Winnipeg Construction X

[Luisito]

That project by northgate looks great. That's exactly what the city needs more of. There is so much room all over the city to build residences like that.

[1ajs]

broposal for broadway and furby



some residents are pissed off it seems as it will replace this witch i kinda agree but why this and not the one down the street thts run as a slum?

[Biff]

Structural steel going up today on the 2 storey addition to the old Charter House Hotel.

[WinCitySparky]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

broposal for broadway and furby



some residents are pissed off it seems as it will replace this witch i kinda agree but why this and not the one down the street thts run as a slum?

..….because the “slum” owners have nothing to do with this property or project?

[T'Cona]

That proposal is hideous.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by WinCitySparky

..….because the “slum” owners have nothing to do with this property or project?

i mean why not buy the slum propert out for this instead

[WinCitySparky]

Sure if they were selling and it was cheap, I’m guessing it’s neither of these. It was recently sold to new owners, there were signs up earlier this year.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

Which slum property down the street?

[davequanbury]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

Which slum property down the street?

Probably the blue and white house next to Hunter and Gunn barbershop

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

i mean why not buy the slum propert out for this instead

If you own your house and want to upgrade the exterior, it would be ridiculous for someone to tell you "You should actually go buy the house down the street and redo its exterior, since it looks worse than yours right now".

Same concept, except building a whole new building. Developers aren't going to dump the properties they already own to try and buy out an active landowner (read - higher than fair market value) just because its a dumpier house.

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by WildCake

If you own your house and want to upgrade the exterior, it would be ridiculous for someone to tell you "You should actually go buy the house down the street and redo its exterior, since it looks worse than yours right now".

Same concept, except building a whole new building. Developers aren't going to dump the properties they already own to try and buy out an active landowner (read - higher than fair market value) just because its a dumpier house.

Yup. Development goes where the property owner is wanting to develop. It sucks because development seldom lines up with what urban planners (armchair or otherwise) would triage as the biggest eyesore sites to development. It's always the nice old house or the small storefront that goes, never the surface parking lot or ancient strip mall.

If you see a dumpy surface parking lot with almost no improvements made since since Juba was mayor, or a rooming house on death's door, odds are the land owner is too absent to sell or redevelop themselves. They will hold on to the property to extract pennies from it until they can't anymore.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by wardlow

Yup. Development goes where the property owner is wanting to develop. It sucks because development seldom lines up with what urban planners (armchair or otherwise) would triage as the biggest eyesore sites to development. It's always the nice old house or the small storefront that goes, never the surface parking lot or ancient strip mall.

If you see a dumpy surface parking lot with almost no improvements made since since Juba was mayor, or a rooming house on death's door, odds are the land owner is too absent to sell or redevelop themselves. They will hold on to the property to extract pennies from it until they can't anymore.

Policies and taxes that discourage surface lots and slum houses would work wonders at getting the owners of said eyesores to sell, even at lower than market value since they don't want to be losing money on their "investments". It would make it more attractive to upgrade these properties and thus greater community value as well.

[trueviking]

Came across this on LinkedIn.

They will likely learn that shipping containers don’t really work. I personally don’t think we should be putting homeless people in them either. Just build regular housing.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

I use my barbecue basically year round (maybe I'm crazy lol). I think having outdoor space is super under rated. The one thing I missed most at my old place was not having any outdoor space at all.

I agree. When I went from living in a spacious apartment with balcony and view to a smaller one without a balcony you definitely feel like you're missing out. Amazing what an extra ~100sq ft will do with access to fresh air and sunshine

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Came across this on LinkedIn.

They will likely learn that shipping containers don’t really work. I personally don’t think we should be putting homeless people in them either. Just build regular housing.

Why don't they work? Have these container home projects failed in other places?

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Luisito

Why don't they work? Have these container home projects failed in other places?

Steel has low thermal conductivity so it would be disastrous in our climate without a major insulation component. Cutting the metal on the shipping container for wiring, windows, doors etc compromises it’s tensile strength a lot which requires it to be reinforced by a different material anyway adding towards the cost. The most important reason is that shipping containers have various health risks because god knows what that shipping container was used for when it was in production.

[esquire]

Shipping containers can certainly be used for fun stuff like this little summertime shopping and entertainment space in Saint John, but it seems questionable as something for year-round habitation in our climate.



I guess it's worth looking into, though.

[wags_in_the_peg]

shipping containers use to be cheap, which provided a "green" solution as they were sitting in railyards / shipyards. Now, there appears to be a shortage of them which has driven up costs.

[trueviking]

I don't actually think you are allowed to use used shipping containers for residential. They have to be new, which defeats the purpose.

The interior dimensions are not livable. 7'-10" high and 7'-8" wide before you add strapping and drywall and electrical/mechanical....they are only useful if you don't have to cut them apart, as soon as you do, their structural integrity is lost and you have to start adding reinforcement. Any perceived efficiencies are gone.

Never mind the difficulty of adding insulation and vapour barriers to stacked metal boxes.

It's a stupid idea that was a greenwashing fad ten years ago....its cheaper and easier to just build a wood frame building with proper dimensions and building technologies.

[Coil]

The container housing project is a bit of a mystery to me...I can't imagine that being a good idea from an economic or environmental perspective. Nevertheless, there appears to be a company in Manitoba making houses out of shipping containers.

I'm interested in any attempts at prefab building and reforming the very inefficient construction industry, because we've never seen prefab be a success on a large scale in North America (this is an entire other discussion), but this appears to be a step in the wrong direction.

Rather than rehashing shipping container ideas, I think the future of prefab building looks a lot more like this:
https://www.atelierschmidt.ch/bombasei-naenikon