Regina Construction III

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by one_brick_at_a_time

Harvard developments will have the ability to build whatever they want during this high construction cost time period. They have the money, that is for sure.

That is not how Harvard operates. They will not build unless the have the building mostly pre-leased to tenants prepared to pay upwards of $35 psf net. That is the challenge.

[Stormer]

Checked out the new Gold's Gym Exec downtown. It is very nice, especially the reception and locket rooms.

[SkydivePilot]

Originally Posted by Nathan

The Saskatchewan election is supposed to be in Nov of 2015, but due to overlap with the Federal election, the laws allow it to shift into April of 2016.

That said, the election period would still overlap with the planning/construction of said building, so they probably want to avoid any overlap at all... Better to do it right at the start of the next mandate (if they are going to go that route).

Assuming they don't try to privatize it anyway...

I'll betcha there will be a snap election later this year. (If I'm wrong, I'll buy ya a beer.)

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by SkydivePilot

I'll betcha there will be a snap election later this year. (If I'm wrong, I'll buy ya a beer.)

Not a fan of beer... but the Sask Party would have to repeal their fixed election date legislation to call a snap election

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Not a fan of beer... but the Sask Party would have to repeal their fixed election date legislation to call a snap election

Quebec also has/had fixed election dates but the PQ called a snap election anyway by dissolving its Legislature. I'm not certain but I believe all governments with fixed election dates (even federal) can hold early elections if the government loses confidence of the legislature or the legislature/parliament is dissolved. Legislation doesn't need to be repealed.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

Quebec also has/had fixed election dates but the PQ called a snap election anyway by dissolving its Legislature. I'm not certain but I believe all governments with fixed election dates (even federal) can hold early elections if the government loses confidence of the legislature or the legislature/parliament is dissolved. Legislation doesn't need to be repealed.

Yes, if the party in power loses the confidence of the legislature, an early election can be called... The PQ did just that. However, in order for the Sask Party to lose the confidence of the legislature, it would need to lose confidence in itself; they have a majority, the PQ didn't.

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Yes, if the party in power loses the confidence of the legislature, an early election can be called... The PQ did just that. However, in order for the Sask Party to lose the confidence of the legislature, it would need to lose confidence in itself; they have a majority, the PQ didn't.

PQ didn't lose support of the Legislature, they dissolved the legislature. They definately lost the support of the public during/after the election.

[TannerF]

With with the majority share of Sears Canada being up for sale will we see some new players come to Canada? Most are reporting the only value is in the real estate and not in operating the business at all.

http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/05/14/sears_considering_selling_its_canadian_operations.html

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

PQ didn't lose support of the Legislature, they dissolved the legislature. They definately lost the support of the public during/after the election.

It's a bit of a grey area. The opposition parties stated they wouldn't support the budget as it was, and the PQ wasn't going to change it, so as was destined for failure, they pre-emptively called for the dissolution of the assembly. Polls were also conveniently indicating that a majority was within reach. I absolutely love it when politicians try to play the game like that only to have it blow up on their faces.

The Sask Party won't be able to use the sure failure of a budget motion as an excuse due to their majority position.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by TannerF

With with the majority share of Sears Canada being up for sale will we see some new players come to Canada? Most are reporting the only value is in the real estate and not in operating the business at all.

http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/05/14/sears_considering_selling_its_canadian_operations.html

Yeah, I can't see anyone buying Sears for the retail upside potential... Kind of a dead/dying brand.

As the article stated, would definitely be interesting if Simon's from Quebec used Sears as a springboard to expand through Canada. Would be nice to have a strong Canadian department store again (I consider the Bay semi-Canadian... its Canadian-ness is a bit murky).

The Cornwall and both its anchors coul use a MAJOR refresh... And if someone ends up taking over the Sears space through this and brings it up to par, it could force the Bay's hand and could encourage the Cornwall ownership (primaris?) to invest a bit. The "renovations" at the Bay were nothing more than a fresh coat of paint on some dividers.

[Festivus]

Personally I don't really get the idea of going to a single store for clothes, appliances, shoes, makeup, etc. For me, I research what I want online, and then if I end up buying it in person it's at a place that specifically sells that thing. I get that their model used to work before the internet and specialty stores, but times have changed and the entire department store model isn't as sound as it once was.

I still go to the Bay occasionally for clothing since Regina doesn't have a good selection of men's stores, but usually I'd prefer to shop at a place that is designed for the thing I am looking for.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Nathan

It's a bit of a grey area. The opposition parties stated they wouldn't support the budget as it was, and the PQ wasn't going to change it, so as was destined for failure, they pre-emptively called for the dissolution of the assembly. Polls were also conveniently indicating that a majority was within reach. I absolutely love it when politicians try to play the game like that only to have it blow up on their faces.

The Sask Party won't be able to use the sure failure of a budget motion as an excuse due to their majority position.

They Saskatchewan legislation (and likely PQ's too) only refers to an early election on dissolution. There need not be a confidence vote. Technically any government, minority or majority, can still ask the LG to dissolve the legislature and call an early election. This would be a pretty cynical and risky move for a majority.

The legislation also requires that the election move to April 2016 if the Feds have an overlapping election. So unless the Harper Government implodes, the SK election will be 2016.

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by Festivus

Personally I don't really get the idea of going to a single store for clothes, appliances, shoes, makeup, etc. For me, I research what I want online, and then if I end up buying it in person it's at a place that specifically sells that thing. I get that their model used to work before the internet and specialty stores, but times have changed and the entire department store model isn't as sound as it once was.

I still go to the Bay occasionally for clothing since Regina doesn't have a good selection of men's stores, but usually I'd prefer to shop at a place that is designed for the thing I am looking for.

Brick and mortar retail is increasingly making less sense. Even for shoes and clothes - if you know your sizes it is so much easier and cheaper to buy online. My last 4 pair of shoes have been online and my last two outer coats have been online. Other consumable stuff I buy mostly from Amazon now.

[Festivus]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

Brick and mortar retail is increasingly making less sense. Even for shoes and clothes - if you know your sizes it is so much easier and cheaper to buy online. My last 4 pair of shoes have been online and my last two outer coats have been online. Other consumable stuff I buy mostly from Amazon now.

I agree, in general. Especially with many online stores that will allow you to exchange for different sizes fairly easily. I will still always buy in person if the price ends up being the same after shipping, but for many things I only buy online.

[jw6969]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

Brick and mortar retail is increasingly making less sense. Even for shoes and clothes - if you know your sizes it is so much easier and cheaper to buy online. My last 4 pair of shoes have been online and my last two outer coats have been online. Other consumable stuff I buy mostly from Amazon now.

The reason my job is getting so stressful but lots of job security and money.

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by jw6969

The reason my job is getting so stressful but lots of job security and money.

courier?

[TannerF]

Originally Posted by SkydivePilot

Last summer, there were crews already digging/trenching west of Campbell St.

It's more than that this year. They have from south of Gordon Road to just south of a farm yard on Campbell staked off and are going just over half a mile west so there will be a decent amount of land having dirt moved on it this year.

[wacko]

This discussion is off-topic for the stadium thread, so I'm bringing it here.

I am not sure that Regina needs a newer or (especially) a larger version of the Brandt Centre. What events in the past year or two have sold out all 6,136 seats? I can only think of one Pats game last season that came anywhere close to filling the Brandt. Admittedly I don't go to concerts, so perhaps someone can help me with this. But to me, it seems those existing 6,000 seats are the right size for Regina and we don't really need any more. Perhaps I can be proved wrong if there's a resurgence of interest in the Pats, but we'll see.

The Brandt Centre I believe is structurally sound and can operate for another 20 years without being replaced. I agree that once the Riders' new stadium is complete, then long-term planning can perhaps begin towards the goal of ultimately replacing the Brandt. However, I hardly think we need to compete with the CUC in Saskatoon. I think only one arena of that size is really financially viable in Saskatchewan, and I'm perfectly fine with Saskatoon having that arena. Most large concert tours aren't likely to book in both Regina and Saskatoon anyway. I would rather have one successful arena than two struggling, largely empty ones. When it comes to growth and large projects, it's time to consider the real needs of the whole province and not get locked in a competitive we-need-to-have-the-same-things-as-the-other-city mentality.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by wacko

This discussion is off-topic for the stadium thread, so I'm bringing it here.

I am not sure that Regina needs a newer or (especially) a larger version of the Brandt Centre. What events in the past year or two have sold out all 6,136 seats? I can only think of one Pats game last season that came anywhere close to filling the Brandt. Admittedly I don't go to concerts, so perhaps someone can help me with this. But to me, it seems those existing 6,000 seats are the right size for Regina and we don't really need any more. Perhaps I can be proved wrong if there's a resurgence of interest in the Pats, but we'll see.

The Brandt Centre I believe is structurally sound and can operate for another 20 years without being replaced. I agree that once the Riders' new stadium is complete, then long-term planning can perhaps begin towards the goal of ultimately replacing the Brandt. However, I hardly think we need to compete with the CUC in Saskatoon. I think only one arena of that size is really financially viable in Saskatchewan, and I'm perfectly fine with Saskatoon having that arena. Most large concert tours aren't likely to book in both Regina and Saskatoon anyway. I would rather have one successful arena than two struggling, largely empty ones. When it comes to growth and large projects, it's time to consider the real needs of the whole province and not get locked in a competitive we-need-to-have-the-same-things-as-the-other-city mentality.

These are all valid points, but I am wondering if we will still be thinking this way in 10 years. I would love to see an Arena downtown, but if the Brandt Centre could be expanded to put boxes where the concourse now is while still having a wide concourse under the seats, plus finish the upper deck on the remaining end, I could live with that for another 15-20 years.

Capacity could probably be increased to close to 8000.

Boxes are crucial to the success of all venues these days, even if most people never get to use them.

[jigglysquishy]

The Brandt Center needs to eventually be replaced. But not in the immediate (<10 year) future.

The railyard development is an excellent location. Especially if it is incorporated with the Casino.

In terms of sizing, it's something that needs to be re-evaluated when the time comes in 10+ years. Regina metro is growing by over 5,000 a year. If an arena replacement isn't completed until 2025 it might serve a community of 300,000 instead of 230,000. Which will certainly affect the sizing needs.

The Pats don't draw large crowds. I have no idea if that will continue into the future. We have less than 4,000 people per game. That's 15th of 22 teams in the WHL. Everett is half our population and draws almost 1,000 people more than us a game. Medicine Hat, Red Deer, and Kamloops are all smaller centres that draw larger crowds. Hell, Moose Jaw isn't that far back. Maybe new management will succeed in drawing a larger crowd. If the Pats can increase their attendance by 1,000 per game that's a huge addition for 36 nights a year. But as of right now, the Pats certainly don't need a larger facility.