Polo Park Expansion - Page 9

armorand93 · #**161** Posted **Mar 5, 2020, 7:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzg

This development is significantly different than almost every other Shindico development of big box crap and parking lots.

Just don't tell Sam Katz about the new TOD! He might convince Shindico to start building competing beige 30-storey jenga blocks right next door. Exorbitant costs included!

buzzg · #**162** Posted **Apr 21, 2020, 12:54 AM**

The property and dev committee vote was tied 2-2, after the community committee voted unanimously in favour. It will now go to EPC.

joshlemer · #**163** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 6:23 PM**

CJOB reporting that the project was voted against by EPC today, 4-3.

esquire · #**164** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 6:27 PM**

Annoying, but not unexpected given WAA's insistence that adding more residential buildings to an area that already has a pile of residential buildings will somehow ruin the airport.

drew · #**165** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 6:34 PM**

Disappointing, but given the current economic climate, there wasn't much chance of this render becoming anywhere near what is depicted anyhow.

It was a long shot pre-COVID.

esquire · #**166** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 6:48 PM**

Yeah, true enough. But least a green light would have given us some hope that some form of the proposal could proceed quickly once the economy recovers, whenever that might be.

headhorse · #**167** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 7:07 PM**

I've made this prediction before, but now with everything that's happened, I guarantee the airport never again sees as much traffic as it did before the shut down... it's insane we're letting these companies dictate development so it can continue to be a useful place for them to profit.

EspionNoir · #**168** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 7:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by headhorse

I've made this prediction before, but now with everything that's happened, I guarantee the airport never again sees as much traffic as it did before the shut down... it's insane we're letting these companies dictate development so it can continue to be a useful place for them to profit.

“Guarantee”
“Profit”

trueviking · #**169** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

Disappointing, but given the current economic climate, there wasn't much chance of this render becoming anywhere near what is depicted anyhow.

It was a long shot pre-COVID.

What makes you say that? This was a long term plan. We will be back. People gotta live somewhere.

drew · #**170** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 7:20 PM**

^ I agree, but I dunno - that proposal always seems too pie in the sky for me.

plrh · #**171** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 7:25 PM**

What is the height/density limit there within the current airport development zone? Maybe this could encourage a revisit to current structural planning in the area. Including the airport's plan. If Winnipeg has a second node, this is it.

wardlow · #**172** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 7:33 PM**

I can already see the comments: 'I guess EPC doesn't want economic development...'

Bruh, keeping an international airport and associated uses inside city limits *is* economic development. Fewer sexy renderings for sure, but economic development all the same.

That said, it would certainly be nice to have the Airport Area boundaries re-examined... comprehensively, not just on the fly (pun intended) whenever a landowner feels like residential development. The Airport Authority does seems amenable to doing that, and recognizes that flight paths change over time.

headhorse · #**173** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 8:31 PM**

^ EPC chooses all the time to prioritize one from of development over another.. suburban over urban, low density vs high density, parkings lots over parks.. they're almost always wrong because they're decisions almost always benefit the smallest number of citizens.

pspeid · #**174** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 9:17 PM**

My comment copied from the Construction thread:

I know many here will disagree but right now I agree with this. Amend the bylaw, with input from WAA, don't just ignore it because Shindico shows some pretty pictures and makes claims that the airport will not be affected. As I have said before, Shindico and CF do not make these plans with the best interests of the city in mind, they make plans because they see profit for themselves. That's perfectly acceptable, of course, but it means they should not simply be believed when they claim there will be no negative impact on the airport.

Actually, I was starting to wonder what a large-scale residential development at Polo Park might do to the efforts to bring more residential downtown? Could it have put a halt to further downtown residential density?

pspeid · #**175** Posted **Apr 28, 2020, 9:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wardlow

I can already see the comments: 'I guess EPC doesn't want economic development...'

Bruh, keeping an international airport and associated uses inside city limits *is* economic development. Fewer sexy renderings for sure, but economic development all the same.

That said, it would certainly be nice to have the Airport Area boundaries re-examined... comprehensively, not just on the fly (pun intended) whenever a landowner feels like residential development. The Airport Authority does seems amenable to doing that, and recognizes that flight paths change over time.

Exactly!

dam_well · #**176** Posted **May 1, 2020, 6:17 PM**

Does anyone know what's going on at the old Sears part of the mall? I drove past today and they're sure doing something.

Biff · #**177** Posted **May 1, 2020, 6:31 PM**

2nd level - 24-7 Intouch Offices
Main floor - One new retailer
Base Building upgrades

dam_well · #**178** Posted **May 1, 2020, 6:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

2nd level - 24-7 Intouch Offices
Main floor - One new retailer
Base Building upgrades

Thanks for the info!

I a call centre is better than empty. I wonder what else could end up on the bottom floor

Biff · #**179** Posted **May 1, 2020, 7:03 PM**

Highest percentage guess is Simons

esquire · #**180** Posted **May 1, 2020, 7:07 PM**

I still don't get why 24/7 wouldn't have just taken up more space in the former Target and pushed the Winners into Polo Park. So many big box stores are just scattered around that area on a one-off basis with nothing else around, and I'm sure a lot people who might pop into them if they were at Polo Park don't bother when they're out of the way. For instance, I've never bothered going into Atmosphere. I went to Bed, Bath and Beyond once. I'm sure I would have popped into them more often if they were actually in Polo Park.