Winnipeg | True North Square | 86.9M | 77.8M | 25F | 17F | 22F | 17F | 19F | U/C

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by cllew

They never actually tarp the furniture on the patio to store it as they may use it. A few Saturday's ago (Feb 17) they actually had an ice party with a DJ and full drink service up there.

Not sure how busy it was so I don't know if they will do it again for a function like that, but if the Jets get into the playoffs I am sure they will open it up again before summer.

It'll be interesting to see if more places (downtown) follow Browns and keep their patios open all winter. Browns has lots of heaters and fire tables, left all their furniture there, and has had many people out on the patio some nights, especially after Jets games.

You'd think at the very least Moxie's and Carbone would consider, as their patios are so self-contained.

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by cllew

What is going in was not sewer work. The contractor was in the process of cutting in a slot trench to a BellMTS Manhole in the middle of Graham and Hargrave and then continuing the trench down the existing communications easement from when BelllMTS Place was built. They had a few trailers of of the orange plastic communications pipe to pull in.

As well they had 3 hydro-vac trucks and a few loaders going at it at 1am so it was fairly noisy. I wonder if the customers at the Delta Hotel would be complaining about the noise?

Installing fibre optics cables actually.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by DowntownBooster

Winnipeg has many mid-rise buildings as it is. Adding more doesn't necessarily improve the skyline as a whole. Maybe it would be preferable to fill the surface parking lots with some low-rise buildings in order to allow for some high-rise buildings. It's the construction of high-rise buildings that creates the impression that a city is actually growing.

Well are we trying to create a skyline/an impression that the city is growing or a quality urban experience?

I love tall buildings too, I'm just saying shorter buildings have an upside too.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by Kinguni

Installing fibre optics cables actually.

maybe so but u still need to run the ducting for the cables to go in

and bell ran new fiberinteresting gusing from their manholes vs mts's

[wags_in_the_peg]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Well are we trying to create a skyline/an impression that the city is growing or a quality urban experience?

I love tall buildings too, I'm just saying shorter buildings have an upside too.

agreed 100% - 2 mid size good looking buildings is better then 1 giant. In Winnipeg, other cities might be diff

[Biff]

...Next Page

[dmacc]

Have they started putting in the glass on the main floor?

[cllew]

Memo out today regarding street access on Hargrave due to overhead constuction

Due to construction preparations for the new skywalk that will be built connecting cityplace to the new True North Square office tower, a section of Hargrave Street, south of Graham Avenue will be closed from Thursday, March 8th to Friday, March 23rd (with the exception of weekends) between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. After 3:00 pm, normal traffic routes will be reinstated.

Access to the cityplace parkades will continue to be available during construction. However, parkers will need to make the following adjustments between the closure hours:

• Those who park in cityplace (Lot 4) will enter as usual but will need to exit south onto Hargrave.
• Employees who park in the seven storey parkade north of Graham Avenue (Lot 1), will need to access the lot by driving east on Portage and south onto Hargrave.
Impark and PCL Customer Service Representatives will also be assisting parkers during this transition.

I guess that PCL Customer Service Representatives are the fancy name for flag persons.

[bomberjet]

^Ya it'll be the guy whos always outside on Hargrave in the bright green get up.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Well are we trying to create a skyline/an impression that the city is growing or a quality urban experience?

I love tall buildings too, I'm just saying shorter buildings have an upside too.

When does one ever even see a skyline in Winnipeg? I live in downtown Toronto and I'm not sure if I've even seen Toronto's skyline other than in pictures (mostly on SSP). I don't see the need for tall buildings in Winnipeg. They are an odd choice of building form for a Prairie landscape that is fundamentally spacious and horizontal. The dream seems to be for Winnipeg to look like Mont St. Michel popping up out of a sea of grain. I don't personally share this vision.

Anyway, I think that TNS is about right ... an office building that is actually usable for the kinds of businesses that exist in Winnipeg, a public square that looks promising, and an apartment building that TNS apparently believes it can fill. Nothing too tall or jarring.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Andy6

When does one ever even see a skyline in Winnipeg? I live in downtown Toronto and I'm not sure if I've even seen Toronto's skyline other than in pictures (mostly on SSP). I don't see the need for tall buildings in Winnipeg. They are an odd choice of building form for a Prairie landscape that is fundamentally spacious and horizontal. The dream seems to be for Winnipeg to look like Mont St. Michel popping up out of a sea of grain. I don't personally share this vision.

Anyway, I think that TNS is about right ... an office building that is actually usable for the kinds of businesses that exist in Winnipeg, a public square that looks promising, and an apartment building that TNS apparently believes it can fill. Nothing too tall or jarring.

I mean, due to its topography Winnipeg's skyline is visible from a number of points, and I don't think there's a contradiction between tall buildings in a sprawling Prairie city. But Winnipeg's downtown is massive by area relative to its population, and I think filling it in and bringing people and activity to it may be more important than building a skyline one tower at a time, surrounded by parking.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I mean, due to its topography Winnipeg's skyline is visible from a number of points, and I don't think there's a contradiction between tall buildings in a sprawling Prairie city. But Winnipeg's downtown is massive by area relative to its population, and I think filling it in and bringing people and activity to it may be more important than building a skyline one tower at a time, surrounded by parking.

I agree. The idea that what the skyline looks like from Garbage Hill (or wherever) would be even 1/100th as important as what downtown feels like when you're actually present in the downtown area is a little hard to understand.

[buzzg]

^Yup.

[Spocket]

If you squint, you can see the skyline from half an hour out on the highway.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by cllew

They never actually tarp the furniture on the patio to store it as they may use it. A few Saturday's ago (Feb 17) they actually had an ice party with a DJ and full drink service up there.

Not sure how busy it was so I don't know if they will do it again for a function like that, but if the Jets get into the playoffs I am sure they will open it up again before summer.

Originally Posted by dmacc

Have they started putting in the glass on the main floor?

Yup. Take a drive by the site, looks Tower 1 is almost complete on the outside, save for screens and decorations of course. But it's getting real close.

[DowntownBooster]

Originally Posted by Andy6

When does one ever even see a skyline in Winnipeg? I live in downtown Toronto and I'm not sure if I've even seen Toronto's skyline other than in pictures (mostly on SSP). I don't see the need for tall buildings in Winnipeg. They are an odd choice of building form for a Prairie landscape that is fundamentally spacious and horizontal. The dream seems to be for Winnipeg to look like Mont St. Michel popping up out of a sea of grain. I don't personally share this vision.

As the population of our larger cities continue to grow, it makes sense to build up rather than outwards. For places like Winnipeg, the cost to maintain infrastructure to neighborhoods expanding further and further from the city core is getting too expensive for our current tax base. Aside from rebuilding streets every few years or patching all the potholes, there is also the cost of plowing snow from all those same roads. Then there's the additional costs for sewer and water required to those extended areas. Another consideration for everyone is the loss of arable land when cities continue to expand outwards. It's probably not the best idea to reduce the ability to produce crops for an increasing population. Our local governments should be looking at ways to provide incentives to developers to build up to counter the migration to the outskirts of our cities. So while you don't see the need for tall buildings in Winnipeg, I see it as a preferable alternative to urban sprawl.

[buzzg]

^I think what Andy means is lets just worry about filling up empty/underutilized lots and making downtown more liveable and walkable before we worry about record-breaking towers. When there's no lots left downtown and space is in high demand, the small and old buildings will make way for new larger ones.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by Andy6

I agree. The idea that what the skyline looks like from Garbage Hill (or wherever) would be even 1/100th as important as what downtown feels like when you're actually present in the downtown area is a little hard to understand.

Totally. I’d take three eight storey buildings over one 24 storey any day.

[DowntownBooster]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Totally. I’d take three eight storey buildings over one 24 storey any day.

That might be nice for a city like Brandon but I would hope a city like Winnipeg could handle a 24 story building. It seems odd when Edmonton is looking forward to getting a 900 foot building and we here in Winnipeg seem to think a 100 foot building is what is preferable. Is our goal just to be a larger version of Regina or do we aspire to be something grander?

[esquire]

The idea that a bunch of lowrises is better than one highrise would be more appealing if we didn't end up with lowrise duds like this. If a surface lot is a 1 when it comes to street interaction, then this thing is a 2, maybe a 3 at best. It does little to animate the streetscape as opposed to the taller, if not quite highrise, Centrepoint development across the street.



As we can see, just filling in lots isn't enough to create a pleasant pedestrian environment.