West Broadway Area | Winnipeg | Development - Page 6

Jeff · #**101** Posted **Jan 10, 2017, 7:40 PM**

it should be a heritage site just for the fact this building actually screams Mumbai or somewhere in the middle east by Winnipeg standards.

BigG · #**102** Posted **Jan 10, 2017, 7:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban recluse

Pending sale of 214/216 Sherbrook--hopefully something much better will replace it.

Of all people on this forum, I thought you would be the one to appreciate the colours of this establishment.

Urban recluse · #**103** Posted **Jan 10, 2017, 8:00 PM**

Hahahahaha. More Water Street (St. John's), less Selkirk Ave.

esquire · #**104** Posted **Jan 10, 2017, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff

it should be a heritage site just for the fact this building actually screams Mumbai or somewhere in the middle east by Winnipeg standards.

Gold!

buzzg · #**105** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 8:00 AM**

Ok, so... as much as I like seeing projects happening on Maryland, the new residential building going up where the fire was last year has got to be the most hideous thing I've ever seen. It's covered top to bottom in light grey tin roofing - looks like they plopped a hog barn down in the middle of Wolseley. I can't believe it. Barely any windows, and its just a big rectangle.

I know that construction costs are high and whatnot but come on... at least bottom-out at hardiboard. The new building a block south uses the tin cladding as well, but at least they used different colours, lots of wood as well, and the building has really interesting shapes.

Like are we seriously getting to the point of needing some sort of actualy beautification standards like they have in the States? Will try and get a picture tomorrow.

MG922 · #**106** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 3:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzg

Ok, so... as much as I like seeing projects happening on Maryland, the new residential building going up where the fire was last year has got to be the most hideous thing I've ever seen. It's covered top to bottom in light grey tin roofing - looks like they plopped a hog barn down in the middle of Wolseley. I can't believe it. Barely any windows, and its just a big rectangle.

I know that construction costs are high and whatnot but come on... at least bottom-out at hardiboard. The new building a block south uses the tin cladding as well, but at least they used different colours, lots of wood as well, and the building has really interesting shapes.

Like are we seriously getting to the point of needing some sort of actualy beautification standards like they have in the States? Will try and get a picture tomorrow.

Completely agreed. Ugliest recent build around. Zero effort to attempt to fit in with the neighbourhood. Snapped a pic a few weeks ago...there's not a single window on the giant south facing wall!?

Edit: figured out how to resize an image

bomberjet · #**107** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 4:12 PM**

What in the hell. That's horrible.. That belongs on someone's farmyard for storing tractors. Beautiful church across the street, then this.

Authentic_City · #**108** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 4:57 PM**

Is there another building planned for the lot to the south? I'm guessing the south facing wall might be too close to the property line for windows? But yeah, I'm not loving the corrugated metal siding look.

WolselyMan · #**109** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 5:00 PM**

Maybe it's just my highly active imagination playing up here, but the 2nd version of this building always looked incredibly shoddy. It gave off the appearance of being 'stitched' together. I don't remember thinking these things about the original construction site. And I certainly remember the first building having much more windows than this.

To be honest, part of me is hoping that this building has been constructed so shoddily that there will be no alternative choice besides tearing it down. It's either all or nothing, and the developer appears to have settled with aiming smack for the middle instead; something that planners in Winnipeg have a chronic habit of doing all too often. (cough*rapid transit*cough)

Besides, maybe if they pulled the plug on this project we could actually take advantage of the extra lot created by the arson, and build something even more ambitious then the original vision.

bomberjet · #**110** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 5:38 PM**

Why would they change the design after the fire. Why not re-build the same thing again?

Authentic_City · #**111** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 5:42 PM**

^good question. The Ranjjan Developments webpage for this project no longer exists. Perhaps they are now rental rather than condo? Wish I could find the original render.

MG922 · #**112** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 5:56 PM**

i thought there was talk a while back of the developer changing the plans for the building after the fire. Presumably to take advantage of the extra space where the demolished (fire damaged) house was, immediately south.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyro

Same developer, this one is at about the same stage of construction..

The Flats on Westminster

The original render. It has definitely changed, and not for the better.

DancingDuck · #**113** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 5:59 PM**

If my memory is correct the north facing side has a ton of windows... But yeah I'm not digging the farm shed vibe, hopefully the south side will be blocked shortly by another building

buzzg · #**114** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 8:46 PM**

It actually looks to be the same design as that render, the cantilevered parking area is there on the other side.

Also DD, there is more windows on the north side, but still not what you would expect from residential.

Even if they just stuck with dark colours it wouldn't be as bad. It's hideous.

MG922 · #**115** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 9:03 PM**

North side of the building:

headhorse · #**116** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 9:46 PM**

There is something about this development from the City Centre Committee, basically saying that the cladding materials they are using are not approved and the recommendation to construct the building per previously approved plans.

headhorse · #**117** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 9:47 PM**

also the Sotirios/Cibinel prpject at 267 Sherbrook was also approved but looks to now be only six stories

drew · #**118** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 10:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Is there another building planned for the lot to the south? I'm guessing the south facing wall might be too close to the property line for windows? But yeah, I'm not loving the corrugated metal siding look.

Correct, the south side cannot have openings and must be built with non-combustible siding and framing.

I am holding out hope for the east and north sides that they include a bit a something other than corrugated steel.

Incidentally, the house the burned down on Westminster, immediately to the west, is currently being re-built. It was the one known as "raspberry manor". I believe the owner said it would be rebuilt and renamed as "phoenix manor".

trueviking · #**119** Posted **Mar 4, 2017, 10:46 PM**

Shouldn't judge it until it's done. I'm curious to see how the window wells will work directly on the sidewalk. Seems a good dump of snow and they could be completely covered. It also looks deeper than 24" which would require a guardrail. It's a curious detail.

buzzg · #**120** Posted **Mar 5, 2017, 1:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by headhorse

There is something about this development from the City Centre Committee, basically saying that the cladding materials they are using are not approved and the recommendation to construct the building per previously approved plans.

Is there legal grounds for the city to force them to change it if it really wasn't approved as built?