Saskatoon Construction

[Jonitecture]

i still disagree with all of you, i think they are beautiful, and a beacon of sustainability.

[Echoes]

Originally Posted by Jonitecture

i still disagree with all of you, i think they are beautiful, and a beacon of sustainability.

lol, well put!

I think a setting such as Diefenbaker Park is great for wind turbines-- in a context such as a park setting I believe they would be attractive, not eyesores.

No, I don't think wind turbines should be a part of any cities' skylines. In Saskatoon's case, a wind turbine erected downtown could be high enough to compete with our tallest buildings, and that would be embarassing! I kid.

However, I do think wind turbines in a campus setting such as on the U of S would work as well. They would be great symbols of science, innovation, and as Jonitecture so beautifully put it, "beacons of sustainability."

I always felt that the U of S's chunk of riverbank was always underused and that the main cluster of buildings on campus do not "front" or interact with the river well.

Some riverbank development such as wind turbines could look cool!

[Echoes]

oops, double post

[BrannyMuffin]

I love driving past wind farms! It boggles the mind! I they're beautiful in their own way. I don't necessarily think they belong in the city. Within the city limits, sure. But I think you have to be pretty specific about where somehting like that would go. I'm not too familiar with the U of S campus...Something like that would work really well in Regina near the U of R and SIAST. Empty fields (most of them belonging to the university) everywhere. It would fit really well with what a traditional wind farm would look like and would work well as "great symbols of science, innovation" as you said. I would imagine the U of S has similar grounds?

[midnightrambler]

I have to disagree with the claim that wind turbines are "beacons of sustainability." Take for instance Palm Springs, CA. I drove through that place where they had 1000s of win turbines churning energy. Sure it is an eyesore to some, and to others a sense of environmental purpose. As I drove through Palm Springs I reminded myself that the entire place was manufactured. Every Palm tree was planted, and every blade of grass should really be desert landscape. The amount of water needed to sustain a place like that is incredible, not to mention a place like Vegas. In the end while power sustainability is quite possible from all the Santa Ana winds blowing through the valley, the potential to keep the Palm's green is another story.

While Saskatchewan is a little different in respect to water, we have other issues to deal with.

I'd rather see a Nuclear Power Plant, while not a "beacon of sustainability" it is a beacon of power, and that is what we are really talking about here.

[shmakim]

Originally Posted by Jonitecture

i still disagree with all of you, i think they are beautiful, and a beacon of sustainability.

Amen to that. I don't think a wind turbine is any less beautiful than a brown brick box. Something sleek and tall and moving would certainly make Saskatoon's skyline look far more cosmopolitan, progressive, and (to use a city buzzword) innovative than many of our other architectural marvels.

Doesn't that Hitachi plant on 43rd make turbine towers too?

[swilley]

Looks like this is one step closer to reality.

from C of S website.

The Lighthouse Supported Living Inc. – Affordable Rental Units
City Council approved the recommendation from the Planning and Operations Committee that $1.458 million from the Affordable Housing Reserve be used to fund ten percent of the project cost for the development of 120 affordable rental units and 20 shelter units by The Lighthouse Supported Living Inc., and that a five-year tax abatement on the incremental taxes be applied. The proposed development project is on the parking lot directly north of the Police Station.

[joelpiecowye]

just to put it out, i think that 10 or so windmills in the u of s or forestry park or possibly diefenbaker park would be great. but lke many things two much is bad. But if they get placed it would show people even more that we care about our environment one good example that we care about our environment is meewasin which is overprotective

as for the lighthouse project i have a feeling it is going to be extremely ugly. Cheap building+ made for poorer people=ugly building

[Ruckus]

^ Yeah, and we could definitely use a few windmills to power Saskatoon's new suburban neigborhoods, for example Rosewood

Builder plans energy efficient neighbourhood
Matthew Kruchak, The StarPhoenix
Published: Wednesday, January 30, 2008

When completed, the Rosewood housing development will have the largest green space of the city's subdivisions, but one of its developers wants it to also house the highest concentration of environmentally friendly homes in Saskatoon.

Boychuk Construction, the developer which owns most of the planned 731-acre development in the eastern part of the city, will be setting aside lots and encouraging builders to construct ENERGY STAR qualified homes, said Ron Olson, general manager.

The houses will be built by ENERGY STAR qualified builders who construct features to reduce heating, electricity and water use, which enables a home to be about 30 per cent more energy efficient than an average new dwelling. Low flow toilets, triple pane windows, and energy efficient furnaces are a few of the features.

When the last family moves into the development over the next 15 to 18 years, Rosewood will be home to between 11,000 to 12,000 people, he said.

"We'd like to see more innovative ways to reduce the carbon footprint that the whole subdivision will have -- which is pretty massive," he said. "We feel that -- the water flows and sewer flows -- we should pay attention to that and try to reduce those flows whenever possible or at least to keep them as low as possible because it's a heavy concentration of people in such a small area."

Boychuk will also encourage the four other landowners involved in the project to construct the ENERGY STAR qualified homes, he said.

Over the next five years, Olson said he hopes to have 200 to 300 ENERGY STAR qualified homes built out of the projected 800 to 1,000 houses. They're aiming to have close to 50 per cent of the 3,000 homes be energy efficient once the development is completed, he said.

Alan Thomarat, executive vice-president of the Canadian Home Builders Association, said the trend of developers pushing environmentally conscience housing options is increasing. It's not only going to save energy and the environment, but it will also save homeowners money, he said.

An ENERGY STAR home will cost at least $2,000 more than the average new dwelling, Olson said.

About 140 single family home lots will go on sale this summer, he said.

[email protected]

Source

[Echoes]

Incentives needed to spur rental developments: Heidt
Lori Coolican, The StarPhoenix
Published: Thursday, January 31, 2008

With the city-wide vacancy rate hovering just above half a per cent, Saskatoon city council is looking for ways to encourage investors to build new rental apartments.

It's so much easier to turn a profit by renovating and selling the existing rental stock as converted condos that no one will bother unless the provincial government provides incentives through changes in its assessment policies, Coun. Myles Heidt said this week.

"We've somehow got to put all of our energies, talk to the provincial government and hope that they will change some of the tax laws that are there, that will allow people to depreciate (their properties) in a couple of years so they get their return on investment," he told city council Monday, "because if we don't . . . all it's going to do is drive rents higher and faster."

The city's own property tax policy provides a cheaper rate for condos -- about 77 per cent of the rate charged for apartments -- though the gap between them has been gradually closing since 2001 and should be non-existent by 2011, according to civic administrators.

Meanwhile, the city is also losing money on processing condo conversion applications.

Development services manager Randy Grauer said the current flat fee of $500 for each application does not cover the entire cost of the transaction -- meaning fellow taxpayers are footing part of the bill for condo investors' conversion projects. A report on ways to improve cost recovery is headed to council's planning and operations committee.

"In short . . . we are losing money on the proposition right now," Grauer said.

The tax differences don't mean condos pay less property tax, according to city assessor Gord Lawson. Assessed values (which are set by the province) are typically higher for condos than apartments -- even if the units are identical -- because condos can be sold individually, he explained in an interview.

That means the ongoing condo craze will benefit the city's coffers in the long term.

Heidt has predicted apartment buildings are doomed to extinction in Saskatoon. The city can best help renters by creating an oversupply of new lots for construction of single-family homes in the suburbs, he told council, adding the city should concentrate its energy on "getting suites into homes for single parents, so they can afford it.

"I'm looking forward to when the administration comes back with some incentives for people to convert some of their homes into suites, duplexes into fourplexes -- those are the type of things that I think we can do that will increase the supply (of rentals)."

Condo conversions are popular because demand for ownership is so high, Heidt argued.

"I've always supported home ownership. Let's talk about the individuals that just bought an apartment that's been turned into a condo. Now they're in the marketplace building equity and can sell it a year or two from now and build their own home. Those are the people that we're helping."

Heidt acknowledged there are "some unfortunate ones" who can't buy a condo. "But that's not anybody else's problem, other than that we've got no supply," he said.

The city has taken steps to increase the stock of affordable housing, "but clearly what we have now is a situation where we're almost having investor anarchy," Coun. Pat Lorje said. "They're basically poking a big giant finger at us and saying, 'We're going to go ahead and do whatever we want, whenever we want.' And I would say to them, yes we want investment in this city, but please let's have active, engaged investment that takes into account normal human decency.

"And instead what we've got is investors plucking at the low-hanging fruit and saying, 'We can come in and fix up these few apartment buildings and then flip them over and turn quite a handsome profit,' instead of doing what we would all like to see happen, which is to have them invest their money in new market rental housing all across this city."

Coun. Charlie Clark estimates about 65 local buildings began the process of converting from apartments to condos last year.

"It's an incredible figure, and one of the arguments that has been made about this whole issue is that we don't want to curb investment. But I think part of the problem is that it's so easy to convert to condos, we're not seeing other types of investment such as new buildings, because this is where you can make the money."

Chanda Mitchell of the Saskatchewan Rental Housing Industry Association said the local vacancy rate isn't as bad as it seems.

"There's a rental shortage when it comes to areas of the city. It's the downtown area that's moreso having the shortage right now, because of highrises going to condos, and there's such limited stock on the highrises to begin with."

The size of the downtown doesn't leave much room to build new apartment towers, and it's a popular location for high-end condo buyers who want the lifestyle advantages, "but unfortunately that's where they also need rentals, because the people who can't afford to buy condos want to rent downtown," Mitchell said.

"I think they need to focus on tax breaks and incentives for new landlords to build . . . and give a stipulation that it has to be held as a rental unit. Otherwise anyone can come and get the break and then condo-ize."

[email protected]


© The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon) 2008

Source

[macca]

Somewhere in the discussion, more suburban lots is always metioned as a solution. Because the people who want to purchase condos/lofts downtown will somehow be satisfied with a 2 car garage in Stonebridge.

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by macca

Somewhere in the discussion, more suburban lots is always metioned as a solution. Because the people who want to purchase condos/lofts downtown will somehow be satisfied with a 2 car garage in Stonebridge.

^ I've been noticing that pattern as well, I wish the city and developers would just come out and say what their real vision for Saskatoon is.

A perspective

The suburban developers and their proponents are mounting their offensive attack subtlety via advertisement by deception, or what some may term advertorials.

As a solution to Saskatoon's affordable housing/rental unit shortage, suburban developers and those who ascribe to such ideals suggest more of the following is the best method for satisfying demand...

Willowgrove


But are Saskatonians in favor of more communities comprised primarily of single family homes? Perhaps they might prefer the following living arrangements and conveniences...

Caswell Hill - T. Eatons lofts


Riversdale - Station 20 West affordable housing


Buena Vista - Water's Edge


Nutana infill


Downtown high density residential cluster


Downtown Saskatoon


Simply put, suburban communities comprised of single family homes is not a standard worth pushing upon our fair city, unless the ultimate goal is inefficiency and degrading the quality of life throughout the city

Here's a map with red (good-core development) and blue (bad-status quo suburban development) representing the above project locations throughout the city.



And yes, I am sure this post/perspective illustrates my obvious dislike outward growth, but I also accept and believe Saskatoon's periphery growth can continue into the future in a healthy manner (slow to moderate pace) because we will have shifted our focus and resources towards the inner city/downtown, existing suburbs and identifying potential sites for dense development.

I like to save $$$ too

[Dalreg]

Won't happen in my lifetime. In other more expensive cities around the World urban expansion continues at an even faster rate than current in Saskatoon. No reason to believe than Saskatoon can successfully slow expansion by infilling and densifying.

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

In other more expensive cities around the World urban expansion continues at an even faster rate than current in Saskatoon.

Which leads to one wondering how they started out, where are they going, and how do they manage their growth? Short answer is they probably don't manage their growth, for the most part they just let market forces guide them , a position I object to for the growth of Saskatoon.

I admit, there is only so much a planning department can do, inevitably the market will play itself out. However, there is a belief one can predict the path and suggest better alternatives (for Saskatoon need only look to Calgary and Edmonton for a predictable path, and now must suggest better alternatives).

Originally Posted by Dalreg

No reason to believe than Saskatoon can successfully slow expansion by infilling and densifying.

No reason to believe? Here's a suggestion, think of all the infill/densifying currently under construction or infill projects that have occurred over the years, now imagine if none of the above infill occurred, what would Saskatoon look like? Hampton Village, Willowgrove, Stonebridge would be near completion (full build out). Rosewood and the Blairmore neighborhoods would also be that much more completed.

If the city did a thorough study of infill versus periphery growth many of our thoughts/curiosities would have some substance from which to build upon. Unfortunately, they have yet to complete such a study, and why would they? Studies cost money, require staff, and why do all that when there is plenty of available land to stretch the suburban tentacles?

The city and developers position make sense from a short term cost analysis perspective, but what about planning for the future, the medium to long term outlook?

Until I see more substantial data and increased financial contributions promoting a vision of a compact efficient city, my position is one of disappointment.

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by SASKFTW

Which leads to one wondering how they started out, where are they going, and how do they manage their growth? Short answer is they probably don't manage their growth, for the most part they just let market forces guide them , a position I object to for the growth of Saskatoon.

I admit, there is only so much a planning department can do, inevitably the market will play itself out. However, there is a belief one can predict the path and suggest better alternatives (for Saskatoon need only look to Calgary and Edmonton for a predictable path, and now must suggest better alternatives).



No reason to believe? Here's a suggestion, think of all the infill/densifying currently under construction or infill projects that have occurred over the years, now imagine if none of the above infill occurred, what would Saskatoon look like? Hampton Village, Willowgrove, Stonebridge would be near completion (full build out). Rosewood and the Blairmore neighborhoods would also be that much more completed.

If the city did a thorough study of infill versus periphery growth many of our thoughts/curiosities would have some substance from which to build upon. Unfortunately, they have yet to complete such a study, and why would they? Studies cost money, require staff, and why do all that when there is plenty of available land to stretch the suburban tentacles?

The city and developers position make sense from a short term cost analysis perspective, but what about planning for the future, the medium to long term outlook?

Until I see more substantial data and increased financial contributions promoting a vision of a compact efficient city, my position is one of disappointment.

Honestly what would be wrong with the city expanding and growing?

Sorry but most folks don't want a new home in an ifill development. If they did the city would never have expanded beyond the downtown. Don't get me wrong I will eventually buy a unit in the downtown core, more than likely in a highrise, as for you??????

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Honestly what would be wrong with the city expanding and growing?

Nothing wrong with our city growing, I only take offense to short sighted planning initiatives (minimal consideration of transit, employment centers, schools, recreation, and how individuals access these services).

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Sorry but most folks don't want a new home in an ifill development. If they did the city would never have expanded beyond the downtown. Don't get me wrong I will eventually buy a unit in the downtown core, more than likely in a highrise, as for you??????

Those same folks will change their attitudes towards infill and high rise living, you'll see

As for me, when the time comes I'll be looking in the downtown area or the inner city. I don't want to be more than 8-10 minutes from the core by bike.

High rise would be nice, if the price is right.

[shmakim]

Surreal article describes the state of the Barry Hotel circus:


SP exclusive: Order could bring Barry Hotel downBy Lori Coolican, TheStarPhoenix.com
Published: Thursday, January 31, 2008
The Barry Hotel's future became a bit more uncertain this week.

The City of Saskatoon registered an order against the title on the aging hotel at the corner of Avenue B and 20th Street on Tuesday, demanding the owner conduct major structural repairs and extensive interior renovations or totally demolish the building by July 31, The StarPhoenix has learned.

"This building has been allowed to deteriorate to a ruinous and dilapidated state that may be dangerous to the health of occupants in the building," a municipal inspector wrote in the order, which lists six major contraventions of the city's property maintenance bylaw identified during a Jan. 15 inspection.


Email to a friend

Printer friendly
Font:****"A large amount of 'standing water' has been allowed to accumulate in the boiler room for an extended time period, causing metal materials to rust and deterioration of wall and ceiling materials throughout the basement. Mould is visible on walls and ceilings in main floor rooms located above the boiler room area."

The problems are not just on the inside, according to the five-page order.

"Masonry bricks display deformity on the north and east walls. Loose bricks above the public sidewalk on Avenue B South may fall and injure persons below."

The structural supports holding up the first floor, "including metal beams and concrete pillars, display rusted and deteriorated conditions. Evidence of damage to the concrete foundation is visible," it adds.

The inspector also found sagging ceilings in hallways and bathrooms - with evidence of more rust and water damage showing through areas where ceiling tiles were missing - and large cracks in a stairwell leading to the hotel's roof.

The interior walls, floors and ceilings "are not being maintained in a suitable manner" and will also need work to bring the building in line with the city's property maintenance bylaw, according to the order.

"Walls and ceilings throughout the building display damage or finish materials are missing. . . . Interior doors and door frames that form a portion of the walls are damaged and doors are not securely fastened to the door frames. Wall and ceiling materials in the 'shared' bathrooms of the second and third floor areas display damaged finish materials including 'sagging' ceilings and cracked and peeling paint."

The walls and ceiling materials of the hotel's notorious main-floor bar are also damaged or missing, and the inspector found mould on the walls and ceilings of the storage rooms, as well as water damage to the walls and ceilings in the basement.

The owner is required to replace floor tiles in the bathrooms, damaged linoleum in stairwells and damaged carpeting.

"Floor coverings are not being maintained in a reasonable state of repair," the inspector wrote.

The building's plumbing is "not maintained in good working order," he added. "Water supply lines are leaking. Waterproof materials near the bathtubs are damaged. Bathroom sinks are stained and water faucets are leaking. Toilets are not operable."

The hotel's windows are not maintained either and panes are cracked or missing in the bathrooms on the second and third floors, according to the order.

Owner Shoshana Goldstein has until the end of March to file a structural assessment report signed by an accredited engineer, showing that all of the structural deficiencies can be repaired and listing the repairs that are needed. Alternatively, she could demolish the place and clear the land of all debris by that date.

If she chooses to make repairs, she is required to file a written confirmation - signed by an engineer - proving the work has all been done before July 31.

The order gives Goldstein until March 31 to fix the plumbing and windows, as well as "remove the 'standing water' from the boiler room and complete any repairs required to avoid an accumulation of water in this area."

In an interview Thursday, Goldstein said she had not seen the city's order and was not aware it existed. She insisted there is nothing wrong with the building, which is currently home to about four dozen long-term residents.

"I don't see anything wrong. I don't know what they're talking about," she said.

Goldstein has been negotiating to sell the hotel to L&L Holdings, a local company which recently applied to the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Commission for a liquor licence and off-sale permit to continue operating it under the name Lorje Place Hotel.

Larry Bozek, one of two partners in the company, has said the new name is only partially a reference to city councillor Pat Lorje, who has been vocally critical of the hotel's reputation for violent incidents. He could not be reached for comment about the property inspector's orders Thursday.

Lorje has hired a lawyer to fight Bozek's plan to change the hotel's name. She and several other councillors expressed a desire to have the Barry torn down last fall, after civic staff negotiated to buy it from Goldstein. The sale fell through after an environmental assessment found problems that will likely make demolition expensive.

According to public documents obtained by The StarPhoenix, the Canada Revenue Agency registered three separate writs against the title of the Barry Hotel last year, for a total amount of nearly $50,000. Two local contractors also placed builders' liens against the property for unpaid bills last year.

The City of Saskatoon placed a tax lien against the Barry in 2006 for an unspecified amount. Late last year, civic officials said the hotel was about $140,000 behind in its taxes and utility payments.



Wow, what a carnival of the macabre. I always thought the "environmental assessment" found asbestos in the building, which was why the city pulled out of buying it. Sounds like there's more to consider. I'm not sure if all the stuff they describe in the list is critically unrepairable but it sure makes the place sound like a hideously ugly hole. With an owner that doesn't seem to care about the building or its taxes, and a couple of clowns wanting to buy the place and name it Lorje Place (textbook bad taste), and if the city doesn't want to take it on themselves, the probably figure one of the few remaining options is to force the owner to clean it up (unlikely) or rip it down.

I had a romantic notion at one time that the building could be restored and repurposed, possibly becoming a strong anchor for the ready-to-boom community of Riversdale, but by this point I dunno. If the building disappears completely, those who get involved in the future of that space will put forward the money to build something strong, modern, (dare I say) innovative... everything the city likes.

[richmond]

What's the poop on the KG? They sure seem to be taking down more than originally intended. I heard that they couldn't salvage the exterior brick as the exterior tile had basically bonded to it, but recently it seems like they've even removed some of the concrete structure?

Also, is the Bay ever going to be done? That's going slower than the College Drive overpass.

Rumley seems to be progressing well.

I'd love to see both open as I think that will start giving enough critical mass to the north end of downtown that perhaps something new would go up on one of the gravel lots around there.

[swilley]

Originally Posted by shmakim

I had a romantic notion at one time that the building could be restored and repurposed, possibly becoming a strong anchor for the ready-to-boom community of Riversdale, but by this point I dunno. If the building disappears completely, those who get involved in the future of that space will put forward the money to build something strong, modern, (dare I say) innovative... everything the city likes.

How do you create a strong, modern, and innovative parking lot?

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by swilley

How do you create a strong, modern, and innovative parking lot?

With recycled tires instead of asphalt, and maybe a solar powered ticket dispenser with 10% of revenue going to a Riversdale community fund.