Waterfront Feasibility Study - Hip, Hip, Hooray!!!
The new Waterfront plan feasibility study is a welcome relief for City Center West movement and here’s why.
- It is a privately funded feasibility study at this point, no more, no less.
- It has closure attached with a 3 month timeline. I repeat 90 days ’til we get an answer.
- For once and for all it ends the conjecture and debate on physically and engineering wise, what is and isn’t possible.
- Focuses the area’s development on residential
- Focuses the residential development on a higher demographic required to draw commercial development
- It clearly spells out the role for city and for the private sector in this development at the outset
Are there some landmines along this path and things to poke at? Sure are and here’s a few
- Forget about mayor Francis; Why are the mayoral ambitions of Dave Cooke so closely attached to this project and touted alongside? Doesn’t that once again politicise this project which desperately needs to be arms length?
- Will developers who see this project attached to Dave Cooke feel the bidding process is impartial? that no one will be favored with information?
- shows the myopic vision of having sold one key acre to one developer, again tainting the process against open bidding. Lets hope that Farhi believes that with great power, comes great responsibility.
- Why hold a downtown strategy meeting and not include this? Do we enjoy just wasting people’s time?
BUT THEN AGAIN, SO WHAT? DEAL WITH IT. GIT-R-DONE!!!
Winston Churchill once said that “the phrase nothing but perfection can be spelled P-A-R-A-L-Y-S-I-S” and thats where City Center West has been for decades. Lets get past that
In the end, what remains foremost is that this parcel of land is the only chance for a new distinct neighborhood in the core that can be developed in an “omni-use” way (Thats right, “mixed use” terminologiy has been replaced and upgraded)
Gord seems worried about a “get eddie Posse” coming out against this, or maybe he’s trying to warn them away. Either way, if everyone sticks to the 90 day feasibility study and an open, transparant bidding process are the best and only way to combat any negative feedback. Especially since this plan has been in the works for months and was not mentioned at the Downtown strategy meeting.
Oh, and P.S. everyone should consider the switch to Credit Unions, they are doing more for the local community than the big banks. If we want to talk about the real leadership and credit, thats who should get it.
Post Feedback
Don’t worry, CKLW jumped Gord’s gun and already warned off naysayers from this deal this morning.
I am eager to see the logistics of this whole venture, it could be something good if done right.
Thats the spirit
Were you being sarcastic?
Let’s hope this ends up becoming a reality…. as long as it’s not geared toward only the rich.
A higher demographic would be the best thing for the entire core. That demographic will not only lure more commercial, it will end up being the driving force towards residents associations and other improvements that will benefit the entire area.
Always depends on definition of rich. I’m assuming condo’s that would be in the 200k to 600k range
I probably should have been more detailed in my post. I’m fine with Condo’s and Yacht Clubs…. but I hope that the areas will be open to the public, not just a “members only” type thing. I would like to see something like Charlottetown and Summerside, PEI have with their waterfront developments.
100%. I think the entire principle of this thing is public access so that it is an attraction like San Antonio’s river walk. The purpose is to connect the riverfront to the downtown.
Yes indeed Mark.
Lets hope that Farhi believes that with great power, comes great responsibility.
Ask London’s city council. about that
This is not going to be a gated community so it will be open to all.
One of the biggest questions I have is what will they do with the existing INTACT neighbourhood? There are many fine homes in the area with at least one going for heritage designation. Another house was awarded a Provincial Award for adaptive reuse and there are still a few that are kept in great shape (too bad we couldn’t get the other owners to at least spray their weeds or do a bit of maintenance on their properties).
I will admit this is a very ambitious project but I am perplexed. Will the city want to expropriate the entire area (a bad idea considering this is the LAST existing neighbourhood of the old downtown that is still feasible)?
I will put forth now that I would be one of those affected if they decided to get rid of yet more heritage in this city. With all of the money and time I have put into restoring my house the city if they force me to do so would have to pay me a fairly good sum to vacate my land.
I would rather they try and use as many existing buildings in their plan as possible to not only save the heritage of Windsor but because it also offers the new development a catalyst which to build on. Let’s face it, older homes are some of the most desired when looking for a unique neighbourhood to live in. Cookie-cutter houses and condo’s can be had anywhere but good, old stock houses are becoming rarer by the week.
Another question I have is why would they want to have the canal on Chatham St.? Why not move it further south on Park Ave or in the middle of the 400 block of Janette and Bruce? That area needs to be wiped clean and rebuilt because it will never gentrify due to the amount of absentee landlords and the dearth of drugs and crime in that area.
What better way to rebuild a neighbourhood that would be beneficial to downtown? It could also give a boost to the low-income earners as they would be placed in areas throughout the city. They would have access to better schools, better neighbourhoods and less crime. It would and should pull them out of the cycle of poverty.
As studies have shown ghettoizing low-income earners only exacerbates the cycle of poverty and crime.
Th elast question I have it how would they stop the canal from becoming stagnant and thus a cesspool of standing water with algae blooms, garbage and mosquitos?
I am all for this but not at the cost of destroying the entire existing neighbourhood. If they really want to do tha tI suggest moving the canal south two blocks.
ME, I agree with the stagnation. There needs to be an inlet AND an outlet to maintain a flow!
Also, whatever happened to the Glengarry/Marentette CIP with a marina? This one only allows for a couple dozen boats, and just power boats. The city still needs to capitalize on the water and have a couple hundred or more slips available, aswell as dockage that alows for masts on sailboats. This plan is already somewhat limiting in that way. Are there any boat people involved in this at all?
The whole point of not having the canal end at the cut is to create the flow, I’ll betcha its can be done simply by engineering the flow through waterfalls and levels. I’m guessing that only the cut can be traversed by boat.
The drawings look as though there has already been some engineering input into the equation.
Look, no matter how you cut it, some eggs will be broken to make this omellette. Its just a matter of minimizing the impact. I love older homes as much as the next guy but the alternative to this plan is to wait another few decades.
Personally, I want to see a revitalized downtown in my lifetime. The alternative is not stagnation, its continued ghettofication of the core. The only way you coast is if you’re going downhill.
Live or Die, that is the choice before us right now, nothing less.
Don’t forget kayaks! What a future great place to paddle from and to than in our own front yard. Also I want the gondola concession for the canal! Also what ME said about expanding the canal right across the core, with a huge psuedo source fountain in City Hall square. We’ve ruined the best farm land in Canada with sprawl, at least we can do to honour and preserve the River and its waters and be more thoughtful on how we develop it.
But on an another disconcerting note, I’ve lived to long in this city to believe any plan that has been proposed and never seen fulfilled to its greatest potential. This idea has great potential but I am tired o speculating and dreaming.
Re: stagnant water and canal expansion.
I just took a look at the PDF file attached in the online Star article, and it seems to show two inlets connected, one at the Caron ave cut and the other further east of there. There seems to be a step-lock system going down from the upstream inlet, so maybe stagnation (if this schematic is followed) won’t be a problem.
It would be pretty amazing, too, if during the wintertime it could act like a mini Rideaux-Canal.
Mark, there is no ghettoization in my neighbourhood. In fact the opposite has been happening.
So I can’t see why they can’t leave the older homes intact to build this canal. They could put the diggers right on the street and and move backwards. They don’t have to have access to the sides of the street in order to do this. If engineers can build skyscrapers next to existing houses they can do this.
Besides, why do once again, those who have put their money where their mouth is and have tried to make downtown a better place have to be the last to be told what is going on? There is an existing community here they can just expand around it!
I find it disengenuous of the city to say they want to build a better downtown yet they don’t consult the very residents that have put their time and effort into doing just that.
This can be done and should be done but not for the sake of yet more lost heritage and the shunning of those who, like myself, have pushed to have a better downtown.
I’m kind of torn in between on this idea.
Yes it is a distinctive project that has really big potential.
As long as council stays away and Eddie keeps his word, this time, that he will not be a part of it, then it has a chance.
You know, the accountability and transparency stuff.
The picture has way too many newer buildings drawn uip on it. Maybe there should be some utilization of the heritage buildings if possible.
Okay the dirty side.
Why will this project have only a few months of study yet greenlink, the new crossing and the tunnel deal take years?
The other issue that is still an eyesore is how long will the people in the west end of Windsor have to wait before they can legally tear down thier own garage?
Meanwhile Eddie has proposed a literal flattening of a neighbourhood.
Again it is a great idea, however there are other parts of the city in dire need of assistance.
This is a great use of the land. It’s unique and could really help the entire region out. I’m looking forward to some detail on how the water part would work. I’m guessing locks of some sort. I went and had a look around today and the level of the river must be a good 50 feet below the parking lot on Caron. Anything can be engineered tho.
From what I heard after the press conference water would be pumped 30 feet up to the canal and then it would flow downhill until it reached a waterfall over the cut
Huh? water pumper up and in? then out and over a waterfall? a lock system too?? seems a stretch …
Mark! how far would 60million go to get the marina at glengarry/marentette to happen? Is that CIP all for not? Does nobody see the benefit of having a marina/boat access downtown?
Trust me Sporto, no one has shouted more than I to implement ALL shelved community Improvement Plans.
I do not like the idea of pitting one against the other but if you have to, then this is why 60 million might be considered more beneficial of an investment into City Center West.
1. When the first Marina was proposed downtown the CAW vigorously opposed it due ot the fact it would be fenced off and limit riverfront access to the so called “Rich boat owners”.
Whereas the CAW vigorously supports the City Center West Canal program.
So you have widespread community support for one marina vs. limited support for the 2nd
2. The city has more acreage of land next to city center west as well as more development opportunities.
But in the end, infrastructure should be provided for both developments. The community Improvement Plan for Glengarry Marentette does not rely exclusively on the marina. There’s a whole host of recommendations that could be implemented on Glengarry Marentette. City Center West could also be model for the neighborhood development
Mark with all due respect who gives a shit what the CAW supports? This has nothing to do with them. This has EVERYTHING to do with the residents it will affect and the developers and those downtown.
Why can’t we have both the existing neighbourhood and the new proposal giving the option to landowners of taking a buyout or having thier houses moved and incorporated into the new design?
By the way I agree that BOTH should be developed.
Wouldn’t it be nice to see Windsor ask Ontario Infrastructure for the $75 million for this development instead of using for the right to operate (NOT OWN) the Detroit side of the tunnel? It seems a much better use of taxpayers dollars with a much better return.
Widespread community support includes the CAW.
I hope we can have both as well. Now, it is just my inference but I really felt a signal that the City was going to be in the providing infrastructure business and leave the development to the developers which includes property acquisition.
I also agree that this would be a far better use of provincial infrastructure funds. In fact I wish the province would specifically make infill development projects, densification and gentrification a criteria for that infrastructure funds so that it actually CAN’t be used to finance sprawl.
A citizen does the math on the canal!
Ed Arditti’s blog; Windsor City blog: http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/ has a letter to Ed from what seems a very mathematical inclined citizen:
In the August 6th blog, item number 2 in the blog Letters Part 2 the citizen states:
“…just suppose we were to decide that a header would provide a water discharge into the canal system at the easterly end from an 18″ diameter pipe at a flow rate of 600 feet per minute.
Area = 3.14159 * 9 * 9 square inches
= 254 square inches
converted to square feet
= 254/(12 * 12)
= 1.76 square feet.
With the proposed flow rate this would be 600 * 1.76 cubic feet per minute = 1056 cubic feet per minute.
A standard year is 365.25 days (counting the leap year as a portion of each year) so we could say a standard month would be 365.25/12 or 30.44 days.
To get the monthly water volume required with this scenario we would multiply 30.44 days * 24 hours per day * 60 minutes per hour.
This works out to 43,834 minutes per month. The water volume required then is 46,288,704 cubic feet per month.
Most people are more familiar with gallons or liters.
In gallons this is 289,304,400 per month.
In liters this is 1,289,140,400 month.”
And….”Industrial use of water is much higher so it would be safer to state that it would increase the water demands about equal to the residential water load. Is the City of Windsor going to pay $450,000 dollars a month to WUC for the use of water and the summer levy?”"
The above math probably will be missing from the feasibility study!