Regina Construction III

[jigglysquishy]

So why are prices so high then? If contractors are desperate for work, surely prices should come down drastically.

[pappcam]

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

So why are prices so high then? If contractors are desperate for work, surely prices should come down drastically.

I guess it's still residual from the boom. Prices should definitely be lower than what they are.

[Crisis]

Originally Posted by pappcam

Oh yeah, the trades are suffering badly right now. It's the worst it has been since the early-mid 90's.

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

So why are prices so high then? If contractors are desperate for work, surely prices should come down drastically.

Originally Posted by pappcam

I guess it's still residual from the boom. Prices should definitely be lower than what they are.

Although I wouldn't necessarily agree with the points noted by Stormer above, there are reasons for the comparatively high prices for construction in Saskatchewan. The primary reason is location - we are geographically a long ways from major market that either produce or warehouse building materials. As a result, the cost for many materials is significantly higher than they would be in either Alberta or Manitoba (both of which have major centres far larger than Regina or Saskatoon).

The "residual from the boom" comment has some merit, in that a number of construction companies moved into the Industrial sector during the boom years when seemingly all of the potash mines had large capital improvement projects underway. There are much higher costs incurred to work in an Industrial setting (beyond simply higher wages) and once a contracting firm is configured to work in that sector, it is difficult to transition back into Commercial construction.

The industry has also seen major material price increases. Beyond simply tariffs, there has been significant price increases likely due to the buoyant economy in the US. Though not specific to Saskatchewan, those increases are a major reason that we have not seen the decrease in construction costs that would be expected in a depressed marketplace.

I can tell you that the profit margins (which have always been extremely low in this industry) have continued to be shaved as companies try to secure work to keep their businesses afloat. Most people simply don't believe that contractors would ever take on the amount of risk that we do in this business for such meager margins. Depending on the scale of the project, margins of 1% - 5% are the norm for General Contractors, with Trade Contractors 5% - 10% or somewhat better.

It's a great time to be buying construction services in Saskatchewan - not such a great time to be providing it.

[Festivus]

Internal emails reveal Brandt and CNIB submitted completed plans months prior to the tender opening for the land.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatche...al-emails-government-geoff-leo-1.5011704

CBC has learned that Brandt Developments and CNIB submitted a building plan for a new office tower on CNIB lands in Wascana Park — and had it evaluated by the organization that runs the park — months before Brandt was selected as the winning proponent to construct such a building.

Until now, CNIB, Brandt and the Government of Saskatchewan have publicly said the Brandt/CNIB proposal first went to the Wascana Centre Authority (WCA) for review in the summer of 2015, after a tendering process that saw Brandt selected as the winning bidder.

Also sounds like the committee responsible for reviewing and approving the plans was railroaded into accepting them, resulting in one member resigning:

Documents obtained by CBC show that Brandt and CNIB submitted a "fully developed scheme" for a four-storey commercial building to the WCA in October 2014 — months before the tender process began — and the WCA began reviewing it at that time.

The plan was so advanced that the architectural committee complained in a Nov. 11, 2014 report, "the committee can only function effectively if projects come forward at the early stages where the concept is malleable."

Roger du Toit, chair of the architectural committee, wrote in an Oct. 21, 2014 report that, "the scale and character of the proposed project does not comply with the [Wascana Centre] master plan." In the November report, he wrote "the committee has profound difficulties with the proposal, stemming in part from the size and layout of the building."

Neither Brandt or CNIB have replied to requests by CBC for an explanation of these new revelations. The provincial government did send an email in response, but it didn't address the questions asked.

The AAC's concerns escalated in the months and years that followed. It dubbed Brandt's project "dangerous to the integrity of the vision and purpose of Wascana" and a "precedent setting divergence from the 'five noble purposes' fundamental to the historic concept of use for the park."

After years of battling back and forth, one committee member resigned in 2017 after protesting that he and the committee had been shunted aside.

Sounds like a case of government corruption, which is standard for the province. Friends of whoever is in charge get what they want, and the rules are changed to ensure it, or agreements are made behind closed doors and the results of committees are pre-determined.

So basically Brandt and the government decided ahead of time that this was going to happen with the design they wanted, and proper oversight and procedure was pushed aside to make it happen. In a just world we would have a vigilante-style Batman who went around punishing this sort of public/corporate corruption instead of street-level crime.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Udon'tknow

I am not sure I agree with your last two bullets. I know a number of construction workers who had been laid off due to the poor economy and a much slower housing market. I've also been dealing with a general contractor on a potential job and he is practically begging for the job. Plus people are not willing to pay the high prices for housing from a number of years ago, which is also influenced by higher interest rates and tougher qualifications to get mortgages now. Less demand means lower prices for home builders, contractors etc..

I was primarily referring to commercial construction not home building. In particular high-rises as we were discussing why a downtown high-rise condo cost so much to build. Home builder's and their trades are definitely hurting and their is competition. Not so much in complex high-rise construction where specialized trades largely do not even exist here in any numbers.

[pappcam]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I was primarily referring to commercial construction not home building. In particular high-rises as we were discussing why a downtown high-rise condo cost so much to build. Home builder's and their trades are definitely hurting and their is competition. Not so much in complex high-rise construction where specialized trades largely do not even exist here in any numbers.

Ummm.... I worked in the commercial/industrial trades for 15 years and there are no "specialized trades" needed to construct a high rise for the most part. The plumbers, electricians and other building trades are local people and a LOT of them are out of work.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Festivus

So basically Brandt and the government decided ahead of time that this was going to happen with the design they wanted, and proper oversight and procedure was pushed aside to make it happen. In a just world we would have a vigilante-style Batman who went around punishing this sort of public/corporate corruption instead of street-level crime.

Who didn't already know this.

Next thing you're going to tell me that Conexus didn't plan their buildings years before the phoney RFP came out. Both park buildings were rigged before they were made public. Conexus execs were talking about the plan way, way ahead of time, but no scrutiny ever happened.

That Leo only seems to care about Brandt suggests something about him.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by pappcam

Ummm.... I worked in the commercial/industrial trades for 15 years and there are no "specialized trades" needed to construct a high rise for the most part. The plumbers, electricians and other building trades are local people and a LOT of them are out of work.

I have seen the out of province people working on the complex projects. You have tower cranes, elevators, glaziers, shoring and foundation, etc. that don't have a huge base to draw from in Regina.

OK but instead of 8 companies bidding on some of the specialized work, in some cases there are 2. That was my point.

[pappcam]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I have seen the out of province people working on the complex projects. You have tower cranes, elevators, glaziers, shoring and foundation, etc. that don't have a huge base to draw from in Regina.

I worked in contruction in those peak years of high rise construction downtown in the late 80's and I worked on a few of them. The trades were populated by local workers and even if it was out of province people working here at that time it wasn't because no one here could do it. It's about who got the bid to do the job.

I'm telling you right now that 90% of the work in a high rise is the same as in a three story building. It's just on a bigger scale.

[J-Walker]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Who didn't already know this.

Next thing you're going to tell me that Conexus didn't plan their buildings years before the phoney RFP came out. Both park buildings were rigged before they were made public. Conexus execs were talking about the plan way, way ahead of time, but no scrutiny ever happened.

That Leo only seems to care about Brandt suggests something about him.

I'm gonna just leave this here.

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

And Brandt is arguably more justifiable. It's land already in the possession of a private entity and they weren't part of an almost predetermined RFP. They simply worked to redevelop an existing building (albeit by vastly expanding). Ultimately both should be cancelled immediately as they're an affront to the park.

If I had to pick one, I'd pick Brandt over Conexus' abomination though.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by J-Walker

I'm gonna just leave this here.

Wow you really spent a lot of time looking that up. Congrats detective.

Unlike most here I change my mind with new evidence. My understanding was the Brandt came in later, proposed a new building and got approved. Instead they did the same thing as Conexus, which was to use their influence to go around the process. Why Brandt is getting all the flack when Conexus' building is more egregious, I'll never know.

[skphc08]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Unlike most here I change my mind with new evidence.

Yes, you're right. You're better than most everyone on here. What with your well-researched, evidence-based opinions.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by skphc08

Yes, you're right. You're better than most everyone on here. What with your well-researched, evidence-based opinions.

That's correct.

[Festivus]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Wow you really spent a lot of time looking that up. Congrats detective.

Unlike most here I change my mind with new evidence. My understanding was the Brandt came in later, proposed a new building and got approved. Instead they did the same thing as Conexus, which was to use their influence to go around the process. Why Brandt is getting all the flack when Conexus' building is more egregious, I'll never know.

I'm pretty sure that people here are equally outraged at both being built.

[pappcam]

Originally Posted by Festivus

I'm pretty sure that people here are equally outraged at both being built.

How about being outraged at neither?

Now bring on the slippery slope/strawman arguments.

[J-Walker]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

Wow you really spent a lot of time looking that up. Congrats detective.

Unlike most here I change my mind with new evidence. My understanding was the Brandt came in later, proposed a new building and got approved. Instead they did the same thing as Conexus, which was to use their influence to go around the process. Why Brandt is getting all the flack when Conexus' building is more egregious, I'll never know.

Just a friendly jab for a little bit of fun, don’t take offense.

I agree with you though. Both projects are marred by issues with proper procedure and fairness. But I don’t consider them equals – I think the Brandt’s project is much more nefarious than the Connexus deal (but yes, both are good examples of behind the scenes dealings that were meant to subvert the public’s anticipated pushback).

Here’s why I think Brandt’s is far worse.

The CNIB building was a “non-conforming” use in the park. Any change in use or alteration to the building (>15%) should have resulted in the non-conforming use status being revoked. This should have prevented the construction of a new building in its place. The Connexus building, on the other hand, is being constructed in the specific area that was always identified in the Wascana Centre Plan for the eventual construction of another building. The Connexus building is completely in line with what was envisioned for that spot.

The Brandt deal only provides value to the CNIB in the form of free lease space – no value at all to Wascana Park – Brandt received 95% of the benefit of this deal. The Connexus deal provides at least some value to Wascana Park and city heritage in the form of the restoration of Darke Hall and other improvements in the vicinity. Its providing value to the park, albeit Connexus does still benefit quite substantially.

Yes, both public tenders were complete BS – they had no intention of ever awarding it to anyone else but Connexus and Brandt – If I were a developer who had spent time and money on putting together a proposal package for either of these tenders I would be suing either party right now for putting out a false and illegitimate tender.

The Brandt deal is being done on Provincial land (owned by the public) however no public representation at all has been solicited. The deal with Brandt and CNIB is specifically being kept secret in order to undermine the public’s ability to scrutinize the agreement. Connexus deal was different – we knew exactly what was going on. When City council voted to provide the land for the Connexus development, they did so willingly and with full and complete information – we were adequately notified and represented by our council. Council new exactly what they were donating the land for and to whom. This was not a behind the scenes deal. Our councilors and mayor are absolute idiots for not getting anything in return (like an equal sized parcel of land at the University or something similar), but that’s our fault that our Councillors are too stupid to scrutinize the land transfer before they voted on it - they sure did after they had already voted though.

Just my thoughts, add to it or criticize where you may disagree.

[one_brick_at_a_time]

Just bugs me the most since there are large empty areas along Broad street and multiple empty lots downtown that could have used a new Brandt tower and new Conexus Tower instead of Wascana Park.

[pappcam]

Originally Posted by one_brick_at_a_time

Just bugs me the most since there are large empty areas along Broad street and multiple empty lots downtown that could have used a new Brandt tower and new Conexus Tower instead of Wascana Park.

Neither building being built is a tower.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by pappcam

Neither building being built is a tower.

I think he means if they were downtown they would be towers.

[one_brick_at_a_time]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I think he means if they were downtown they would be towers.

Yes. And would most likely be apart of multi use including retail, other office and maybe hotel too.

So much space empty to be built on downtown. Wish the city had rules that either you build on your land downtown or you have to make mandatory green space until a project is built.