Winnipeg | 300 Main St.- Phase II 360 Main St. | 465 Ft | 42F | Completed

[Urban recluse]

Well I hope Artis REIT inspires the Richardson family to do it.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by drew

The Richardson facade (and similarly the BMO tower and RBC tower) doesn't lend itself well to replacement a la 360 Main Street (or perhaps much of the TD Tower down the road).

I suspect it would cost much more to reclad the Richardson, meaning it won't make any economic sense for the foreseeable future.

It's not a matter of economics. It's more a matter of the lifespan of precast concrete.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Well I hope Artis REIT inspires the Richardson family to do it.

So you end up with two anonymous glass towers with probably the same piss poor, autocentric street level. That will save this intersection.

[Urban recluse]

They do not need to look the same.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

Originally Posted by Arts

As someone that spent his primary years there then moved away only ever visiting family there once or twice a decade, I have come to that very conclusion myself... many people in Winnipeg don't even know what they have, it truly is one of the most established and interesting cities in North America. It does not have glitz, nor screams for attention, but it has grit and character and strikes a certain balance that no other city in Western Canada can claim.

Liking this!

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

They do not need to look the same.

Glass is glass.

Let's face it you would like to transform all the towers here into Dallas like towers. Sad part in another 40 years glass will be the new and we will have another material you like and then the people will look back at the Richardson and wonder 🞵🞵🞵 they were thinking when they reclad it in boring glass.

[Urban recluse]

You are now being vile. Winnipeg has too many slabs of concrete, and not enough glass. The city has many heritage buildings, which are beautiful, but south of Portage, it is a sea of the 70s. You can enjoy brutalist architecture all you want; Winnipeg's image needs a major updating. You would be foolish and naive to think Dallas is the only city renewing its downtown with glass. There is a reason brutalist architecture is being either demolished, recladded or dwarfed by new, sparkling buildings: most people do not like it.

If you can say you prefer this:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.8937731,-...aN5lfvBTF4bqw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

over this:

http://icedistrict.com/assets/imgs/tower-bg.jpg

I would not understand.

[DancingDuck]

Is it not possible to have both? The ICE district in Edmonton is all new construction, they didn't have to reclad anything.

Can we not just wait until we have new (glass) towers too? That will help balance out the amount of concrete we have downtown now.

The way it currently stands, it's possible to see all the different architecture phases the downtown has gone through... The Exchange district from the early 20th century, concrete from the 50s to 70s, PoMo from the 80s and 90s, and finally now we are getting our very own glass towers...

[Spocket]

I've never understood how anybody could like concrete facades that are basically just monolithic slabs but to each their own. With that said, I don't get Winnipeg's resistance to change. Seems people here will insist that nothing should ever be torn down. Hell, it's difficult to even build on a site where something was standing over a century before. It's like these places become sacred or something.

I believe there's a case to be made for preserving an entire district. I believe that a truly outstanding building should be saved. Saving something just because it's an example of something that few people even care about is ridiculous. "Save Eaton's !" "Save the place where a gate once stood !" "Save the burned out husk of a building !" Yeah, they're all examples of what some people actually want.

In the case of the Richardson building I don't think it lends itself to much modification in terms of facade. It wouldn't really look all that good with a simple glass curtain wall. I'm not saying it can't be done but it would have to be more than just hanging some glass off each side.

A little to the west is a building that desperately needs to be re-clad. It was the Radisson for years but I'm not sure what it's called now. Either way, it's one of the ugliest buildings in the country in my opinion. I would actually be happier with it torn down than to see it stand as is forever. Nevertheless, I'm sure somebody would try to organize a protest against changing any part of it because this is Winnipeg and we fear change.

360 Main is a different animal and actually looked alright for probably the first 25 years. My fear is that the people putting up the new tower haven't quite learned that brown just doesn't hold up well. Well, more to the point, it's the paneling that just winds up looking like 🞵🞵🞵🞵 a few decades down the road. It looks cheap. It always looks cheap. With the right color scheme you can make it look good for a lot longer (plain white would work if nothing else) but somehow brown ends up looking aged long before it should. Whether it's stucco, paneling, shingles on a house, or just about anything except brick, brown just doesn't hold up to time.

[BAKGUY]

The hotel you mention still is The Radisson. I agree it is hideous. Mostly because it is so tall & prominent so on a cloudy day looks even uglier, just blends into the sky and the street, yuk!
I am not sure what can be done but something would be nice. I fear the hotel owners, Canada Inns and Mr Leo Ledehowski will say it not feasible to do so.
Also, I have recently mentioned how begging for a reclad is 433 Main street in its bile baby poop colour and the west concrete 18 floor wall of the Kensington Bldg on Portage avenue.
Also, the current Fairmont and Delta facades could be improved as well. IMO.

[rkspec]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

Glass is glass.

Let's face it you would like to transform all the towers here into Dallas like towers. Sad part in another 40 years glass will be the new and we will have another material you like and then the people will look back at the Richardson and wonder 🞵🞵🞵 they were thinking when they reclad it in boring glass.

Whats the big deal with keeping up with the Jones'?
Glass is glass but mirrored glass is nothing but beautiful when being draped over a hi-rise. I really cant see myself looking at a mirror in 40 years from now thinking this material is so ugly.

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by BAKGUY

The hotel you mention still is The Radisson. I agree it is hideous. Mostly because it is so tall & prominent so on a cloudy day looks even uglier, just blends into the sky and the street, yuk!
I am not sure what can be done but something would be nice. I fear the hotel owners, Canada Inns and Mr Leo Ledehowski will say it not feasible to do so.
Also, I have recently mentioned how begging for a reclad is 433 Main street in its bile baby poop colour and the west concrete 18 floor wall of the Kensington Bldg on Portage avenue.
Also, the current Fairmont and Delta facades could be improved as well. IMO.

You are bang on. The Delta concrete nastiness was painted an off-white, no? It is definitely brighter than it was years ago.

Canad Inns: ugh. I hope they do something to the Radisdon facade, as it is so depressing I simply cannot look at it.

The Fairmont would look amazing reclad in glass. As far as the Richardson, there has to be done scheme that could freshen it up and update it.

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by rkspec

Whats the big deal with keeping up with the Jones'?
Glass is glass but mirrored glass is nothing but beautiful when being draped over a hi-rise. I really cant see myself looking at a mirror in 40 years from now thinking this material is so ugly.

Many older skyscrapers clad in such that are 30 years old; just as stunning now as then; does not grow tired.

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by DancingDuck

Is it not possible to have both? The ICE district in Edmonton is all new construction, they didn't have to reclad anything.

Can we not just wait until we have new (glass) towers too? That will help balance out the amount of concrete we have downtown now.

The way it currently stands, it's possible to see all the different architecture phases the downtown has gone through... The Exchange district from the early 20th century, concrete from the 50s to 70s, PoMo from the 80s and 90s, and finally now we are getting our very own glass towers...

That is not the point. The point is it is all glass, and looks marvelous, and all the light reflecting off/through sparkles.

[rkspec]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Many older skyscrapers clad in such that are 30 years old; just as stunning now as then; does not grow tired.

In the late 80's to early 90's i used to drive my mom to work at Royal Trust on St.Mary, it still looks great up to today.

[Urban recluse]

Yes. I have always loved that building, from childhood to now.

[drew]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

It's not a matter of economics. It's more a matter of the lifespan of precast concrete.

I agree.

But it always comes down to money.

[Jammon]

Originally Posted by DancingDuck

Is it not possible to have both? The ICE district in Edmonton is all new construction, they didn't have to reclad anything.

Can we not just wait until we have new (glass) towers too? That will help balance out the amount of concrete we have downtown now.

The way it currently stands, it's possible to see all the different architecture phases the downtown has gone through... The Exchange district from the early 20th century, concrete from the 50s to 70s, PoMo from the 80s and 90s, and finally now we are getting our very own glass towers...

I totally agree. I don't believe that we need to make Winnipeg more like Toronto, Vancouver or Calgary by adding more buildings with glass. Winnipeg's architecture is very unique and it's something we should be proud of because very few cities have architecture like this in North America. I think we can compliment the existing skyline, but I don't want to see a lot of change. It's about time we appreciate what we have and what makes us so unique.

[DowntownBooster]

I think the Richardson Building looks just fine the way it is. With the changes and development to occur at the southwest area of Portage & Main and with 201 Portage already clad with lots of glass there is really no need to make changes to our first real tower in the modern era. Although many new glass towers have gone up in New York over the years, the Empire State Building still remains a classic.

[esquire]

^ Like I said before, the culprit here is really lack of new development to modernize our streetscapes and skylines. Trying to bastardize classy older buildings into something that attempts to look modern would just add insult to injury.

360 Main is a very different situation since the cladding was deteriorating badly and had to be replaced, and the change in that instance is really not a fundamental one - it's effectively new panels with a different colour.