Regina Construction III

[J-Walker]

Originally Posted by thefourthtower

http://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/ra...ng-and-a-game-changer-says-mayor-fougere
Railyard concept plan 'exciting' and a 'game-changer', says Mayor Fougere

Craig Baird, Regina Leader-Post Craig Baird, Regina Leader-Post
More from Craig Baird, Regina Leader-Post

Published on: May 31, 2017 | Last Updated: May 31, 2017 4:33 PM CST
“We are one of the few cities in Canada that has, in its core, a blank piece of land,” Fougere said. “Most cities have already done that and made their choices. We have the chance to craft and build what people want to see. It is exciting to me. I can’t think of any other city in Canada with this opportunity.”
[/COLOR]

I don't know if half the things the mayor says are just promotional nonsense or political speak, or he really just doesn't know better - but maybe he should take a cross country trip. Most major cities in Canada are either in the process of redeveloping large parcels of land near their downtown or will have the opportunity to do so in the future - not all of them on former rail yards, but land which is essentially void of development or current uses. Just off the top of my head I can think of False Creek in Vancouver, East Village in Calgary, City Centre Airport in Edmonton, River landing in Saskatoon, the Forks in Winnipeg, etc. That's just a few in Western Canada. This doesn't even take into account all the Cities that have major rail yards near their downtown (way larger than Regina's) that currently are considering developing them - Hamilton, Winnipeg, etc. This is a mayor who is constantly touting our downtown, but does nothing to ensure the downtown's infrastructure is maintained beyond the bare minimum required. His media bites promoting the downtown don't square with his lack of leadership in improving the downtown. Its sad to walk down 11th Avenue and see the absolute disarray the streetscape is in.

[thefourthtower]

Correct he really needs to look at those horrible side walks the most revolting stretch of land on sask drive to the Levan , the horrible broad street by the bus depot do some thing just don't lookout the window as your driving by Mister Mayor , those areas have been like that for decades , show some pride

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by thefourthtower

Correct he really needs to look at those horrible side walks the most revolting stretch of land on sask drive to the Levan , the horrible broad street by the bus depot do some thing just don't lookout the window as your driving by Mister Mayor , those areas have been like that for decades , show some pride

I believe the areas you are referring to a slated for road widening. The problem is they defer the widening for decades and we are stuck with the nasty sidewalks. It is hard to blame this City though. The cost per metre in this City of new curbs and sidewalks is astronomical.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

They think this is a brilliant strategy. We need to respect the low rise! Thanks Toronto consultants!

I like how they want short buildings on Sask Drive...in order to preserve the view of the oil and potash trains passing by.

[HomerSPC]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

They think this is a brilliant strategy. We need to respect the low rise! Thanks Toronto consultants!

Source?

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by HomerSPC

Source?

http://reginarevitalization.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/RRPOpenHouse2Pres.pdf

[one_brick_at_a_time]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I believe the areas you are referring to a slated for road widening. The problem is they defer the widening for decades and we are stuck with the nasty sidewalks. It is hard to blame this City though. The cost per metre in this City of new curbs and sidewalks is astronomical.

What is the reason for the high cost?

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by one_brick_at_a_time

What is the reason for the high cost?

High labour costs and a lack of competition in ready-mix makers and contractors.

[Drofmab]

Originally Posted by J-Walker

I don't know if half the things the mayor says are just promotional nonsense or political speak, or he really just doesn't know better - but maybe he should take a cross country trip. Most major cities in Canada are either in the process of redeveloping large parcels of land near their downtown or will have the opportunity to do so in the future - not all of them on former rail yards, but land which is essentially void of development or current uses. Just off the top of my head I can think of False Creek in Vancouver, East Village in Calgary, City Centre Airport in Edmonton, River landing in Saskatoon, the Forks in Winnipeg, etc. That's just a few in Western Canada. This doesn't even take into account all the Cities that have major rail yards near their downtown (way larger than Regina's) that currently are considering developing them - Hamilton, Winnipeg, etc.

I agree - this whole notion that the railyard land is a unique opportunity is nonsense. There's numerous examples in Canada. Lebreton Flats next to downtown Ottawa is about 2/3rds the size of downtown (0.84sqkm vs 1.25sqkm). Other than a couple condos recently, and the War Museum, it's a blank slate. It was expropriated in the 1960s, and then never developed (talk about a kick in the teeth to former residents/landowners)... it made a handy snow dump, though

Not knocking the opportunity Regina has - but it's not exactly unique. Given this, we needn't re-invent the wheel... what have other cities done well? What have other cities done poorly with similar parcels of land?

Originally Posted by J-Walker

This is a mayor who is constantly touting our downtown, but does nothing to ensure the downtown's infrastructure is maintained beyond the bare minimum required. His media bites promoting the downtown don't square with his lack of leadership in improving the downtown. Its sad to walk down 11th Avenue and see the absolute disarray the streetscape is in.

NW corners of Rose & 11th & the boulevard in front of City Hall are my pet peeves. Not only have they been in complete disrepair for at least 3-4years, they are liabilities. Someone is going to trip & injure/impale themselves & sue the City (I bet the City's lawyers have already had to deal with these locations).

[Stormer]

I noticed the sidewalks around the Anderson Building at 11th and Albert are mostly complete. They cut down all the Schubert choke cherry trees on the 11th side and left tiny boxes with big stumps in them. Not sure how they will ever be able to replace them.

On Albert they have the very wide double sidewalks. They are just a mass of concrete however. Nothing like the double wide café style that was envisioned. The City had required a double row of trees as well. That appears to have been ignored.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I noticed the sidewalks around the Anderson Building at 11th and Albert are mostly complete. They cut down all the Schubert choke cherry trees on the 11th side and left tiny boxes with big stumps in them. Not sure how they will ever be able to replace them.

On Albert they have the very wide double sidewalks. They are just a mass of concrete however. Nothing like the double wide café style that was envisioned. The City had required a double row of trees as well. That appears to have been ignored.

It's ok though, they put in their driveway so people can drive through the building!

[Regina Boi]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

It's ok though, they put in their driveway so people can drive through the building!

I mentioned that in my last post, and yeah, 🞵🞵🞵 is up with that driveway?!?!? The mayor and council have zero credibility, they let developers do whatever they want, regardless of what any master plan says. I don't even know why the city bothers to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on them. They have no intention of ever following them.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Regina Boi

I mentioned that in my last post, and yeah, 🞵🞵🞵 is up with that driveway?!?!? The mayor and council have zero credibility, they let developers do whatever they want, regardless of what any master plan says. I don't even know why the city bothers to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on them. They have no intention of ever following them.

The building was never supposed to have residential in it. But yes, the city should have refused to even entertain the internal driveway.

[thefourthtower]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I believe the areas you are referring to a slated for road widening. The problem is they defer the widening for decades and we are stuck with the nasty sidewalks. It is hard to blame this City though. The cost per metre in this City of new curbs and sidewalks is astronomical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh8IVkzwYEo
Starting at about 2.20 that stretch of street is the most ugly in Canada . before they do any rail yards development clean up this 🞵🞵🞵🞵

[dsmmace]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I believe the areas you are referring to a slated for road widening. The problem is they defer the widening for decades and we are stuck with the nasty sidewalks. It is hard to blame this City though. The cost per metre in this City of new curbs and sidewalks is astronomical.

The cost of materials for sidewalks/curbs is astronomical. Labor to hand form curbs or the machinery to extrude the curbs is up there with a 8 man crew is astronomical. Liability if you screw it up is astronomical. The time to wait for the city engineers inspections and meetings is astronomical.
*From the other side of the fence*

[BrutallyDishonest2]

I swear to god the administration is deliberately inconsistent. In the past couple of years the city has happily approved three medical clinics in pure industrial areas. Which is absurd and should be banned.

But someone wants to change a house on College in a clinic and it's the end of world.

[PhotoJim]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

I swear to god the administration is deliberately inconsistent. In the past couple of years the city has happily approved three medical clinics in pure industrial areas. Which is absurd and should be banned.

But someone wants to change a house on College in a clinic and it's the end of world.

The issue is parking. Industrial areas have parking. Residential areas tend not to have enough parking.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by PhotoJim

The issue is parking. Industrial areas have parking. Residential areas tend not to have enough parking.

There's plenty of parking in the area, it's not an issue.

[PhotoJim]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

There's plenty of parking in the area, it's not an issue.

There will be a lot less if there's a medical clinic. Every patient there will probably have a car parked, remember, and there will be a waiting room full of patients waiting at times.

The city is quite careful about approving businesses that attract vehicular clients when the business will be in a residential area, unless the business has its own off-street parking. In commercial areas, they treat it differently since residents aren't affected.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by PhotoJim

There will be a lot less if there's a medical clinic. Every patient there will probably have a car parked, remember, and there will be a waiting room full of patients waiting at times.

The city is quite careful about approving businesses that attract vehicular clients when the business will be in a residential area, unless the business has its own off-street parking. In commercial areas, they treat it differently since residents aren't affected.

Yes and that's an asinine policy that should eliminated now.

By your logic we should discourage clinics in walkable neighborhoods were a local could walk to a clinic and instead put them in industrial parks with massive parking lots.

What could go wrong?