Winnipeg | Osborne Village & Corydon area - Page 116

plrh · #**2301** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 4:44 PM**

It's also a shame that they are allowed to build single-family homes on that lot. It's not keeping with the changing character of the area.

bomberjet · #**2302** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 8:55 PM**

Single family homes definitely fit the character of that specific area. I would not want that area to become filled with condos. It's one of the nicest areas of the City.

It all depends what the new homes will look like. Hopefully not junk crammed to the property lines.

optimusREIM · #**2303** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 9:24 PM**

Notwithstanding the loss of a beautiful historic home that would have been amazing if restored correctly, I hope that their plan for a new home blends in well with the surroundings and doesn't stick out too much. There are several real head-scratchers on Wellington which are a bit much even for people who have F- You money.

plrh · #**2304** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 9:31 PM**

I disagree. SFHs for the middle, higher density on the busier routes. They should have at least low-rise apartments on the ends of every block in Crescentwood. I guess my overall thought is if something is to be torn down in a mature neighbourhood, the new development better substantially increase density. I will concede that 3 units is more than 1 unit, but it's not enough for my tastes.

drew · #**2305** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 10:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Notwithstanding the loss of a beautiful historic home that would have been amazing if restored correctly, I hope that their plan for a new home blends in well with the surroundings and doesn't stick out too much. There are several real head-scratchers on Wellington which are a bit much even for people who have F- You money.

That's the rub.

When this developer bought the house, 3 or 4 years ago, that house didn't need restoration, it was in perfect shape. The only thing it needed was some personal touches and modernization.

It was one of the few houses of that size and vintage in Winnipeg that had remained single family and unchanged since it was built.

Truly a huge loss IMO.

The garage in the back had (or maybe that hasn't been knocked over yet, so has) a circular concrete turn-table in the floor allowing you to drive in, spin the car around, and drive back out.

It's just too bad someone with the $$ couldn't have purchased it to live in it.

EspionNoir · #**2306** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 10:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

That's the rub.

When this developer bought the house, 3 or 4 years ago, that house didn't need restoration, it was in perfect shape. The only thing it needed was some personal touches and modernization.

It was one of the few houses of that size and vintage in Winnipeg that had remained single family and unchanged since it was built.

Truly a huge loss IMO.

The garage in the back had (or maybe that hasn't been knocked over yet, so has) a circular concrete turn-table in the floor allowing you to drive in, spin the car around, and drive back out.

It's just too bad someone with the $$ couldn't have purchased it to live in it.

The buyer probably saw the future and profitability of multiple single-family housing in that area. I think this was an important motive.

trueviking · #**2307** Posted **Nov 25, 2020, 10:55 PM**

guaranteed a fake old condo will replace it with lots of heritage details replicated in Styrofoam.

buzzg · #**2308** Posted **Nov 26, 2020, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

That Stafford and McMillan project drives me nuts. It faces the wrong way. The little fake old commercial building facades should be on the commercial street not the residential side. The sidewalk facing units are great but it looks like they are on the side of the building. Imagine if they had flipped it to have the commercial looking facades fronting the Stafford sidewalk with the retail at the ground floor. It could have been interesting (if you like fake old facades). This has urban, commercial looking facades that are supposed to be on the sidewalk, sitting beside houses, set back with a front yard and a fence. It makes no sense. Turn it 90 degrees.

I really like except I completely agree it's weird that all the nice finishings are on the side street and Stafford looks like a garage. Wondering if these are approved renders – the city could easily just make them finish the Stafford side nicer. Wouldn't break the project obviously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Single family homes definitely fit the character of that specific area. I would not want that area to become filled with condos. It's one of the nicest areas of the City.

It all depends what the new homes will look like. Hopefully not junk crammed to the property lines.

You would not want a beautiful area (that has lots of medium density nearby) to be enjoyed by more people, increase its tax base, density, and spend for local shops, and locate more people in a highly walkable and bikeable route?

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

That's the rub.

When this developer bought the house, 3 or 4 years ago, that house didn't need restoration, it was in perfect shape. The only thing it needed was some personal touches and modernization.

It was one of the few houses of that size and vintage in Winnipeg that had remained single family and unchanged since it was built.

Truly a huge loss IMO.

The garage in the back had (or maybe that hasn't been knocked over yet, so has) a circular concrete turn-table in the floor allowing you to drive in, spin the car around, and drive back out.

It's just too bad someone with the $$ couldn't have purchased it to live in it.

By media records the house hadn't been lived in in years, had holes in the ceiling and sever water damage.

Wpg_Guy · #**2309** Posted **Nov 26, 2020, 12:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzg

I really like except I completely agree it's weird that all the nice finishings are on the side street and Stafford looks like a garage. Wondering if these are approved renders – the city could easily just make them finish the Stafford side nicer. Wouldn't break the project obviously.

You would not want a beautiful area (that has lots of medium density nearby) to be enjoyed by more people, increase its tax base, density, and spend for local shops, and locate more people in a highly walkable and bikeable route?

By media records the house hadn't been lived in in years, had holes in the ceiling and sever water damage.

The three facade side was at request of the city to have the building fit in with the side street. There were zero concerns about the Stafford side.

drew · #**2310** Posted **Nov 26, 2020, 12:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzg

By media records the house hadn't been lived in in years, had holes in the ceiling and sever water damage.

Like I said, when it was purchased, there was nothing wrong with it. I cant speak for what the developer allowed to happen in the time since.

One of my former colleagues went through the house and I saw numerous photographs.

trueviking · #**2311** Posted **Nov 26, 2020, 12:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wpg_Guy

The three facade side was at request of the city to have the building fit in with the side street. There were zero concerns about the Stafford side.

I’m not sure how a Disneylandesque Main Street USA faux commercial streetscape fits in to a street of single family homes. It’s bad enough to do fake old facades. It’s really bad to not even put them on the right kind of street or in the right context. They are pretending to be turn of the century urban high street buildings but they are on a residential street set back from the sidewalk with a yard and fence. It gives me such a headache.

It’s amazing they got that kind of density. 22 units replacing three houses is very high.

bomberjet · #**2312** Posted **Nov 26, 2020, 12:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzg

You would not want a beautiful area (that has lots of medium density nearby) to be enjoyed by more people, increase its tax base, density, and spend for local shops, and locate more people in a highly walkable and bikeable route?

Totally. Just don't want it to be some stucco square box junk. I assume they will orient the houses to the side street like the rest of the block. Which is on smaller lots already. IMO I don't see the need for this particular site to be a condo.