Winnipeg Construction

[drew]

Originally Posted by ctochico

Still boggles me why not just have underground parking on new developed buildings...u have to dig down there anyways ie h20

Underground parking is ridiculously expensive.

[JamieDavid Exchange]

...

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange

Agreed. I believe dcondo and glasshouse are asking upwards of 40+K extra per stall per unit.
District Condos in the east Exchange had no choice but to put their trust in the city to pull their weight and build the James Street Parkade. Obvioulsy they're failing Streetside and now District Condos are suffering with sales.

I think you're a little up there with the 40 000 dollars. I think it was more around 2 800.

[wags_in_the_peg]

I thought the target demographic these Exchange were folks who live, work, play all there. no need for cars. i think this is proving wrong is that is reason why people are not buying.

I go to MTC Warehouse monthly and dinner before and I must say in general the streets are dead, buildings are dark.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

I think you're a little up there with the 40 000 dollars. I think it was more around 2 800.

No, I think he's right. Generally it's between 25k and 30k per underground stall, but it could be a bit higher near the river. The cost (plus a premium) is going to be passed onto the buyer, no doubt...

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Bdog

No, I think he's right. Generally it's between 25k and 30k per underground stall, but it could be a bit higher near the river. The cost (plus a premium) is going to be passed onto the buyer, no doubt...

That seems extremely high for a parking stall. Good thing I don't own a vehicle. When the time comes, I may invest in the car sharing program. Winnipeg has an excellent program, and I have a great driving record, lol.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Bdog

No, I think he's right. Generally it's between 25k and 30k per underground stall, but it could be a bit higher near the river. The cost (plus a premium) is going to be passed onto the buyer, no doubt...

A few years back I inquired about Sky 2. At the time they were asking $7,500 for an outdoor spot and $20,000 for indoor.

So yeah $40,000 is likely right.

IIRC H20 is asking $10,000 for their outdoor spots. But I'm not 100% sure on that one.

[ctochico]

Originally Posted by cheswick

A few years back I inquired about Sky 2. At the time they were asking $7,500 for an outdoor spot and $20,000 for indoor.

So yeah $40,000 is likely right.

IIRC H20 is asking $10,000 for their outdoor spots. But I'm not 100% sure on that one.

yup...my sky 2 parking is $20k. it may be expensive but it sells...and in the long run...its a better investment. downtown condos may try to attract thsoe who work downtown, but nevertheless can't ignore the fact that most if not all of peggers will have cars.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by ctochico

yup...my sky 2 parking is $20k. it may be expensive but it sells...and in the long run...its a better investment. downtown condos may try to attract thsoe who work downtown, but nevertheless can't ignore the fact that most if not all of peggers will have cars.

Even for those without cars, it's generally a good idea to invest in a spot anyway, as not having one can affect the resale value of a condo significantly.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange

If the city would get off their asses and get to building the James Street Parkade, things would be different for the Exchange condos.

Does this mean you think a parking structure will add to the street life in the exchange? Or that it would make it easier to sell the condos there?

Originally Posted by vid

If they didn't cheap out, everyone who lives in Not East Kildonan would get their 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 in a knot.

I thought the bridge was a 3P venture, IE: the builders design/build/maintain the bridge, like Peguis Trail? I guess it still means the City would approve the design, but as long as it meets minimum the City Planner (Engineer?) would need a really good reason to not approve.

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

That seems extremely high for a parking stall. Good thing I don't own a vehicle. When the time comes, I may invest in the car sharing program. Winnipeg has an excellent program, and I have a great driving record, lol.

The last paper I read has the cost, but it was from 2002. It says a parking structure costs between $28000 and $30000 per stall for above ground... I don't know what this is in 2013 dollars though.

[SKYSTHELIMIT]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Abbotsford eh? Yep, you'll be in the car. You might want to register yourself for a TREO sticker for the new Port Mann Bridge (toll bridge). I think tomorrow is the last day to get the discounted toll rate for a few more months.

Good call on the False Creek Area. Its actually not that bad reverse commuting from there. Terminal Ave - 1st - Freeway - Abbotsford.

Lots of construction happening around the area too!

Company covers all of the tolls but I appreciate the heads up.

[JamieDavid Exchange]

...

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I thought the bridge was a 3P venture, IE: the builders design/build/maintain the bridge, like Peguis Trail? I guess it still means the City would approve the design, but as long as it meets minimum the City Planner (Engineer?) would need a really good reason to not approve.

The funding method of a project has no impact on the design of the structure. The bridge was built to the 🞵🞵🞵🞵 standards. There is no shoulder, at all. Shy is only about 0.5 metres. So basically you make one wrong move and both those lanes are closed until the accident is cleared up.

The city should have closed the bridge for the two or three years and built it properly. And by properly I mean straight and not with the hack job paving that was done on either end of the bridges. Or the shoddy centre median between the bridges which was clearly finished by hand.

Has anyone noticed on the downtown end of the northbound lanes, the median lane of asphalt that is 2"-3" above the rest? Like you drive down the road and all of a sudden there is another layer of asphalt there. Seems to me somebody bunged up the curb and gutter elevation and the city let them get away with it. Then just built the roadway higher, but only for one lane!! Try to change lanes and your tire gets caught on the lip of the next lane!

Sure it's a new bridge, but just not what should be there. Yes I'm pissed LOL

[drew]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

The last paper I read has the cost, but it was from 2002. It says a parking structure costs between $28000 and $30000 per stall for above ground... I don't know what this is in 2013 dollars though.

Add about 5% per year to adjust for rough construction inflation.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The funding method of a project has no impact on the design of the structure. The bridge was built to the 🞵🞵🞵🞵 standards. There is no shoulder, at all. Shy is only about 0.5 metres. So basically you make one wrong move and both those lanes are closed until the accident is cleared up.

The city should have closed the bridge for the two or three years and built it properly. And by properly I mean straight and not with the hack job paving that was done on either end of the bridges. Or the shoddy centre median between the bridges which was clearly finished by hand.

Has anyone noticed on the downtown end of the northbound lanes, the median lane of asphalt that is 2"-3" above the rest? Like you drive down the road and all of a sudden there is another layer of asphalt there. Seems to me somebody bunged up the curb and gutter elevation and the city let them get away with it. Then just built the roadway higher, but only for one lane!! Try to change lanes and your tire gets caught on the lip of the next lane!

Sure it's a new bridge, but just not what should be there. Yes I'm pissed LOL

Fact, We as in the city do not OWN the bridge, we LEASE it. When we take over the Bridge in 2??? they have to sell it to us in pretty much perfect shape. Now if you were the company who is leasing it to the city, would you go overboard and make something special? NO, as they know they are going to have to resurface the entire bridge when the transfer date comes along anyway.

As for complaining. Would you rather have the old Bridge? I doubt you would. You have a new bridge, it is better then the old one, you are getting a waste of money Ped bridge also. There are lots of other places in this city that would be happy to have a bridge.

Basically IMO, if you want a fancy bridge, then the people WHO USE it should pay for the extra costs, and in turn not 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 when they have to shut it down for 3-4 years as we all know people would. the Dis, is a people bridge, is serves only to move basic car traffic, not like there is any industrial area's on the other side. So it is built for cars not semis and the like.

Nuff said.

Lets get back to actual construction and not complain like typical Peggers.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The funding method of a project has no impact on the design of the structure. The bridge was built to the 🞵🞵🞵🞵 standards. There is no shoulder, at all. Shy is only about 0.5 metres. So basically you make one wrong move and both those lanes are closed until the accident is cleared up.

Actually it does... According to http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/MajorProjects/DisraeliBridges/procurementProcess.asp Plenary Roads Winnipeg won the bid and will "Design, Build, Finance and Maintain" the bridge -- they call it a DBFM procurement procedure. It's used to take risk away from the City and transfer it to the private sector.

This is not to say that the bridge is built well, but that it is not the City that designed it.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Actually it does... According to http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/MajorProjects/DisraeliBridges/procurementProcess.asp Plenary Roads Winnipeg won the bid and will "Design, Build, Finance and Maintain" the bridge -- they call it a DBFM procurement procedure. It's used to take risk away from the City and transfer it to the private sector.

This is not to say that the bridge is built well, but that it is not the City that designed it.

The city did not "design" it. But it would had to have been designed to City specs. The City really doesn't design much of it's infrastructure anymore. Consultants take care of a lot of that work. But the City for sure has a design standard that everything must adhere to. Plenary Roads couldn't just throw whatever bridge they felt like up there and say there's your bridge.

They designed it, built it, financed it, and will maintain it. All to City specs.

[bomberjet]

And sorry for whining, I usually try to avoid that. That one really grinds my gears though.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The city did not "design" it. But it would had to have been designed to City specs. The City really doesn't design much of it's infrastructure anymore. Consultants take care of a lot of that work. But the City for sure has a design standard that everything must adhere to. Plenary Roads couldn't just throw whatever bridge they felt like up there and say there's your bridge.

They designed it, built it, financed it, and will maintain it. All to City specs.

Sorry -- text is sometimes hard to interpret. And as an aside, the City specs are in alignment with the specs put forth by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). They are THE institution when it comes to street design standards.

http://www.ite.org/

[wags_in_the_peg]

plessis underpass is starting this Spring