Winnipeg Construction

[trueviking]

my three most hated parking lots are (in order) , portage and main, graham in front of the old post office and graham across from the MTS centre.

followed closely by the ones south of the convention centre, the one on bannatyne at waterfront....and the giant swath along the tracks.

the stupidest parking lot is the one that forms part of old market square...if i was mayor that would be the first thing i changed.

[lilwayne]

Originally Posted by trueviking

my three most hated parking lots are (in order) , portage and main, graham in front of the old post office and graham across from the MTS centre.

followed closely by the ones south of the convention centre, the one on bannatyne at waterfront....and the giant swath along the tracks.

the stupidest parking lot is the one that forms part of old market square...if i was mayor that would be the first thing i changed.

BIFF or TRUVIKING im guessing you guys have seen the proposals for the mpi lots... I bet the new tallest be filling one of those lots... Okay we wont compete with calgary but having 10- 15 new highrise, mid rises and 100 meter plus bldgs will make a significant difference in our downtown.

[Wigglez]

Originally Posted by flatlander

Geez I swear I didn't mean to copy that!

There's a nice red brick building underneath that giant tiger sign. They made it look cheap and nasty on purpose.

hahaha nice to see someone else hates that lot too!

I think it would be perfect for a nice tall condo tower. It would be a quick walk to Portage, Main, and the exchange!

[Wigglez]

Originally Posted by trueviking

the stupidest parking lot is the one that forms part of old market square...if i was mayor that would be the first thing i changed.

That lot is just so annoying... And it tells the story of downtown winnipeg fairly well.

You have a really nice green space surrounded by some beautiful heritage buildings, and then theres an ugly grey parking lot at one side taking down the charm of the area.

With the RRC addition to the square I really hope someone steps up and puts something of value there. Its one of the best lots in the city, its on main street and in the heart of the exchange.

[1ajs]

now i got another confirmation via a city employee at realistate this things real just have to wait and see

all i really wonder at this point is how big are the floor plates?

[armorand93]

Maybe this is what the Mayans predicted - the end of the world mocking our three skyscrapers!

[Biff]

Apparently at city hall right now they are debating whether or not to assist CentreVenture in a loan to purchase the Carleton Inn. I presume this would be related to the new, proposed WCC Hotel site (my assumption).

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Biff

Apparently at city hall right now they are debating whether or not to assist CentreVenture in a loan to purchase the Carleton Inn. I presume this would be related to the new, proposed WCC Hotel site (my assumption).

I still wish that a new WCC hotel that is not on the surface lot south of York between Carelton and Edmonton would be on the WCB surface parking lot one block east. We really need to beef up downtown between Portage and Broadway and taking on the surface lots specifically in that area should be high on the priority list.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by CoryB

I still wish that a new WCC hotel that is not on the surface lot south of York between Carelton and Edmonton would be on the WCB surface parking lot one block east. We really need to beef up downtown between Portage and Broadway and taking on the surface lots specifically in that area should be high on the priority list.

Most people have said that it will be a cold day in hell before the WCB gives up their parking lot.

[trueviking]

they will give it up, but they will expect the same number of stalls at the same cost to their employees in return....so if a developer buys the site and builds a parkade, they would have to subsidize those stalls forever.

[khabibulin]

Originally Posted by trueviking

they will give it up, but they will expect the same number of stalls at the same cost to their employees in return....so if a developer buys the site and builds a parkade, they would have to subsidize those stalls forever.

Since when did employer subsudized parking become a forever and ever entitlement to WCB employees? Seems kind of messed up to me! How many people work downtown with no right to a parking subsidy? Why can't WCB employees also tough it out like the majority of downtown workers?

[1ajs]

cause they own the land and its their right to put cavits on it as they own the land

[flatlander]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

cause they own the land and its their right to put cavits on it as they own the land

the employees don't own the land. WCB owns the land. it's probably a negotiated part of their contract. I assume they're unionized? But WCB could change that if they wanted. I'd love to see someone go on strike over subsidized parking.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by flatlander

the employees don't own the land. WCB owns the land. it's probably a negotiated part of their contract. I assume they're unionized? But WCB could change that if they wanted. I'd love to see someone go on strike over subsidized parking.

kinda makes sens though i would imagin they need to be able to drive around to go visit clames in hospital at home ect ect?

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

kinda makes sens though i would imagin they need to be able to drive around to go visit clames in hospital at home ect ect?

If so, that would be like 1% of their workforce.

[CoryB]

The fact remains that there is a deal to be made to rid us of the WCB parking lot. Perhaps something along the lines of splitting the lot with the south section becoming a hotel and the north park a multi-level parking structure. My thinking here is that the land could be purchased for the cost to build the multi-level parking structure with the same number of spaces as the surface lot. Once the parkade is built the on-going up-keep could become a responsibility of the WCB. This seems like a more reasonable approach than a developer needed to construct and maintain parking spaces forever.

Edit: Call the Carelton Inn rumor confirmed. Sounds like the deal price is $6.6 million.

Source: CJOB

[good_dude]

Originally Posted by Shinook

Regardless of whether it is or isn't going to happen, perhaps instead of constantly being Mr. Negative and saying "no no no", perhaps maybe just let us keep the discussion going. It's nice to have this amount of good news right around Christmas time. I'll enjoy seeing whatever plays out over the next few years, tallest or no tallest. But comon man, it's the holiday season. Leave the grinch persona at home and just let us enjoy the speculation, and hell even join in with us in the fun, key word being "fun"

I totally disagree. What I WOULDN'T like to see is a case where everyone on this forum has rose coloured glasses. I think any of us would support a new tallest as we would support many kinds of development, but I don't see how it's productive to dream about certain developments while stifling closer analysis of them. I'd like to think this forum can help forumers learn a bit about planning, including economics and the market, which are arguably the most important determinants of change.

[Shinook]

Originally Posted by good_dude

I totally disagree. What I WOULDN'T like to see is a case where everyone on this forum has rose coloured glasses. I think any of us would support a new tallest as we would support many kinds of development, but I don't see how it's productive to dream about certain developments while stifling closer analysis of them. I'd like to think this forum can help forumers learn a bit about planning, including economics and the market, which are arguably the most important determinants of change.

His analysis has been well documented many times. I think we all get where he's coming from. He has provided indepth "analysis" of his point of view, and I do appreciate it, but now it's recently been more about saying "no" in a debbie-downer kind of scenario. BUT he isn't privy to inside info like several forumers seem to be on here, and I believe they know more about these kinds of development than he has; don't see all that big of a "rose-coloured" glasses scenario here.

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by good_dude

I totally disagree. What I WOULDN'T like to see is a case where everyone on this forum has rose coloured glasses. I think any of us would support a new tallest as we would support many kinds of development, but I don't see how it's productive to dream about certain developments while stifling closer analysis of them. I'd like to think this forum can help forumers learn a bit about planning, including economics and the market, which are arguably the most important determinants of change.

I think that there is some truth to this. I would like to see Winnipeg get a "new tallest" as much as the rest of you, but even if we assumed that there was just enough demand for a new, tall office tower (and that's a large assumption), imagine that as soon as it was built, the office space market in Winnipeg would suddenly have a massive increase in supply and not enough demand to completely fill it. A few months back there was a free press article that outlined the current prices for office space in Winnipeg based on class, and even the highest class of office space in Winnipeg was still too cheap to make any sort of major office construction profitable. Now if for some reason a project did come along and make a tower which opened up office space, it would depress the price much further than it is now, resulting in even less incentive for further developers to build something office related in the future, which would not be a very good thing.

I think that sometimes we have to remind ourselves that just because vacancy rates may be low for office space, that doesn't mean there is a large demand for it. It simply means the majority of the stock is being used up, and unless some major force comes in that demands significantly more office space, a new office tower, let alone a "new tallest" isn't likely to happen. The market prices for office space just isn't high enough. I think we all know that Winnipeg likes to grow slow and steady, avoiding large booms or busts, and so Winnipeg does not seem like the city that would suddenly attract a large, foreign tenant who would demand more offices. Instead, I think it's more likely that as the already existing local and international firms here grow, this will slowly increase their needs, allowing for small scale expansion projects to take place, as opposed one rare massive one, and I don't think that there is anything wrong with that type of growth.

However, if it was a mixed use building, that would be an entirely different story, but I have a hard time imagining Winnipeg's new tallest building being a hotel or condo.

[1ajs]

in other news

theres a litz crane being deliverd to centerpoint on flat bed so i would imagin they will start assembly tomarrow of that




and theres a new restraunt opening at the albert soon????