Edmonton Construction 13 (November 2015) - Page 8

Harrison · #**141** Posted **Nov 15, 2015, 3:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMD UW

I guess I am in the best position to provide addition information on this given my involvement in this project from day 1. Reality is that we did more than what many other developers would have done as most would have submitted a demolition permit the day after they closed on the land. We didn't. We planned around the mansion and designed it so that it would be a focal point in the community. We purposely aligned the new road so that it was the first house you saw when you entered the community. We even named the development after the name of the mansion. Councillor McKeen's comments stating that we deliberately planned it to fail are grossly inaccurate and false. I am not sure what more any one else could have done.

Fact is that we made a verbal commitment to retain the house (for more than 4 years) in the hopes of finding a suitable buyer who would be prepared to take on the risk and costs of renovating the house. One of the biggest factors against the house was its size. At over 8000sf it would have been a daunting task to bring it up to a livable standard. There also is not much inside the house either, its very underwhelming. The previous owners also let it fall into disrepair over the decades. The interior was demised and at one time it looked as if it was used as an apartment or rooming house.

Now it is time to move forward. I will let our track record of designating other historical buildings such as the Crawford Block and soon the Hulbert Block (Block 1912 cafe building) speak for itself.

Thanks for the background Chris. nice to know that you and Ivan did do all you could to try and save it, which is more than many developers in this city would do I am sure.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**142** Posted **Nov 15, 2015, 11:23 PM**

New $40-million student residence planned for University of Alberta campus
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-ne...planned-for-university-of-alberta-campus

Quote:

The University of Alberta’s new president wants to see more students living on campus and involved in local business, community groups and agencies.

A new $40-million residence to accommodate 520 first-year students will be ready in 2018, David Turpin said. Construction of Lister Hall Five will proceed as soon a the province approves borrowing the money.

What an odd article. The headline and first two paragraphs talk about the new residence, but then most of the rest is about Turpin and his goals for the university.

rapid_business · #**143** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 6:46 PM**

I like the courtyard of El Mirador. Good human scale, nice looking semi-public (community) space.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baronmine

"Recognizing its significance to the citys built heritage, El Mirador is on the A list of the Register of Historic Resources in Edmonton. Any plan to dramatically change or demolish the structure must first be brought to a vote of Edmonton City Council." (yegishome.ca)

http://yegishome.ca/news/2004/08/05/a-touch-of-spain-in-edmonton

The author of that article is incorrect. It's actually on the B list. It isn't designated as a municipal historic resource, but is on the City's 'inventory list'. This means the City sees architectural significance in the building, but is not protected as those that are designated: http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/edmonton_archives/historic-resources-inventory-register.aspx

CMD UW · #**144** Posted **Nov 16, 2015, 9:30 PM**

If its on the 'B' list there's likely zero chance of this being retained.

Baronmine · #**145** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 5:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rapid_business

I like the courtyard of El Mirador. Good human scale, nice looking semi-public (community) space.

The author of that article is incorrect. It's actually on the B list. It isn't designated as a municipal historic resource, but is on the City's 'inventory list'. This means the City sees architectural significance in the building, but is not protected as those that are designated: http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/edmonton_archives/historic-resources-inventory-register.aspx

Right, good to know. Thank you for that.
The courtyard is awesome. Cold beer on a hot sunny day... I want summer back.

hilman · #**146** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 5:29 PM**

https://twitter.com/tedgbauer

240glt · #**147** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 5:37 PM**

Mmhmm

240glt · #**148** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 5:40 PM**

There's obviously been a big shake-up within Sustainable Development in the past two months or so. Very few variances being granted and it does not seen that they are following their "guide" anymore. I wonder if Scott's departure has had anything to do with that...

Hallsy's Toupee · #**149** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:22 PM**

I love how they kept the lower level repurposing very vague.

teddybear · #**150** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:28 PM**

I notice that the arch of the new bridge should be made higher, imo... Higher and bigger arch will make it looks better.. It will look grander.. and it will bring focus to the bridge when people see the downtown... too bad it's not. The current height of the arch will make it just another bridge..

s4.audios · #**151** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:30 PM**

re: 240glt

I've heard a lot of people have left from the development department and according some people at my work, it has been the good people that have been pro-development. It has gotten more tough to get DPs. Mind you this is from an employer that develops outwards and creating new suburbs (mostly south of Henday).

Sorry no real credible source I can't confirm anything, just word of mouth.

s4.audios · #**152** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by teddybear

I notice that the arch of the new bridge should be made higher, imo... Higher and bigger arch will make it looks better.. It will look grander.. and it will bring focus to the bridge when people see the downtown... too bad it's not. The current height of the arch will make it just another bridge..

I have a feeling the whole structure will be elevated. They have some temporary support structures (those red frames) that are higher than what the current ends of the arches are sitting on. I never looked at the bottom of the ends though so I don't know if they are already bolted into the ground. Something I've been wondering about every time I drive by but never stopped to inspect. Thanks for bringing it up!!

Airboy · #**153** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:40 PM**

The north and south bank arch section still have to be lifted and fitted onto the trust block sections. That will raise it a couple of meters. then the central section will be lifted into place. I noticed that the central section has been moved closer to the water. Lets hope the open water is still there when they make the final lift.

Daveography · #**154** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:50 PM**

Yup, still lots of lifting to do on the new Walterdale. The arches will rise a fair ways higher than the red structures, if that helps provide any indication.

The prominence of the arches will also be enhanced when the old bridge is demolished.

The new bridge will have a a much better presence than you think.

Makenosmallplans · #**155** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 6:58 PM**

the top of the arches will end up being about the same height as the bottom of the high level bridge - so yes, i think some hoisting to do and i think will indeed be quite impressive.

if you look at the web cam you can see that the north end of the arches are being attached to one barge tower - i suspect they will float that out and then maneuver the second barge underneath the south end from downstream... looks like its happening fairly soon.

teddybear · #**156** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 7:02 PM**

Thanks guys! I just wanna bring it here. If it still to be lifted then it's better. Hopefully it will not disappoint just because oil is down and tight budget..

Daveography · #**157** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 7:10 PM**

^ Everything about the bridge and its construction was decided on and the contracts signed long before oil dropped; it will not have an impact.

Coldrsx · #**158** Posted **Nov 17, 2015, 9:47 PM**

Exactly... it will look very good when complete...be patient.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**159** Posted **Nov 18, 2015, 3:25 AM**

Edmonton's historic McDougall United Church saved from the wreckers
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-ne...ll-united-church-saved-from-the-wreckers

Quote:

Edmonton’s historic McDougall United Church was officially saved from the wrecking ball Tuesday, at least for the moment.

The church and the Friends of McDougall Church society still face the difficult task of fundraising to secure up to $15 million needed to fully restore the 105-year-old church, 1,000-seat concert hall and community meeting space. A council vote Tuesday officially added the building to the city’s Municipal Historic Resources inventory.

That move prohibits anyone from taking out a demolition permit and secures $500,000 to start stabilizing the structure. The province agreed to contribute $750,000 from its Community Facility Enhancement Program after the building was given a provincial historic designation last spring.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**160** Posted **Nov 18, 2015, 3:38 AM**

Edmonton creating new department to centralize big projects
http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonton/20...ng-department-for-capital-projects-.html

Quote:

The city is creating a centralized capital-project department where the buck will stop if another bridge sees its girders bend or another LRT line is delayed for multiple months.

Currently, individual departments manage their own capital projects, but the new department will be responsible for everything — from roads to LRT to recreation centres.

Adam Laughlin, acting general manager of the new Integrated Infrastructure Services department, said the shift isn’t necessarily about recent construction problems but rather the future.

“It’s more of a reflection of the growing city that we are. We have a $4-billion capital program over the next four years,” he said.

Still, Laughlin said the city hopes managing all projects under one roof will lead to fewer cost overruns and delays.

“It creates a consistent, efficient and effective approach to capital delivery that’s all within one area.”

Laughlin said the new department will not add to costs, and that it will move existing staff and re-organize them.

“Our goal is to have the department developed and built early next year, so right now we are in the process of assessing the best way to build the department,” he said.

Coun. Scott McKeen said it’s clear the city needs to improve, but also noted despite many headlines it is doing a decent job.

“The vast majority of the contracts the city undertakes are on time and on budget,” he said.

Coun. Mike Nickel said he hopes the change will mean better accountability for problems.

“It’s certainly got to be better than what we have right now,” he said. “What we are lacking is oversight, monitoring, professional procurement practices, professional construction management practices.”