Regina Construction III

[Chorduroy]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Yeah that was literally what I was basing it on. I have no faith in council in and of themselves. I thought the business opposition would start their behind-the-scenes influencing.

Now something else is going on. So I expect a Havard proposal for the park within the decade.

I don't know why I blindly assumed this proposal wasn't going to go ahead. I just figured common sense might prevail at some point. I know nothing about how the deals are handled behind closed doors, other than the narrative that the developers are at the wheel. I'm so naive.

Now anything is possible, obviously. Depressing.

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

Sean Fraser misunderstood the plans a bit during that city council meeting. Although CNIB and Brandt are partnering on the building there's no plans for it to be "an office tower". It's still going to conform to WCA's regulations of no buildings exceeding tree height and I believe it's a two story plan, similar to the current building.

Correction: It's a three story plan, but remaining short enough not to exceed the tree canopy. I checked last night because I wasn't sure.

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by one_brick_at_a_time

Also any photo updates of Superstore Golden Mile and Fairfield South Albert Street?

It's not a great picture but this is from yesterday:

[one_brick_at_a_time]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

It's not a great picture but this is from yesterday:

THANK YOU! Lookin' good!

[one_brick_at_a_time]

I wonder what is going to be built just north of the hotel on the old gas station land?

As for the new Conexus building, let's wait and see what the designs look like. There is also no way a stucco building is going to be approved. It will be a mixture of stone, brick and glass.

[StealthGirl]

News Talk 980 CJME ‏@CJMENews 35m35 minutes ago
Eastbound and westbound Sask Drive is blocked from Hamilton to Smith after a sign falls from a nearby building. #yqrtraffic

Cornwall Centre sign?

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by StealthGirl

News Talk 980 CJME ‏@CJMENews 35m35 minutes ago
Eastbound and westbound Sask Drive is blocked from Hamilton to Smith after a sign falls from a nearby building. #yqrtraffic

Cornwall Centre sign?

Could be SaskTel. Windy today, it may have been that ad banner on the west side.

Twitter says SaskTel. I blame Bell.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by one_brick_at_a_time

As for the new Conexus building, let's wait and see what the designs look like. There is also no way a stucco building is going to be approved. It will be a mixture of stone, brick and glass.

Serious question: what policy measures exist to regulate the actual building material. As nothing is supposed to be built in Wascana I'd be interested to know what's on the books.

For most commercial projects there isn't actually much in the way of regulations aesthetics assuming they meet building codes.

[jigglysquishy]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Serious question: what policy measures exist to regulate the actual building material. As nothing is supposed to be built in Wascana I'd be interested to know what's on the books.

For most commercial projects there isn't actually much in the way of regulations aesthetics assuming they meet building codes.

Canterbury Gardens is the only place in the city with any type of architecture rules.

[thefourthtower]

Ctv news is reporting a joint office building for Brant and CNIB

[Dan0myte]

In my best grumpy old man voice:

The construction crews at the new Golden Mile Superstore are taking up way too much space with all of their equipment and building supplies. Trying to go to the Golden Mile for anything is silly right now because you can't park anywhere. Couldn't some of the work trucks or pallets of goods be stored in the back parking lane by Rae street?

I tried going to the Golden Mile yesterday and every single spot, from the Extra Foods all the way over to Original Joe's was taken. I had to go park at Mr. Sub and walk over.

OK, complaint mode off. I know it's temporary and they'll be cleared out of there soon and it's for the greater good. As a Reginan I feel entitled that I should be able to park close to the front doors.

[jigglysquishy]

I go to golden mile regularly (most often during rush hour)and I've never struggled to find a place to park.

It's the same thing with downtown, there's parking available if you look.

[Stormer]

It is a shame that Brandt is not going downtown, but at least the are not moving from downtown. Clearly this is the death knell for the giant building they proposed at Rose and 12th.

http://regina.ctvnews.ca/mobile/video?clipId=941757

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by djforsberg

I agree. I've been going to that Goodlife at peak hours (around 5-6pm) and the furthest I had to park was three rows away. About downtown parking: I always scoff at people who complain about it. Either they are too lazy to walk or too lazy to find a spot. People (this isn't aimed at you Dan0myte) don't seem to like any kind of challenge nowadays and always expect instant results.

Haha, I accept my laziness and embrace it.

Most days I'm able to find a spot fairly close to the door there. I was just annoyed yesterday as there was an oddly high number of people at the mall around 4 and the construction crew had pushed their fencing out even farther due to some equipment movement they were doing.

[CCF]

With respect to 'planning' one of the most obvious things Regina has done well over the last 50+ years was the continued concentration of office space within the downtown.

That position however, has started to erode in more recent years - first with the Harbour Landing Office park, and now with the allowance of multiple office buildings in Wascana Park. There is zero justification for any of this. Poor decisions made with a pretty narrow scope in mind.

[sastaunik44]

Does anyone know what is being built on corner of Ross and Winnipeg Street? Is it going to be ANOTHER Tim Hortons?

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by sastaunik44

Does anyone know what is being built on corner of Ross and Winnipeg Street? Is it going to be ANOTHER Tim Hortons?

yes

[Drofmab]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Serious question: what policy measures exist to regulate the actual building material. As nothing is supposed to be built in Wascana I'd be interested to know what's on the books.

For most commercial projects there isn't actually much in the way of regulations aesthetics assuming they meet building codes.

Not sure what you mean by "As nothing is supposed to be built in Wascana..."

In terms of regulating the building materials - they have not only policies (in addition to the Master Plan, WCA Bylaws 21 & 24 are most applicable), but legislation (the Wascana Centre Act, sections 15-22).

The legislation provides the Board with broad authority regarding all improvements (defined as any building, structure or service facility with an aggregate cost of $2,000 or more in a period of 12months... so, basically everything )

The Act says

"18(1) Subject to subsection (2), no approval of the construction of a building shall be given under section 17 unless:
(a) the participating party requesting approval of the proposed building submits all plans, elevations, specifications and models relating to the exterior of the proposed building that the Authority may require"

(section 2 allows WCA to waive these requirements for buildings under $25,000 or temporary buildings)

They have architectural advisory committee who review & recommend proposals - the Master Plan advises proponents to submit "palette of proposed materials, colours and textures," so it's clear that these will be reviewed.

With the notable exception of the Soundstage (the construction of which began without WCA's knowledge or approval, and wasn't stopped/penalties weren't levied for largely political reasons - but that's another story), I'd say most new buildings/renovations have conformed to the aesthetic principles outlined in the Master Plan.

It's also interesting to note that the Wascana Centre Master Plan trumps the City's Official Community Plan. In practice, with City reps on the Board, you'd expect them to align - but technically, WCA doesn't need to consider/comply/align with the OCP at all. So, in the case of Conexus, the City had no ability to prevent this development on the basis of the OCP.

[Drofmab]

Originally Posted by CCF

With respect to 'planning' one of the most obvious things Regina has done well over the last 50+ years was the continued concentration of office space within the downtown.

That position however, has started to erode in more recent years - first with the Harbour Landing Office park, and now with the allowance of multiple office buildings in Wascana Park. There is zero justification for any of this. Poor decisions made with a pretty narrow scope in mind.

"multiple" is a tad hyperbolic. 1 (at best 2, if Brandt/CNIB goes ahead) is hardly multiple... or did I miss a cluster of office buildings recently built in Wascana Centre?

[CCF]

Originally Posted by Drofmab

"multiple" is a tad hyperbolic. 1 (at best 2, if Brandt/CNIB goes ahead) is hardly multiple... or did I miss a cluster of office buildings recently built in Wascana Centre?

Okay - if you would prefer to sub out 'multiple' and replace it with an alternative word, go for it...by all means - but the point still stands.

This is a slippery slope - it starts with one, and now a second proposal is at hand, and then where does it go from there?

Do you believe that New York City (with likely some of the greatest development pressures in the world) would start carving out portions of Central Park? No. What about Vancouver - same issue. Have they started doing anything similar in Stanley Park? Nope! Yet, Regina which has an abundance of inefficiently used land within the downtown believes that eroding at Wascana Park for development is a path with pursuing.