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

[Peggerino]

Awesome photos and welcome to the forum!

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by peggerino

awesome photos and welcome to the forum!

x 2

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by blue4life

Nice photos!

The lot directly west of the building (shown in the photo) and across the street, this was recently purchased by Artis, was it not? I was hopeful that might have meant a 3rd Artis tower at that location. Curious what the new leadership group will plan to do with that empty lot, more so than the future of 300main (which one would assume would be completed as planned, adjustments notwithstanding).

I don't think it's the big lot. They own properties and/or the lot which are directly behind 360 Main in the photo. The lot you cant really see.

I think they own the vendome and want to strip it's heritage status. Could be wrong on that though.

[buzzg]

Not an expert on this at all but maybe the new leadership will just focus more on making sure the company hits the right vendors for jobs over nepotism. lol.

Wasn’t the Vendome bought by the Albos (owner of Fort Garry Hotel)?

Side note the interior signage for GoofLife is up now.

[bomberjet]

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/heritage-tag-rankles-developers-394907631.html

This article gives a summary. ARTIS was involved looking to develop the west side of Fort. Albo too.

[The Jabroni]

Welcome, new people!!

Great photos!!

[Bdog]

Is it just me or does the core seem to take up a huge amount of floorplate?

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Is it just me or does the core seem to take up a huge amount of floorplate?

Yes, that's how it is in tall buildings, which is why they're not very economical, especially for offices. For apartments, it's not so bad because there isn't as much use for space that is far from the exterior wall and windows.

[drew]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Is it just me or does the core seem to take up a huge amount of floorplate?

You gotta put the elevators, stairwells and utilities somewhere.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by drew

You gotta put the elevators, stairwells and utilities somewhere.

I think it might just be the angle of that photo on that last page, but the core seemed to take a larger than typical amount of floorspace for a residential tower than I would have expected. But then again, I don't really have anything locally to compare it to

[esquire]

It's not so much that the core is large... it looks more or less what I'd expect for a building like that. It's that there is fairly little usable floor space surrounding the core. It gives the impression that the suites will be tiny.

[The Jabroni]

New page, by the way...

[bomberjet]

I feel like there is a sense of scale that gets lost with these cams. I was looking at the main floor space where earls will be in the cam. And thought the floor area look really small. But then there was a photo somewhere with people standing in there. And the ceiling is very tall and floor space quite large. Just gets lost at that distance. So maybe the core is large. But the floor area is still sizeable or adequate for what the use is.

I suspect if this was an office building, the floors would be laid out differently. Larger floor area.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I suspect if this was an office building, the floors would be laid out differently. Larger floor area.

When you see original renderings for the south tower of Winnipeg Square, it looks like the tower stretches the entire width of the block from Fort to Main... or close to it. This tower is very thin compared to what the pad was designed for. Not surprising considering the use, but still...

[bomberjet]

It is definitely a lot smaller. The original tower was similar in shape to 360 Main. But I think even bigger.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I feel like there is a sense of scale that gets lost with these cams. I was looking at the main floor space where earls will be in the cam. And thought the floor area look really small. But then there was a photo somewhere with people standing in there. And the ceiling is very tall and floor space quite large. Just gets lost at that distance. So maybe the core is large. But the floor area is still sizeable or adequate for what the use is.

I suspect if this was an office building, the floors would be laid out differently. Larger floor area.

Definitely possible but depending what size you were expecting Earls to be... this location is almost half the size. They're going from 10,000 sqft to 6,000.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Yes, that's how it is in tall buildings, which is why they're not very economical, especially for offices. For apartments, it's not so bad because there isn't as much use for space that is far from the exterior wall and windows.

I was reading somewhere, I'll try to find it, where the sweet spot for a tall building is 60 floors. Now that doesn't mean that all builders should be building 60 storey buildings, but that taking into consideration an average floor plate size to building core ratio, 60 floors maximizes value.

Obviously you have to fill all 60 floors and a 60 storey building costs a lot more than a 30 storey building but apparently, all things considered 60 is it.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Biff

I was reading somewhere, I'll try to find it, where the sweet spot for a tall building is 60 floors. Now that doesn't mean that all builders should be building 60 storey buildings, but that taking into consideration an average floor plate size to building core ratio, 60 floors maximizes value.

Obviously you have to fill all 60 floors and a 60 storey building costs a lot more than a 30 storey building but apparently, all things considered 60 is it.

Can you imagine a 60 storey in Winnipeg? I pray I live to see the day.

Now is that 60 Storeys for commercial or residential?

[Biff]

I can't remember clearly, it might be office but I'm not sure.

I don't think that this is the article I remember, but it talks about it.

https://buildingtheskyline.org/skyscraper-height-i/

"The point of this exercise was to demonstrate that the supertall towers rising in Manhattan during the late 1920s were not “freak” buildings, but rather, were based on reasonable economic foundations.[1] They showed that when one did all of the accounting—comparing the income to the costs—the height that maximized the return was 63 stories. (Ironically, this is not that much different than today."

[esquire]

Originally Posted by dmacc

Can you imagine a 60 storey in Winnipeg? I pray I live to see the day.

Now is that 60 Storeys for commercial or residential?

If Edmonton can hit 66 storeys and Kelowna is now slated to get a 42 storey building then I don't think it's out of the question for Winnipeg to hit 60.

If it happened, it would likely be a Stantec Tower like mishmash where you basically stack two or three buildings on top of one another to create impressive height. So imagine a scenario where True North Square was rearranged to shift several functions into one really tall tower... 25 storeys of apartments, 15 storeys of hotel rooms and 20-odd office floors.

That being said, I think there is less pressure for that kind of thing here from a growth perspective. We also don't have the kind of skyscraper arms race happening like there is between Edmonton and Calgary. But it could still conceivably happen.