HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #241  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2017, 7:33 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,146
It's like the drama club took over City Hall. They're making these big productions in front of the press that ultimately end up getting resolved. Same thing with the transit budget.

Anyways, good to see it moving forward. Is phase 2 the part along Waterfront, or the part along Amy?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #242  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2017, 1:02 AM
headhorse's Avatar
headhorse headhorse is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,119
^ building along waterfront is next.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #243  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2017, 5:39 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,216
Sanity prevails.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #244  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2018, 12:57 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,823
Anything new on this? Pics?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #245  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2018, 1:03 AM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,146
It looks so cool at night my wife commented. haha seriously though. I guess the lights inside looked cool.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #246  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2018, 1:07 AM
optimusREIM optimusREIM is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 806
I noticed that too last time I went by. Wonder when construction on the residential starts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #247  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 4:16 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,823
Leaseing brochure: http://capitalgrp.ca/wp-content/uplo...Pump-House.pdf







Some of the concerns the city had:

This Historical Buildings and Resources Committee has raised concern with several aspects of the proposal:
1. Obstructed visibility of the main pumphouse façade – The space between the pumphouse façade and the overhead walkways/stairwells on the proposed building is only ten feet, and the ability to see the pumphouse from Waterfront Drive is severely limited by the proposed east building.
2. Excavation in front of main pumphouse façade – The creation of a sunken plaza in front of the main façade will require exposing the raw foundation, which changes the appearance of the façade.
3. Cutting new openings through foundation – The proposal involves cutting seven new openings through the foundation of the main façade. This not only causes irreversible damage to the façade, but negates the symmetry and design quality of the original façade.
Urban Design Review
Urban Design Review has identified several issues that have yet to be resolved:
1. Sunken plaza – A plaza below grade can appear to be private rather than a space welcoming for the public to enjoy. The grade change also results in most of the open space being allocated to ramps rather than space for passive enjoyment.
2. Walkways encroaching over the sidewalk – Since Waterfront Drive is a unique street with its own design guidelines, there is concern about how the overhanging walkways fit with the character of the street, especially if the predominant façade material is black corrugated metal, which may seem visually heavier than other options.
3. Commercial access from the street – While the inclusion of a commercial rental unit on Waterfront Drive is a desirable component of the project, having the entrance internal to the site with the rear facing Waterfront Drive negates policies to activate the street edge. The issue is exacerbated by the intent to have the commercial space also sunken with to the lower plaza level rather than at the level of the street.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #248  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 4:37 AM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 287
^^That last photo pretty much says it all. The waterfront-facing part of this proposal is just awful. Beams, ramps, stairs, a strange sunken plaza, and a big looming black box overhead. Hardly a desirable streetscape. That one long ramp/walkway going horizontal across the lower area seems like a bad joke.

I realize this is a tough site to develop but I know something better than that can be done.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #249  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 4:46 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,823
I dont get the ramps and stair cases, it's very messy, just put the stairs inside get rid of the ramps to clean it up in the least. The other aspect is there is no waterfront drive access to the CRU which is located in the east side of the pump house along waterfront drive in the sunken plaza. Also, black corrugated metal siding is going to look extremely cheap.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #250  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 5:01 AM
pegcityboy's Avatar
pegcityboy pegcityboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 154
James Avene Pumping Station

Wow , I'm not an architect but that is just awful , you can't have that monstrosity in the front of the facade ! That cladding does look cheap also , maybe build the building in the back taller and figure out the front facade . Now that True Viking is done the Richardson lab maybe he needs to go to this because this needs help badly !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #251  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 5:10 AM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 287
Also what is the point of having any sloped area? It becomes totally unusable space, not to mention it will end up being fenced off so people don't fall off the sidewalk and slide to the bottom
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #252  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 5:15 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,823
I believe the machinery inside the pump house is located below street level, so the sunken plaza allows for large windows to be installed to the basement floor so the public can view the machinery inside.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #253  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 7:45 AM
Roger Strong's Avatar
Roger Strong Roger Strong is offline
Speak the truth, then run
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 896
Quote:
Originally Posted by WpG_GuY View Post
I dont get the ramps and stair cases, it's very messy,
Fire escape. Judging by the design, the Exchange District has a bylaw requiring those evacuating the top floors to run the width of the building no less than six times and the length of the building at least once before than can escape any fire.

Really, has anyone else noticed that?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #254  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 2:12 PM
buzzg buzzg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,979
I don't mind the overall design of the building, but:
- The sunken plaza is horrible, no reason for it – the existing window openings go all the way to the floor for people to see in already!
- Black corrugated metal? Here? Seriously?! It'd look like the OZ on stilts or Mere with no colourful bars.
- I hate the James entrance – is it really needed here if there's an entrance on either side, and no offices on the main floor?

It doesn't really bother me that the east facade is somewhat hidden – the star of the building is the inside, and we can still see the whole south side. But the black metal and sunken plaza are not only horrible designs, but the plaza doesn't even look good in renders. And yeah, can easily see people falling a lot. Good on the city for making them rethink this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #255  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 2:55 PM
robertocarlos robertocarlos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 521
Is there a reason they can't build over top of the present building?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #256  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 3:00 PM
Ando Ando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 704
For those of you who want to build 30 storey skyscrapers in the heart of the Exchange, the list of concerns from the City give an idea of type of considerations that go into being in a historic district. And the pumphouse is really on the fringe. There is nothing wrong with building new in the Exchange but there are guidelines relating to height and blending in to the district.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #257  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 3:32 PM
Roger Strong's Avatar
Roger Strong Roger Strong is offline
Speak the truth, then run
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ando View Post
For those of you who want to build 30 storey skyscrapers in the heart of the Exchange, the list of concerns from the City give an idea of type of considerations that go into being in a historic district.
There's also the question of whether the existing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure will handle it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #258  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 3:50 PM
robertocarlos robertocarlos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 521
In Toronto they build over and around existing buildings. Perhaps without even touching the existing structure. It would be no taller than the present proposal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #259  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2018, 2:56 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,823
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #260  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2018, 9:31 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by WpG_GuY View Post
This Historical Buildings and Resources Committee has raised concern with several aspects of the proposal:
1. Obstructed visibility of the main pumphouse façade – The space between the pumphouse façade and the overhead walkways/stairwells on the proposed building is only ten feet, and the ability to see the pumphouse from Waterfront Drive is severely limited by the proposed east building.
2. Excavation in front of main pumphouse façade – The creation of a sunken plaza in front of the main façade will require exposing the raw foundation, which changes the appearance of the façade.
3. Cutting new openings through foundation – The proposal involves cutting seven new openings through the foundation of the main façade. This not only causes irreversible damage to the façade, but negates the symmetry and design quality of the original façade.
Urban Design Review
Urban Design Review has identified several issues that have yet to be resolved:
1. Sunken plaza – A plaza below grade can appear to be private rather than a space welcoming for the public to enjoy. The grade change also results in most of the open space being allocated to ramps rather than space for passive enjoyment.
2. Walkways encroaching over the sidewalk – Since Waterfront Drive is a unique street with its own design guidelines, there is concern about how the overhanging walkways fit with the character of the street, especially if the predominant façade material is black corrugated metal, which may seem visually heavier than other options.
3. Commercial access from the street – While the inclusion of a commercial rental unit on Waterfront Drive is a desirable component of the project, having the entrance internal to the site with the rear facing Waterfront Drive negates policies to activate the street edge. The issue is exacerbated by the intent to have the commercial space also sunken with to the lower plaza level rather than at the level of the street.

I guess I'm late to this party... but these are some of my thoughts corresponding to numbers above:

Historical:
1)Fair, but what other ideas do you have? A building at grade blocking the whole thing?
2) Way too picky. That's what architects and engineers are for, to solve these problems, not figurehead civic organizations
3) GTFO, you think engineers aren't aware of this? "Cutting into the building might hurt it?" clearly that would be considered and reinforcing mandated

Urban design

1) Whether people like the sunken plaze or not, I disagree with the "feels private" nonsense, because it's completely open and visible space in a very different looking property.

The positive of the sunken plaza is that it actually adds a small perimiter to the public space once you're in it, and not before since there's no visual barrier. Small visual cues to a degree of enclosure do give a sense of space, like the small sink at market square. It's clearly super open and public, but you feel like you're IN something. It invites you, encourages you to stay there. People respond to elevation changes like that, but raising it is less inviting than sinking. Plus it turns the foundation into a feature.

I'm not pro-sunken, but I'm curious. A flat space will feel unremarkable, and like something to pass through rather than sink into.

2) the design, while I may not like it, isn't heavy. it's slight and minimalistic. Stone and all the existing materials in the exchange are heavy, and that's not bad. Non-issue. Also, overhanging the sidewalks? GTFO. What they should just say is they don't like the design, which is a fair point. But to artificially leverage their position through nonsense? I'm not a fan of that either.

3) But they weren't going to allow retail to take away that facade anyway. They make a fair point but it's moot. If commercial space is on the side, creative signange and design on the east facade can still advertise that. Furthermore, what added visibility do they expect? That building has to be raised.

I'm not a big fan of the design but not an opponent. I do think the city doesn't know what it's doing and that's not fair either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:23 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.