Winnipeg Construction VIII

[CoryB]

Personally I like the revision of the "active transportation link" between U of M and St Vital as a "row your own canoe" instead of the bike/pedestrian bridge. Seems like a much more realistic solution.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

The link I have above is exactly what I think an extra 120 acres of land on the University should look like, and while I'm not an expert or a professional I think that quite a few people here would agree with something near this idea.

Thank You..the 1st poster to offer an idea on what this developement should entail.
Rather than suck,barf,stupid..etc... a peg mentallty imo. Density, walk ability, a real community/neighborhood. Thiers much time still involved before plans are finalized for this concept/developement and the possiblities are endless.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by esquire

What Andy6 said.

To add to his comments, I've circled the best part of the campus. Make the new parts of the campus as much like this as possible:



This part of campus is the best because it's filled with people, activity and buildings in close proximity with each other. In recent years the U of M has started to add residences which is a plus, because it adds life to the area, especially after hours.

Building the concept as shown would turn the U of M into a laughing stock. A bunch of isolated towers in a forest... yeesh. Way to build a campus.

This is a sound proposal, as for laughing stock my most enjoyable residence in years was an apt. block on the assiniboine river surrounded by mature trees, wildlife, and blocked off from 10+ strorey apt blocks to either side of me, it was bliss. Relaxing,calm and close to the Village, secluded by trees but close enough to everything that you would call urban. I could retreat to peace and quiet yet walk a block to madness if I was in the mood.

Matter of perspective, on what an individual wants from thier residence.

[Only The Lonely..]

It might turn out nice.. Pripyat was a planned community too.

[morty]

Here are the runner ups: http://www.visionaryregeneration.com...s/gallery.html

The second place design is particularly appealing to me. A series of walkable, mixed use midrises, designed with families (school), students, and IGF parking in mind. It's dense, yet still provides a more appealing park than the winning design. As well, it reimagines the transportation network of the entire campus by replacing what are currently the main car access points with the Rapid Transit Corridor instead (IMO an excellent idea) and improves connectivity with the other side of the Red River and with the neighborhoods to the south.

The winning plan relies on walking long relatively long distances in empty fields (sounds fun in the winter, right! anybody...?) as well as proposes underground parking, which is prohibitively expensive in Winnipeg. Whoever was on the jury that selected a generic "Towers in a park" concept, an idea that has already been built in many cities and proven to not work, should be ashamed of themselves.

Direct link to the runner-up concept I was talking about (Warning: very high res)

[jthor]

I have to say that I was hoping for something much more urban and human-scale for the Southwood site. This plan seems to ignore the fact that people might want to walk across the site, especially the fact that they might want to do so in the winter. Also, it seems odd they left out the whole rapid transit thing. I would be interested to know more about the deliberations and rationale behind the choice; perhaps (one hopes) this will be one of those cases the execution ends up better than the overall (preliminary) design. Density with a mix of urbanism and park-like feel can be done really well, as in Hammarby Sjöstad, Stockholm (http://www.google.ca/search?q=hammar...w=1103&bih=664), The Yards in Washington D.C.:



or Moshe Safdie's work in Modi'in, Israel (more info here: http://www.archnewsnow.com/features/Feature22.htm):



TrueViking, do you know where we can see the second place plan? The Edmonton airport scheme looked great in a Canadian Architect spread some months ago. EDIT: Thanks morty and Cyrodill; I think this was posted as I was writing.

Also, I'm glad its been posted here already, but I came here to link to great news that a Growth Development Charge is under consideration by the city. There's more info on Jenny Gerbasi's FB page:https://www.facebook.com/jenny.gerba...54386914649163

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by jthor

we can see the second place plan?

Posted before your post by Morty.

http://www.visionaryregeneration.com...s/gallery.html

[DancingDuck]

I much prefer the entries that have dense, 3-4 story buildings instead of the spread out high rise one we got. It's a shame there wasn't an entry that combined the two... If there is a positive to be seen in the winner, it's that there's a lot of room left for future developement

[Wigglez]

To Cyrodill

The problem with someone like me giving "suggestions" on how to make this better is that my opinion doesn't matter, and spending however much time on here coming up with what I think would be a better solution for this area would be a waste of time.



The problem is this is a real development in an important area made by people with the power to build it.

This is a university location. A university is supposed to be a place of forward and innovative thinking... This design is at best lazy and shows no signs of any progressive thinking.

They had a real chance to do something special here. A green walkable community built for the future, as a design to show what future communities should look like, a place to test out new ideas for city planning. This looks like they opened a 50 year old textbook and said "lets do that, but change the colour of everything to green".

Hell I'll toss out an idea I would have loved to see part of this. What if they built a light rail system throughout the whole campus? Its a very large campus, it gets cold in winter, it could be a great chance to showcase what cities should look to do for public transportation.
Its a university, that would also give them a cool chance to test out new light rail technology. Power saving/efficiency.. Anything.

Again my biggest problem with this is its a university campus. It was a huge chance for progressive thinking. Then again the education I received from that university was more about becoming a good employee, not becoming a good thinker. So I guess this is what I should have expected.

*rant over*

[headhorse]

that perkins + will design is so much better in so many ways

[Spocket]

Why spend so much money ? Why not simply build a shantytown ?

No , really. I mean look at what we're getting. It's sterile. It's lonely. It's lifeless and bland.
With a shantytown you solve all of those problems with the added bonus that it's pretty much free. If the people in a shantytown go anywhere , they'll almost certainly be going by public transportation so that's another bonus.

Actually , I started saying this with the intention of it being tongue-in-cheek. Then I realized that it really is a better idea.

Apparently I should be on the board that chooses these concepts.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Andy6

It's one of the stupidest ideas I've ever seen. It looks like a screen capture from a 1990s version of Sim City, after it was played for 10 minutes by a bored six year old. It's not a concept of anything. Look, for pete's sake, at what makes other university-area precincts lively and wonderful in places around North America (such as where I have lived personally, in the Harvard-MIT area and the University of Toronto neighbourhood). It's not isolated commieblocks-in-the-forest or unrealistic boat docks that would never be seen again after one season.

Nailed it! The naivety in thinking you could cut into the Red's banks to hack out a marina is beyond stupid. Sim city done by a bored six year old indeed.

[jthor]

I'm sorry to sound like a broken record here but, seriously, a close-up look at the Perkins+Will plan shows that it was absolutely wonderful and did all the right things: create more of a gateway to Pembina thereby connecting the campus to the city around, establish density and even some urbanity with classic collegiate touches right near the vacant parts of the North-West edge of the campus, bring in the LRT as a central component, leave some green space, link with the river. I am baffled as to how this ended up second.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by Wigglez

To Cyrodill
................

*rant over*

Feel better?

[Cyro]

The Smart Park Ecological Corridor at the University of Manitoba, as envisioned in the winning Visionary (re)Generation proposal "Arpent."

Their design won't be the final say but will rather "guide development," the university says.

Arpent mimics early French settlers' division of land into long, narrow river plots.

That structure was also used by early Metis settlers in the area, which is part of Treaty One lands.

"The creativity and ingenuity of the winning concept provides us with a starting point from which we will move from vision to reality," says David Barnard, president and vice-chancellor at the University of Manitoba. "Together with our partners the university will further transform our campus and community into a place that enriches the lives of all who learn here, work here, play here and call it home."


A public exhibition of all the work will be on display at the U of M from November 5-9, and the finalists will be displayed at Manitoba Hydro Place from December 11-29. Visit visionaryregeneration.com for more information.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/2013/11/0...outhwood-lands

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

The naivety in thinking you could cut into the Red's banks to hack out a marina is beyond stupid.

That is essentially what was done at the Forks.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by jthor

I'm sorry to sound like a broken record here but, seriously, a close-up look at the Perkins+Will plan shows that it was absolutely wonderful and did all the right things: create more of a gateway to Pembina thereby connecting the campus to the city around, establish density and even some urbanity with classic collegiate touches right near the vacant parts of the North-West edge of the campus, bring in the LRT as a central component, leave some green space, link with the river. I am baffled as to how this ended up second.

Several of the runners-up and honourable mentions did a much better job of charting a course for the U of M's land use. I'd be interested in hearing the rationale behind the choice that was made... I could understand if only one firm was commissioned to come up with a plan and this was the result. But in this case, it looks like several far superior alternatives were left on the table in favour of a real head-scratcher of a choice... I don't understand why.

[Cyro]

Perkins/Will Proposal..As mentioned before, extreme size/resolution..scroll up/down etc..

http://wwwdevapps.cc.umanitoba.ca/ip...ges/4006-1.jpg

[Riverman]

^^^ That is quite nice.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Cyrodill

Perkins/Will Proposal..As mentioned before, extreme size/resolution..scroll up/down etc..

Wow. Much better than the weird golf course looking type greenspace landscaping towers in the park thing the winner is...