Winnipeg Construction VIII

[esquire]

Originally Posted by drew

My guess list for chances of happening from greatest to lowest would be:

D Condos
Glasshouse
W-hotel
So-Po
Fortress
Pumphouse

Out of that list, I'd say I have real confidence in the top two... both developers have good track records and have sunk a lot of real money into the projects already. Further to JamieDavid's remarks, I presume that the RBC WCC hotel project is pretty much a go?

Project W and SoPo seem a little more speculative, but at least the developers also have good track records.

Fortress and Pumphouse both seem pie in the sky at this stage, although that could certainly change.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Cyrodill

I was always under the impression,that a tower, or maybe a better term would be tall building, was dependent on the surrounding buildings? ie: If a structure was 80M, as the # of floors are not always an accurate measure,floor to ceiling, and the surrounding buildings in the area were all 50-70M even if if they were 9 flrs 10 flrs..etc..that the 80M blg even at 10 flrs. for example would be considered a tower?

If the bldg. was located in a smaller urban setting where 11-12 flrs or 80M plus was one of the tallest structures and towered above the surrounding buildings. Is this not a tower? In a perspective point of view?

Curious what architects and others think?

I think that is taking our comments a little to literal. I am not sure if there is any technical term that distinctly differentiates between a 10 storey building and a 15 storey building. I usually think of a building that height as a high-rise. I personally don't feel that anything under 500 ft should be considered a skyscraper. To me all Winnipeg has is high-rises and office towers.

Just how I view things......in the end it really makes no difference though.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by cheswick

Official definitions:
Oxford: a tall narrow building, either free-standing or forming part of a building such as a church or castle:

Merriam-Webster: a building or structure typically higher than its diameter and high relative to its surroundings that may stand apart (as a campanile) or be attached (as a church belfry) to a larger structure and that may be fully walled in or of skeleton framework (as an observation or transmission tower)



I'm not sure about the relative nature definiton. Would the Richardson building not be a tower if it was located in ?

At 33+ flrs or 124M as per listed specs, It probably wouldn't be listed as a tower in Manhattan , tall building perhaps, but in Saskatoon for example? Still somewhat relative if you accout for the location. Perspective I guess, but New York as an example is one of the bench marks for everything in the tower,skyscraper or tall building category.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by Biff

I think that is taking our comments a little to literal. I am not sure if there is any technical term that distinctly differentiates between a 10 storey building and a 15 storey building. I usually think of a building that height as a high-rise. I personally don't feel that anything under 500 ft should be considered a skyscraper. To me all Winnipeg has is high-rises and office towers.

Just how I view things......in the end it really makes no difference though.

Yes, in finding a term that accurately reflects the word "tower", it would be difficult for me to actually define it with a number, flrs. or height or in a dictionary. High-Rise is another term that would fit the description well.

Skyscraper is another definition that is again subjective in terms of height,but not clearly defined, more an opinion an experienced individual in the industry as your self would determine.

Overall it really does make no difference as you mentioned but is a gauge for those as exp.in the industry as your self to how/or what bldgs. are labeled. I never worked on a structure taller than 5 storey's,while working in the various trades, so I'd take the advice of individuals who design 10+ storey bldgs. for a living every time.thx.

[JamieDavid Exchange]

What exactly was the point of that article today in the Free Press by Bartley? Just to show the rest of the world that Winnipegger's are still negative about their city? Because, he did not offer any suggestions on HOW to get all of these proposals off the ground. So, I really do not see the point of the article.

[JamieDavid Exchange]

Originally Posted by drew

My guess list for chances of happening from greatest to lowest would be:

D Condos
Glasshouse
W-hotel
So-Po
Fortress
Pumphouse

Originally Posted by trueviking

agreed....I might flip W and Glasshouse.....maybe.

And, here I thought Glasshouse was doing really good for sales. When we went to the sales display, there were a ton of blue dots covering available suites, meaning they were sold.

[trueviking]

^yeah, I think they both have a good chance of happening....westin really want in to the Winnipeg market and they provide a solid backing to the W project....I would not be surprised if there ended up being no condos or office in the building, which would change it but im pretty confident that a hotel will be built there soon.

as for glasshouse....it seems to be selling but you never know with residential development...its always sketchy even if it seems like a sure thing....my money is on it happening...I just think the hotel has fewer variables.

that being said the developer of glasshouse has a track record of building things and the developer of W has a track record of cancelling things.

[Spocket]

It seems to me that virtually all of the projects are likely to happen with the exceptions of Fortress and the Pumphouse thingy.

D Condos and Glasshouse ? Good to go.
W ? Different market.
SoPo ? Government and make-work.

Fortress ? Probably our favorite prospect but still just a bunch of hype and not much else. By the time these guys actually get their act together the market may well have cooled off considerably.

Pumphouse ? Pretty early for anybody to say one way or the other.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange

What exactly was the point of that article today in the Free Press by Bartley? Just to show the rest of the world that Winnipegger's are still negative about their city? Because, he did not offer any suggestions on HOW to get all of these proposals off the ground. So, I really do not see the point of the article.

I was up early and skimmed through that article, I was going to post it but in all honesty it was a bit of a downer (others did). I understand that time frames involved,raising the capital for proposed projects, sales projections for a condo project to be realized and to proceed, etc..do take time. It seems like an eternity before "shovels are in the ground", when it comes to many winnipeg projects at a time where most people we're projecting 10 cranes on the sky line rather than Barts 2.

It did seem somewhat negative, It may be the old "Winnipeg Reality Check", angle that I've grown used to or it may signify something I would never usually post?
Is Winnipeg really ready for the amount of residential/condo space slated for the core?

Don't get me wrong, I'm an optimist and realize dev.s take time to materialize It appeared like a who knows if it will ever happen article,maybe/maybe not. Sitting on the fence on any topic is safer for some that picking what yard your going to put your foot into.

[trueviking]

convention centre hotel is also a pretty sure thing....the land has been purchased and they are contractually bound to building it...would take some real effort and negotiation to not happen....may not be a high rise though (18+)....may be a mid rise (10-14)

[1ajs]

the pump house from everything i understood from the source i stumbled upone it from months ago its got some big backing


it has been 5 yrs

[Danny D Oh]

Originally Posted by Cyrodill

I was up early and skimmed through that article, I was going to post it but in all honesty it was a bit of a downer (others did). I understand that time frames involved,raising the capital for proposed projects, sales projections for a condo project to be realized and to proceed, etc..do take time. It seems like an eternity before "shovels are in the ground", when it comes to many winnipeg projects at a time where most people we're projecting 10 cranes on the sky line rather than Barts 2.

It did seem somewhat negative, It may be the old "Winnipeg Reality Check", angle that I've grown used to or it may signify something I would never usually post?
Is Winnipeg really ready for the amount of residential/condo space slated for the core?

Don't get me wrong, I'm an optimist and realize dev.s take time to materialize It appeared like a who knows if it will ever happen article,maybe/maybe not. Sitting on the fence on any topic is safer for some that picking what yard your going to put your foot into.

I just keep wondering what the market for a lot of these condo developments is. I'm a 26 year-old university grad 3 years into a teaching career. Nearly all of my similarly aged friends are also university grads, several from professional programs, and few of us are established in our careers (ranging from Education to Engineering to Nursing and Business) to the point where we could purchase and afford to live in most of these condo developments I take a look at, both in the core and suburbs. I have many friends in their early to mid 30s, some of them could afford it, but aren't really interested in condo lifestyle with young families, especially in the core. I feel that by the time I'm ready to purchase, the housing market will have cooled, I'll likely have a young family that puts me in a spot where living in the exchange is not ideal, and I think that's pretty typical, even among those of us who aren't afraid to live downtown. Basically, at this point in my life living downtown would be great, but by the time I can comfortably afford it I probably won't be interested. Seems like this 25-40 bracket would be the typical age group to live downtown. Are they hoping for a flood of retirees?

I believe it is pretty certain that the housing bubble will pop relatively soon in Winnipeg and Canada as prices and debt continue to rise, and the condo market will be a big part of it. Are supply and demand lining up? Seems like there is trouble selling existing condos (subsidy-gate) and more are proposed.

[Widget]

Originally Posted by trueviking

^yeah, I think they both have a good chance of happening....westin really want in to the Winnipeg market and they provide a solid backing to the W project....I would not be surprised if there ended up being no condos or office in the building, which would change it but im pretty confident that a hotel will be built there soon.

as for glasshouse....it seems to be selling but you never know with residential development...its always sketchy even if it seems like a sure thing....my money is on it happening...I just think the hotel has fewer variables.

that being said the developer of glasshouse has a track record of building things and the developer of W has a track record of cancelling things.

I recognize that this is purely anecdotal but, a friend of mine whom works for Fairmont hotels based in Toronto. He was in Winnipeg Last month and he said that Fairmont hotels is going to be ramping up standards and training, at their Winnipeg property, as well as hotel renewal projects specifically because of this Westin Hotel development. It seems that this new hotel is making everyone at the Fairmont very nervous. He implied that, he thought it was a certain thing.

[trueviking]

creswin are very skiddish investors....but having been in their process, it seems hard to believe that at least the hotel would not happen....if the WTC bails on them, which they might, then there will not be any office space...and I could see them not wanting to risk residential sales...few in Winnipeg build without sales.

but westin are rabid to come here because their competition is so meagre.....they checked out the Fairmont and were salivating over the prospects.....they also have an agreement that all the NHL teams and concert people will have to stay there, so it has a pretty good base.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by trueviking

but westin are rabid to come here because their competition is so meagre.....they checked out the Fairmont and were salivating over the prospects.....they also have an agreement that all the NHL teams and concert people will have to stay there, so it has a pretty good base.

I agree that there isn't a lot of competition when it comes to business hotels in Winnipeg. Most of the places preferred by business travellers are tired 1970s-era buildings that, frankly, haven't had to put much money into updating their properties because virtually nothing newer and more impressive has been built since those days.

But given that the downtown hotel market appears to be able to support at least a few new hotels (as we see with ALT, Project W and the Convention Centre hotel), I find it interesting that the hotel pad at Winnipeg Square never seems to come up in these discussions. It's a prime Portage and Main location that could support a large, full-service hotel... if a hotel is going to be built anyplace downtown you would think this would be the preferred spot.



Image source: http://westenddumplings.blogspot.ca/2008/07/parkades-and-charades.html

The hotel pad is the low-slung building between the two towers shown in the Winnipeg Square rendering.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by esquire

I agree that there isn't a lot of competition when it comes to business hotels in Winnipeg. Most of the places preferred by business travellers are tired 1970s-era buildings that, frankly, haven't had to put much money into updating their properties because virtually nothing newer and more impressive has been built since those days.

But given that the downtown hotel market appears to be able to support at least a few new hotels (as we see with ALT, Project W and the Convention Centre hotel), I find it interesting that the hotel pad at Winnipeg Square never seems to come up in these discussions. It's a prime Portage and Main location that could support a large, full-service hotel... if a hotel is going to be built anyplace downtown you would think this would be the preferred spot.



The hotel pad is the low-slung building between the two towers shown in the Winnipeg Square rendering.

It seems so odd looking at what's on the ground now. Why is there an underground mall/parkade/walkway when nothing is there above ground? I know all the "future" plans that were made. But if you didn't know, it makes no sense to have everything underground and have a wasteland at the most prominent location in the city.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by esquire

I find it interesting that the hotel pad at Winnipeg Square never seems to come up in these discussions. It's a prime Portage and Main location that could support a large, full-service hotel... if a hotel is going to be built anyplace downtown you would think this would be the preferred spot.

I think about these things as well. The Trizec site and the Portage Place Pads. I wonder if these properties have inferior business development/property management people in place because it amazes me that these 3 pad sites can go undeveloped for so many years. You would think that cutting the proposed rent/fees for potential new construction on these pad sites would more than be offset by having a fully functioning building paying monthly fees above. Not to mention the increased traffic to your existing properties (ie: Portage Place and Shops of WPG Square).

I am not well versed in the business plans for how these deals go down so i may be way out to lunch.

[hexrae]

Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange

What exactly was the point of that article today in the Free Press by Bartley? Just to show the rest of the world that Winnipegger's are still negative about their city? Because, he did not offer any suggestions on HOW to get all of these proposals off the ground. So, I really do not see the point of the article.

He has a vested interest in the Winnipeg mentality - Link

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Biff

I think about these things as well. The Trizec site and the Portage Place Pads. I wonder if these properties have inferior business development/property management people in place because it amazes me that these 3 pad sites can go undeveloped for so many years. You would think that cutting the proposed rent/fees for potential new construction on these pad sites would more than be offset by having a fully functioning building paying monthly fees above. Not to mention the increased traffic to your existing properties (ie: Portage Place and Shops of WPG Square).

I am not well versed in the business plans for how these deals go down so i may be way out to lunch.

Wasn't there an article a while back in regards to the Portage Place pads. Something about any potential developer wanting access to the parkade but FNP unwilling to give it up cause they get too much revenue from it.

[DonaldSmith]

Originally Posted by trueviking

...and I could see them not wanting to risk residential sales...few in Winnipeg build without sales.

Are they hotel condos in association with Westin or a stand alone residential portion?