Winnipeg | CentrePoint | Alt/Glasshouse | 20F | 21F | 72.5M | 70M | Completed

[Cyro]

^ ^ Agree with both posts, AC and Buzz, there is/was always a place for the the establishments removed because of the build/parkade and the need for the outlets removed in the past, O Calcutta has a place here as well. The parkade has done nothing for the area mentioned, if anything it's moved it backward for any plus gain or attempt to make this area more appealing to pedestrians or add to the street level connectivity. The only draw is the LC.

[buzzg]

^Yeah, if we want that stretch of Ellice to ever regain any life, it's going to be imperative that if/when the surface lot across from the Masonic Temple is developed, it MUST have Ellice-fronting CRUS

[Urban recluse]

What is needed is an increase in population in the area, and a higher median income.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by cheswick

Not sure what the $1250 is based on. A $200k home with 5% down on a 25 year amo term and 3% interest would be roughly $900 a month.

You would add taxes and condo fees on top of that, but you are also accumulating equity in the home where as if you rent at the end of your term you have nothing to show for it.

Hey, if people are willing to pay 1250 for 450 sq ft, I'm all for it. Downtown needs a boosted income profile, and this indicates a demand we'd like to see.

[Authentic_City]

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

What is needed is an increase in population in the area, and a higher median income.

Boosting income and population alone won't improve the experience on the street in this area if condo owners (or apartment dwellers) live in bunkers disconnected from the street and accessed only through a parkade. The North Portage redevelopment injected a huge number of apartments behind Portage Place, but residents remained cut off from the street by the skywalks and the underground parking. These were nice apartments when they first opened, but it didn't do anything to encourage a lively pedestrian culture. CentrePoint seems destined to be much the same. There is no reason to walk down Ellice or Hargrave, and I would bet most folks will go from condo to parkade to car without ever setting foot on the street. It is a real shame the city didn't insist on street level CRUs in the parkade subsidized with public funds.

I get a good chuckle looking at the original renders of Glasshouse with lots of pedestrians milling about on the street with their lattes and smart phones. Quite a different scene on the street today. The image below is still on the CentrePoint website. Lol.



Today:

[Urban recluse]

True. However, with the average income around central park relatively low, there is no interest to open new stores, cafes, etc. The gentrification which has helped transform West Broadway is needed in Central Park. A clustering of social housing was a stupid move. The vicinity simply feels like a poor neighborhood.

[robertocarlos]

^^ Usually that intersection isn't that crowded. Is that parking garage even built straight? It looks a bit crooked on the second floor.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by robertocarlos

^^ Usually that intersection isn't that crowded. Is that parking garage even built straight? It looks a bit crooked on the second floor.

the floors are slopped as they serve as a ramp to the next lvl
also its a parking garage u need sloped floors to drain the water out

[buzzg]

Not only did they drop the CRUs from the original render, but the original one actually had some visual interest and covered the fact that it was a parkade. What was built looks cool at night with the LEDs (although the lighting inside kinda ruins it), but dreadful during the day. The city should make them put panelling like that yellow part over the whole thing, artfully.

[Urban recluse]

That is a 1990s kind of approval. Sad.

[CoryB]

If you slapped some LEDS on the side Smith St "Jail" aka parkade it really wouldn't be too different than the one at CentrePoint which is very sad.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by CoryB

If you slapped some LEDS on the side Smith St "Jail" aka parkade it really wouldn't be too different than the one at CentrePoint which is very sad.

Might be better... at least the Smith one uses some decent looking bricks. Just paint up the white and blue parts and it ain't too bad, as far as parkades here go.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Not only did they drop the CRUs from the original render, but the original one actually had some visual interest and covered the fact that it was a parkade. What was built looks cool at night with the LEDs (although the lighting inside kinda ruins it), but dreadful during the day. The city should make them put panelling like that yellow part over the whole thing, artfully.

The short answer: $$$

Original proposal was much more costly.

The current parkade looks just fine IMO... more flattering in some angles/light, less so in others. But it's also a parkade, not a museum.

Other than that, we're comparing a rendering to reality. I've seen renderings of the current parkade and they looked sweet.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

The short answer: $$$

Other than that, we're comparing a rendering to reality.

That shouldn't matter, the city should not allow developers to build buildings that don't follow what the masterplan lays out. If it costs more money to do it, well that's just the cost of business unfortunately. If you put CRUs in, you're going to make rent so the difference will eventually make it up. We're at a point where there's enough action going on around there that the city can 'afford' to say no sometime and enforce its own rules. They did it at the Bedford Parkade — what makes this (True North) project any different?

And no, we're comparing one rendering to what had a different rendering in reality. This is not a case of a shiny render turning out dull. It's a completely different design, not just cosmetically. The initial plan actually had Glasshouse on top of the parkade too.

At the VERY LEAST the city should've required them to build the parkade a bit taller and narrower to leave some room for a commercial building on the corner of Ellice & Hargrave.

[CoryB]

The design of the CentrePoint parkade removed the CRU and pushed GlassHouse close to Portage Ave to intentionally cerate a dead space to better isolate the prized SHED from the Central Park neighbourhood to the north. The lowering of cost for the parkade was an added bonus of course. The issue is much deeper than the yellow panel in the render looked nicer than the LED strips the build ended up with. Losing those CRU also makes it harder to trickle benefits from that development across Ellice and into the Central Park area.

[Urban recluse]

If there is demand, businesses will find a way to open up locations in the area. But, yes, very idiotic what was approved.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by buzzg

That shouldn't matter, the city should not allow developers to build buildings that don't follow what the masterplan lays out. If it costs more money to do it, well that's just the cost of business unfortunately. If you put CRUs in, you're going to make rent so the difference will eventually make it up. We're at a point where there's enough action going on around there that the city can 'afford' to say no sometime and enforce its own rules. They did it at the Bedford Parkade — what makes this (True North) project any different?

And no, we're comparing one rendering to what had a different rendering in reality. This is not a case of a shiny render turning out dull. It's a completely different design, not just cosmetically. The initial plan actually had Glasshouse on top of the parkade too.

At the VERY LEAST the city should've required them to build the parkade a bit taller and narrower to leave some room for a commercial building on the corner of Ellice & Hargrave.

Again, $$$. It was too expensive to build the tower on top of the parkade. also, narrower/taller = more concrete and less efficiency. What commercial building would go next to it? At what rents? What CRUs would go into that parkade? I'm not sure it would ever fill.

It would also take away the north view of way more Glasshouse units. They would lose hundreds of thousands of sales dollars, unless of course they built taller, which means higher costs. There is always a cost.

As for "the city should not allow".... well I don't put much stake in the capability of our City. Nor would I like them to dictate what happens to private property. Nor do they know what's best for the city all the time either. The cities that grow often are the cities that don't put arbitrary hurdles in front of developers. Winnipeg has not been one of those cities.

"The cost of doing business" is not to cater to idealistic whims like "that parkade should be nicer" when it's already a major upgrade to the area. We already have costs of doing business. And a master plan should be the slightest of guidelines.

There are a number of things I'd change about Centrepoint, but I choose to see the positive. Parkade? B, maybe B+ (There are a lot of uglier new ones). Glasshouse? B+. Alt? I think I'm one of the few who likes it, but lets say B to B+ to reflect popular opinion.

Winnipeg is still very much in the "just be thankful someone is doing something" stage, and I'm not sure it's always appreciated just how hard it is to a) get these deals to go ahead, and b) turn a profit. Are we just sitting back and thinking "when will these rich guys do something?" If we all suddenly had money, we wouldn't just get up and do this ourselves and score big.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Again, $$$. It was too expensive to build the tower on top of the parkade.

It would also take away the north view of way more Glasshouse units.

They could have built it as-is, put one floor of CRUS and just bumped the parkade up one level, if they wanted. They didn't build this "for the good of the city" — they did it to make money. They would have still made money, and if costs are a little higher, you can up the price a bit. Businesses would eventually have moved in, there's no doubt about that. Bedford took some time but is fully leased now.

Originally Posted by Wolf13

As for "the city should not allow".... well I don't put much stake in the capability of our City. Nor would I like them to dictate what happens to private property. Nor do they know what's best for the city all the time either. The cities that grow often are the cities that don't put arbitrary hurdles in front of developers. Winnipeg has not been one of those cities.

So you just think we should have no zoning, no development rules, no requirements for developers to adhere to? That's ridiculous.

The issue here with "arbitrary hurdles" almost always has nothing to do with design standards and requirements; it's usually just ridiculous red tape with permits, etc. at city hall. Making life easier for developers I am on board for, letting them do whatever the hell they please, I am not. That's how we almost got a Canalta at The Forks.

Originally Posted by Wolf13

"The cost of doing business" is not to cater to idealistic whims like "that parkade should be nicer" when it's already a major upgrade to the area.

You seriously think a half-assed giant parkade is better than a bunch of businesses?

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by buzzg

You seriously think a half-assed giant parkade is better than a bunch of businesses?

Given what came with it, it's a definitely improvement.

[robertocarlos]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Given what came with it, it's a definitely improvement.

The clubhouse sandwich from Wagonwheel came with real turkey but if you think the shit they serve at Moxies for 2X the price is better than that's OK.

Or are you inferring something else?