Winnipeg Construction X - Page 556

borkborkbork · #**11101** Posted **Mar 2, 2024, 3:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riverman

Remember, the members of the Mclub run the city. They are not to be told what to do.

do the friends of upper fort garry still "run" the park? because that dumb LED storytelling art/signage thing has been broken for months

WinCitySparky · #**11102** Posted **Mar 2, 2024, 3:41 AM**

I believe Richardson owns the commercial spaces directly under their building/courtyard. I did work there 14 years ago and we were working down there and on multiple floors at the same time doing various renovations and I believe I recall Richardson being the customer for all of it.

cllew · #**11103** Posted **Mar 2, 2024, 2:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinCitySparky

I believe Richardson owns the commercial spaces directly under their building/courtyard. I did work there 14 years ago and we were working down there and on multiple floors at the same time doing various renovations and I believe I recall Richardson being the customer for all of it.

You are correct its all part of what is known as the Richardson Centre which also includes the parking structure and 161 Portage Ave E building, and is managed by BentallGreenOak

WinCitySparky · #**11104** Posted **Mar 3, 2024, 2:25 AM**

Yes Bentall thank you

trueviking · #**11105** Posted **Mar 3, 2024, 4:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by borkborkbork

i wonder what artis, richardson and harvard think of this. i would imagine that they would benefit overall but also have a harder time leasing their basement level retail spaces since they're no longer connected to anything

(or is all the retail under P&M in city-owned property?)

I think Richardson, Harvard and whoever owns the MTS building will be upset by the idea of disconnecting them from the skywalk system. That is a significant hit to their leaseability. Being on the skywalk was the entire reason Wawanesa moved from Broadway. It's not about the few shops under their buildings, but more about the indoor connectivity for their office workers to the rest of downtown.

They will have to find a solution to this before they close it, I think.

borkborkbork · #**11106** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 4:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

I think Richardson, Harvard and whoever owns the MTS building will be upset by the idea of disconnecting them from the skywalk system. That is a significant hit to their leaseability. Being on the skywalk was the entire reason Wawanesa moved from Broadway. It's not about the few shops under their buildings, but more about the indoor connectivity for their office workers to the rest of downtown.

They will have to find a solution to this before they close it, I think.

They balked at $70M and years of construction. What's the cheapest option for opening P&M and preserving a skywalk connection? I presume all the options they were showing last year would be ruled on on cost?

1ajs · #**11107** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 4:39 PM**

hows it cost 79million to fix this

we should open it but have both options

by shutting it down ur making p&m less convient in the winter when working there and will push people away from wanting to be there we need the balance not one or the oitgher

peg · #**11108** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 5:17 PM**

I wonder if they will mothball the concourse until they plan/build the transit station at P&M.

Maybe as a part of the station, they can revamp the concourse, and get some transit funding from the feds for it too.

pspeid · #**11109** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 5:35 PM**

It's funny. Just a few years ago the estimated cost of opening P & M was pegged at about $15 million and some people were horrified at the cost, and predicted "carmageddon" traffic problems. I think that was before they started looking at the cost of repairing the moisture barrier for the underground walkway, but what a difference 5+ years makes. Now it's too expensive to keep it closed and repairing the concourse would create "carmageddon" traffic problems.

bomberjet · #**11110** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 5:42 PM**

I wonder how much of that $73 million is contingency?

They can't just close the underground and let it sit. Would create a safety risk with the leaky structure below a major intersection. They'll need to do something with it at some point.

Fill it with grout? haha

Dig it out, fix the membrane. Put a snazy new ground level streetscape with transit being the main focus point.

borkborkbork · #**11111** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 5:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

leaky structure below a major intersection. They'll need to do something with it at some point

indoor water park, problem solved

WinCitySparky · #**11112** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 6:22 PM**

I’m with bork

Rutlander · #**11113** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 6:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by borkborkbork

indoor water park, problem solved

Maybe when it opens, Sam Katz can do the ribbon cutting.

Biff · #**11114** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pspeid

It's funny. Just a few years ago the estimated cost of opening P & M was pegged at about $15 million and some people were horrified at the cost, and predicted "carmageddon" traffic problems..

Even back when it was announced (2018) I was told it would likely be $50m+

drew · #**11115** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 7:31 PM**

Classic Winnipeg. Just opening an existing intersection to pedestrians is 10s of millions of dollars. Good grief.

Let's just K.I.S.S. this issue and move on please.

bomberjet · #**11116** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 7:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

Classic Winnipeg. Just opening an existing intersection to pedestrians is 10s of millions of dollars. Good grief.

Let's just K.I.S.S. this issue and move on please.

It really is ridiculous.

We're talkin about crossin the street man (in my best Allen Iverson impression).

optimusREIM · #**11117** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 7:49 PM**

I would be interested in knowing why the cost is so high? Like where does $50m go to if that is what it costs to open the interesection. I can't imagine even if you go with a high value, that it would cost that much to remove barriers, paint lines, and rejig the traffic signals and timing. Maybe I'm being naive, but perhaps we have a K.I.S.S. problem. If it costs $50m that better be the most incredible intersection with a permanent staff of 20 who keep the place clean, maintained, and man a complaint hotline 24/7

Biff · #**11118** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 8:24 PM**

I need to edit my response. That $50m estimate (2018) was to repair the membrane to keep the underground open. I read pspeid's post wrong.

bomberjet · #**11119** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 8:25 PM**

The $50m+ (now $73mil) number was to repair the concourse and open the intersection.

Purely opening the intersection at the surface will require road works, streetscaping, etc and will be probably half that full re-build number in the end.

FactaNV · #**11120** Posted **Mar 4, 2024, 8:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The $50m+ (now $73mil) number was to repair the concourse and open the intersection.

Purely opening the intersection at the surface will require road works, streetscaping, etc and will be probably half that full re-build number in the end.

I could see them building the future transit station during the same timeframe, if you have it opened up, may as well get it all done at once.