Winnipeg | Red River College | Innovation Centre Exchange District campus | U/C

[Ando]

Continuing the dialogue that is!

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by esquire

The fact that the skywalk is linking a single complex makes a difference here IMO.

I don't think anyone would suggest that a new downtown-style skywalk network linking all the buildings in the Exchange would be a great idea. But in this case RRC is basically one big complex which will now span a couple of streets... I can definitely appreciate why they would want to have a skywalk link connecting their buildings. Personally, I don't think it's a big deal.

Basically my position as well. The urbanist in me definitely doesn't like the skywalks anywhere, but as a user I guiltily love them. I think having ground-floor uses oriented to the street is a better way to encourage street activity than people walking from one front door to another.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by Ando

Look, go back and read my posts if you want. The points I have made stand. I think your arguments are weak, unconvincing and somewhat convoluted. Hope that clears things up. Not sure why that’s not getting through to you but don’t really see any point in continuity using the dialogue.

What you're not getting (and I have read your posts) is that I'm basing my opinions on principles. This isn't made up shit. While we clearly need each other like yin and yang to kick up dust on SSP, I've repeatedly stated proven market principles throughout this forum, only for you to do the Ron Burgundy "...... I don't believe you".

I'm stating the obvious, and if it's ever not obvious perhaps it is because this forum tends to forget what developers need out of their projects. I don't think the lack of a skywalk is detrimental to the campus, but I do think it is less than optimal for the project. To scale back the highest and best use is simply unwise. The project/owner, the end user/tenant, then the streetscape, in that order. Not that streetscape is a distant third.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Basically my position as well. The urbanist in me definitely doesn't like the skywalks anywhere, but as a user I guiltily love them.

Which is what I'm trying to get across... yes, urbanism = no skywalks (which I think is less valid in extreme climates), but make a property or area appealing to the end user and you draw people in. Ergo, pedestrian activity and all that.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

What you're not getting (and I have read your posts) is that I'm basing my opinions on principles. This isn't made up shit. While we clearly need each other like yin and yang to kick up dust on SSP, I've repeatedly stated proven market principles throughout this forum, only for you to do the Ron Burgundy "...... I don't believe you".

I'm stating the obvious, and if it's ever not obvious perhaps it is because this forum tends to forget what developers need out of their projects. I don't think the lack of a skywalk is detrimental to the campus, but I do think it is less than optimal for the project. To scale back the highest and best use is simply unwise. The project/owner, the end user/tenant, then the streetscape, in that order. Not that streetscape is a distant third.

You state what you consider to be obvious in your little world based on your philosophy and your principles. Thankfully, people hold different principles and values. I thought I was clear though, I'm not buying what you're selling so no need to engage further on this.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Which is what I'm trying to get across... yes, urbanism = no skywalks (which I think is less valid in extreme climates), but make a property or area appealing to the end user and you draw people in. Ergo, pedestrian activity and all that.

I think this is stretching it a bit far, cause it's not like students will be making their decisions on whether to take classes at RRC based on if it has skywalks or not. Education is pretty inelastic; sure you have a few choices, but really the walking connections on campus are probably not gonna factor into how many people are gonna be on site overall.

But for the students there, I think it'll be a good amenity to have. Again, as esquire said, it's all one campus so it makes sense. Not like we're funneling them to Portage and Main from there. And it's not like people running through the cold for 5 seconds between front doors is gonna add a whole lot of spark to the area.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by Ando

You state what you consider to be obvious in your little world based on your philosophy and your principles. Thankfully, people hold different principles and values. I thought I was clear though, I'm not buying what you're selling so no need to engage further on this.

Experience and principles.

I spend a significant amount of time professionally investing money, my own and that of others in exactly this stuff, talking to professionals who develop/build/own. While I'm not a developer, it overlaps strongly into my world. Considering this is the financial world, which claims a large role in real estate, also a big big world, your petty attempts to talk my perspective down are laughable. My o

And I mean principle as a fundamental truth to pursuing the most effective use of real estate, not an opinionated stance on urbanism morality. This isn't coming from "my little corner of the world". Quite frankly, there are next to no private professionals in these two industries that think like you. And no, you're not keeping "the man" accountable, you're not batman

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I think this is stretching it a bit far, cause it's not like students will be making their decisions on whether to take classes at RRC based on if it has skywalks or not. Education is pretty inelastic; sure you have a few choices, but really the walking connections on campus are probably not gonna factor into how many people are gonna be on site overall.

But for the students there, I think it'll be a good amenity to have. Again, as esquire said, it's all one campus so it makes sense. Not like we're funneling them to Portage and Main from there. And it's not like people running through the cold for 5 seconds between front doors is gonna add a whole lot of spark to the area.

Certainly not entirely. The point is when you're an owner/developer, you consistently make the decision for the end user easier, not harder. Winnipeg is historically one of those cities known by expats as a place where making money always had more barriers or red tape.

When you make your product easier to use, more likeable or more effective, it intrinsically raises its value or use. That attracts more outside attention and potentially investment, and who knows, attendance. Attendance = more people. This is but one factor, but stack all the pros and cons against each other and you'll find a million issues that won't be single determinants to a decision. But if a strong amount of these factors fall on the wrong side, it becomes weighty. For me, adding comfort and convenience, two things our downtown needs improvement in, can be benficial long term.

My position for the skywalk individually is just to offset the opposition in equal measure.

[windypeg]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Certainly not entirely. The point is when you're an owner/developer, you consistently make the decision for the end user easier, not harder. Winnipeg is historically one of those cities known by expats as a place where making money always had more barriers or red tape.

When you make your product easier to use, more likeable or more effective, it intrinsically raises its value or use. That attracts more outside attention and potentially investment, and who knows, attendance. Attendance = more people. This is but one factor, but stack all the pros and cons against each other and you'll find a million issues that won't be single determinants to a decision. But if a strong amount of these factors fall on the wrong side, it becomes weighty. For me, adding comfort and convenience, two things our downtown needs improvement in, can be benficial long term.

My position for the skywalk individually is just to offset the opposition in equal measure.

Certainly the skywalk has value for the tenants/users of these buildings, but I don't think that's what's really being debated here. I think we'd mostly agree the skywalk would be useful to students but I think the debate is should that be permitted in a heritage district? The streetscape is not insignificant, a historical district or character neighbourhood is an asset greater than the sum of its parts and provides tangible economic benefits to the properties within it. I mean if a developer wanted to build a single-storey Burger King with a drive-thru and surface parking on Albert st, and felt a drive-thru would enhance the value of what they're building, does that just outweigh the impact on all the surrounding properties? Surely there is a balance between the needs of the developer and impact on the rest of the block.

That having been said, I can live with this skywalk seeing as it's on the very edge of the Exchange and will be surrounded by mostly modern buildings once Marketlands takes shape

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Wolf13

Experience and principles.

I spend a significant amount of time professionally investing money, my own and that of others in exactly this stuff, talking to professionals who develop/build/own. While I'm not a developer, it overlaps strongly into my world. Considering this is the financial world, which claims a large role in real estate, also a big big world, your petty attempts to talk my perspective down are laughable. My o

And I mean principle as a fundamental truth to pursuing the most effective use of real estate, not an opinionated stance on urbanism morality. This isn't coming from "my little corner of the world". Quite frankly, there are next to no private professionals in these two industries that think like you. And no, you're not keeping "the man" accountable, you're not batman

You have no idea what I do or what my experience or expertise entails. I do know that you have a certain perspective, however misguided, that I don't agree with. Intellectually, you're not even worth my time because you are too narrow-minded. You weren't going to convince me the Inuit Art Centre was a bad idea and you aren't going to convince me of this either. You do live in a little world. If you think otherwise, you really need to get over yourself. So as I've said several times now, we don't need to engage on this anymore.

[tree]

i see both sides of this one. its a tough call. i hate skywalks especially in the exchange but there is something to be said for the staff and faculty too - for convenience and to attract them to the area these little things add up. i also gotta think about moving equipment around and everything - a bit of a pain to have to exit the building. it just makes a slightly overall, nicer working environment. i agree with both Ando and Wolf on a few things but the buildings at UW for example that are separated from the rest of the campus can be a pain to get to. Even the walk across to Duckworth Center from the rest of the campus - super short but its nice to have that skywalk especially in winter. One can enter campus from the heated underground parking in Axeworthy and make it all the way to old Wesley hall entirely indoors.

Now thats UW but I can see why Red River wants to do this from an operations / convenience standpoint. Its not just students but faculty, maintenance, visitors, security, etc. For what they've done for the Exchange I can give them a pass on this as much as I get the other side of the argument as well. Hopefully it doesn't look too ugly.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by windypeg

Certainly the skywalk has value for the tenants/users of these buildings, but I don't think that's what's really being debated here. I think we'd mostly agree the skywalk would be useful to students but I think the debate is should that be permitted in a heritage district? The streetscape is not insignificant, a historical district or character neighbourhood is an asset greater than the sum of its parts and provides tangible economic benefits to the properties within it. I mean if a developer wanted to build a single-storey Burger King with a drive-thru and surface parking on Albert st, and felt a drive-thru would enhance the value of what they're building, does that just outweigh the impact on all the surrounding properties? Surely there is a balance between the needs of the developer and impact on the rest of the block.

That having been said, I can live with this skywalk seeing as it's on the very edge of the Exchange and will be surrounded by mostly modern buildings once Marketlands takes shape

This is a good point too. It's not like they're desecrating historic brick buildings around Old Market Square. It'll be two modern buildings - aesthetically, it'll look fine.

[Wpg_Guy]

https://instagram.fybz2-1.fna.fbcdn....63348398_n.jpg
Tomasz Fiertek (@tomaszfiertek) on Instagram

[buzzg]

Just as the new lofts on Ross are opening behind this, the city has started to rip up the block to do sewer/water upgrades. I know the city doesn't really plan these around private development interests, but man it would have been nice if they did this during construction of the apartments so it could open all nice and new.

Normally I wouldn't care about this, but this development is slightly risky based on location, but the city should want to do everything in their power to help it succeed, as its success could start a massive shift in expanding the Exchange's footprint and improving the surrounding area. Having prospective tenants walk through a war zone isn't ideal lol.

[Wpg_Guy]

https://media.winnipegfreepress.com/...NEP4810631.jpg


https://media.winnipegfreepress.com/...NEP4810630.jpg


https://media.winnipegfreepress.com/...NEP4810629.jpg

RRC builds on innovative approach to education
Construction underway on college's new facility
Martin Cash By: Martin Cash
Posted: 09/26/2018 6:30 PM

The excavation and piling work has begun on Red River College’s $95-million Innovation Centre just north of the Roblin Building on its Princess campus, and is on schedule to be completed in the fall of 2020.

The building is necessary for purely expansionary reasons and will bring an additional 1,200 students and staff to the Exchange District on top of the 2,500 already there.

And, in addition to the innovative approach to the manner in which RRC will provide education, the building itself includes lots of innovative features.

For starters, the 100,000-square-foot building on Elgin Street will fully integrate a 100-year-old, three-storey building that happens to be one of the first buildings in the city to use concrete construction instead of timber.

"The vertical concrete columns are as thick as the timbers that were being used in construction," said Maria Mendes, RRC’s senior project manager. "It is a sound building. It has not moved in 100 years."

The building is being designed specifically to encourage collaboration and multi-disciplinary team work, so there won’t be classrooms with desks all facing the front. The walls that will be there will mostly be made of glass.

"It is an approach to collaborative learning that’s very different from the way we have done education in the past," RRC president Paul Vogt said. "What employers increasingly tell us is they are looking for that cluster of what we used to call soft skills, but are now being described as power skills or 21st-century skills."

Conceptually, that sounds reasonable. But, practically pulling that off in a $95-million building seems risky.

But,the open-design concept is not being dreamed up by RRC folks in a vacuum. In addition to design assistance being provided by Number Ten Architectural Group, the main architects are Diamond Schmitt Architects with offices in Toronto, Vancouver and New York, who have been responsible for the recent design work at a number of other collaborative learning facilities at institutions, including Emily Carr University of Art and Design in Vancouver, Lazaridis Hall at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ont., the Papadakis Integrated Sciences Building at Drexel University in Philadelphia and the Schulich School of Engineering at the University of Calgary.

"Buildings designed for collaborative education are being developed across North America and Europe," Vogt said. "These kinds of spaces have been tested out already. They are highly functional for the kind of education we are doing and for bringing business and the community into an educational setting."

The plan is for the building to be open in the evenings and on weekends to accommodate re-skilling courses that are expected to be a growth area for RRC.

Part of the old building — the Scott Fruit Company Warehouse — will be used to house RRC’s successful Ace Project Space, now being offered in conjunction with North Forge Technology Exchange. It allows students to work with existing entrepreneurs or startups on company projects.

Vogt sometimes refers to the Innovation Centre as Ace Space super-sized.

"It is not entirely a leap into the dark." he said. "With Ace Space, it is a tested model and it works.

"We are very confident in expanding it."

The Innovation Centre will be flexible enough to include broad multi-disciplinary programs to allow for expanded business and business IT, and design and computer-design programs.

Designed as a net-zero building — it will generate as much energy as it uses — it will include photovoltaic cells on the roof of the Scott building and innovative vertical PV cells on the south wall of the new building. It will also experiment with Power-Over-Ethernet technology for some of the lighting in the building, and all sorts of specialized design has been integrated for optimal acoustic effect throughout the building.

Mendes said using big data, RRC’s design consultants came up with 260,000 different models to achieve the kind of energy and performance efficiencies it was looking for.

"Then we narrowed it down to four, and it was like a shopping list," she said. "We were able to play with all the different elements and tweak it so we can be as cost effective and efficient as possible."

The second floor will feature a 210-seat flexible auditorium designed as a building within a building. It will be the downtown campus’s first auditorium of that size.

martin.cash@freepress.mb.ca

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bu...494314401.html

[esquire]

^ Looks great! It's nice to see RRC establishing a real critical mass in the Exchange. The first part of the PSC did a lot to reinvigorate the area, and this expansion will probably help.

[Tacheguy]

We are lucky to have Paul Vogt in this town..

[Jeff]

Now all we need to do is relocate the u of m from Fort Garry to the area between this campus and the HSC and BAM! a full-fledged educational district!

[Tacheguy]

Originally Posted by Jeff

Now all we need to do is relocate the u of m from Fort Garry to the area between this campus and the HSC and BAM! a full-fledged educational district!

yup. the u of m would only have their land-intensive faculties out in the south end in my perfect world.

[headhorse]

U of M could just slide ride back into being downtown, taking over the Bay building and eventually having a campus along Osborne/memorial that includes the IG buildings and land behind it.

obviously it'd expensive, but the mistake of putting it out in the suburbs in the first place has been so much more detrimental.