Winnipeg | Forks Redevelopment | Parcel 4 - Rail Side Initiative | Proposals

[bomberjet]

Let the professional developers make the decision on where they want to spend money. Not Johnny O and the band at City Hall. If they want to build something below grade, let them. If not, it's all good.

The City sticks their nose where it doesn't belong and things do get (hot) messy.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Let the professional developers make the decision on where they want to spend money. Not Johnny O and the band at City Hall. If they want to build something below grade, let them. If not, it's all good.

The City sticks their nose where it doesn't belong and things do get (hot) messy.

This.

And this dig is nonsense.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

And this dig is nonsense.

Lurnin' stuff is dumb!!

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by pspeid

Lurnin' stuff is dumb!!

There's a time and a place, and sure enough, only Manitobans would find a way to swing an anthropologist into this mess.

This is a development. So onward with development. Lots of other places to learn, and this whimsical class experiment could have been conducted decades prior. A decision was made with the lands, let's go. That's what happens in the adult world. Unless it's Winnipeg.

[Temperance]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

There's a time and a place, and sure enough, only Manitobans would find a way to swing an anthropologist into this mess.

This is a development. So onward with development. Lots of other places to learn, and this whimsical class experiment could have been conducted decades prior. A decision was made with the lands, let's go. That's what happens in the adult world. Unless it's Winnipeg.

I'm a bit baffled by this discussion. Isn't it pretty routine to do archaeological digs before these types of developments? It's not unique to Manitoba at all. Also it's not any real impediment to development - just a short delay. Seems quite reasonable to ensure that historical/cultural artefacts are not lost.

[Wigglez]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

There's a time and a place, and sure enough, only Manitobans would find a way to swing an anthropologist into this mess.

This is a development. So onward with development. Lots of other places to learn, and this whimsical class experiment could have been conducted decades prior. A decision was made with the lands, let's go. That's what happens in the adult world. Unless it's Winnipeg.

This seems like a well informed and well educated opinion and not at all embarrassing.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by Wigglez

This seems like a well informed and well educated opinion and not at all embarrassing.

I would say the embarrassing part are the naive taunts referring to archaeological research as a "whimsical class experiment" and goading it's proponents to accept the "adult world". This is more the sign of a petulant minor having a hissy fit after being told they must eat their veggies before getting their cake, rather than a serious discussion on this new development.

I agree with Temperance. The fact this discussion is even happening is baffling. I would invite people to review the provincial Heritage Resources Act for the pertinent laws in this situation.

And for the record, every province in the country has laws that govern this, as do many nations around the world. How anyone can suggest that this is somehow a "fault" that is unique to Manitoba is sheer fantasy.

[bomberjet]

Don't even look at development in BC if you don't like slow process and archaeology. Literally stop the machines mid project, we've found some artifacts. Which is great IMO.

Spending a few months collecting artifacts at the forks should be a no brainer.

[GarryEllice]

Not to pile on, but if a concrete example helps, the ongoing St. Lawrence Market North development in Toronto was preceded by a lengthy archaeological dig. I guess nobody told them that you only have to do that in Manitoba.

[buzzg]

A dig was happening here from day 1, it's been part of The Forks bylaws since the day The Forks was created. And it's actually not holding up TFNP's plans at all, as the dig location wasn't supposed to be developed for at least 15 years. The hold ups at Railside have nothing to do with the dig.

[Spocket]

What's the big hurry? Once we build something on the land, we'll have to wait what, 100 years or so for the next chance to roll around unless the city council of the future decides to give the buildings heritage status. I'm sure we can spare a few months, no?

[bomberjet]

100% we can spare a few months.

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

There's a time and a place, and sure enough, only Manitobans would find a way to swing an anthropologist into this mess.

This is a development. So onward with development. Lots of other places to learn, and this whimsical class experiment could have been conducted decades prior. A decision was made with the lands, let's go. That's what happens in the adult world. Unless it's Winnipeg.

Please tell us more about this adult world you speak of, where sites in, uh, National Historic Sites are not not closely examined for possible artifacts of er, national historic significance.

[EdwardTH]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

There's a time and a place, and sure enough, only Manitobans would find a way to swing an anthropologist into this mess.

This is a development. So onward with development. Lots of other places to learn, and this whimsical class experiment could have been conducted decades prior. A decision was made with the lands, let's go. That's what happens in the adult world. Unless it's Winnipeg.

Stantec did an archaeological assessment as part of the rehabilitation of Parliament's centre block a few years ago:
https://buyandsell.gc.ca/cds/public/...70.ATTA014.PDF

Archaeological assessments are also a regular occurrence for pipeline, dams, etc... but yeah, TOTALLY just a silly Winnipeg thing...

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by EndoftheBeginning

They updated the map showing the dig locations.

This is basically the footprint of the proposed "tech" building going on Parcel Four. One big building, eight storeys. Pretty glassy, campus-y, not terrible design. Haven't seen colour elevations though.

Unfortunately includes surface parking with about 150' of street frontage at the NW corner of the property. So anyone waiting around for some great future pedestrian corridor between the Forks and Portage and Main...

[Biff]

They are looking at just over 300,000 sq ft of space for this building.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

They are looking at just over 300,000 sq ft of space for this building.

To put it into some context:

333 Main (aka Bell MTS) - 168,537 sf
201 Portage - 505,960 sf

So a little over 300,000 sf is very substantial by Winnipeg standards. This will probably appear to be a hulking beast of a building at 8 storeys... you could say it might be like a modern version of the Grain Exchange Building, which is 11 storeys and 250,000 sf.

Interesting that it's just one building, though.

EDIT: Maybe a better analogue is the Great West Life Building on Osborne, which is basically a horizontal skyscraper at 5 storeys, 320,000 sf.

[buzzg]

Unless its just a small accessory lot as shown in the Railside plan, I doubt TFNP would approve any remotely large surface lot. They have final say here.

[esquire]

^ Anything more than a loading zone would be counter to what FNP has been doing with the Forks for the last 20+ years.

[bomberjet]

Based on the NW corner of the lot thing. I would assume the surface parking will be between the existing access/approach at the tracks, which is being maintained, and the new building.