and then only to 660,000 by 2001. The city would have had a system which by about 20-25 years ago would have needed all stations to be retro-fitted as well as new rolling stock, which has about a 40 year life expectancy. It may have been similar to the 45 year old Concourse, the costs to upgrade and maintain being simply too great.

I don't think the plan reflects the pre-Unicity boundaries of Winnipeg, but rather a very good portion of the high transit use areas of the time. Transit by that time was operated by the Greater Winnipeg Transit Commission and then Metro Transit starting in 1961. That is another point to make. While growth may have followed a different pattern if the subway system had been built, in actuality the service area as detailed by the map has declined in population. The City of Winnipeg in its pre-Unicity boundaries has lost about 1/3 of its population since 1961. Then it contained about 55% of the Metro's population, now it is under 25%. Jane Jacobs described suburbs as parasitic. Unicity has not been kind to the inner city. As suburban councillors are the majority, suburban interests get top priority. So, auto commuting times and ample parking become a primary focus. The inner city continues to decline, esp. most of the North and West Ends and Elmwood.

I think Winnipeg is large enough now though for rail based rapid transit. Though not an underground subway as costs have risen prohibitively. No heavy rail metro has been built in North America in over 30 years, the most recent being in L.A., though many existing systems have been expanded.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

^^^ The Wilson Plan may have been a very expensive mistake. During the 1950s Greater Winnipeg grew from about 350,000 to about 475,000 or 35% in one decade. The Plan forecast Winnipeg's population to grow to about 850,000 by 1980,

To call it a "mistake" is not correct, considering construction costs were a fraction of what they were today, and it would have served a huge area of the city.

Had 1950s growth rates have continued, Winnipeg would today be a city of 3 million.

LOL....you may want to check your math. It's closer to 2 million.

The city would have had a system which by about 20-25 years ago would have needed all stations to be retro-fitted as well as new rolling stock, which has about a 40 year life expectancy. It may have been similar to the 45 year old Concourse, the costs to upgrade and maintain being simply too great.

...and yet far less expensive than building a subway system in the mid 2000's

While growth may have followed a different pattern if the subway system had been built, in actuality the service area as detailed by the map has declined in population.

Whether inner city Winnipeg declined in population is pretty irrelevant, considering overall use would have increased due to things like }park and rides" and the inevitable expansion of the original lines. Most inner cities in North America have declined in population from 50 years ago, yet public tansit ridership has increased.

The City of Winnipeg in its pre-Unicity boundaries has lost about 1/3 of its population since 1961.

This is just not true. The pre-Unicity population has declined by 11.1% from 1972-2016. In fact, I've heard this trend is reversing itself in many areas, so as of 2024, it could technically be under 10% decline from 1972.

source: https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=227673

The inner city continues to decline, esp. most of the North and West Ends and Elmwood.

Again, this is false:

Year................2001........2006.......2011.......2016

Downtown......15,954 > 15,960 > 16,673 > 17,826
River Heights..60,002 > 59,897 > 59,159 > 60,661
West End........56,055 > 56,340 > 56,521 > 58,668
North End.......43,427 > 44,156 > 46,766 > 48,320
Elmwood........14,363 > 14,358 > 14,806 > 14,713
Inkster...........17,097 > 16,728 > 17,311 > 18,337

Pretty much every neighbourhood in old Winnipeg has seen an increase in population, especially the North End.

[Curmudgeon]

[QUOTE=BlackDog204;10160867]To call it a "mistake" is not correct, considering construction costs were a fraction of what they were today, and it would have served a huge area of the city.

MAY have been a mistake. No one can be certain about how Winnipeg's development may have changed. Would ridership have still declined? Peak ridership was 105m in 1946. Still 60m in early 80s, then sharp decline and levelling at 30-40m (generally).
LOL....you may want to check your math. It's closer to 2 million.

35% growth per decade

1961 475,000
1971 641,000
1981 866,000 ((approx Wilson Plan estimate)
1991 1,169,000
2001 1,578,000 (approx. Calgary)
2011 2,130,000
2021 2,875,000
2024 3 million+


...and yet far less expensive than building a subway system in the mid 2000's

[Yes, definitely. Now about $1 billion per mile.

Whether inner city Winnipeg declined in population is pretty irrelevant, considering overall use would have increased due to things like }park and rides" and the inevitable expansion of the original lines. Most inner cities in North America have declined in population from 50 years ago, yet public tansit ridership has increased.

[Only Winnipeg (and Montreal to a lesser degree) among major cities in Canada. Many US cities, esp. many in the Midwest and some Northeast. As I wrote above, ridership in Winnipeg is much lower.


This is just not true. The pre-Unicity population has declined by 11.1% from 1972-2016. In fact, I've heard this trend is reversing itself in many areas, so as of 2024, it could technically be under 10% decline from 1972.

[I mentioned 1961, this was peak population of 265,000. I added up census tracts a number of years ago and got a pop. of 190,000, so just shy of 30%. I'd have to do this again based on 2021 numbers. Note Winnipeg's current neighbourhoods do not align with pre-Unicity boundaries, ie. Elmwood ends between Harbison and Larsen, not Munroe. Census tracts do though.

source: https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=227673



Again, this is false:

Year................2001........2006.......2011.......2016

Downtown......15,954 > 15,960 > 16,673 > 17,826
River Heights..60,002 > 59,897 > 59,159 > 60,661
West End........56,055 > 56,340 > 56,52158,668
North End.......43,427 > 44,156 > 46,766 > 48,320
Elmwood........14,363 > 14,358 > 14,806 > 14,713
Inkster...........17,097 > 16,728 > 17,311 > 18,337

Pretty much every neighbourhood in old Winnipeg has seen an increase in population, especially the North End.[/QUOTE
[ By decline I meant more than population. Take a walk in the North End when it warms up a bit. I'll make the effort to put the numbers together for 2021. It's a bit of a project. My point is that the project was very ambitious in 1959 and growth did not occur as expected. Who knows what MIGHT have happened, but it could have been an underutilized costly mistake. Starting in 1990s it would have needed major upgrades at a time when Winnipeg was at its economic nadir.

EDIT: Just had a quick look at the four CTs for Elmwood. 15,107 in 2021, so up 2% from 2011. Well, that's good. For historical comparisons, I use "1" census years. As I write this the 1902 Romanesque Guest Block is burning down on Main St.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

[QUOTE=BlackDog204;10160867]T

MAY have been a mistake. No one can be certain about how Winnipeg's development may have changed. Would ridership have still declined? Peak ridership was 105m in 1946. Still 60m in early 80s, then sharp decline and levelling at 30-40m (generally).
LOL....you may want to check your math. It's closer to 2 million.

35% growth per decade

1961 475,000
1971 641,000
1981 866,000 ((approx Wilson Plan estimate)
1991 1,169,000
2001 1,578,000 (approx. Calgary)
2011 2,130,000
2021 2,875,000
2024 3 million+

The growth in the 1950's was never sustainable. It was the height of the baby boom, as well as when hundreds of thousands of immigrants arrived in Canada after the Iron Curtain went up. Not to mention there were still people looking for a better life post-WW2 Europe. This was across North America.

[Only Winnipeg (and Montreal to a lesser degree) among major cities in Canada. Many US cities, esp. many in the Midwest and some Northeast. As I wrote above, ridership in Winnipeg is much lower.

This has far more to do with the outdated transit system we have. Just look at Calgary, which has the highest LRT ridership in North America. Since expanding their main line 15 years ago, and building the Valley Line, Edmonton ridership should see a dramatic increase. of course, Winnipeg blew it, and is stuck with a bus route.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

35% growth per decade

1961 475,000
1971 641,000
1981 866,000 ((approx Wilson Plan estimate)
1991 1,169,000
2001 1,578,000 (approx. Calgary)
2011 2,130,000
2021 2,875,000
2024 3 million+[/B]

I stand corrected. Must have missed out on a decade.

My math skills are not what they once were...

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

The growth in the 1950's was never sustainable. It was the height of the baby boom, as well as when hundreds of thousands of immigrants arrived in Canada after the Iron Curtain went up. Not to mention there were still people looking for a better life post-WW2 Europe. This was across North America.

This has far more to do with the outdated transit system we have. Just look at Calgary, which has the highest LRT ridership in North America. Since expanding their main line 15 years ago, and building the Valley Line, Edmonton ridership should see a dramatic increase. of course, Winnipeg blew it, and is stuck with a bus route.

Yes, of course it was unsustainable, just saying the Wilson Plan projected that rate of growth. Calgary though has come close, with growth of over 420% total since 1961. It was barely half Winnipeg's pop. in that census year.

We're on the same page, really. Few would like to see rail-based rapid transit in this city more than me. I just think in hindsight that the the heavy-rail Wilson Plan subway was probably too ambitious for Winnipeg. In my opinion the bigger mistake was failing to renew the streetcar system in the immediate postwar period, as Toronto did. Most of the lines would have been extended and a few could have then been converted to designated right of way and pre-emptive signalling LRT lines at a later date,

[oaktom]

I found old documents of designs for forks by different developers. Check out photos below

[oaktom]

[oaktom]

[oaktom]

[Biff]

I can remember in the 80's, I believe there was a concept design competition at the UofM for some of The Forks landmarks. There was a proposal for a 1,000 ft(ish) observation tower. It was loosely based on ice shards, all glass. I have looked for it online periodically but have never found it.

[Biff]

From Gaboury, Lussier, Sigurdson Architects

[1ajs]

i like what we got for the harbour and buildings in the end and how every so often a new peac is added allowing it to evolve economicaly