As it is the weekend, there has been little development on the official-end of the story. I have been ‘rallying the troops’ so to speak, trying get people to voice their protest against building a large high rise right beside the gate. So far, I think, the numbers are encouraging. As of now there are 46 names. Within Canada, the majority of these people are obviously in Winnipeg; but there are also people in Kitchener, Edmonton, Vancouver, Toronto, St. George, Victoria, St. Andrew’s, and Starbuck. There is even a vote from Pasig City in the Philippines. So clearly there are people outside of Winnipeg who agree that this is a bad decision. Do you wish to sign it too? http://siteocanada.start-a-petition.com

But it is not enough to simply slam it as bad and leave it as that. There is nothing worse than destroying a solution without fixing the problem. That is why I congratulate Winnipeg Free Press columnist Gordon Sinclair for the article he wrote last week on a proposed ‘land swap’ with the development company, for a river lot just down the street. Even better was that the developer has expressed willingness to consider a compromise - this truly would be a ‘win-win’ situation in my opinion. For this I also applaud him, for his sensitiveness to a community against this proposed development. It also means that public out-cry is working, and that there is hope that an amiable solution can be attained. Lets all hope for that.

I came across a debate on this issue on a website called “New Winnipeg Community.” Some very good points were made, on both ends I think; instead of signing up on the site I’m just going to leave a commentary here. One member said:

Should the city sell the downtown land regarded as the birthplace of Winnipeg to a private developer?

Like I asked elsewhere:
Just how many “birthplace of Winnipeg”s are there?
-The Forks is the birthplace of Winnipeg
-Portage and Main is the birthplace of Winnipeg (why, oh why were they short-sighted and develop on that corner for “short-term financial gain” over the past 145 years?
-Point Douglas is the birthplace of Winnipeg (again, why did they allow people to live on that important historic site?)
-What’s today the east Exchange District could be considered the “birthplace of Winnipeg”, because that’s where a handful of settlers set up free-market commerce and trade on their land from 1849 to the mid-1860s, when commerce moved over to Portage and Main
-Upper Fort Garry is now, too? What about Fort Douglas, Rouge or Gibralter?

If we did not build anywhere adjacent to historic sites, all of downtown would be a giant park.

I have to admit that he does have a point; If we were too paranoid about our historical buildings and building new ones next to them (or over them) we would have a huge giant park downtown. This is funny to imagine, but ridiculous to discuss. There is in no way a movement to make, or even an opinion that there should be, a giant park downtown. The one thing that Heritage Winnipeg strives for is to feed on this economic excitement that has always seemed to characterize our downtown; not drown it in a large historic site. Don’t be silly. They don’t want to wall of these buildings, they want them to be an active part of Winnipeg; some of our most historic buildings are currently used - one must only take a stroll down Portage Avenue to see this. I am an historian at heart, and so I know that I am not as sympathetic to the argument of new buildings as some others may be. I do not see why we cannot continue to use these buildings, and respect their history as well as take a part of it. The Ashdown building’s history did not end when the hardware business moved out. We are not removed from history - we are an active part of it. We live in history, both the history that we create and that has been created for us.

However, I want to focus on the commenter’s major issue: “how many birthplaces of Winnipeg are there?” This, to me, shows an introduction to Winnipeg history backed by a major ignorance of it. For starters, the areas he mentioned are all part of a common area within the city, where all the major events that led to the city’s founding happened, starting with the North West Company, or further back the arrival of the French and Fort Rouge, or even farther back the use of the site as a native trading grounds. There are all part of the common birthplace of Winnipeg. But what the person who wrote this does not understand is that Upper Fort Garry is the only remaining relic to the beginnings of the city. Yes, there are numerous old buildings downtown that need cultural protection - but those were all after the advent (and decline) of UFG. Our history stems from the fur-trade and trading companies like the NWC and the HBC. The first seeds of settlement were the Red River Settlers, but before that there was European occupation by the Montreal controlled NWC at Fort Gibraltar - of which no physical remains of the original structure remain. UFG grew out of this struggle for trade in the region, and was the first sign of European permanence in the area. So yes, all of those areas mentioned are considered pieces of Winnipeg’s birthplace, but no one has ever suggested changing it all into a park. If one listens to what is being fought for, it is the retention of these buildings and their continued use within an active community - not to separate and alienate it.

But it can be argued, perhaps, that this is what is proposed to be done with the gate - create a park around it. For starters, what is so wrong with that? Are we so arrogant and proud of our own day that we turn our backs on the past and the physical relics of those that have given us our history? This is really such a small concession to make to the past, and it will have a wonder of effects in the future. A people that is in touch with their history is far more rich than those that are not. A city is given a certain charm to visitors and inhabitants, and the whole place seems to exude an air of permanence. These are all just words I realize, and may only serve to rally those already on my side while inviting scorn from those who oppose. But to me it seems that some people think Friends of Upper Fort Garry simply want the land to make a park, of the same kind of Bonnycastle, which one has called “a passive park.” This is telling of our current mind frame: If there are not attractions or flashing lights or something to distract us, it is useless. I personally feel that Bonnycastle park is one of the city’s best - small, quite, close to the river, and surrounded by the past.

Fort Garry Gate Park will be the same deal, except with a Gate. I don’t see what you could achieve in an entire square block that you couldn’t achieve with half. It’s not like this is some idyllic piece of green pasture - it’s an urban block surrounded by two of the busiest streets in the City.

We shouldn’t pretend it’s something it isn’t.

An ignorance, to me, of what FUFG plans to do with the site. “Look - one of the proposed highrises leaves all the room you want for a huge park.” To see what he is referring to, follow this link: http://www.corbettcibinel.com/images/uploads/100MainStr%20aj2.jpg. I’m sure people will agree with me that this statement cannot be honestly heartfelt. Its like sharing the remaining scraps of a nice dinner with a friend and saying they both got what they wanted. To me this is a matter of respect, to the fort that saw and spurred the growth of this city. Also another plan of the proposal: http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c222/cvist/100mainB.jpg. This might look okay, but I just do not think that it is right to build such a high rise building, that will dwarf the fort, right beside it. “It is possible for hertiage sites to coexist with modern buildings, but not here. We should turn it into park.” With that I totally agree. I think what the problem is is that people simply think FUFG and Heritage Winnipeg wants only to make a park with a reconstruction of part of the fort. I was personally baffled when I read that one of the proposed high rises “leaves all the room you want for a huge park.” That blue outline makes it seem like we would actually get a lot - except that the building on 100 Main Street would remain, half of the fort’s space would still be lost to Main Street, and the curling club would still remain. What are we left with? I would offer that these people don’t realize what is proposed for the site. Not another park to amble about, gazing at the nice reconstructed walls (which to me is a great idea enough, though I realize my own bias is at work there), but a world-class interpretive historical site for locals and tourists. And what I hope to accomplish in my petition is to not only show that there is a strong sentiment within Winnipeg that the city’s current plans should not be carried out, but that there are also people outside of Winnipeg that are concerned about this. But what is it that they propose? Check it out - http://www.heritagewinnipeg.com/advocacy/fortGarry.htm.

For those of you who haven’t signed the petition to try and reverse City Council’s decision, and you would like to, please visit http://siteocanada.start-a-petition.com and add your name. Also, spread the word of this petition to all that you can. We need as much voices as we can to show how big of an issue this is.

Sorry, but I did not give the link to the website that I centered this discussion upon. Here it is: http://www.newwinnipeg.com/community/discussion/1472/condos-at-citys-birthplace/

Thank you!

- JGM

I have begun a petition asking the City of Winnipeg to reconsider its decision mentioned in my previous posts. It is online at http://siteocanada.start-a-petition.com. Please visit the site and sign it, and get others to sign it if you are able. Thank you very much!

Also, it appears that after an editorial article in the Winnipeg Free Press this last week, the head of the development company that is planning to build the apartment block is willing to consider moving the site just a short distance from the proposed site. This is very encouraging news, as the company is willing to reconsider its placement of the building. There is still hope for a beneficial resolution in which both parties will actually win.

-JGM

There has been a significant public backlash in the last couple of days on the news that the land surrounding Upper Fort Garry will be given over mostly to a commercial firm who will be building a 15-storey apartment block on the site. The remaining land would be sold to those who wish to develop Upper Fort Garry. I was pleased to hear that there was such a response. I was also very pleased to hear from the descendant of one of Winnipeg’s ‘big names’, who also believes that this plan is very much flawed.

I have been in contact with the group - Friends of Upper Fort Garry - who is one of the main public voices against the city going forward in this development. In the very near future I will be starting a petition to give to the Friends of Upper Fort Garry to forward to the City of Winnipeg. I realize that the number of people who read this site is very limited, but I believe that all support is valuable in this case - every voice counts. Those from Winnipeg who wish to express their support for the City not going ahead with this plan are encouraged to contact me at malekjon’alt’shaw.ca. But, I also strongly encourage those not from Winnipeg to email me with their support for this initiative. The City must see that this is not just a local concern. Upper Fort Garry has played a very historical role on the civil, provincial, and national level. Even so on the inter-national level, as Winnipeg (thus Fort Garry) has for a long time been a major trade center, a place which was secured by the position and importance of the Fort. So please email me if you would be interested in giving your support to this fight against allowing the city to sell the property surrouding Upper Fort Garry to be developed into another apartment block, casting the Fort in yet more shadows.

Also, as a commentary to something I read in a Winnipeg Sun article today: Mayor Sam Kates was quoted as saying, “I’m of the opinion that the majority of people who are commenting on this are not aware of the fact, No. 1, there was a completely open and public process,” he said, explaining the land was declared surplus during a public council meeting in 2006.” I agree with this 100%. I, who so loves the small remnant of Upper Fort Garry, did not know of this. However, I might like to add a small bit to this statement. There is a fellow down the street from looking for one reason or another to get a zoning variance to his property; as far as I know, I would not have become aware about this, except for a little sign posted on his property, although it would have been open to the public just as much as the discussion on the property of Upper Fort Garry. My point is this: why is it that I, a regular citizen of Winnipeg who is not involved in the political workings of the City, know more about the “open and public process” regarding a neglible piece of private land than I did about such a monumental decision in regards to the city’s history? The degree to which a people recognize and appreciate their history is reflected by the way they treat their historical relics. Yes, we have a lot of historic buildings, especially in our downtown. But I challenge anyone to tell me which architectural relic captures the spirit of Winnipeg’s history? What building started the excitement at the Forks that grew into the great city of Winnipeg? What building was place to so many historical events, not only of Manitoba, but Canada? I think it is a down right shame that the public was not given more notice about this. Announcing this “during a public council meeting in 2006″ is the same as mentioning it under one’s breath.

There has been a development in the story of the proposed development of the Upper Fort Garry gate in Winnipeg, MB. For information on what was planned by an organization named “Friends of Upper Fort Garry,” follow this link: http://www.heritagewinnipeg.com/advocacy/fortGarry.htm They have on this site a nice .pdf file that explains in detail the proposal. Apparently the City had put out a call for people to submit proposals to build up the land surrounding the Gate. If anyone has seen it, they will already know how horribly cramped the Gate is already; but the city has agreed to in essence split the reward of the contract in two, between Friends of Upper Fort Garry and a company called Crystal Developers. This is apparently a win-win situation, though I can’t help but feel it is only a half victory. I have only had the opportunity to briefly read on the story, so I will not be too stingy about my criticism on this decision, because I also must keep in mind financial matters and other concerns of the city. But, the point of the matter is that this fort has been poorly treated by the city since its demolition commenced in 1881. It has been the efforts of individual and non-governmental groups who have largely saved the only remaining relic from Winnipeg’s birth - the Gate - from being torn down or neglected. It is, to me, a sign of disrespect; in the shadow of the Upper Fort Garry and the presence of the HBC Winnipeg grew up, and for a time was the greatest city in Canada West. The Fort housed the Assiniboia council, one of the formative governmental bodies in Manitoba, as well as Louis Riel’s provisional government during his rebellion. It is currently cramped enough - Fort Garry Mall and Hotel cast shadow, while a gas station ruins the ambience of the small park. Granted the presence of the Manitoba Club - an historical presence itself - makes it a little more bearable, though the buildings to the south only add to the sore. Add this to the litter and graffiti and you get one neglected - yet highly important - historical site. To throw a 15-storey apartment block is not going to make it better.

However, the Friends of Upper Fort Garry are still getting something, which is worth being excited about. They intend to reconstruct the two south towers of the fort, as well as a section of the wall (as I understand), and make an interpretation/historical section explaining the site and its worth. According to the Winnipeg Free Press story (which I will post shortly) what is being given to the project is a far cry from what they planned. Nevertheless, it is good to know that the area is getting civic attention and will hopefully be cleaned up and built up.

Winnipeg Free Press article: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/story/3974425p-4591054c.html

I would love to hear your comments on what you think of the difference between the original proposal for the Fort Garry Gate and what looks like they will be granted.