Winnipeg Construction VIII

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Kronos

Not sure about this common 'pre-med' program....I personally don't see the Faculty of Medicine requiring a shared pre-med program as they are trying to diversify who's being accepted, in addition to a decreased emphasis on GPA in the admissions process in favor of MCAT and interview.

I could be wrong about the move to a common pre-professional program for medical fields but the U of M plan does specifically call out having common courses across all of the programs in the new faculty. For example an intro to human bio-chemistry benefits most of those professions which are going to have roles in prescribing or administering drugs. As would a common course in anatomy and medical terminology. If you take some of the concepts University-One bought to the U of M and apply it to the medical professions you get sort of a "Medical-One". Overall a common course path could lead to a higher quality of applicants in the pool and a better understanding of them by the selection panel.

I am not saying this is what will happen but say there are five common courses with a total of ten instructors. It doesn't change the pre-professional program hugely but when you apply you need to include a reference letter from one of those instructors. The admissions panel will have a good sense of how those instructors recommend students and it could sway the panel on lower GPA students that would be otherwise an excellent fit in the program.

[Kronos]

Originally Posted by CoryB

I could be wrong about the move to a common pre-professional program for medical fields but the U of M plan does specifically call out having common courses across all of the programs in the new faculty. For example an intro to human bio-chemistry benefits most of those professions which are going to have roles in prescribing or administering drugs. As would a common course in anatomy and medical terminology. If you take some of the concepts University-One bought to the U of M and apply it to the medical professions you get sort of a "Medical-One". Overall a common course path could lead to a higher quality of applicants in the pool and a better understanding of them by the selection panel.

I am not saying this is what will happen but say there are five common courses with a total of ten instructors. It doesn't change the pre-professional program hugely but when you apply you need to include a reference letter from one of those instructors. The admissions panel will have a good sense of how those instructors recommend students and it could sway the panel on lower GPA students that would be otherwise an excellent fit in the program.

Medical schools across Canada are encouraging more varied bachelor degrees including arts and humanities; U of M medical school only requires a general biochem course and a few social sciences/humanities within one's degree and there is no requirement for a whole bunch of medically related courses prior. Admissions panels don't care about whether you've taken medically related courses and your performance on them, a good score on an MCAT shows an ability to learn and a good interview to make sure you're not a shmuck. All the basic biochem and biology is taught again anyway in med school in a specific format.
All the above is a moot point anyways, as how much co-operation would one expect between the faculties of medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, rehab, nursing etc?

[Tacheguy]

drilling has started on the Place Aubert condos. vacant lot at corner of Aubert and St Joseph.

[drew]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Bison East Gym. Saw my first concert there, 1971. The Edgar Winter Group.

When I started at UofM, I wrote a few exams at Bison East, just before it was demolished. There were bits of the fibrous coating from the steel roof frame above that would gently fall down throughout the exam. It was lovely.

Thinking back, it is amazing the number of improvements that have happened over the past 20 years at the UofM.

[wags_in_the_peg]

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

drilling has started on the Place Aubert condos. vacant lot at corner of Aubert and St Joseph.

who is developing it, I've been searching looking for sketches and I see nothing?

[Brizzy82]

What exactly is going in across from Ikea (north of Sterling Lyon/west of Route 90)?

Is it Seasons Of Tuxedo or that proposed outlet mall? Or are those one & the same?

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Brizzy82

What exactly is going in across from Ikea (north of Sterling Lyon/west of Route 90)?

Is it Seasons Of Tuxedo or that proposed outlet mall? Or are those one & the same?

Outlet Collection at Seasons

[Tacheguy]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

who is developing it, I've been searching looking for sketches and I see nothing?

there is just a banner with an email address for info. I will note it next time I go by there.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

The University's priorities are so completely messed up, I have no idea how you salvage them. And the truth is that its mostly the fault of the individual faculties. There is so much money awash within the alumni, but its all earmarked for the projects of the megalomaniacs who ultimately want to fund a faculty building with their name on it somewhere. There's no glamour in subsidizing housing. So, like all educational institutions these days, the eye is towards constant expansion with no accounting for the maintenance of anything. Instead of having money to subsidize or even properly direct tuition towards housing, there isn't any left. The U of M's biggest problem with the Southwood lands is that they have no money! This, all as the more upper-tier faculties sit with tens of millions in commitments for new faculty buildings.

Hell, nursing is about to get a new $100MM faculty. It's total lunacy when you think about how many students could be housed for even half of that.

The U of W ran into the same problem with McFeetors Hall. Instead of building low-key housing that you could run at a discount, they undertook an architectural masterpiece that doesn't come anywhere close to paying for itself and now it's a huge millstone around the neck of the U of W.

University housing should be an issue for the Feds and the Province if there is subsidy. And if it's housing international students, the costs should be baked into the tuition. And if that cuts down on the number of international students, then that's too bad for the U of M. The university doesn't need $100MM faculty buildings.

Have you seen the new housing going up beside the WAG? I know where I'm going if the Soviets ever attack....that thing is built of solid concrete. Bottom five stories are cast-in-place...some crazy huge concrete beams.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Have you seen the new housing going up beside the WAG? I know where I'm going if the Soviets ever attack....that thing is built of solid concrete. Bottom five stories are cast-in-place...some crazy huge concrete beams.

It's a monstrosity, I really hope it's as pedestrian friendly as the not-detailed renders make it out to be.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Have you seen the new housing going up beside the WAG? I know where I'm going if the Soviets ever attack....that thing is built of solid concrete. Bottom five stories are cast-in-place...some crazy huge concrete beams.

I'm quite familiar with the building. It's absurd. It's also probably why Sherman Kreiner has more or less been put out to pasture by the U of W's development arm. That building is going to come in at literally two and a half times its value. It's going to be north of $30MM when it's finished. It doesn't have anywhere near the necessary subsidy to cover the shortfalls of all the 'affordable' rents and inevitably the U of W is going to have to apply to the government for more subsidy because apparently affordable housing - unlike, say, housing for those who pay full freight - can only be done for $400psf these days.

It's all such a grandiose waste of resources. Not to mention that the U of W also had to buy another parking lot downtown in order to accommodate the parking they removed in order to build.

[esquire]

^ Which lot did the U of W buy as a replacement?

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Which lot did the U of W buy as a replacement?

I believe it was a house (or 2) and a lot on Good.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

It's all such a grandiose waste of resources. Not to mention that the U of W also had to buy another parking lot downtown in order to accommodate the parking they removed in order to build.

Maybe it just can't support it but they should have looked into adding a storey on to the parkade like Misercordia did.

[drew]

I am not sure of economical means in which to build a 14-storey building.

If you aren't using reinforced concrete - your other options are steel - and lots of it - and the potential extra fire protection that needs to go with it.

Either which way you go, it's going to be spendy.

Build a bomb shelter, don't worry about maintenance.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by drew

I am not sure of economical means in which to build a 14-storey building.

If you aren't using reinforced concrete - your other options are steel - and lots of it - and the potential extra fire protection that needs to go with it.

Either which way you go, it's going to be spendy.

Build a bomb shelter, don't worry about maintenance.

There isn't one, really. But the university has other options. There are ramshackle houses up and down all of those streets that would do the neighbourhood a huge favour by vacating the existing tenancy and renovating to accommodate single unit occupancy run by the university for students.

The U of W has 'premium' suites in that building. For one, you will never rent out premium suites at the necessary rents in a building that's full of students and subsidized renters. But even more realistically, the university doesn't need them. Even if you could get a small premium on those suites you will never get enough to subsidize other units because this isn't New York.

Buy a street worth of ramshackle houses, either renovate them into single room occupancy, or tear them down and build a bunch of small three-storey apartment blocks that can be built at $150psf.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

There isn't one, really. But the university has other options. There are ramshackle houses up and down all of those streets that would do the neighbourhood a huge favour by vacating the existing tenancy and renovating to accommodate single unit occupancy run by the university for students.

The U of W has 'premium' suites in that building. For one, you will never rent out premium suites at the necessary rents in a building that's full of students and subsidized renters. But even more realistically, the university doesn't need them. Even if you could get a small premium on those suites you will never get enough to subsidize other units because this isn't New York.

Buy a street worth of ramshackle houses, either renovate them into single room occupancy, or tear them down and build a bunch of small three-storey apartment blocks that can be built at $150psf.

One of the first steps in the renewal of W. Broadway came when the U of W bought some houses south of St. Mary Ave and Portage and renovated them into student residences about 15 years ago. It worked out quite well as I recall.

However, I'm guessing that's probably tough to replicate given that a) real estate, especially in that area, can no longer be had for a song... the days of the $60,000 fixer-upper are long gone, and on a related note b) buying blocks of houses is probably tough given that landlords won't sell to the U of W for anything less than top dollar given the U of W's track record as an aggressive buyer.

As for "premium suites" in the new building, are we sure these aren't just going to be regular market-standard apartments? The word "premium" can be pretty meaningless... I'm sure even the Econo Lodge has a premium suite that goes for $20 extra but is still pretty cheap and economical compared to most other hotel rooms out there.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by esquire

One of the first steps in the renewal of W. Broadway came when the U of W bought some houses south of St. Mary Ave and Portage and renovated them into student residences about 15 years ago. It worked out quite well as I recall.

However, I'm guessing that's probably tough to replicate given that a) real estate, especially in that area, can no longer be had for a song... the days of the $60,000 fixer-upper are long gone, and on a related note b) buying blocks of houses is probably tough given that landlords won't sell to the U of W for anything less than top dollar given the U of W's track record as an aggressive buyer.

No doubt. But when we're talking about the options being $400psf apartments, that's a lot of latitude where the price for alternative housing is concerned. Even if you bought a ramshackle triplex for $320,000 and dumped another $80K into turning it into housing for 6 or 7 people, it's still almost half the cost.

But anyway, it's the same problem. The U of W shouldn't have more people than it can viably house and it certainly shouldn't be in the housing development game. The complex they're building isn't even close to exclusively for students. It's mostly not, in fact. If the university is finding that what they're trying to accomplish doesn't work from a housing standpoint, then they need to raise tuition or cut elsewhere to support their mandate.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

If the university is finding that what they're trying to accomplish doesn't work from a housing standpoint, then they need to raise tuition or cut elsewhere to support their mandate.

Not that I'm touting raising tuition is the only way to fix the problem, but when I went a few years ago I was shocked how cheap it was. About half the price of a non-trades program at RRC.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Not that I'm touting raising tuition is the only way to fix the problem, but when I went a few years ago I was shocked how cheap it was. About half the price of a non-trades program at RRC.

It's cheap to the student, but the costs of running the University went absolutely mental the moment Lloyd Axworthy decided to build his legacy and the University can't close the gap now. For the second year in a row they've 'closed the deficit' by leaving positions unfilled and encouraging the retirement of tenured profs in favour of adjuncts. And they're not the only university doing that, but they're all doing it for the same reason. Hence the uptick in international students and the subsequent inability to house anybody.