Winnipeg Construction IX

[esquire]

Originally Posted by h0twired

Thank you.

This is my main issue with the Liquor Mart on Ellice in general. They sell and heavily stock products that fuel alcoholism. Now granted, ANY alcohol can result, but if you are intentionally stocking cheap foul booze at a specific locations one must consider their motives and thought process behind it.

Now I am not a fan of minimum drink prices and generally feel that people should be able to do what they want to their own bodies, but there comes a point where the province selling alcohol isn't exactly helping the problems in certain areas.

Ever try to buy a bottle of Stone Cold in your area? Of course not. You probably don't live in a poor area. You have to go there to get some.

Ha. I would buy some for the hell of it. I should pick some up next time I'm at the Ellice location.

But getting to your main point, I'm pretty sure that MLL's predecessor went on the record saying that it did that (kept longer hours at certain location, stocked certain questionable products, etc.) to prevent people from using more harmful substances that weren't safe for human consumption. i.e., if you're an addict and you can't get your bottle of sherry at 9 am, you're going to resort to rubbing alcohol or whatever. So there is that social concern element. You take away the Ellice LC, then people may turn to something worse. And even apart from that, why shouldn't people in that area have a LC available to them?

Getting back to the main issue though, I think drew nailed it. There is no question that social issues are affecting the pace of development in some parts of downtown. Personally, I'm not advocating any approach that involves simply sweeping people under the rug... this is not some third world city where it's OK to sweep out favelas without any regard for inhabitants. But we have to acknowledge the real problems that exist. And a better, safer, more orderly neighbourhood benefits everyone.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by oftheMoon

If any "fear" or feelings of "discomfort" exists in downtown, it begins from that area. If one was out at MTS concert etc. and then wanted to go enjoy the Exchange after, a walk up Smith to Ellice or along Ellice may make them think twice about doing it again.

People are really that delicate?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by EndoftheBeginning

In order to meet code, they needed to reduce the elevation of the building (67' down to 56'), add spandrel glazing to the upper floors, add terracotta cladding to the south side, recess the entries and they had to add a solid wall area to the east side (zinc cladding). So three of the four sides lost their full glazing treatment in order to meet the energy code.

Sigh. Our new world energy-efficient order.

It makes sense, but still...

[robertocarlos]

They were drinking hairspray. Cheap Sherry is better.

[oftheMoon]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

People are really that delicate?

Yup, I think so. I've worked downtown for over 25 years with many folks who've been here that long and they are scared of downtown and being approached for a dime. I live in the East Exchange and some have shockingly asked, "do you feel safe there?". It amazes me...saddens me actually...

[OTA in Winnipeg]

I had a guy trying to shine my headlights today at Princess and Notre Dame. I started to move the car and he went on to the car behind me. My car is clean. Please don't touch.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by biguc

Phased development. The podium alone could house about 200 people and would eliminate the void and all the problems that come with it.

Living in a modern place on the edge of the Exchange sounds good to me. One half of that equation worked for Glasshouse, and Skycity has gotten traction too. Both of those places are way closer to sketchy places.
.

And what developer would want to take on such a project? Would it look financially worthwhile to them?

Originally Posted by jmt18325

People are really that delicate?

Yes. My wife wouldn't walk that stretch with a crowd if I wasn't there. Anyone not used to walking a bout downtown may have reservations

Originally Posted by esquire

Sigh. Our new world energy-efficient order.

It makes sense, but still...

The idea makes sense, the solution and whether or not we even need a solution does not.

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

I had a guy trying to shine my headlights today at Princess and Notre Dame. I started to move the car and he went on to the car behind me. My car is clean. Please don't touch.

This. My car is my other wife. I wouldn't let you touch my human wife so the same goes here.

[biguc]

It's just a concept for what would be great there. Why is it suddenly on me to know developers and solve social problems? God forbid I act like a nerd on the internet.

When I do get around to befriending Saudi Princes and Chinese billionaires you can be damn sure I'll stop sharing any ideas with you dorks.

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Esquire, I am laughing hysterically.

So this is out of the question??

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.8871255,-...T8DAQ4XrclVqw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

So true. No reinvented brutalist influenced, "no name" style low end or social services dept. please.
That special parcel of land needs to embrace the shape of the lot in question and have one or two very distinct towers mimicking the lands shape.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by biguc

It's just a concept for what would be great there. Why is it suddenly on me to know developers and solve social problems? God forbid I act like a nerd on the internet.

When I do get around to befriending Saudi Princes and Chinese billionaires you can be damn sure I'll stop sharing any ideas with you dorks.

this place is a rather interesting sandbox

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by biguc

It's just a concept for what would be great there. Why is it suddenly on me to know developers and solve social problems? God forbid I act like a nerd on the internet.

When I do get around to befriending Saudi Princes and Chinese billionaires you can be damn sure I'll stop sharing any ideas with you dorks.

Well, I know a couple of Chinese millionaires so you're some of the way there.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by EndoftheBeginning

Interesting to read in the Riel Committee minutes that the architects for 110 Innovation Place (75,000 sq ft) at UofM had to resubmit plans in order to meet the new energy code. They had originally designed almost 100% glass curtain wall on all four sides as shown below.

In order to meet code, they needed to reduce the elevation of the building (67' down to 56'), add spandrel glazing to the upper floors, add terracotta cladding to the south side, recess the entries and they had to add a solid wall area to the east side (zinc cladding). So three of the four sides lost their full glazing treatment in order to meet the energy code.

Umm. Is this true? Do you have a link to it? I'd love to read it.

The energy code is hardly new. How would they think full curtain wall could be done without proving it in an energy model. Cibinel is an experienced and quality architect. That would blow me away if they actually had their plans rejected by the city at permitting.

[trueviking]

Biguc , you'd be surprised how close your plan is to at least one I've seen proposed.

[EndoftheBeginning]

Trueviking, the Riel Committee agenda from May 1 meeting has the planners report. I quoted directly from that report the reasons they gave for asking to revise their previously submitted plans.

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/dmis/ViewDoc.asp?DocId=16115&SectionId=&InitUrl=
The exact words are below.

This revised plan approval application is seeking to modify some of the site plan, landscaping, parking and building elevation elements that were previously approved in January 2017 (see below).

The overall intent of the project remains the same. Below are some of the project highlights:

- With regards to parking, the applicant is meeting the requirements of the zoning by-law (144 spaces) which is the same amount that was approved at the January 2017 Riel Community Committee Meeting. The major change was to how vehicular site circulation occurred on the site. The changes will make the site more efficient in that regard.

- With regards to landscaping, the applicant is providing well above the minimum requirement. For example, they are providing 134 trees, 480 shrubs, 325 grasses and 13 vines. The minimum requirement is 25 trees and 145 shrubs.

- With regards to the outdoor amenity space, the outdoor patio has shifted from the north side of the building to the east side of the building near the front entranceway.

- With regards to the building elevations, below are the following changes to meet the energy code requirements:
The building elevation has dropped from approximately 67’ to 56’.
The north elevation has remained fully glazed with minor changes to the northeast and northwest corner as the entries are now recessed.
The south side upper three floors have remained glazed with the greyed areas indicated as spandrel glazing to increase energy performance.
Between gridline 1 and 6 on the south side there is terracotta cladding and terracotta louver screening for mechanical room and recessed loading area.
The south pedestrian entry is now in a recessed area between gridline 6 and 9.
As it is difficult to comply with energy code with 100% glazing, solid wall area needed to be increased and we introduced zinc cladding on the east and west with vertical strip window glazing.

Previous Plan Approval (January 2017)

The proposed project will be a four-storey research institution building with 75,000 square feet of total floor area, which will feature a large curtain wall of glass on all four sides of the building.

[bomberjet]

I was just perusing the Perkins+Will website seeing if they had any renderings on TNS. Came across there shot at the U of M master plan. Take a look. Seems way better than whatever the towers in the park thing is that won the competition. Not exactly sure what direction they are planning on going as of now.

https://ca.perkinswill.com/work/fort-garry-campus-masterplan

This is the winner.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/thinking-ahead-230455641.html


Edit: Funny you folks are talking about U of M right now. Coinkydink.

[Kirk]

Wow...that Perkins+Will proposal is so much better. How disappointing.

[biguc]

Yeah the proposal looked really good. I'd forgoten how terrible the winning proposal was but... Goddamn is it shit.

[DancingDuck]

The winning proposal is not what will be built... it'll look more like the Perkins+Will plan

[JM5]

Looking at the two footbridges from St. Vital to the U of M in that Perkins+Will proposal reminded me of how in all these years no link of any kind has been built there. Don't you guys think that a dedicated BRT & AT bridge linking St. Mary's to the campus would make the most sense? This would prevent busses and cyclists from having to go around from south St. V. to Bishop and back down every time without the traffic nightmare a full vehicular bridge would incur. Has a link like this ever been proposed?

[LilZebra]

In the past there have been proposals to install a monorail and gondola to transport people back and forth that area.

I guess those proposals are off, because they haven't been done.

Welcome to the forum JM5.