Winnipeg | Osborne Village & Fort Rouge - Page 149

trueviking · #1 Posted **Feb 8, 2023, 7:47 PM**

un real.

drew · #2 Posted **Feb 8, 2023, 8:12 PM**

I wonder if that million dollar remediation liability killed off any reasonable chance for a private development to occur at this site.

If so, how is that the previous owner of the site (gas station) able to walk away from a site without properly remediating it?

borkborkbork · #3 Posted **Feb 8, 2023, 10:20 PM**

Here's the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzOBTwbpfRc&t=24052s

They *say* that it's a strategic purchase for a "future transit customer service and administration building" (something there are no plans for, no budget for, and no timeline for). They talk about it being on their 10-year unfunded capital projects list, and about how they would need to secure federal funding.

But, of course, the other "possible intended uses" include both a transit garage or a "temporary" staff parking lot.

During the meeting, Transit talks about the parking pressure on side streets nearby, and their parking lot being "at capacity", and how they have a waitlist for staff parking. So it's absolutely clear they have a desire to use it for parking.

Santos even says it out loud: "It'll probably be a surface parking lot." Transit says absolutely nothing to rebut or correct that.

Santos says again: "If it's going to be temporary, how many spots do you plan to build." They know exactly: "Probably 50 cars, we have a waiting list of 300". They won't say anything about how long that a temporary parking lot will stay, they say they have to do more due diligence.

Lastly, rather than having the seller do the remediation and buying a clean site, they took the $1.3M purchase price and broke it into a $350k purchase, with the city assuming the $1M remediation liability. The $350k purchase is budgeted... but the remediation isn't. So there's a $1M barrier to them doing anything with this site that isn't just paving it.

In short, I'm not a betting man, but I think I'd wager a pretty hefty sum this entire city block is going to get turned into "temporary" surface parking, and everyone on this forum knows that "temporary" parking, especially when it's being offered at a deeply subsidized rate ($1.25 a day or $32 a month) to transit staff, will become permanent.

Again, if I bought this land as a private developer and said "I don't have any specific plans or budget, but I'm going to ~maybe~ build something on it in 10 years time, and in the meantime I'm going to use it as a surface parking lot", the city would slam the door in my face. But because it's the city... no problem.

borkborkbork · #4 Posted **Feb 8, 2023, 10:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

I wonder if that million dollar remediation liability killed off any reasonable chance for a private development to occur at this site.

If so, how is that the previous owner of the site (gas station) able to walk away from a site without properly remediating it?

"An independent appraiser completed an appraisal for the Proposed Acquisition on behalf of Imperial Oil Limited at a market value of $1,980,000. The City’s external appraiser estimated a market value of $1,117,000 assuming a highest and best commercial use for re-development for the site as though un-contaminated. The negotiated purchase price of $1,400,000 was then adjusted for remediation costs of $1,033,000 and an offer of $367,000 was accepted by Imperial Oil."

The city took on the liability in exchange for a reduced purchase price. Oh, by the way, this surface parking lot will also require the city to spend between $14,000 and $23,000 every three years for environmental reporting until they clean it up.

When will they clean it up? In all likelihood, either decades from now or never: "Remediation of the Property Acquisition (and related costs) and/or funding for the future development of the site will require subsequent Council approval at a later date."

borkborkbork · #5 Posted **Feb 8, 2023, 10:32 PM**

OH and just because I'm on a tear about this:

This site is located less than 600 meters from Osborne Station, making it a site that would be suitable for TOD according to PPD's TOD handbook.

So, along with the Mulvey property the city clawed back, another sign that the city will never allow any of the TOD it swore that rapid transit would create (and allow for BRT to be paid for) to actually get built.

cllew · #6 Posted **Feb 12, 2023, 2:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

I wonder if that million dollar remediation liability killed off any reasonable chance for a private development to occur at this site.

If so, how is that the previous owner of the site (gas station) able to walk away from a site without properly remediating it?

There are different levels of remediation the most common is just let the land sit there as long as the soil tests show the contamination is contained on the gas station site. The idea is the fuel just naturally evaporates over time. At some sites there is a blower installed to speed up the evaporation.

If the city is going it use it as a parking lot they probably don't have to do anything different at this time. Once they start building construction then there is a different level of remediation required once the results of the most current contamination levels come back.

Carpathia Credit Union bought a remediated site from Shell on Grant ave and still had to do further remediation once construction on their building started as they found fuel slicks forming in the excavation after a heavy rain storm. They ended up installing a special air filtration system and vapor barrier in case of more problems

pegster · #7 Posted **Feb 11, 2023, 11:50 PM**

Is it just me or are the "for sale/lease" signs in front of (the former) Basil's gone? Any news there?

trueviking · #8 Posted **Feb 12, 2023, 6:33 AM**

Was sold a while ago. To a solid restauranteur.

Malcsta · #9 Posted **Feb 12, 2023, 7:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

Was sold a while ago. To a solid restauranteur.

Can you give us much information?

This spot is cursed. I can remember 5 or 6 restaurants existing in this spot over the course of my life and none of them seem to have lasted more than a year at most. A friend of mine mentioned a while back that it's partially because the owner of the building charges a ridiculous amount of money to lease the spot and that he owns loads of other property in the village.. can't quite remember his name though..

I think the spot has a lot of potential and I have fond memories from when It was Black Rabbit. The back patio in the summer, especially.

borkborkbork · #10 Posted **Feb 16, 2023, 9:50 PM**

Looks like the MFR development on Wardlaw just off Donald (near the Domo) is back in front of the City Centre committee.

Looks pretty similar to me (before=top, after=bottom). Looks like they shrunk the stairwell/elevator shaft a bit, shrunk the windows, and switched up some materials. Typical Hardie and brick veneer, in the cheapo white/black/grey color scheme that developers seem to love

esquire · #11 Posted **Feb 16, 2023, 9:55 PM**

^ Yeah, it's pretty generic. It's the architectural version of camouflage.

optimusREIM · #12 Posted **Feb 16, 2023, 10:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Yeah, it's pretty generic. It's the architectural version of camouflage.

I don't mind a bit of camouflage, as long as it's not literally every building.

what we need more of is textured brick buildings (like what you'd see in the exchange or with many of the older prewar apartment blocks) with a proper godammned cornice. Fortune block did it right and looks stunning (though i get that it was mega expensive and perhaps not the wisest of investments). Let's make buildings beautiful again.

trueviking · #13 Posted **Feb 16, 2023, 10:51 PM**

honestly, at this point, getting any building built is a minor miracle....my bet is the Hardie becomes EIFS because suddenly Hardie is like gold for some bizarre reason.

It is a very frustrating time to be an architect.