Saskatoon Construction II

[dsim249]

Originally Posted by Morogolus

I'm amazed they're not bankrupt yet. The web site that LP had up for RLV has been taken down. I wonder how that development in Calgary is going or if it's just a big hole in the ground still.

I'm pretty sure the city of Calgary filled in the hole themselves and billed LP, because they weren't doing it themselves.

[Arts]

Originally Posted by CCF

Of course greenspace is part of the urban realm, however, in a project of this nature I think the landscaping is better served as hard (paving stones) rather than soft (grass). I don't necessarily feel that the buffer of grass contributes much to the project.

I would prefer to see buildings pushed up to the adjacent roadway to create an attractive and welcoming streetscape. Personally I'd like to see a building replace the green space on the right hand side. Something lower scale 2-3 stories that could have retail fronting along the street and another use (restaurant/coffee shop) spilling onto the interior plaza.

Glad I'm not the only one thinking along that line... the city spent all the money developing a nice street appeal and green space already - it is good to have a public space but having everything set back from Spadina (or whatever the roadway there is named) seems like it just separates it from the streetscape. Even if instead of a low-rise retail space along there, they put a large glass covered public space it may make it feel less distant and exposed...(but again expense )

[Larch]

Originally Posted by Arts

Glad I'm not the only one thinking along that line... the city spent all the money developing a nice street appeal and green space already - it is good to have a public space but having everything set back from Spadina (or whatever the roadway there is named) seems like it just separates it from the streetscape. Even if instead of a low-rise retail space along there, they put a large glass covered public space it may make it feel less distant and exposed...(but again expense )

fridays@work give me too much "free" time so here's my six cents:

exposure = key visual link = successful connectivity with the river / landing. a glass enclosure might provide a similar connection, though the physical barrier would be a much different experience psychologically than having an open vista.

on that note, the street trees will grow beyond what's in the rendering (or at the very least will appear much larger on the ground), providing more of an edge....though permeable...which i think is important.

[111ddd]

Its hard to tell from the rendering, but it doesn't look like there is much space for ground floor retail. It would be disappointing if they scaled that back from the original design.

[prairieguy]

this city lacks riverfront establishments for restaurants/pubs/shops....it would be nice to see that encorporated into this new design, but does not look like there are structures to accomodate that. We have this great natural vista of the river valley in Saskatoon, and basically no eating/drinking establishments that provide a view of that...

[Larch]

Originally Posted by prairieguy

this city lacks riverfront establishments for restaurants/pubs/shops....it would be nice to see that encorporated into this new design, but does not look like there are structures to accomodate that. We have this great natural vista of the river valley in Saskatoon, and basically no eating/drinking establishments that provide a view of that...

i totally agree, and i've heard at least one option is in place and just waiting for a developer to go ahead with it (which is probably hinging on the RLV).

that sign at the south-west corner of the roundabout, "future site of feature building" or something, apparently marks the location. according to my source the site was prepared with the infrastructure of a restaurant/patio facility in mind.

anyone heard anything similar?

i thought i had also heard of something comparable on the farmer's market side, near the old pumping station... but it's possible i dreamed that one up :p

[Crisis]

Originally Posted by Larch

that sign at the south-west corner of the roundabout, "future site of feature building" or something, apparently marks the location. according to my source the site was prepared with the infrastructure of a restaurant/patio facility in mind.

anyone heard anything similar?

This is going back 2 or 3 years, but I know the intent was to have a restaurant at the SW side of the roundabout, tucked in next to the Victoria bridge. The idea was that it would be constructed on the riverbank, with a portion of it overhanging the river. The idea sounds great. I'd think all that is holding it back would be proof that it is financially feasible (wouldn't be cheap to build) and approval by the MVA (could be dicey).

Is there any idication that the new group has secured financing? Also did I read correctly in the SP that the parking structure is supposed to cost $62.5 million! WTF!

I believe that was a number floated about for the Lake Placid design. Don't know how big of a parkade is planned for Nasser's development.

[EarlyByrdProductions]

Originally Posted by prairieguy

this city lacks riverfront establishments for restaurants/pubs/shops....it would be nice to see that encorporated into this new design, but does not look like there are structures to accomodate that. We have this great natural vista of the river valley in Saskatoon, and basically no eating/drinking establishments that provide a view of that...

100% agreed.
Our city has some great restos and patios but none of them take advantage of our main city asset, our river!

Two years ago when Broadway Roastery was renovating their roof, I was so excited to assume they were putting up a Patio on top!...no just new shingles.
So good to see the new plans for the RLV include 'cultural, retail and restaurant space.'
And once all of this construction starts hopefully a great restaurant right by the old Water Tower as well. It was too perfect using some of that area as a beer gardens during WakeRide over looking the river.

[Brutopian]

I am very happy with the new design and layout of River Landing Village. Kudos to Nasser and his team. Saskatoon boasts a beautiful river, riverbanks, and river valley, but does not have a tower high enough to allow residents and tourists the opportunity to enjoy a panoramic view of the river and valley. I have viewed the river valley from the Renaissance condo tower (from roughly the 10th floor), and the river valley is stunning from that vantage point. I can only imagine how beautiful the river valley will look from the 27th floor of the RLV condo tower. I am hoping that they put a restaurant atop that tower so people can enjoy the breathtaking view while they dine.

I am thrilled that Nasser's group has lowered the plaza to grade level. Not only will this allow easier access to RLV for people walking the Meewasin Trail, but it will allow for an unimpeded view of the river from more of the hotel rooms, as well as from more rooms in the office and condo towers. Just as importantly, people enjoying the plaza will also be able to enjoy a river view.

Also, graduating the height of the buildings from south to north (i.e., 10-storey to 17-storey to 27-storey) is more visually appealing to me than the former design.

It sounds like Nasser's group has been working closely with the City and Meewasin during the redesign process. Let's hope that this means the zoning approval process can possibly be fast tracked. I don't think that it would be inappropriate for Nasser's group to request a streamlined approval process at this point, considering the group's considerable commitment to keeping this massive development project moving forward.

Let's get construction of this baby underway!!

I am curious as to what hotel (chain?) is going to occupy the hotel site.

[Temperance]

I have to say that I prefer the earlier design. I think these buildings are very non-descript. The at grade plaza is a definite improvement but the lack of a defined edge along the river bank (with restaurants and retail) is a definite minus. I am also concerned that the height and mass of the buildings might overwhelm that space.

[Larch]

Originally Posted by Crisis

This is going back 2 or 3 years, but I know the intent was to have a restaurant at the SW side of the roundabout, tucked in next to the Victoria bridge. The idea was that it would be constructed on the riverbank, with a portion of it overhanging the river. The idea sounds great. I'd think all that is holding it back would be proof that it is financially feasible (wouldn't be cheap to build) and approval by the MVA (could be dicey)

so then it's "true"... and i'm behind the times.

sounds a bit overreaching (so to speak) especially with a new and presumably larger traffic bridge to consider.

Originally Posted by EarlyByrdProductions

Two years ago when Broadway Roastery was renovating their roof, I was so excited to assume they were putting up a Patio on top!...no just new shingles.

haha i thought and hoped for the same thing! such a let down...

Originally Posted by Temperance

The at grade plaza is a definite improvement but the lack of a defined edge along the river bank (with restaurants and retail) is a definite minus

can someone please explain the reasoning behind this?
if there were buildings on all four sides, all i envision is a dark plaza that funnels wind really well, and is consequently deserted 95% of the time (not to mention its complete disconnect from the river).

Originally Posted by Temperance

I am also concerned that the height and mass of the buildings might overwhelm that space.

i'm with you on this one, especially about the height

[Temperance]

Yeah I have mixed feelings about the plaza. In some ways it is a definite improvement. I guess a defined edge is not necessary per se but it would be good to have some activity facing the river bank and also to differentiate the plaza space further from the riverfront park.

I think the buildings themselves could definitely use some improvement - they are just not that visually interesting and they seem a bit "heavy" for the riverbank.

As far as I know the city already issued a call for proposals for the "feature building" next to Victoria bridge ages ago and nobody was really that interested. Maybe when there is more development in the area.

[Dillweed]

Originally Posted by Crisis

I'd be curious to see what Michael Lobsinger's take on all of this will be. I have no doubt that he would say that if he had been allowed to go 27 floors with a condo and 17 floors of office, then he would have been able to secure financing. If this goes through in it's current state, then the City has changed the rules from when Lake Placid was developing the site (and they'd already given them concessions), so Lake Placid would have a valid argument.

While I fully expect that this project will be approved as planned, due to the intense political will to see this parcel of land developed, it wouldn't shock me to see Mr. Lobsinger appear again - likely in the form of a lawsuit against the City.

Personally I doubt that would be the outcome myself. I suppose anyone can sue anybody in this country for anything but that doesn't always mean your going to win.

I could only see this being an issue if A) the new development was re-zoned for the higher density, and B) the Lake Placid project failed only because the city failed to give the same concessions to the Lake Placid group.

I probably haven't followed this project as long as others here. So anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. But did Lake Placid ever request re-zoning for the higher density when they had the project? If they didn't what was ever stopping them from going before the city and requesting the re-zoning bylaw? That's something developers do all the time.

My understanding is that Lake Placid was also having problems obtaining financing at the time for other developments. Like a lot of developers where a few years during the global financial crisis.

Just look at the problems we had here in Vancouver at that time with the Olympic Village development. And our new Ritz Carlton hotel/condo development which hasn't seen so much as a scoop shovel turned in the last two years and is just a big hole sitting in the heart of downtown Vancouver.

[Crisis]

^^^^^^^^
You may well be right and Lake Placid's desire to initiate any legal action may also be limited by the fact that it would involve a significant outlay of money without a high probablity of success.

The interesting thing about this parcel of land is that it falls under the Direct Control District No.1 guidelines, as opposed to a typical zoning designation. Here is the original DCD1 document:
http://www.meewasin.com/common/pdfs/about/document_library/dcd1_guidelines.pdf

It was then amended in 2008 to accomodate Lake Placid's requirements:
http://www.theriverlanding.ca/reports_public_input/reports/dcd1_guidelines/dcd1_guidelines.pdf

Among those changes were an increase from 50,000 sqft of office to 100,000 sqft. Even then, the RLV condo design was beyond the 20 storey limit of the guidelines. So, what I'm getting at is that this isn't a typical situaton of simply applying for re-zoning - rather it's set of development specific guidelines for a particularly sensitive area of the city. And even then, those guidelines are something of a moving target. The new proposal now tears that target down and places it further away by going to a 27 storey condo and a 17 storey office (presumably containing well over 100,000 sqft of floor area).

While I personally have no objections to what the Nasser group is proposing, it still would surprise me if we don`t get some sort of statement from Mr. Lobsinger. I could well be wrong and the financial arrangements between Mr. Nasser and Mr. Lobsinger may have been statisfactory enough for him to stand quietly on the sidelines, but it certainly wouldn`t be in keeping with Mr. Lobsinger`s style to date.

[Jerry]

Originally Posted by Brutopian

It sounds like Nasser's group has been working closely with the City and Meewasin during the redesign process.

MVA Waiting to Officially Hear From River Landing Developer
Saskatoonhomepage.ca
Friday, 12 August 2011
(ct/aug12/11)

Meewasin Valley Authority has yet to officially hear from Victory Majors Investments Corporation about possible amendments to building regulations on River Landing. [...]

Full story here >>http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34243&Itemid=421

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'm a little surprised to hear this but since the City and Meewasin are collectively working on this I'm hoping there will be no issues. Certainly we will be looking at snow on the ground by the time everything is finalized.

Personally I love the way the plaza opens up to the river but the shear size of the buildings has me a bit worried.

[kgc087]

I think both designs have their pros and cons. Aesthetically I much prefer the Lake Placid design. There was something about the subtle curvature of the structures and minimal variance in material usage that really made that design stand out. Saskatoon really showcases beauty through subtlety which I felt like this pushed along further. As well I think Lake Placid's aesthetic was more harmonious with the surrounding area. The one thing LP didn't have going for it was the connectivity for the public meeting space.

My first comment about Nasser's design was "It looks like a couple of condo towers were plucked from Gaungzhou and dropped into Riverlanding. I don't think the aesthetic works with anything else in the city with any sort of rigger. I like that the public meeting space is connected but it just seems lazy in how they achieved that....lets remove a building and just open it to the river. Overall I like LP's better but this no matter what will be an incredible addition to the city so lets hope SOMETHING gets built! Perhaps Nasser will take on the proposed condos for across Senator Sid B and build something with equal flare

[prairieguy]

The approval process definitely could take some time...as both the MVA and City need to approve any amendments, PLUS the fact that because this piece of land falls under the Direct Control District Guidelines NO.1, it also requires a public consultation process....yikes!! Another opportunity for all the naysayers to come forward and kill the project. (I don't really believe the project will be killed, but you can count on another round of negative opinions regarding development).

I am not convinced this should go to the public again. I realize that 'amendments' are being requested, but lets let the MVA and the City sort that out. That is what they are elected for! The concept of this project has not changed (i.e. hotel, office tower, condo) although some of the parameters around them have. So, let the 'experts' deal with the parameters and lets move this thing forward...public consultation at this stage seems rather redundant.

I certainly hope we can have approval by December and 'shovels are in the ground' at first thaw in 2012.

[Echoes]

A report in Wednesday's City Council agenda regarding the requested amendments to the DCD1 notes a requested increase in building height to 95 m.

Saskatoon's current tallest is 79.2 m.

[Morogolus]

I'm doubtful that the increased height will be approved considering that River Landing is pretty much right over where planes come in to land from and how hesitant they seemed to approve the last height increase proposal. Although I rarely see planes flying overhead when I'm downtown so what do I know?

[drto]

Originally Posted by Morogolus

I'm doubtful that the increased height will be approved considering that River Landing is pretty much right over where planes come in to land from and how hesitant they seemed to approve the last height increase proposal. Although I rarely see planes flying overhead when I'm downtown so what do I know?

Has there ever been any other mention about relocation of the airport (extremely unlikely and excessively expensive and possibly even redunadant, I know, but it was discussed)or building accessory runways that would allow for increased building heights in the downtown core???