HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #201  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 3:19 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
I don't get how CentreVenture, an "arms-length agency", can have unabated control over anything. Who holds them accountable, the mayor?

Sure I can email their reception ffs lol. Which will likely do nothing. Who voted on this, the board of directors? Was is a majority vote or some other requirements? Without getting into the nitty gritty, seems their is some internal disagreement there on the final outcome.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #202  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 4:43 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
From the website: http://www.centreventure.com/market-...gn-competition

The following Jury members have prepared this final report and are unanimous in their selection of the
winning proponent:
Bruce Kuwabara, Founding Principal, KPMB Architects Toronto
Eladia Smoke, Principal, Smoke Architecture, Hamilton
Angela Mathieson, President & CEO, CentreVenture, Winnipeg
John Kiernan, Director, Planning, Property and Development, City of Winnipeg, Winnipeg
Alan Tate, Professor and Head of Landscape Architecture, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg
Zephyra Vun, Executive Director, Design Quarter Winnipeg, Winnipeg
Annitta Stenning, CEO, CancerCare Manitoba Foundation, Winnipeg.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #203  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 5:01 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Ah, yes. Right. Thanks Biff.

Seems like a group of smart people. Must be focused on business rather than functionality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #204  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 6:49 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
Download the Jury Report -

https://storage.googleapis.com/wzuku...21%20FINAL.pdf

It is only 8 pages (with pictures) so it is a short read.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #205  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 7:07 PM
pspeid's Avatar
pspeid pspeid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
Download the Jury Report -

https://storage.googleapis.com/wzuku...21%20FINAL.pdf

It is only 8 pages (with pictures) so it is a short read.
Thanks for posting this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #206  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 7:07 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Thanks again Biff.

It's interesting how they mention the connection to the northern half of the site for one of the submissions. And the winning submission mentions how it blocks the entire northern area of the site. So they were aware of this and chose to ignore it, mentioning it would be handled by the architects..



It seems most of the issues had to do with the market either being incorporated into the overall buildings too much (not stand alone), sunlight not getting to the market with the mixed use building placed on the east property line, and definable public plaza area. We'll see how she goes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #207  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 7:46 PM
cheswick's Avatar
cheswick cheswick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: South Kildonan
Posts: 2,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
Thanks again Biff.

It's interesting how they mention the connection to the northern half of the site for one of the submissions. And the winning submission mentions how it blocks the entire northern area of the site. So they were aware of this and chose to ignore it, mentioning it would be handled by the architects..



It seems most of the issues had to do with the market either being incorporated into the overall buildings too much (not stand alone), sunlight not getting to the market with the mixed use building placed on the east property line, and definable public plaza area. We'll see how she goes.
I think all that means is they had to prioritize certain aspects over others and none were perfect.

Another comment made a couple of times were the buildings in the designs didn't fit in well with the surrounding neighbourhood. That the surrounding neighbourhood consisted of really square buildings.
__________________
There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #208  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 8:04 PM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 595
Thanks for posting that, but tbh their explanation is mostly fluff. Light, clarity, simple, blah blah blah.

They lost me at their opening statement:

The Jury was most impressed with the clarity of the proposal – an elegant Market Building on a bold new square with a visibly sustainable residential building to the north of the site creating a strong, commendable and appreciated response to the context, particularly the urban grain and morphology of the site creating a clear continuation northward of the continuation of Albert Street and Old Market Square.

"Bold" new square? It is simply a flat rectangle.

"Visibly sustainable"? Is that really a priority over having a sustainable development that isn't necessarily visible?

I totally disagree with the "commendable" response to the context and urban grain. I can't even believe they'd write that.

"creating a clear continuation northward of the continuation of Albert Street and Old Market Square"....Uhhhhh, ANY of the design would have achieved this simply because it was required that the south portion of this site be public/market space!

Just as I expected their explanation would be a load of finesse and fluff. Whatever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #209  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 8:11 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
I think all that means is they had to prioritize certain aspects over others and none were perfect.

Another comment made a couple of times were the buildings in the designs didn't fit in well with the surrounding neighbourhood. That the surrounding neighbourhood consisted of really square buildings.
Which is fair. Like others have mentioned, the entire north half of the site is now detached from the southern portion. If this is what they prioritized, then they did it. They didn't really need a design competition to come up with this.

Basically the priority was to have the market in full sunlight all the time and have the building detached from the other buildings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris22 View Post
Thanks for posting that, but tbh their explanation is mostly fluff. Light, clarity, simple, blah blah blah.

They lost me at their opening statement:

The Jury was most impressed with the clarity of the proposal – an elegant Market Building on a bold new square with a visibly sustainable residential building to the north of the site creating a strong, commendable and appreciated response to the context, particularly the urban grain and morphology of the site creating a clear continuation northward of the continuation of Albert Street and Old Market Square.

"Bold" new square? It is simply a flat rectangle.

"Visibly sustainable"? Is that really a priority over having a sustainable development that isn't necessarily visible?

I totally disagree with the "commendable" response to the context and urban grain. I can't even believe they'd write that.

"creating a clear continuation northward of the continuation of Albert Street and Old Market Square"....Uhhhhh, ANY of the design would have achieved this simply because it was required that the south portion of this site be public/market space!

Just as I expected their explanation would be a load of finesse and fluff. Whatever.
This is also my take, a lot of fluff. This is how I find a lot of the Cities public engagement strategies go. Lots of fluff out there for the public to ogle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #210  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 9:28 PM
DonaldSmith's Avatar
DonaldSmith DonaldSmith is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Wpg, Mb
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
Download the Jury Report -

https://storage.googleapis.com/wzuku...21%20FINAL.pdf

It is only 8 pages (with pictures) so it is a short read.
Too bad no one we know is on the Centre Venture Board. Specifically, someone who is opposed to it. It would also help if they were the chair.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #211  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2019, 9:55 PM
asher__jo asher__jo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by headhorse View Post
centreventure is accountable to developers, not citizen's, so I doubt they care about anything planners or the public say. weird thing for a publicly funded corp.
Any proposal will still be voted on by city council, so the public does have the last say.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #212  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2019, 5:56 PM
pspeid's Avatar
pspeid pspeid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1,704
I once worked at a company where we would regularly monitor and evaluate the performance of our telephone representatives. Whenever we did this as a group of 15-20 people, the group's evaluation would inevitably rate our rep's performance as "terrible" after our group discussions, despite the fact that initial individual evaluations tended to rate the rep as "average". As a group, we tended to dissect the rep's performance in the smallest detail, and nip-pick every small error until they became magnified in our minds.

I kind of see that happening here. When the "final five" plans were first posted, I think most people rated what became the "winning" plan as "middle of the pack"; maybe not the best, but not the worst. Now, in some people's minds, it's an abomination and a tragedy.

I personally still stand by my initial reaction, which was kind of "meh". Not the best choice, but not the worst either. I think there have been some good observations to try to give the plan a little more "sizzle", but overall I don't think it's a terrible design.

IMO-The alignment of the apartment block seems to be a major point of contention, but I think it has some positives. It gives the RRC more visibility from King and Main streets. The apartment that face south will have great views, but the north-facting apartments will have it pretty bleak until the rest of the area is developed. The market stalls themselves will depend greatly on the vendors that use them and the hours of operation, no mater what they look like. The RRC end of the apartments (glass) will, I think, have a nice "airy" fell, but the King Street side may need a large piece of art to make it interesting. I think it's a good opportunity for a colourful mural or mosaic to give the area a sense of identity.

Of course, the conceptual drawings are not always the final form. I will be interested to see what that looks like.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #213  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2019, 9:22 PM
OTA in Winnipeg's Avatar
OTA in Winnipeg OTA in Winnipeg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Silver Heights
Posts: 1,614
I heard yesterday that there's a complete redesign underway so where you see Urban Shaman it will only be one floor opening up that part of the streetscape. The plan is to then have an open deck above for events, etc. and projecting images/artwork onto the east side of the building.
__________________
Fill downtown with people in all kinds of housing. Anyway possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #214  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2019, 9:57 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by pspeid View Post
I once worked at a company where we would regularly monitor and evaluate the performance of our telephone representatives. Whenever we did this as a group of 15-20 people, the group's evaluation would inevitably rate our rep's performance as "terrible" after our group discussions, despite the fact that initial individual evaluations tended to rate the rep as "average". As a group, we tended to dissect the rep's performance in the smallest detail, and nip-pick every small error until they became magnified in our minds.

I kind of see that happening here. When the "final five" plans were first posted, I think most people rated what became the "winning" plan as "middle of the pack"; maybe not the best, but not the worst. Now, in some people's minds, it's an abomination and a tragedy.

I personally still stand by my initial reaction, which was kind of "meh". Not the best choice, but not the worst either. I think there have been some good observations to try to give the plan a little more "sizzle", but overall I don't think it's a terrible design.

IMO-The alignment of the apartment block seems to be a major point of contention, but I think it has some positives. It gives the RRC more visibility from King and Main streets. The apartment that face south will have great views, but the north-facting apartments will have it pretty bleak until the rest of the area is developed. The market stalls themselves will depend greatly on the vendors that use them and the hours of operation, no mater what they look like. The RRC end of the apartments (glass) will, I think, have a nice "airy" fell, but the King Street side may need a large piece of art to make it interesting. I think it's a good opportunity for a colourful mural or mosaic to give the area a sense of identity.

Of course, the conceptual drawings are not always the final form. I will be interested to see what that looks like.
That's just it. It's meh. This is supposed be transformative. If that just means putting up buildings on the site, again don't really need a competition for that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #215  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2019, 1:48 AM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg View Post
I heard yesterday that there's a complete redesign underway so where you see Urban Shaman it will only be one floor opening up that part of the streetscape. The plan is to then have an open deck above for events, etc. and projecting images/artwork onto the east side of the building.
Thanks for this info. I won't get my hopes up for a "complete" redesign, but based on what you said it sounds like there will be some improvements.

Kinda funny to have an international design competition, pick a winner, then tell them their design is shit and you'd like it redone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #216  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2019, 3:16 PM
pspeid's Avatar
pspeid pspeid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris22 View Post

Kinda funny to have an international design competition, pick a winner, then tell them their design is shit and you'd like it redone.
The winning design is terrible. Changing the design is insulting to the design we hate.

Let's all just gripe about stuff.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #217  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2019, 3:30 PM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by pspeid View Post
The winning design is terrible. Changing the design is insulting to the design we hate.

Let's all just gripe about stuff.

Haha I was just pointing out how messy this seems when there were other great designs just sitting there. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for changing the design we hate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #218  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2019, 3:43 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
I guess this begs the question, what would everyone prefer to see?

The larger building split up so there is access to the northern half of the site?
Why there is a roadway running through the middle of the site? Is that good or bad?
Include the northern half in this planning exercise so the site is cohesive?
Something more with the market itself?
What else?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #219  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2019, 3:47 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
All this talk of "re-design". Is it really a re-design or is it the "actual" design which is occurring? The design competition created a conceptual design that now needs to be turned into an actual working building. The bones of the winning design will be kept with the added changes from the input of the competition critique.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #220  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2019, 3:55 PM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
I guess this begs the question, what would everyone prefer to see?

The larger building split up so there is access to the northern half of the site?
Why there is a roadway running through the middle of the site? Is that good or bad?
Include the northern half in this planning exercise so the site is cohesive?
Something more with the market itself?
What else?
I think for me it's the orientation of everything in the site, which effects all the things you mentioned. I much preferred the designs that maintained the street wall along Princess, then had the market along King. That in turn opened up the site northward.

I supposed I don't really understand the huge emphasis the committee put on needing full sunlight, as long as possible, on the market site. This is not a park were you sit. It's a shopping area. There aren't even areas marked out for lounging around in the winning design.

I don't see the need for streets/loading zones/curb cuts going right through the site. Loading can be on the inside lanes of King and Princess

The monolithic nature of the high-rise is dated and visually unappealing to me.

Honestly I feel like we all already expressed on the last few pages what we would like to see at the site so I feel like I am just repeating myself.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:40 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.