Thank you again WestEndWander for your response. I’m very glad to finally have my first actual dialogue with you because truth be told I agree with about 90% of the things you say on this board. Now that our ideals are clashing I am hoping for a productive discussion about how we can further bolster urban design in Winnipeg. I especially appreciate your open mindedness in terms of Waverley West with the statement “No amount of attempted rationalization for far flung car dependent suburbs will convince me there are any redeeming qualities within W.W.” I’ll save your response for last because there is a lot to unearth in your statements. However, feel free to look at the post as a whole because you might learn a thing or two.
Firstly, I want to explicitly state that I wasn’t referring to Waverley West as a whole on a macro scale. I was just referring to a project occurring in Bridgwater Centre. Now I’m sure you guys have seen my prior posts regarding Waverley West where I vehemently criticize the land use patterns for the majority of the area. However, when it comes to Bridgwater Centre the land use and zoning is actually something I would even regard as excellent. The zoning map below showcases Commercial Mixed Use zoning in purple, commercial only zoning in red, and Residential Multi Family zoning in brown.
Just for anyone not familiar with what can be built on commercial mixed use zoning, think of the 5 over 1s that are popping up all over North America which is essentially 5 floors of residential on top of 1 floor of commercial with an active street front. Waterfront Drive has the most prominent collection of these types of buildings in Winnipeg. Because of this zoning let’s take a look at how the proposed buildings for Bridgwater Centre would look in plan view. The white block on the east side is for a future recreation campus that has gotten funding approved from all three levels of government. The buildings east of the recreation centre are two schools providing k-12 education for residents in the area. There will also be a fire hall constructed in that general area. The building in black is the proposed development I was initially discussing
As you can see most buildings are not going to have any sort of setback and face the road without any nonsensical parking to hinder the aesthetic and vibe. Now this brings me to my first response to GreyGarden who said the following
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyGarden
I don’t think Bridgwater or Waverley West will ever be walkable. They may have dense buildings built in them, but the layout and design of the roads and neighbourhoods kind of prohibits walkability. Even if this is built on a road, the roads are wide and designed for high speeds.
Pembina highway is also too wide and fast to be walkable. But I disagree about Sherbrook. It could be better, but it’s context means that it has the potential to be a thriving high street one day. A bit more density and affluence and the street should improve.
|
So for some reason there is a misconception in the community that the roads in Bridgwater are wide. In fact Centre Street, which is our “high street” only has 1 lane on each side of the road with on street parking. Here’s a picture of Centre Street to show what it actually looks like.
When the sidewalk is wider then the road how can anyone say with a straight face this is an area hostile to pedestrians? I certainly feel much more relaxed walking here then walking on Sherbrook which is a 1-way traffic hellhole with a puny little bike lane. Nevermind the other supposed "high streets" in the west end like Ellice, Sargent, or god forbid Portage.
Believe it or not Centre St actually has the same amount of road space as Waterfront Drive which is widely regarded as excellent urban design. There is a caveat that it also has a median boulevard with a pedestrian refuge in the middle of the street which limits the amount of time you are in a conflicting zone with a car. In comparison Waterfront Drive only provides a pedestrian refuge on the intersection at Bannatyne with the roundabout. As I have tested before it only takes me about 4 seconds to cross Centre St before I avoid an area of conflict and 10 seconds to cross the whole street. Compared to crossing a street like Pembina which takes roughly double the time too cross without any sort of barrier or refuge so it is 20 seconds of being in a conflicting zone with vehicles.
Now this is a perfect segway to address Kris22’s comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris22
Stripmalls and box stores between two 80 km/hr highways is definitely not a "vibe" in the way I think you meant it thebasketballgeek 
These far-flung suburban development threads aren't even necessary on this forum. We all know what suburban development looks like; it's the same all over Winnipeg and the same all over Canada. I'm pretty sure we all didn't end up on this forum to look at this shit. |
I already discussed how the land use works to create a pedestrian friendly environment so no need to say anymore on that. Although I can even expand this to the intersection crossings at Kenaston. Sure the speeds get up to 80km/h, but we have to consider that pedestrians only have to cross 2 lanes rather than the typical 6-8 lane intersection seen on the rest of streets like Kenaston. As a result, I surprisingly feel quite safe crossing Kenaston in Bridgwater, but I can’t say the same when I am crossing Kenaston on Scurfield, Sterling Lyon, McGillivary, or even Grant.
So now let’s address the idea presented by both Kriss22 and WestEndWander about Waverley West being a “far-flung suburban development.”
As you all are aware by now I do reside in Waverley West, however, I am only 12 km away from Downtown. Virtually the same distance as Transcona, Westwood, and Assiniboine Park. However, what has been ignored by the majority of people who state this is a far flung suburb is the fact that I am also only 4km away from our provinces biggest University, and 2km away from my nearest rapid transit station (Chancellor Station). I would argue that Waverley West is actually more interconnected with the parts of the city that actually matter than a lot of suburbs that are even closer to Downtown Winnipeg. Also, being near Kenaston and Bishop Grandin provides me a direct route to the cities 3 biggest shopping centres. In which 2 of them I can cycle too quite easily.
Oh yea I almost forgot to discuss the fact that Waverley West has the second best active transportation infrastructure in the city besides the Exchange District. Realistically St. Boniface should hold this title but they don’t even have bike lanes on Marion, St Mary’s or Provencher so they’re disqualified. Let’s take a look at the cities cycling map.
You see all that large concentration of green lines in the southwest part of the city? Yea that’s Waverley West. I would even go so far as to say I have never seen a suburban community anywhere in North America with as much active transportation infrastructure that Waverley West provides. As a result of this extensive system, I am able to cycle to virtually any part of the city and have roughly 85-90% of my ride on a separated path away from traffic. This is a privilege that has allowed me and many others in the community to stay in pretty good physical condition. To add to that, this summer I tried to use my car as little as possible, and found out that I was able to essentially remove 80% of my automobile trips by cycling. In comparison when I was visiting my cousin in Brampton, I could not cycle anywhere without fearing for my life. Could you believe that there is a direct bike lane to a Walmart and Costco in suburban Winnipeg. You would be hard pressed to find that type of infrastructure in suburban Vancouver nevermind a city as small as Winnipeg.
So WestEndWander, it’s finally time to respond to your comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestEndWander
It's o.k, you can save the write up and flex. I too have urban planning education. Greenfield development of generic stick framed 4 story apartments and single family homes in exurban regions of the city where no resources, services, or amenities exist prior to development are a drain. Plain and simple.
No amount of attempted rationalization for far flung car dependent suburbs will convince me there are any redeeming qualities within W.W. But if you want to try and counter every existing study out there that echoes these sentiments you go ahead. You do you, or whatever the kids say these days.
This is a pulled from a study commissioned in Edmonton by one of the most progressive urbanists to hold the position of Mayor in Canada in the past 10 years:
"To service these areas, developers are contributing a significant amount of money – $3.84 billion, in fact. In addition, the City will spend $1.4 billion in capital to build additional infrastructure to support these communities – things like fire stations, parks, roads and interchanges etc. In turn, tax revenues and utility fees generated by these developments help to recover some of these costs.
However, when we consider the full life cycle of this infrastructure and the delivery of city services to these growth areas, the model shows a revenue shortfall of $1.4 billion over the next 50 years."
Do you know something that everyone else doesn't seem to?
|
Firstly, we have to understand that regardless of what area of the city one lives in that with enough reform to land use that every single suburban community, small town, or inner city in Manitoba can be walkable and not be a drain to the cities finances. This is the 15 minute community model that is prevalent all over suburbs in Europe and NYC. I would argue that because of our climate we should be striving for 5 minute cities. To make that a reality that inherently means suburbs need to be densified and reintroduce corner stores. Not everyone can or wants to live near the inner city and I think that should be respected. Therefore, when I see a development positively affecting a communities quality of life by enhancing walkability REGARDLESS OF AREA I will champion it. If we didn’t want Waverley West to exist then it should have not been approved back in 2005 (which was spearheaded by our “urbanist” mayor btw). Now that the community exists, don’t you think that unequivocally bashing the area instead of figuring out ways to improve is counterproductive to what planners strive for?
Regarding my education, don’t worry the faculty still states that sprawl is terrible despite the hypocritical design choices of the Russell building having a parking lot and everything about smartpark but that’s another discussion. In fact not to brag or anything, but most professors actually commend me for having a knowledge of urban affairs well beyond my years, and I currently have an A+ in my City Planning class with Rae Bridgman despite still being in my undergraduate program. So let’s just say I know a thing or two.
Back to the project that was initially being discussed on a micro scale. I’m going to present a scenario to you.
I am a young adult who just got recently married and is planning to have 2 kids. My wife is an educator for a high school and I am pursuing my career as an urban designer at AECOM. Luckily for us my wife was able to secure a job at the new high school being built on Bison Drive which also has a K-8 school and massive recreation campus adjacent to the site. I found a 3 bedroom apartment in Bridgwater Centre designed by Paragon. The first thing I realize is that I am 500 metres away from Altea Active which is a 120,000 sq ft gym. Then I look for my nearest grocery store and see Save-on-Foods is also 500 metres away on the other direction. Within this 500 metre radius because of the CMU zoning I have all of my essentials I need.
Fast forward a few years later and my kids are ready to attend school. The school is a bit further away at about 1.3km away from my apartment. However, we are within the school bus radius and because of our extensive active transportation system I can confidently allow my kids to cycle or walk to school without any worry. Because all of my core services are within my 15 minute radius of walking I make the decision to not own a car and save thousands of dollars per year which I can use for investment, or to store away for my children’s post secondary education should they pursue that path in life.
“But what about going outside the neighbourhood.”
Well my friend let me introduce you to the
rapid transit long term network plan. Essentially there will be 6 different busses operating in Bridgwater Centre which are the following: The O-line which will run from Red River College to U of M via Kenaston BLVD, the P line which goes from St. Norbert to U of M via Kenaston and Bison DR. Both of these busses will have 10 minute headways which is quite adequate for a “far flung suburb.” then 4 other routes which take me too Fort Richmond, Southwest Transitway, and 2 more busses that terminate at the U of M. Since AECOM is on Kenaston BLVD I just need to walk 100 metres to my station on the intersection of Centre St/Bison Dr, and am able to take the O line to commute to work everyday. In the summer I can bike there comfortably as the Kenaston bike lane gets completed.
I don’t see a problem with this kind of living at all. It is sustainable, equitable, and allows flexibility in mode of transportation. Bridgwater Centre by definition is a 15 minute neighbourhood although it might be more accurate to call it a 10 minute neighbourhood. Safety is also quite nice to have here because truth be told I can at least walk down the street after 9pm without fearing for my safety. Something I wouldn’t be able to do in the West End for example.
To conclude my dialogue, this framing of essentially 3,000 acres of land to be considered all bad showcases a lack of nuance in this discussion that would usually be present in planning circles. Furthermore, stating that every part of a development is bad because of your preconceived notions about suburban sprawl also lacks historical precedent. I say this because virtually every single neighbourhood in Winnipeg besides Downtown and St. Norbert was at its origin an edge of city neighbourhood. Whether that be Osborne Village, the West End, or even Elmwood. Therefore, at one point the majority of neighbourhoods in Winnipeg could have been classified as “suburban sprawl.”
Hopefully I was able to shed some light on why I believe that certain elements of Waverley West are actually good, and maybe changed your view on how to approach suburban sprawl. For this reason I wrote a 2,000 word excerpt with visuals and pictures in 3 hours. The crazy thing is I'm just scratching the surface on this topic and stopped here because I don't want too shut down this argument with one reply. I have deliberately put holes in my argument to see if you are able to spot and respond too accordingly so I can gauge just how much you understand about this topic.
The thing is while you might be interested or even passionate about urban planning, I fucking eat, sleep, and breath urban planning. My whole life essentially revolves around understanding spaces and thinking of ways that Winnipeg can improve and one day be a world class city and pioneer of urban development. If you truly have that same conviction and purpose than I encourage you to reply and dissect the points I’ve made.
As the young folk like me say, “there’s levels to this shit.”
Prev
Linear Mode
