Regina Construction III

[Scruff Bucket]

Originally Posted by CoR East

Maybe if they work in the south end, they should consider living in the south end, as neighbourhoods go it isn't so bad, I hear they have some grocery stores...

As we (my wife and I) have found out, with our 3 young kids, a vehicle is almost indispensable to greatly facilitate efficient time management. So yes, it may make sense for a lot of people to live close to where they work, but among them and even themselves are plenty of families with kids not old enough to travel alone. When it comes to daily outings, whether dropping kids to daycare/school, to learning/activity programs and picking them up at the end of the day/session, or taking them to regular check ups at their preferred family physician/dentist (often not located close by where they live), and/or the parent(s) doing daily errands with or without their kids, a family vehicle sure helps expedite the day's routine! And, as we all know, young children require a lot of attention (there are endless details to perform/attend to before going out) and don't always cooperate to keep on the aspired timeline, plus unexpected incidences can occur, all of these which can limit the remaining time for the parent to to their things!

While it may technically be possible for a family with young children to use public transit when long trips are needed (taxis are another option, but can become expensive, quickly!), for the most part, centering the daily routines on public transit schedules becomes impractical/time consuming/exhausting, when your (the parent's) time is/should be centred on your family! In our modern family age, and esp. in Regina where public transportation is still needing improvement, and where weather can deter parents from exposing their kids, then yes, having at least one family vehicle and a designated parking spot for it is a good asset!

[CCF]

Originally Posted by Scruff Bucket

As we (my wife and I) have found out, with our 3 young kids, a vehicle is almost indispensable to greatly facilitate efficient time management. So yes, it may make sense for a lot of people to live close to where they work, but among them and even themselves are plenty of families with kids not old enough to travel alone. When it comes to daily outings, whether dropping kids to daycare/school, to learning/activity programs and picking them up at the end of the day/session, or taking them to regular check ups at their preferred family physician/dentist (often not located close by where they live), and/or the parent(s) doing daily errands with or without their kids, a family vehicle sure helps expedite the day's routine! And, as we all know, young children require a lot of attention (there are endless details to perform/attend to before going out) and don't always cooperate to keep on the aspired timeline, plus unexpected incidences can occur, all of these which can limit the remaining time for the parent to to their things!

While it may technically be possible for a family with young children to use public transit when long trips are needed (taxis are another option, but can become expensive, quickly!), for the most part, centering the daily routines on public transit schedules becomes impractical/time consuming/exhausting, when your (the parent's) time is/should be centred on your family! In our modern family age, and esp. in Regina where public transportation is still needing improvement, and where weather can deter parents from exposing their kids, then yes, having at least one family vehicle and a designated parking spot for it is a good asset!

The solution to the problem is to design neighbourhoods which are 'complete communities' - people should be able to walk 5 minutes to get milk, coffee, or whatever it is.

Changing the efficiency of a City's transit system takes a lot of resources and won't happen over night - on the contrary it's actually pretty easy to create more walkable and bike friendly neighbourhoods. Unfortunately in Regina, that's not being done and there seems to be little interest in doing so.

[Scruff Bucket]

For now, such neighbourhoods would probably only minimize vehicle use for some families that decide to reside there, as not all relevant/preferred and frequented resources/services/shops/etc. can be hosted in a single neighbourhood that would appeal to every resident, maybe because they already exist elsewhere in the city, esp. ones that are publicly supported, or for any number of reasons cannot or will not be further duplicated within our city. For a family seeking these and possibly multiple specific services that would likely be spread throughout the city anyways, road trips will still be necessary, and if not by public transit, then the family vehicle/parking space issue comes up again! Plus, I'm thinking that many families would prefer to take road trips for family vacations, rather than fly the whole family, and/or rent a vehicle for the duration. ... Or maybe they would ...

For some people, this type of neighbourhood could work fine like CCF has described, if they are not particular about the services occupying it, and find them adequate and suitable.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

Fred Clipsham, former councilor and current boss of the Cathedral community association was quoted as saying he would support it if the house was saved.

If parking requirements are lightened no one will have a legal leg to stand on to oppose it.

In what universe is that POS house worth killing an entire development over? Clipsham is a sham.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Stormer

Hardly, if you have read this thread:

http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7330777&postcount=4735

It's most interesting. It completely looks like Holden is being a giant dick right now.

It is, of course, not unusual to see people passed over for promotion to leave, however it sounds like like he was fired, not that he quit.

To add insult to injury Holden has also completely eliminated his position. So not only did he not get the job, Holden is saying "your job was irrelevant". That's some stone-cold, A-level Alpha posturing shit right there.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by Scruff Bucket

For now, such neighbourhoods would probably only minimize vehicle use for some families that decide to reside there, as not all relevant/preferred and frequented resources/services/shops/etc. can be hosted in a single neighbourhood that would appeal to every resident, maybe because they already exist elsewhere in the city, esp. ones that are publicly supported, or for any number of reasons cannot or will not be further duplicated within our city. For a family seeking these and possibly multiple specific services that would likely be spread throughout the city anyways, road trips will still be necessary, and if not by public transit, then the family vehicle/parking space issue comes up again! Plus, I'm thinking that many families would prefer to take road trips for family vacations, rather than fly the whole family, and/or rent a vehicle for the duration. ... Or maybe they would ...

For some people, this type of neighbourhood could work fine like CCF has described, if they are not particular about the services occupying it, and find them adequate and suitable.

While of course not everything can be in one place, a family could easily live in Cathedral, grocery shop in Cathedral, have daycare in Cathedral, elementary school in Cathedral and walk downtown to work. A one car family is not an outrageous idea.

Banning such developments only makes that more difficult.

[Scruff Bucket]

Cathedral is a nice, complete-in-itself neighbourhood! Some renewal, and (mostly) aging gracefully!

[HomerSPC]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

It's most interesting. It completely looks like Holden is being a giant dick right now.

It is, of course, not unusual to see people passed over for promotion to leave, however it sounds like like he was fired, not that he quit.

To add insult to injury Holden has also completely eliminated his position. So not only did he not get the job, Holden is saying "your job was irrelevant". That's some stone-cold, A-level Alpha posturing shit right there.

I guess I should have clarified. What was shocking is not the fact that he left, but that he was fired.

[CoR East]

my point is about choice. What works for your family of five might not work for a single senior... The city's current parking policy mandates a lack of choice, mandates that, even if you can't afford a car, you subsidize those who can by paying for parking as part of your rent, or as a built-in cost of construction.

Should you be able to find a place in this city to live that allows you to have a car? Yes
Should your choice to have a car mean that everyone has to have one? No

As others have pointed out, Cathedral is a walkable neighbourhood, with good access to schools, libraries, transit, services, entertainment and employment. To me this means that some of the people who choose to live there might also choose to meet their transportation needs in ways that don't require them to have a car.

These are 1 and 2 bedroom suites, this is not family housing.

[Scruff Bucket]

If it's the portion of maintenance fees on parking spaces that concerns you in a multi-dwelling condominium property, wouldn't that be up to the condo's building management (or whoever decides these policies for your building) if/how they want to compartmentalize common maintenance fees (and you just pay for what you want)? Otherwise, the closest model I can think of in this perspective would be in other cities, like Vancouver and Toronto, where you purchase separately your parking space, private or enclosed garage space, or storage locker (like, $60 - 100k or more per parking space) if you want any of these, or as value added to your condominium purchase value. Do they sell parking spaces like that, with (or even without) a condo purchase in Regina? Or is it just one price, whether you want a parking space or not? Or is it adjusted in/from your purchase price if you want to purchase more or less space(s)? Would you be able to rent or sublet if you possess one? I know of some landowners of rental apartments in Regina that separately rent parking spaces to both residences, and non-residences if they have an excess.

But a portion of your common maintenance fees would probably still go towards simple upkeep of the parking area (cleaning, snow removal (if outside), security, etc.), if it benefits everyone, maybe preventing, for example, you from falling or slipping on the parking surface if you happen to walk on it, or being mugged, if there are cameras or periodic checks. On another note, if the condo's management decides your condo proper requires re-roofing/roofing improvements, I think as a condo unit owner, you'd be responsible for a portion of the cost, even if your condo is lower- or mid-level and not directly under the roof, because again, everyone benefits! (By preventing roof water leakage that could make its way down, potentially damaging lower units). Other significant investments, like resurfacing a parking area, might otherwise require your input to the condo's management to exempt you from having to pay for an improvement you'll never benefit from, also dependent on their policy guidelines/rules.

For rental units, I think that is up to the landowner/landlord for what your rent goes into for maintenance, unless you can get an explicit clause in your rental agreement, excluding you from paying a portion of parking maintenance.

Then again, if it's property taxes on items like parking spaces that concerns you, sorry, I haven't a sniff about what taxable portions of what can be charged back to you! I believe in Vancouver, value added items, just like parking spaces, enclosed garages, storage lockers in your possession can be taxed and charged to you.

Can someone enlighten me on these things?

[Davidson]

Originally Posted by Stormer

I do not disagree but try telling this to someone with a house near a project with limited parking. They will likely never have any available street parking in front of their house.

I do think there's a mindset here that people feel entitled to have a parking spot in front of their house 24/7, when in fact that space isn't owned by the homeowner. That idea is entrenched and hard to change.

I live across the street from a very busy church that has lots of activities during "non-church" hours (as in, not just Sunday mornings). After living here a few years here we've learned to adapt to the times when the on-street parking is not available for us, or anyone that we invite over to our house to visit. Of course if we really can't live with it, we're feel to move somewhere else.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

Fred Clipsham, former councilor and current boss of the Cathedral community association was quoted as saying he would support it if the house was saved.

If parking requirements are lightened no one will have a legal leg to stand on to oppose it.

Maybe Fred should pay for the reno if he thinks that house is so valuable.
Go through cathedral every day on my way to work. I'd say that close to 30% of the houses there should be knocked down and totally rebuilt.

[StealthGirl]

Usonia is in financial trouble again. I'd heard a year or maybe 18months ago that Usonia was having trouble paying bills, but I thought that had been sorted out. Maybe not.

The building company behind a giant construction hole beside a Regina man's home says it hasn't fixed the issues with the pit because it doesn't have any money.

Zach Michell, owner of Usonia Homes, a local home building company, said the company encountered some unforeseen problems that resulted in some big financial losses.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/usonia-homes-financial-situation-1.3550108

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by Scruff Bucket

If it's the portion of maintenance fees on parking spaces that concerns you in a multi-dwelling condominium property, wouldn't that be up to the condo's building management (or whoever decides these policies for your building) if/how they want to compartmentalize common maintenance fees (and you just pay for what you want)? Otherwise, the closest model I can think of in this perspective would be in other cities, like Vancouver and Toronto, where you purchase separately your parking space, private or enclosed garage space, or storage locker (like, $60 - 100k or more per parking space) if you want any of these, or as value added to your condominium purchase value. Do they sell parking spaces like that, with (or even without) a condo purchase in Regina? Or is it just one price, whether you want a parking space or not? Or is it adjusted in/from your purchase price if you want to purchase more or less space(s)? Would you be able to rent or sublet if you possess one? I know of some landowners of rental apartments in Regina that separately rent parking spaces to both residences, and non-residences if they have an excess.

But a portion of your common maintenance fees would probably still go towards simple upkeep of the parking area (cleaning, snow removal (if outside), security, etc.), if it benefits everyone, maybe preventing, for example, you from falling or slipping on the parking surface if you happen to walk on it, or being mugged, if there are cameras or periodic checks. On another note, if the condo's management decides your condo proper requires re-roofing/roofing improvements, I think as a condo unit owner, you'd be responsible for a portion of the cost, even if your condo is lower- or mid-level and not directly under the roof, because again, everyone benefits! (By preventing roof water leakage that could make its way down, potentially damaging lower units). Other significant investments, like resurfacing a parking area, might otherwise require your input to the condo's management to exempt you from having to pay for an improvement you'll never benefit from, also dependent on their policy guidelines/rules.

For rental units, I think that is up to the landowner/landlord for what your rent goes into for maintenance, unless you can get an explicit clause in your rental agreement, excluding you from paying a portion of parking maintenance.

Then again, if it's property taxes on items like parking spaces that concerns you, sorry, I haven't a sniff about what taxable portions of what can be charged back to you! I believe in Vancouver, value added items, just like parking spaces, enclosed garages, storage lockers in your possession can be taxed and charged to you.

Can someone enlighten me on these things?

Based on my narrow experience, you own a condo within a condo corp. The condo corp pays all common costs associated with that building for maintenance and heating etc. I believe the condo owns (or is responsible for) all exterior and common areas. Condo fees are assessed in two ways, either by flat factor or by unit factor. Most (and I believe the default) is by unit factor with ground floor one bedrooms having a lower unit factor than upper floor and multi-bedroom units. Most (if not all) condos in Regina come with a parking stall. Some condo's have extra stalls beyond the one per unit which are bought and sold independently. You are free to sublet out your condo or parking stall if you aren't using it. There is no compartimentalization of costs that I have ever heard of - you all share the costs whether your unit has a roof or repair issues or not. I don't know about some of the newer developments where the condo consists of both townhouse and apartment style units - those could have cost breakouts between the types of units.

[jvj]

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

Fred Clipsham, former councilor and current boss of the Cathedral community association was quoted as saying he would support it if the house was saved.

If parking requirements are lightened no one will have a legal leg to stand on to oppose it.

I believe Clipsham's commentary was more directed to the rezoning process.
The community plan for the Cathedral neighborhood states that there shouldn't be any expansion of commercial zoning into current residential areas.
However the reality is that there's already been selective expansion of commercial zones in the recent past.
I don't know how often or how many lots, but the obvious one that comes to mind is the rezoning of 4 residential lots in 2012 to allow for the construction of the expanded Safeway store.

If the parking rules can be revisited then the project could potentially proceed without the rezoning.
And...the fate of the house would then become a completely separate discussion...the reality is that there is nothing preventing the house from being demolished and replaced.

[Scruff Bucket]

Thanks TP!

Correction for my post: It seems like most, if not all, new condos in Vancouver will have a parking space designated for it, and you can purchase additional spaces if available. That provisional condo/parking space ratio might change (or might have already changed?) as developers realize that there has been increasing numbers of unused parking spaces available quite recently. Apparently, condo owners can sell their designated parking space, if they don't feel the need for it. I guess they just need to be aware how it affects the resale value and saleability of their condo if they decide to sell it later. It seems car share programs like Cars2Go, Evo Car Share, Zip Car, that are available over there allow for a relatively inexpensive alternative mode of personal transportation, eliminating the need for vehicle ownership for some, esp. the younger millennial generation.

Sorry CoR! Not sure that the City's mandate for developers regarding parking space provision for condos is out-of-line from other cities, and I wonder if they may be following provincial or national guidelines. The rules for condo owners and what they can do in Regina are probably governed provincially, too, since BC (and Ontario?) has all that laid out in their legislations. Nevertheless, the rules for here as TP has described seems not-so-much in your favour for the situation you describe, so you have my respect.

Does anybody else know more about this?

[Udon'tknow]

Not the greatest shot but this is the view of the stadium from the Cornwall pedway. The Mosiac sign is centred nicely in the middle of the street.

[StealthGirl]

Leader Post now reporting Usonia Homes has ceased operations. Anyone have a guess as to how many unfinished projects are out there?

Usonia Homes, a high-profile, Regina-based custom home builder, appears to have ceased operations, leaving some customers, suppliers and subcontractors in the lurch with unpaid bills and unfinished home projects.

Indications of the company’s financial troubles began to appear this week, with builders’ liens being applied against several of the company’s projects.

One subcontractor, who didn’t want to be identified, said he recently placed about $30,000 in liens against a couple of projects that Usonia was building.

http://leaderpost.com/business/local-bus...rs-suppliers-subcontractors-in-the-lurch

[Stormer]

Has anyone else heard rumours that Fiacco is considering challenging Fougere for the Mayor's chair this fall? Could be a trial balloon.

[CCF]

Fiacco should be commended for how he changed the perception and attitude Reginians have for the city. However, I think the city would benefit from having a new mayor who could bring Regina into a modern era of urban planning (ala Nenshi).