Winnipeg Construction IX

[drew]

I dunno. Scale is OK, it's a building replacing a parking lot.

I am not sure what we expect here. That street is basically a backlane, it doesn't seem that it would benefit much from or be deserving of some showpiece architecture.

It leaves the back-half of that parking lot for a future something fancier facing the fancier Bannatyne.

Give 'er.

[ywgwalk]

I think many of us are hoping for a reduction is the readily-available parking in that area.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by drew

I dunno. Scale is OK, it's a building replacing a parking lot.

I am not sure what we expect here. That street is basically a backlane, it doesn't seem that it would benefit much from or be deserving of some showpiece architecture.

It leaves the back-half of that parking lot for a future something fancier facing the fancier Bannatyne.

Give 'er.

I can live with its appearance. I feel you on the McDermot as glorified backlane thing, there are a few streets downtown that fit that description and that block is one of them. The building doesn't look great but it's not terrible and it would be a net improvement for a block that really feels barren.

But I think allowing more new at-grade parking is a terrible precedent. That is the deal breaker for me.

It looks like the building will have a couple of levels of parking... if that's the case, why not build a full on parkade, and then build a proper office building next to it? Why make the entire streetscape parking by concentrating parking on levels 1 and 2?

I also hate the little wedge of land left behind, which will inevitably be surface parking until the end of time because it's too small to do anything else with it.

[drew]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

I think many of us are hoping for a reduction is the readily-available parking in that area.

There is already a shortage of parking in the area..?

[ywgwalk]

Originally Posted by drew

There is already a shortage of parking in the area..?

Perhaps there's a legit need for more available casual parking but that's a gigantic sea of monthly parkers.

[drew]

Originally Posted by esquire

I can live with its appearance. I feel you on the McDermot as glorified backlane thing, there are a few streets downtown that fit that description and that block is one of them. The building doesn't look great but it's not terrible and it would be a net improvement for a block that really feels barren.

But I think allowing more new at-grade parking is a terrible precedent. That is the deal breaker for me.

It looks like the building will have a couple of levels of parking... if that's the case, why not build a full on parkade, and then build a proper office building next to it? Why make the entire streetscape parking by concentrating parking on levels 1 and 2?

I also hate the little wedge of land left behind, which will inevitably be surface parking until the end of time because it's too small to do anything else with it.

I think we need to get used to the idea of buildings over top of parking. U/G parking is quickly becoming a non-starter in this city due to costs.

Remember there are finalized drawings (just waiting for the owner to say go) for a new ~10 storey residential building going up on James that includes SEVERAL levels of parking from grade and residential on top.

Parking is a big issue in the exchange, especially that area. Any person building is going to want to control or provide on site parking, and it isn't realistic anymore to go below grade.

[buzzg]

I agree the scale is good and overall design fine, it's the parking that kills it. And I assume the left over piece of land belongs to someone else – or else it should go to Ship Street and underground parking access should be off Ship.

I disagree with the lane thing – it's hard to relegate it to that when 50% or less of the frontage is even developed. If you build this building with an active streetfront, and do the same eventually with the lot across the street, all of a sudden it's a decently busy street (extending the good block of McDermot) with some less desirable chunks. Plus, with the protected bike lane and angled parking going in, all of a sudden it'll be more active and have more people on it already. Lombard is already a mess, why actively kill another block of the Exchange?

I remember someone mentioning on here a year ago or so that Parks has been cutting down their staff in the building at McDermot & Rorie – we could see that building eventually repurposed for new tenants and more entrances added as well.

[drew]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

Perhaps there's a legit need for more available casual parking but that's a gigantic sea of monthly parkers.

Right - but there are LOTS of people who live and work there.

The parking that this building will provide will almost certainly be exclusive to the tenants of that building, meaning it will be a net loss of parking to the area.

The only way to justify a large parking garage or more "pretty" means of parking is to get to the point that parking costs will drive that development.

So, any development, even one that is "ugly" like this, will get us towards that goal.

I am fine seeing ugly buildings going up on ugly streets.

[drew]

Originally Posted by buzzg

I agree the scale is good and overall design fine, it's the parking that kills it. And I assume the left over piece of land belongs to someone else – or else it should go to Ship Street and underground parking access should be off Ship.

I disagree with the lane thing – it's hard to relegate it to that when 50% or less of the frontage is even developed. If you build this building with an active streetfront, and do the same eventually with the lot across the street, all of a sudden it's a decently busy street (extending the good block of McDermot) with some less desirable chunks. Plus, with the protected bike lane and angled parking going in, all of a sudden it'll be more active and have more people on it already. Lombard is already a mess, why actively kill another block of the Exchange?

I remember someone mentioning on here a year ago or so that Parks has been cutting down their staff in the building at McDermot & Rorie – we could see that building eventually repurposed for new tenants and more entrances added as well.

You can't kill something that's already dead.

You could theoretically bring it back from the dead, but demanding CRUs on that particular block and then hoping to see them filled by something meaningful - is a stretch.

[esquire]

You are the prophet of doom, drew.

I get that parking is a must with new buildings, that's the reality of Winnipeg. But surely there must be a way to configure the parking part of things without making the entire length of sidewalk that runs past the building look into a parking lot.

[drew]

Originally Posted by esquire

You are the prophet of doom, drew.

I get that parking is a must with new buildings, that's the reality of Winnipeg. But surely there must be a way to configure the parking part of things without making the entire length of sidewalk that runs past the building look into a parking lot.

I didn't say I liked it. I just said I can live with it on this particular block. It certainly won't make it any worse.

There are SO many parking lots to be developed in the exchange. We aren't going to win on every one of them. Ultimately this is a step forward - in terms of spurring further development.

Where was this outrage for the really horribly ugly building that went up on Bertha? That particular block is far more prominent, and got IMO, an even uglier building than this.

[ywgwalk]

The worst thing about the east exchange right now is the amount of cars, parked and driving. As someone who lives and works there I'm all for increasing density, but I want nothing to do with anything but a decrease in cars.

More people can start carsharing, taking the bus, and using active transportation. Less available and more costly reserved parking spots would go a long way towards making that a reality.

[Urban recluse]

Originally Posted by drew

I dunno. Scale is OK, it's a building replacing a parking lot.

I am not sure what we expect here. That street is basically a backlane, it doesn't seem that it would benefit much from or be deserving of some showpiece architecture.

It leaves the back-half of that parking lot for a future something fancier facing the fancier Bannatyne.

Give 'er.

It is a narrow street, which is a good thing. Have you ever been to, say, I don't know, Boston? This is a selling feature IMO. To think this is acceptable is sad.

[esquire]

The Bertha St. apartment block isn't great but at least it has more than just parking on the main level. So to that extent it has a leg up on this McDermot proposal.

Is there any chance that the city can play a role in ameliorating the parking situation? Instead of every new development getting built with parking on levels 1 and 2, perhaps a larger parkade could be built to serve several developments? You can reach an awful lot of buildings from that area within a 5 minute walk.

[drew]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

It is a narrow street, which is a good thing. Have you ever been to, say, I don't know, Boston? This is a selling feature IMO. To think this is acceptable is sad.

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.8969135,...TlW0k3uNNK0hLMjNrym0g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Charming, narrow street this is not.

I count ONE door facing the street from the old Custom's building.

The grain exchange has zero.

Further down you have a parkade, surface parking.

Next, you progress to what is functionally the ass end of Ship Street, and the Bricks building and National Bank building.

What am I missing here? What kind of tsunami of development unseen in Winnipeg in 100 years would have to happen to get this street into a "charming" narrow street a la Boston?

[Wpg_Guy]

Originally Posted by esquire

The Bertha St. apartment block isn't great but at least it has more than just parking on the main level. So to that extent it has a leg up on this McDermot proposal.

Is there any chance that the city can play a role in ameliorating the parking situation? Instead of every new development getting built with parking on levels 1 and 2, perhaps a larger parkade could be built to serve several developments? You can reach an awful lot of buildings from that area within a 5 minute walk.

Something like this needs to happen soon, these kind of developments are neighborhood killers. Or rather it stay surface parking for another 20 year than see crap like this kill the streetscape forever, we can do better. I hate the because it’s Winnipeg menality. Richardson innovation centre was a step in the right direction this is ten steps back.

[drew]

I dunno. I am obviously in the minority, but I just can't get myself all worked up about this one.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by drew

I dunno. I am obviously in the minority, but I just can't get myself all worked up about this one.

I take your point, it isn't the end of the world and on some level it would be an improvement over surface parking.

But at the same time I'm not sure Winnipeg couldn't do better than what looks kind of like a 1960s industrial park office building plopped on top of the civic centre parkade. It would be somewhat unfortunate if this became the McDermot streetscape for the next 150 years...

[esquire]

What about tucking away the parking a bit so it doesn't swallow up the entire at-grade portion of the building?

Here is one example on Garry St.; there are others. This development could put a parkade in between the Customs House and the new office, and build the office right out to Ship St. Then the parkade only stretches a few hundred feet instead of 75% of the block's length:

[Kris22]

I personally would rather that lot stay surface parking until the end of time than have that atrocity go up. Other than being built to the sidewalk it will contribute NOTHING to the urban fabric of the east exchange. Yes that block is a little bleak right now but putting this there would condemn it to being bleak forever. Not to mention that just a block away is a thriving street...

At least with a surface lot we can hang on to some bit of hope or delusion!