Winnipeg Construction X

[esquire]

Yeah, the one at Seven Oaks is a bit on the small side but it's moving in the right direction.

[1ajs]

wonder if artist reit will pull a engineering scheme to see if they can put a spire on their tower now lol

[Wpgstvsouth94]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

wonder if artist reit will pull a engineering scheme to see if they can put a spire on their tower now lol

They really should! A nice light standard to create a statement towards our skyline. All the cities I’ve travelled to have vibrant bright downtowns. Winnipeg is lacking this on so many levels.

[esquire]

Hey, if Epcor Tower can boost its official height 40 feet with these antenna things, I don't see why Artis shouldn't go for the gusto, order some kind of attachment off AliExpress, and crack the 500 foot mark

[zalf]

I humbly submit my proposal for a light standard atop 300 Main:

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by esquire

Heh... clever. But the point is they conceived the project and found a way to get it executed, even if it wasn't actually by themselves.

For what it's worth, I would be OK with the bank and Bockstael finishing this one too.

I am not sure I like the proposed name of this 46 story project: the 'Syndicated Mortage Tower II.'

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by esquire

Heh... clever. But the point is they conceived the project and found a way to get it executed, even if it wasn't actually by themselves.

For what it's worth, I would be OK with the bank and Bockstael finishing this one too.

I think that condo tower is an attractive building, great location, the units there could hold and grow in value.

However, in thinking of whether to buy there I always figured that the 'errors in construction' would be passed on to the consumer.

My guess is that the costs are out of wack because of an inexperienced developer with buildings of that scale.

There is an appetite for higher end apartments / condos in downtown Winnipeg. It just needs a developer with a better track record.

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by esquire

Interesting dynamic going on with the vacant lots on or near Graham being slowly transformed into a row of tall buildings, while the older buildings lining Portage continue to remain underused... it's basically a bunch of 9 to 5 weekday government offices, budget residential conversions and empty storefronts.

It would be nice to see Portage get a little love, either in the form of having new towers built on that street (e.g. between Fort and Smith), or at least seeing some of the existing buildings get put to better use and maybe shined up a bit.

Well, between Fort and Smith, fronting on Portage, not much exists that can be taken down..The Curry Building is staying, as is Paris Building, the conversions to rentals next to it "The AVenue" 265 Portage..as well as Kensington tower then Sterling, the buildings after that, Dollarama can go anytime. That is a fair piece of land in width.....So, Southside, between Fort and Smith...not much..Unless The Dreeman, faux building/parking structure goes..the buildings between The former Scotia bank/Vital Statistics then Birks..a small area..264, 266 Portage etc..but something could be done?
But I agree..new builds & polishing up what remains is vital.We might not have dept stores but we can have some nice essential retail & dining options for workers downtown, residents & eventually tourists.

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by T'Cona

A 46 storey skinny tower would be incredible. I was told St. Regis site, and I am attempting to get more info

Although in the preliminary stages, a 46 floor tower on a 2? 3? or 4 floor podium with services/ retail possibly mechanical etc who knows? and or parking might raise it closer to 50? We shall see..
I as well as many will settle for 46 in total too. lol
Mind you, Wawanesa just added 4 floors (from 19 to 23) after public announcements & renderings so anything can happen.
When I mentioned this tidbit a month back, my source was saying 50 in total was the goal but I know,in the end, the money, finances have to work..and make sense.

[bomberjet]

Settling for 46? hahah right.. I'll settle for the 12 storey ish thing I had thought was rumoured there. Will settle for most anything on the St Regis site really.

[Biff]

First off, I love tall buildings. I am though, also in the camp that honestly, I think I would prefer 3 - 15 to 20 storey buildings filling up vacant lots around downtown instead of one 40-50 storey tower. Good thing there are 5 in the works (Private Pension 20 storey on Portage, White 20 storey on Colony, the two Portage Place pad towers and another that i'm not sure how well known yet)

Having said that, apparently this thing is in the works so since it is, I really hope they can do some kind of ornamental top feature that can push it to the 600 ft mark. I really feel that buildings start to get tall around 600 ft.

[H2man]

I too would take a downtown with a boring skyline and no surface lots vs our current downtown plus ~3x skyscrapers.

As everyone here knows, a part of the problem is the sprawl of downtown itself. Hard to incentivize building density (and therefore height) when there are so many properties on which "something" needs to get built, lest it remains surface lots.

[peg]

Originally Posted by Biff

(Private Pension 20 storey on Portage, White 20 storey on Colony, the two Portage Place pad towers and another that I'm not sure how well known yet)

Is the 5th one on Donald? I remember someone mentioning something about Donald and St marys a while ago? But I believe that was speculation on the site of the 'tall boy' we are discussing.

[bomberjet]

Drilling was done on the Donald/St Mary site I think about 1.5 years ago in the fall. Someone, I think Labroco, mentioned something still in the works there.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Drilling was done on the Donald/St Mary site I think about 1.5 years ago in the fall. Someone, I think Labroco, mentioned something still in the works there.

I think something done on that lot would go a long way in terms of breaking up the windswept feeling there. Even one missing tooth filled in makes a difference.

[esquire]

I'm not a developer but I would imagine that there has to be at least some kind of advantage to building taller as compared to assembling land for multiple shorter buildings? If some large developer wants to build 400 suites in one go then I can see why they might opt to build 40 storeys on one lot as opposed to acquiring three lots to do 3 x 13 storey towers or what have you. I realize building taller has added costs, but at the same time you are minimizing the outlay for land, and I'm not sure if it's enough to tip the scales but I'd think there might be at least some marketing advantage to having very high (for Winnipeg) suites that are above the 25th floor.

In a perfect world we'd have downtown streets all lined with 5-15 storey buildings, but in this case I am OK with it if a developer wants to go bigger. Adding some critical mass can only help to build a neighbourhood that will in turn grow the market for more residential.

[T'Cona]

Exactly.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by H2man

I too would take a downtown with a boring skyline and no surface lots vs our current downtown plus ~3x skyscrapers.

As everyone here knows, a part of the problem is the sprawl of downtown itself. Hard to incentivize building density (and therefore height) when there are so many properties on which "something" needs to get built, lest it remains surface lots.

Agreed - that said, if a tall tower like this rumoured one could get built, I would imagine it could certainly incentivize those to build "something" as well (perhaps install confidence in the downtown market). Perhaps those 15-20 storey towers become less risky then or more developers start to explore developing them

Winnipeg could certainly benefit from a standout, marquee structure...sort of the Peg's version of the Santec tower (even though the Santec tower is borderline comical in terms of how it sticks out). There's 300 main, Hydro, CMHR...none of them are quite "stick out marquee" imo although perhaps the CMHR comes closest to that.

Winnipeg could use something similar...I wonder if there is any true effect to having some sort of standout structure that incentivizes other developments? If at the very least, instils some level of confidence in the market (should they go through)

[T'Cona]

I agree with that. I would love to see a...I don't know...800 ft signature tower on the site of where SkyCity was to be built, in the centre of downtown.

[kattiff]

Originally Posted by T'Cona

I agree with that. I would love to see a...I don't know...800 ft signature tower on the site of where SkyCity was to be built, in the centre of downtown.

I agree with that. Don’t get me wrong a cluster of buildings like Calgary looks so good and full, then I see Edmonton and I don’t know why but it just looks neat with a tower sticking out being all like “Heyyy” I think it looks good!