Winnipeg Construction X - Page 219

esquire · #**4361** Posted **Mar 2, 2021, 3:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy6

Could be a Museum of Shopping. Each floor representing a different decade until you end up on the roof and there's just a bunch of weeds and a computer terminal set to Amazon.

You kid, but this would be featured in every in-flight magazine known to man... the publicity would be priceless!

H2man · #**4362** Posted **Mar 2, 2021, 7:45 PM**

Read today in the WPF that the Portage Place project is having some major issues with a missed deadline for $20M from the feds. I dislike developers holding our nutbags to the fire for special public deals but at the same time I really want this to happen. Actually, it needs to happen.

bomberjet · #**4363** Posted **Mar 2, 2021, 8:45 PM**

Yup. Check the previous page.

Spocket · #**4364** Posted **Mar 2, 2021, 11:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCake

Old St Norbert residents are gearing up to fight against what will be a sizeable infill project just north of Lemay. Don't know if they'll be able to round up Markus Chambers in their fight but there's a lot of the same sentiment as in St B there.

http://landmarkplanning.ca/project/st-norbert-development.php

Not that I am against well thought out developments but if anyone is more 'right' in their plight, its St. Norbert. They're not opposing a modest infill project on a main arterial road just 3 minutes from Downtown.

Okay, so at what point is it okay to develop infill within city limits?

trueviking · #**4365** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 1:01 AM**

Very interesting variance poster just went up on a Bannatyne parking lot beside Corrientes. Asked for 150 feet in height!! Wow. Not a surprise it was denied. Either way a very prominent building. Hope it’s not a board special.

trueviking · #**4366** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 1:12 AM**

Biff. Do your thing....

WildCake · #**4367** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 2:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spocket

Okay, so at what point is it okay to develop infill within city limits?

It's always okay, as long as it aligns with the city development plan. I was just comparing the two areas of the city and saying that St Boniface should be more open and accommodating to densification and modernization given its proximity to downtown and its maturity as a neighbourhood.

In Winnipeg, it seems like places that have been stagnant development-wise for extended periods of time and have wealthier and older residents will be the ones that will protest the loudest. Think St. B, river heights, charleswood, crescentwood, wolseley. Not saying these are multimillionaire residents but it takes a bit a leisure time to afford the luxury to launch a St B scale campaign against every multifamily project that gets proposed in the area.

optimusREIM · #**4368** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 2:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCake

It's always okay, as long as it aligns with the city development plan. I was just comparing the two areas of the city and saying that St Boniface should be more open and accommodating to densification and modernization given its proximity to downtown and its maturity as a neighbourhood.

In Winnipeg, it seems like places that have been stagnant development-wise for extended periods of time and have wealthier and older residents will be the ones that will protest the loudest. Think St. B, river heights, charleswood, crescentwood, wolseley. Not saying these are multimillionaire residents but it takes a bit a leisure time to afford the luxury to launch a St B scale campaign against every multifamily project that gets proposed in the area.

There have been a few new residential builds in those areas, just nothing prominent or on surface lots. They're always on lots with houses still on them. It doesn't really move anything forward.

bomberjet · #**4369** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 4:38 AM**

Was that Bannatyne one denied? I have a hard time reading what those actually mean. It says there is a variance in and you have the right to appeal. It also leaves out the height from 100 to 150 feet. in the order part. That means it was denied then?

Anyways sounds interesting!

trueviking · #**4370** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 5:56 AM**

Brutal isn’t it. Why even bother with those signs. Height was denied by the planners. I think it’s an appeal? I’d be surprised though. That’s too tall for that site IMO.

1ajs · #**4371** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 5:58 AM**

sure came outa nowhere

zen-kz · #**4372** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 12:36 PM**

The 127 Bannatyne ave proposal looks too high for this area. I would prefer to keep it within 5-6 storeys to maintain nice look of this character neigbourhood. On the other hand it is on the edge of the parking sea, so building it taller won’t hurt too much to the streetscape we have there.

Speaking about infill strategy I think it make more sense to ban converting single family lots to 6-8 unit apartments similar to what is building along Talbot ave and move towards renovating and densifying whole blocks. Small buildings with no yards, no CRU, no parking and with windows looking to a neigbour’s wall is not quite density we need. We need a complex approach when 8-10 houses are replaced with 4-6 storey mixed use buildings, with car-free yards and underground parking.

esquire · #**4373** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 1:45 PM**

I'd be curious to see a rendering of what 127 Bannatyne looks like in the context of its surroundings... I get that it would be taller than its neighbours, but 145 feet is not exactly like that scenario of the Claridge Icon in Ottawa right next to single family homes either. There are some buildings in the Exchange that are taller than the rest... It wouldn't dominate at that height. I would not want to see the Exchange frozen in time forever at the typical 1900-era 4 to 6 storey level.

There are so few complete blocks in the Exchange that are uninterrupted by parking lots that I'd hate to see an opportunity to fill one in lost because the plan was a measly 45 feet too tall.

Biff · #**4374** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 3:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

Biff. Do your thing....

About a year ago I got a call from an architect inquiring about building a 150' (10 to 12 storey) building in the Exchange. Wouldn't tell me where...I guess this is it.

esquire · #**4375** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 3:42 PM**

Seems odd that they would be so secretive about it?! Anyone know who owns the lot? I would have thought it was attached to one of the neighbouring buildings...

bomberjet · #**4376** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 4:47 PM**

It's getting towards the south end of the area. Closer to the P&M cluster. Maybe the 100' limit is appropriate. Was it across the street where that parkade/commercial development was going in? Or it was on McDermot?

How tall is the grain exchange. Got to be around 100'.

Could be an interesting project if it engages with John Hirsch in the back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

Brutal isn’t it. Why even bother with those signs. Height was denied by the planners. I think it’s an appeal? I’d be surprised though. That’s too tall for that site IMO.

It should spell out exactly what the situation is. Like this property is up for a variance and we denied it based on this. Which would then seem pointless to have a poster up stating that. Or. Put the up the poster, as in most cases. Stating there is a proposed development and this is the proposed variances from current zoning which you can appeal. Seems that is what the poster reads to me. But again I have no clue haha

bomberjet · #**4377** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 4:58 PM**

Question for you folks while I was looking at the map. Is there a reason Sky condos has the parking lot out front along Pacific and Waterfront. Like a Hydro corridor underground or something? Kind of a buzzkill to the street along Waterfront.

optimusREIM · #**4378** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 4:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

It's getting towards the south end of the area. Closer to the P&M cluster. Maybe the 100' limit is appropriate. Was it across the street where that parkade/commercial development was going in? Or it was on McDermot?

How tall is the grain exchange. Got to be around 100'.

Could be an interesting project if it engages with John Hirsch in the back.

It should spell out exactly what the situation is. Like this property is up for a variance and we denied it based on this. Which would then seem pointless to have a poster up stating that. Or. Put the up the poster, as in most cases. Stating there is a proposed development and this is the proposed variances from current zoning which you can appeal. Seems that is what the poster reads to me. But again I have no clue haha

Sometimes I think that the way the posters are designed is deliberately impenetrable so that no one can possibly actually know what they mean, not even planners and lawyers. Kinda how the CCP distorts google maps in China so you can never actually know exactly where things are

bomberjet · #**4379** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 5:05 PM**

Reading through it again. Seems the left poster is what they asked for and the right poster is what they permitted. And now the neighbours have the right to appeal. The fine print at the beginning says you must own real property adjacent to the site to appeal.

And I see at the end it says they denied the height variance. This is why it's important to get some sleep before making important decisions haha

So seems like we may get a 100' building in that hole. First 50' would be flush to the property lines podium style, with a 50' building on top that is narrower per the dimensions in the variance. Hopefully the parking variances are for inside the building (parkade) and not a surface lot in the back.

Wigglez · #**4380** Posted **Mar 3, 2021, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Question for you folks while I was looking at the map. Is there a reason Sky condos has the parking lot out front along Pacific and Waterfront. Like a Hydro corridor underground or something? Kind of a buzzkill to the street along Waterfront.

Hydro lines under that parking lot would have been very expensive to dig up. Its the Exchange/St. Boniface connection under the river. It sucks but its also unavoidable I'm afraid...

The real problem is Sky's interaction with Waterfront on the part that does have the building. just some rocks, a few plants, and a condo at ground level.