Winnipeg Construction X - Page 11

LilZebra · #1 Posted **Jul 8, 2019, 11:04 PM**

Cell phone tower atop the old Medical Arts bldg.

cllew · #2 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 12:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LilZebra

Cell phone tower atop the old Medical Arts bldg.

I'm on holidays and not downtown this week, it an actual tower now? I know that MTS has had antenna's on the building corners for years (Google maps street view shows them in 2007)

LilZebra · #3 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 12:41 AM**

Google Maps Streetview - Medical Arts - October 2018

No, it has antennas now that weren't there before the way they are now. I think you meant that they were placed on the corners of the building. Well, now they're in a cluster in the centre.

Didn't have my cell phone camera to snap a quick picture.

lilwayne · #4 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 3:45 AM**

Earls site will be a tower

Portage place 2 towers

Next 5 years well get about 20 new tower proposals for the core... 300 main true north portage place.. forks residential are game changers..

Spocket · #5 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 4:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilwayne

Earls site will be a tower

Portage place 2 towers

Next 5 years well get about 20 new tower proposals for the core... 300 main true north portage place.. forks residential are game changers..

Sorry, Earl's site has a tower proposal? How did I miss this?

lilwayne · #6 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 4:38 AM**

Maybe earls wants to sell the land to a developer than i dunno the details

buzzg · #7 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 4:42 AM**

They do not have a buyer or developer in place yet. They've only just begun to start planning the new location, and are expecting it to be likely 3 years away. Hell, the city hasn't even decided what land it wants to reserve for the eventual exit of BRT coming from Union Station yet – there's a chance there could be ROW stipulations on the north part of the Earls-owned land.

CoryB · #8 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 12:42 PM**

With the increased (current) rail setbacks I cannot see the Earls on Main site ever having a tower. It is going to be too narrow a slice of land.

optimusREIM · #9 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 2:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

With the increased (current) rail setbacks I cannot see the Earls on Main site ever having a tower. It is going to be too narrow a slice of land.

That's too pessimistic. If you own that land and have the right motivation you can totally make it happen.

esquire · #10 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 2:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

That's too pessimistic. If you own that land and have the right motivation you can totally make it happen.

Exactly.

There is a Winnipeg mindset that still exists where anything new seems impossible. Remember when TNS 1 went up and people were saying that would be the last new office tower for a generation? Last few months we got to see the unveiling of Wawanesa's new tower and of course there is whatever Skip is cooking up in the background. These challenges are seldom as insurmountable as they seem.

optimusREIM · #11 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 2:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

Exactly.

There is a Winnipeg mindset that still exists where anything new seems impossible. Remember when TNS 1 went up and people were saying that would be the last new office tower for a generation? Last few months we got to see the unveiling of Wawanesa's new tower and of course there is whatever Skip is cooking up in the background. These challenges are seldom as insurmountable as they seem.

It's cool that Skip wants a little campus but how cool would it be if they put up a giant new tower to house all their employees. They're looking for space for 4,000 is it? Man, they could easily build something to dwarf anything that is currently here. Wawanesa has 19 floors and they expect to house 1,100. A similar parcel of land would yield a 70+ floor tower for Skip. (~300m). Yeah I know it isn't going to happen and that a campus would be better for the city but damn that would be something.

esquire · #12 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 2:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

With the increased (current) rail setbacks I cannot see the Earls on Main site ever having a tower. It is going to be too narrow a slice of land.

There is about 200 ft from Main to the tracks, that's a fair bit of width. Note that the westernmost tracks leading into Union Station have been disused since the current rail underpass was built in 1998... VIA never uses them anymore. So in reality there is nearly 300 ft from Main to the nearest actively used tracks. Seems to me that there is more than enough space for a tower.

wardlow · #13 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 3:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

There is about 200 ft from Main to the tracks, that's a fair bit of width. Note that the westernmost tracks leading into Union Station have been disused since the current rail underpass was built in 1998... VIA never uses them anymore. So in reality there is nearly 300 ft from Main to the nearest actively used tracks. Seems to me that there is more than enough space for a tower.

Yep. I think the current regulations for setbacks from rail lines for residential uses is 30 metres (98'), which wouldn't impact the Earls property. And keep in mind that the required setback is just for residential space - you can have parking/loading structures inside the setback area, as I understand.

***
Hearing of another serious proposal in the works for something tall (20-25 floors), not downtown strictly speaking, but definitely urban.

trueviking · #14 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 3:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wardlow

Yep. I think the current regulations for setbacks from rail lines for residential uses is 30 metres (98'), which wouldn't impact the Earls property. And keep in mind that the required setback is just for residential space - you can have parking/loading structures inside the setback area, as I understand.

The crazy thing is that the setbacks are only residential. You could build an office tower inside the setback. Not sure why a train hitting a building and exploding matters if you are sitting on your couch but not in your cubicle.

trueviking · #15 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 3:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wardlow

Hearing of another serious proposal in the works for something tall (20-25 floors), not downtown strictly speaking, but definitely urban.

interesting...north south east west?

optimusREIM · #16 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 4:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wardlow

Yep. I think the current regulations for setbacks from rail lines for residential uses is 30 metres (98'), which wouldn't impact the Earls property. And keep in mind that the required setback is just for residential space - you can have parking/loading structures inside the setback area, as I understand.

***
Hearing of another serious proposal in the works for something tall (20-25 floors), not downtown strictly speaking, but definitely urban.

Is it going into an area where it could be nimbyied to death?

esquire · #17 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 3:28 PM**

^ Ha! I know it goes against all urban planning orthodoxy and Skip would never do it, but goddamnit I still want it to happen

buzzg · #18 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 4:10 PM**

I hope nest Confusion Corner! Make the most of the TOD potential there, which follows the city master plan for that area.

Wolf13 · #19 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 4:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmacc

Check out the first page of the 300 main thread, it states it as $140 million which includes the $35 million recladding of 360 Main and build of 330 main. I was claimed to be so cheap because the foundation was already in place and it was a steel build instead of concrete.

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/lo...373789981.html

Interesting find... I've never heard that number from anyone internal, and considering the sheer size of the project, I'd think anyone in the industry would laugh at (but looooove to build at) that price. Just not realistic. It's actually laughably low, even with foundation savings, because Artis allegedly spec'd this thing nicely.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...ipeg-1.3524897

That's the initial number I've seen and that actually is tower only, so throw in the central portion too. It's also before plans were complete, so who knows where they came in. Considering the massive cost saving exercises allegedly entertained, you can guess that a $165M + 330Main cost wasn't what happened. I've heard internal numbers noticeably higher for the set budget, but I'm not sure if that's chatter or confirmed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzg

The owner of that lot is Earls.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilwayne

Maybe earls wants to sell the land to a developer than i dunno the details

Considering Earl's hasn't done anything with the land, I'd imagine they'd sell.

borkborkbork · #20 Posted **Jul 9, 2019, 5:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Considering Earl's hasn't done anything with the land, I'd imagine they'd sell.

Isn't there a clock ticking where Earls either has to shit or get off the pot? I thought that land used to belong to the city or centreventure or something and there was a caveat saying it had to be used... this is all pretty foggy memory but I remember people talking about it here when the city rejected Earls last horrible plan