AGW and Canal commentary
The councillors are ridiculing AGW for not being as politically savvy. That gives me hope for the AGW.
The day that our AGW has the political savvy of our city council, will probably be the last day I go there. Is that what our city wants or deserves, an Art Gallery that has to hire professional political lobbyists for our own municipality?
CANAL PLAN- I think its great that somewhere out there a feasibility study exists and look forward to the scrutiny that will occur by other bloggers. I figure if it can overcome this scrutiny it will be a go. So have at it, those who feel that part of opposing the mayor must be to oppose anything he’s remotely attached to. Sorry if I don’t wish you good luck, Best I can do is hope you “break a leg” 
BTW, am I the only one that didn’t know how many types of “feasibility” studies exist. I am now educated that there are several types of “feasible”. There’s engineeringly feasible, economically feasible. Before we undertake another feasibility study, I’d like to know how many types of feasible will have to be studied? Will we have to do a study on whether its “politically” feasible? what about “Grant” Feasible, “internationally” feasible? “Tourism” feasible.
For me its not about the Canal Plan anymore, I support it to the chagrin of some of the city center west residents and other people. I will always support an investment into our core, especially one that is focused on residential intensification.
The issue is leverage, with no downtown strategy in place, how will we leverage this investment to create further development in the downtown. The best canadian example that I was made aware of is the Bow bldg in Calgary that generated 200 million dollars of spin off investment. There was no “If you build it, they will come” Mentality. They actually prepared the surrounding area for this investment by dealing with crime issues, development incentives etc…
The example of Windsor’s failure in this area is the casino/arena/convention center. The casino which is great by itself, generated no development of the surrounding area, few employees that moved downtown. It could have if we followed through on the glengarry marentette CIP or the sustainable downtown CIP. If we offered development incentives and the like.
If the Canal is coming, we need to prepare
Post Feedback
Well, I agree.. The canal project does have the potential to be a great development, but you are right that we have to prepare for it. The casino development did not expand beyond casino grounds because that area is downright scary and not family friendly. Glengary needs to be transplanted out to nice looking affordable housing that is not so concentrated in one area. (there is some land by the WFCU center to start). So, since there are a lot of business savvy and downtown-oriented people on this blog, what do we propose that we need to do to prepare? What kind of input will the public have on this project? And will the Casino and other downtown businesses be willing to help to attract workers back to the core? (I always liked the idea of higher wages or lower taxes based on proximity to work.. like an incentive) It will be interested to see the study’s results and the economic feasibility. What i can say, is that everyone that I have sent this news story to in places all over Canada and USA think its a great idea… at least in principle. Lets see the details and go from there.
How about two tier development charges in the core? Facade grant incentives and streetscape taken over by the city so that the DWBIA can focus on beautification, marketing and promoting the area as per its mandate.
For a blog that is supportive of residential intensification, I find it troubling that improvements to the downtown require that the poor people be shipped off to oblivion. Personally, I find the Glengarry complex rather interesting. Certainly far safer and more pleasant than parts of Pelisser or the parking garage on Chatham.
Whatever plan emerges for downtown, it has to include a mix of housing from social / affordable to luxury condos. We already know that this is the way to a safer community.
I should commend you, Mark, on your pre-emptive strategy of setting up a straw-man by insinuating that anyone who isn’t on board for this canal plan is a knee-jerk Eddie-hater.
At that Future of the News I remember they said people who blog don’t tend to be community based. Yet I see the Windsor Star post stories that hurt the community more than help them. The one posted today about the AGW is so childish.
I’m always so busy attending events happening in this city, yet I never see the Windsor Star there. Even at The Future of The News the Windsor Star used a stock photo of their editor for the story they did on it, since no one at the star seemed to care about what happened there that night.
This is my first trip to this Blog and find the post idiotic. The canal is a terrible idea in multiple ways. It is a total waste of tax dollars, like most of what the Mayor and Council has done in the past. As an engineer, I believe that most things are possible, baring a violation on the laws of physics. But the canal is not feasible due to cost, land usage issues as well as upkeep costs. Does no one realize the water level is 15-20 feet below the road grade? The canal will be an ugly gash in the earth with concrete walls. There plan is to use municipal water to flush the canal? What a waste of treated water. I am for projects which spur development and such, but the 700 million dollar infrastructure deficit which Windsor faces is where dollars need to be spent. Windsor needs to get its house in order and that has to be there focus. Not on wasting money on a canal.
Laughable,
The water level being 15-20 feet below the road grade is one of the best feature of these canal projects. It creates a wonderful multi–dimensional atmosphere kind of like the second floor balcony restaurants and bars of Montreal and New Orleans. At the same time, down at canal level, it really does feel like a mini-oasis in metropolis. People flock to these places to escape. I was in San Antonio a few months ago, and even in the current economic environment the canal was packed on a normal weekday. If anything the sidewalks were too narrow for the amount of people.
Let’s see the report. Let’s see how this project fits with other plans to move the city in a new direction. Let’s see what the choices are. And then let’s decide.
First please note that my blog partners do not necessarily agree with me
Margaret, which poor people do you speak of? We have enough affordable housing in downtown Windsor to accomodate quite a few low income people. What downtown lacks are price points in the mid range, say from $150k to $250k
Didn’t mean to do that, Juxtaposition, I also referred specifically to bloggers not the general public. I know there are many people who will oppose this on its own merits. [ME] will be a big opponent for reasons independent of our mayor. However there is a blogger out there whose sole raison d’etre is the mantra “ABC good, Mayor Bad”.
Laughable, c’mon, tell me how you really feel, stop beating around the bush. Like I said, my blog partners don’t necessarily agree as well as many experts. I even went to a seminar entitled Iconic vs. Incremental Change where they stated that incremental change was more effective to revitalize downtown than creating a new icon.
However, experts stated that there were many exceptions to that rule and I believe this could be one of them if the area was prepared for its arrival.
How do you know the canal is not feasible due to cost? Doesn’t it seem a bit hasty to condemn the feasibility study without even seeing it???
ThenI will state my claim again Mark. How about putting the canal down Ouellette Ave instead? That seems more true to your San Antonio comparisons that a now reduced 3 block canal (from 4 blocks) with a 20ft wide water.
No one has even mentined that fantastic condos that sit on a mile wide river with a real view can’t be sold eve in great times but we expect condos to be sold ona 20ft wide canal?
Since Scaledown is about heritage along with intensification and INVESTMENTS in neighbourhoods, what about all of those century old houses that will be demolished and thrown into the landfill?
What about our $700 million infrastructure deficit in the netire city?
What about the piss poor look of the EXISTING buliding downtown? Where the owners do nothing to fix or clean them up?
What about the crime in the entire downtown that kills any incentive for people to want to move in the downtown area (whether real or perceived. In many cases other than the village that will be destroyed for this scheme the crime is a real threat). other than those low income people who have no where else to go?
What about the imbalance between bars and retail in downtown?
What about an existing city-owned marina that is less than 40% rented and bleeding money?
What about the city chasing away Green Shield over parking (amongst a few other companies), building office parks on the peripheral of the city while ignoring the downtown?
Can you tell me doing any of the above wouldn’t have the same effect as a $50 million+ canal?
How about I propose demoishing your house in the ‘burbs for a bocci ball field especially when your assessment has come back and your house is now worth less than you bought it? How about I demolish your hopes and dreams for an idea that is baseless?
The faact is the city didn’t even try to build a neighbourhood. They didn’t any of the studies they proposed but now all of a sudden this is a good idea? Build the damn village as intended while doing all of the above and then tellme I’m wrong? My facts of the above will back me up (as they are all EXACTLY what YOU have proposed). A damn canal based on a hunch won’t do squat other then piss away yet more dwindling tax dollars.
IT ISN’T FEASIBLE BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE NOT BOGHT CONDOS ON THE RIVER! WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THEY WILL BUY IT THERE?
Besides, we can’t fill the stores we have in our shrinking downtown what makes you think we need even MORE stores at this time? Didn’t we (including YOU) just see the study that shows Windsoris already saturated with retail and cannot accomodate anymore?
But I guess you only give a crap because your restaurants MAY see an increase. I guess if you have money to gamble on this project it is o.k because YOU get the return. What about us who get shit?
I will say one thing. My laywer has already stated he will make sure this expropriation will make the Candarel building look like childs play as there is no reason to do this with little to no business plan for it at all. Interesting because he has pulled all of the studies I have sited above.
Note to self. Don’t type too fast or I will have a ton of typos.
Unfortunately, the canal plan reeks of “gimmik”. One of the reasons that these things are successful elsewhere is that they evolve from local conditions. that’s the case in San Antonio as well as in Milwaukee.
Our efforts should be on sustaining and evolving our core (Ouelette) and riverfront.
It is also difficult to “leverage” these kinds of developments because there is no plan. Plans guide what is to happen, and the logistical order that they should happen in.
What we are in the midst of is reactionary development. Reactionary development typically gets you a) a large vacant parcel years later (see the current western site) or b) a disasterous development that dies relatively quickly (think AutoWorld).
its hard to weigh in on a subject that evokes so many intense comments. basically i’m all for it. the points made against the idea are so vague and riddled with emotions attached to past city decisions and the same old “city of windsor makes bad decisions” argument. there is no doubt that one can question many a past project but many decisions have come to be for the better. the arena for example is a great ending to its saga. placing a community driven structure in the heart of a city neighborhood and moving away from downtown was a great decision. now many eastside businesses are feeling a mini economic boom and the land dubbed as the western super anchor site is still available for big projects like this that can lure tourists and at the same time create retail and residential opportunities. lets stop whining about the canderel building and the police station and other past shortcomings from the city. to say that mark cares because he will benefit from his restaurants being busy so he should like it…..well…… no shit. he has invested in the core. he fights the fight daily to try to make ity and to make windsor.
Looks like ‘Dave’ is determined to make this a costly procedure if this plan goes through.. Who can we blame then? the city, or the lawyers that purposely “will make sure this expropriation will make the Candarel building look like childs play”. Well, Dave, keep reading your conspiracy rags and jump on the anti-everything-the-city-comes-up-with bandwagon. The rest of us will at least try to make something work.
What conspiracy JohnF? The conspiracy to level an existing neighbourhood that could easily be the catalyst for a new Cabbagetown for Windsor? The one the mayor is pushing through in order to repay back-scratches. All for what? A 300 meter piss trough to no where!
If the city wants the canal so bad then why not dig the canal and leave the houses intact? After all, if we can put a man on the moon we should be able to dig a 20ft wide ditch without disturbing peoples homes.
I stated above that if the mayor was so gung-ho for a canal then why not put it down Ouellett Ave? At least it would be tied to a destination?
Interesting that in this city if you oppose one thing you are labelled an “anti-everything”. I have a right to defend my house, my home, my dreams and future.
If I were to state that I believe a waterpark should be built where your house is and you will only get market value at todays prices which is less than what you bought your house for (thanks in part to a none exiting job strategy in this city) would you be so happy to do it? I doubt it!
As have I Rino. But why does an exiting 100 year old village need to be removed to do it? Can they not use it as a base to jump forward?
Why does it have to be a canal instead of a large reflecting pool?
Why not build the urban village as the many studies have paid for and instead use most of that money to invest in the ENTIRE downtown? More fountains, beautification, police, hospitality areas…no one has yet explained how this will bring tourism (would you travel to a city to see a 3 block canal?) or help downtown.
What about our $700 million infrastructure deficit? Are these to be ignored?
Sure, there is emotion to this because it is MY house we are talking about. This is MY neighbourhood that I was promised would be the catalyst for a new urban village by this very city and council. But there are also logical debated questions above that no one has yet answered.
But I guess logic gets trumped if there is any emotion involved.
Dear Dave, I’m sorry but 10 houses hardly make a cabbagetown. Sure, it would be nice to incorporate the old building style into any new development, but I don’t believe that that area has a great deal that is worth saving (I’ll hold make a point of driving by later today to confirm). My point about your anti-council and reading conspiracy theories comes from one of your previous posts about getting your news sources from certain questionable-motivated blogs. (one of which is hardly a blog, seeing that they do not allow people to respond). Ps. the nice homes can be moved to new locations.
I guess its a matter of giving a residents in the area a bigger say but not the entire say. The 5.5 remaining acres belong to the entire city of Windsor, not to mention the College Campus and Art gallery being public institutions and public property.
I have my skepticisms about the canal plan as well, if its done wrong it will be a white elephant, if its done right it can be leveraged for substantial ancillary investment. It can also be used to get Windsorites to stop crapping on their own downtown by changing our perception of it.
Its a new neighborhood and can be created as such with a fresh start.
Here’s my comments from the Radio show
Sure, I’m for the canal, but it’s qualified support and the qualification is tremendous. It won’t work in and of by itself. It will only work if steps are taken to prepare the area to leverage this investment.
Some of those steps
-Completion of the Sustainable downtown plan and implementation of its recommendations,
-Cleaning up and beautifying the parking garages,
-programming of riverfront park,
-zoning massage parlors and after hours bars out of the area and the rest of downtown other than ouellette,
-Dealing with the high crime in the area across university adjacent to the canal site,
-building a farmers market, and
-Implementing recommendations in the Glengarry marentette CIP
Working on the other 120+ recommendations never attempted in the 1995 downtown revitalization plan
Then a canal would work great
Mark, I think you left out the most important part: it must be a part of a bigger plan of connecting Windsor by the most efficient method to the world. The transit station at that location must be leveraged. The new via station proposed for just south of there must be leveraged. Connections to downtown Detroit must be leveraged. Connections between the downtown, the riverside park, and the canal to city neighborhoods thru walkable pedestrian and cyclist friendly improvements must be leveraged.
development charges
infill development
two tier tax rates for the core
I’m willing to accept that there are rare instances where a single infrastructure project can rejuvenate a city centre. I do not think the proposed canal project is an example. I’m not a negative person. I love downtown and feel it’s worth investing in. I just don’t believe that we’ll get the vibrancy we want until we start doing some small things for the existing residents. And if we have to throw around some money for the purpose of legacy making, the Armouries is a much better project.
Windsor has an embarassing history of poorly handled expropriations without much to show for them. I’d much rather have however many nices houses with residents that are dedicated to their neighbourhood.
Tristan, what expropriations? The pals are for an area that is most empty parking lots. It is a prime location in the heart of the city doing nothing for the city. If we develop and rejuvenate in the heart of the city, this means less coco type fringe development. If we put these empty parking lots to work it means more revenues for the city. Three million dollars from the NCAA event this week. How many millions can we expect from redbull? Imagine if we had these empty parking lots working at generating revenues too.
JohnF,
I didn’t say the existing village was a cabbagetown. What I am saying is that it could be part of a greater village with row houses designed to be architecturally sensitive to the remaining area which would make it a cabbagetown like neighbourhood. My apologies for not describing it better.
You are also correct that homes could be moved. But will they? And where to? I wanted to live close to the riverfront but also live downtown. Can the city move my house and give me the land necessary to achieve what I have? What other land would be available to me downtown that won’t have to be expropriated to accomodate me and others who live here?
Edwin, all of those parking lots were homes and businesses that were expropriated in the 1990s. Houses of all sorts of wonderful architecture were plowed under for something that was not thought through. Interesting that yet again an idea springs out of no where and once again the same ideas of leveling a neighbourhood are being sought.
Did Eddie ever campagin on such a massive idea? I think there is more to this issue than meets the eye.
I imagine the area beign leveled and then sits vacant “for the right time”. I also wonder who is really cashiing in on this idea because it is rather odd that a canal to no where is thought up. Did Eddie see this on one of his junkets and decide Windsor needed one? Did he talk about it to Farhi at the wedding of relatives in London (like his meeting with Dwight Duncan in the back of a car while travelling from Pearson Airport)?
If Windsor wants a canal so badly (yet again I will state if people won’t live on the beautiful Detroit river what makes anyone think they will live on a 3 block canal?) then why not put it down Ouellette Ave? Imagaine the impact!! Imagine that it might actually take you to a destination!
And if it is for business then shouldn’t the city fix up what they have first before spending $50 million plus on this idea?
Let me be clear here. I am not opposed to an urban village as it will give the density needed for our downtown. But why clear away an existing neighbourhood where the city has done enough damage the last 15 years by both destruction and neglect. No one has yet to answer my questions. Why dodge them? If the people that are so excited by this prospect want it so badly, and at little cost to their livelyhood and futures (easy to do when you aren’t being affected) then give me answers to my questions.
An urban village is a great idea and I support it. But a canal to no where? Put the money into the existing downtown and watch the transformation. As it it, the city can’t even do a one block streetscape properly and we want to give them the green light to spend $50 million on a hunch?