Winnipeg | 300 Main St.- Phase II / 360 Main St. | ~142M | 465 Ft | 42F | U/C - Page 143

wardlow · #**2841** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheswick

By the Riddlers clues there, its gotta be Earls. They obviously wanted to re-do their space but were their plans were shot down. Maybe they'd be more willing to go parking lot free in that area of downtown.

I can't/shouldn't confirm. Would be funny to see Earls go from pitching a new one-storey building which was rejected because it was too short... move into the ground floor of the tallest building in the city.

esquire · #**2842** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:17 PM**

If Earls leaves their current location, I wonder what the means for their site? That could be one of the juiciest redevelopment sites in all of downtown... high profile and very visible, immediately adjacent to The Forks, close to Portage and Main and right along a major street with excellent transit service.

...so naturally a 3 storey Canalta hotel will go there.

windypeg · #**2843** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheswick

By the Riddlers clues there, its gotta be Earls. They obviously wanted to re-do their space but were their plans were shot down. Maybe they'd be more willing to go parking lot free in that area of downtown.

that doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Earl's would be trading a very profitable location for a new space that's half the size, why would they do that?

esquire · #**2844** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:22 PM**

^ A great deal from Artis/Marwest/whoever the landlord actually is?

Biff · #**2845** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Or could it be The Keg?

This I would officially boycott....I love the Keg location on Garry. It would probably upset me more than Portage and Main staying closed.

cheswick · #**2846** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by windypeg

that doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Earl's would be trading a very profitable location for a new space that's half the size, why would they do that?

Spitballing it its true. They obviously wanted to rebuild, so they have some issues with the current restaurant in some way. They aren't in the business of property development. They could see more value in selling the current property and leasing in a new marquee building. From my understanding their Main st location used to be the best performer in the country but it's now average.

esquire · #**2847** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheswick

Spitballing it its true. They obviously wanted to rebuild, so they have some issues with the current restaurant in some way. They aren't in the business of property development. They could see more value in selling the current property and leasing in a new marquee building. From my understanding their Main st location used to be the best performer in the country but it's now average.

They didn't have much competition in the 90s... there weren't many of those types of casual dining restaurants downtown in those days. Contrast with today, when the SHED is chock full of them.

Jeff · #**2848** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 6:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

...so naturally a 3 storey Canalta hotel will go there.

with the city's LARGEST (or smallest) WATERPARK!!!!

if earls moves to 300 main, comping parking spots in the Winnipeg square parkade wouldn't be that tough on evenings im sure... most people are for sure capable of driving out of that thing after an evening imbibing right?

bomberjet · #**2849** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 6:36 PM**

I would love for Earl's to sell that land and someone come in with a long mid rise building, CRU's on the front street. Some kind of walking/pedestrian/something along the backside near the tracks.

High rises would be cool too, of course.

esquire · #**2850** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 6:42 PM**

^ It's a pretty big site, you could easily do a Sutton Place-type twin building complex if residential/hotel is the aim.

Or conversely, a tech company like Skip the Dishes could build a whopper of an office building to house a ton of employees on less than 10 large floorplates.

Spocket · #**2851** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:19 PM**

It strikes me as unlikely that Earl's would move to any new site further away from the Forks. P&M is good place for the lunch crowd but that's pretty much it. Actually, it's not even good for the lunch crowd for the simple reason that people don't have two hours to spend at Earl's waiting for lunch. If you do the math for average times to get there, order your food, have it served, pay and get back to work, people will almost never say "Let's go to Earl's for lunch!"

Otherwise, there's no good reason at all for them to move. Even with this tower, there simply aren't enough people in the area to support the place especially with a lack of free parking. Now they'll have the new development on the back of the Forks to boost their walk-in clientele. They ain't going anywhere and they'd be idiots if they seriously considered a move. They get their money from the Forks and people going to and from work or Jets games. It makes absolutely no sense for them to choose a new location at such an inaccessible location. They want to redevelop the site because that brings in new customers. In fact, a crowd attracts a crowd so if there were more restaurants on that row they'd actually be happier. I'm not even sure why people here are seriously entertaining the possibility of them moving to any other space.

By the way, I keep seeing it pop up so what's a CRU?

BigG · #**2852** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:24 PM**

Commercial/Retail Unit.

bomberjet · #**2853** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:27 PM**

I would agree with spocket that I don't see them selling the site. But hey you never know. Having them sit on that land forever is not doing anything. A la SkyCity, holding the city hostage.

esquire · #**2854** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:35 PM**

^ Is there a possibility that they might just park in 300 Main temporarily (well, for a few years) while a development gets built on their current site?

Spocket · #**2855** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I would agree with spocket that I don't see them selling the site. But hey you never know. Having them sit on that land forever is not doing anything. A la SkyCity, holding the city hostage.

Did they move out of the space? If not then how can anybody have a problem with a successful business and tacitly imply that they're wasting the city's development opportunities? They're not holding the city hostage and I'm not sure I understand how anybody can make that suggestion.

wardlow · #**2856** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Is there a possibility that they might just park in 300 Main temporarily (well, for a few years) while a development gets built on their current site?

That seems like a lot of expense to move to a new location (while still keeping up branding, quality, etc. at the temp location), then moving back. Seems like you could lose a lot of customers that way. I haven't heard of that in the restaurant business before?

bomberjet · #**2857** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 7:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spocket

Did they move out of the space? If not then how can anybody have a problem with a successful business and tacitly imply that they're wasting the city's development opportunities? They're not holding the city hostage and I'm not sure I understand how anybody can make that suggestion.

They're still in the current space at Main and York. However, they own all the property along Main St. from York to St. Mary. It's a wasteland right now and the City can't really do anything. Earl's proposed to put up another building at the north end, IIRC it was 2 storey's, then demolish the existing and turn it into parking. Which doesn't meet the Cities zoning bylaws or something.

So now we're in a cycle of who blinks first. Earl's or the City. Earl's selling the land and going elsewhere frees everything up. Like I said though, why would they do that?

Kris22 · #**2858** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 8:15 PM**

Will this view ever look different in two years!

Also my bet is on Moxies relocation.

cheswick · #**2859** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 8:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

They're still in the current space at Main and York. However, they own all the property along Main St. from York to St. Mary. It's a wasteland right now and the City can't really do anything. Earl's proposed to put up another building at the north end, IIRC it was 2 storey's, then demolish the existing and turn it into parking. Which doesn't meet the Cities zoning bylaws or something.

So now we're in a cycle of who blinks first. Earl's or the City. Earl's selling the land and going elsewhere frees everything up. Like I said though, why would they do that?

It was a single storey, they argued it was close in height to two stories. Regardless the city requires 3 stories and also had an issue with the parking arrangement, wanting it behind the building or in a parkade. It was rejected and Earls said they had no plans to revise their proposal. This was in 2015.(For the record Gerbasi and Orlikow voted against, Jeff Browaty and Brian Mayes voted for)

esquire · #**2860** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 8:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wardlow

That seems like a lot of expense to move to a new location (while still keeping up branding, quality, etc. at the temp location), then moving back. Seems like you could lose a lot of customers that way. I haven't heard of that in the restaurant business before?

Yeah, fair enough. It somehow seemed more plausible before you brought all those pesky facts into it.