Regina Construction III

[HomeInMyShoes]

We should be increasing the odds that all charities can get funding. There's lots of space in the core. We could give tax incentives for the charitable help against property taxes. At the end of the day the city can have a lot of influence on what Regina's built form will be but our city does little to influence that form. Outside of funding studies and recommendations which they don't follow any way.

[UPP]

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

What good cause? Saying no to Brandt will likely force them downtown.

And CNIB is moving downtown this month anyways so it's demolishing an abandoned building for new park space.

Or they go outside the city limits like with all their other divisions.

Anytime you have to 'force' a company to develop downtown, you've already lost.

[thefourthtower]

Originally Posted by UPP

Or they go outside the city limits like with all their other divisions.

Anytime you have to 'force' a company to develop downtown, you've already lost.

Exactly whats the difference there replacing an existing building Brant is building them a new building it does not get any better than this , or either move to the outskirts with no new building

[Treesplease]

I see the wascanna issue as one of preserving limited green space in the centre of the city and we are slowly chipping away at that. The CNIB has a right to exist but nothing says it has to be in the park. Granted the park is a very nice place to be situated but it is going to be costly. How much extra cost is going to be incurred by building a structure that will in theory comply with higher building standards and materials in the park vs. outside. It may well be more cost effective for CNIB sell the park land back to Wascanna and purchase/rent space in a stucco box somewhere else in the city and preserve funding for those they are intending to help. This brandt exercise looks like an exercise in convenience and luxury for CNIB and their management and little to do with providing services for CNIB clients.

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

I see the wascanna issue as one of preserving limited green space in the centre of the city and we are slowly chipping away at that. The CNIB has a right to exist but nothing says it has to be in the park. Granted the park is a very nice place to be situated but it is going to be costly. How much extra cost is going to be incurred by building a structure that will in theory comply with higher building standards and materials in the park vs. outside. It may well be more cost effective for CNIB sell the park land back to Wascanna and purchase/rent space in a stucco box somewhere else in the city and preserve funding for those they are intending to help. This brandt exercise looks like an exercise in convenience and luxury for CNIB and their management and little to do with providing services for CNIB clients.

Good post!

I have a feeling that now that the CNIB deal with Brandt is public and people realize the amazing opportunity Brandt is taking advantage of here, if the WCA were to kibosh this deal with Brandt I think there might be a very good possibility of a more deserving non-profit group coming forward to take Brandt's place and partner with CNIB for a new building. I don't think anybody in the business community around town knew just how dire the situation was at CNIB or knew how to take advantage of it like Brandt did. Now that the secret is out... Brandt may lose their leverage.

[Drofmab]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

As both the land and property owners, CNIB can lease as much or as little space out of their building as they see fit.

Originally Posted by Treesplease

It may well be more cost effective for CNIB sell the park land back to Wascanna and purchase/rent space in a stucco box somewhere else in the city and preserve funding for those they are intending to help.

Minor point of reference, since I've seen reference more than once to CNIB owning the building & land... they don't own the land, the Province owns that parcel. Granted, CNIB has a very long-term lease, but the land isn't an asset they can sell.

And I'm willing to bet the Prov has a clause preventing subletting the land... so they also aren't able to derive an income stream from moving out of Wascana & leasing their land to another entity.

As for leasing the space to whoever they want, Wascana has turned a blind eye (pun fully intended) to this because CNIB & RODS are both charities, and aren't detracting significantly from Wascana (they aren't high traffic, noisy, etc).

If, however, CNIB found a tenant interested in leasing a portion of their current building (or in a new building, for that matter), and Wascana truly objected to the leasee, they have a piece of legislation that they can use to effectively dissuade the leasee. All improvements in Wascana valued at $2,000 or more (over 12 months) are subject to approval by the WCA Board. Even minor leasehold improvements would cross that threshold in a heartbeat. Heck - even signage could cross the $2,000 threshold.

CNIB is in a tough position. The building they're in is essentially worthless. They don't own the land, so they can't sell it. Even if they did own the land, the pool of buyers would be limited based on the restrictions/approvals WCA places on all entities in the Centre (not to mention the fact that WCA must approve all land transfers; registers and interest with Land Titles in all properties within the Centre; and has broad expropriation powers within the Centre - so a buyer would never really "own" the land).There isn't a lot of money out there for charities' capital needs - people don't like seeing money being spent on administration. I don't envy CNIB & can empathize with the position they're in.

Given all of this, it's no wonder the Brandt deal looks so sweet. I agree that having the Brandt proposal out in the open might get other parties circling the water... but I'm not sure how many of the ones that WCA would approve in the first place (aligned with the Centre's mandate) would be interested in effectively having two landlords: the Prov (land owner); and WCA.

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Drofmab

Minor point of reference, since I've seen reference more than once to CNIB owning the building & land... they don't own the land, the Province owns that parcel. Granted, CNIB has a very long-term lease, but the land isn't an asset they can sell.

You're right, I'll be careful with the wording from now on.

Another hypothetical question for those against the CNIB deal: If public pressure and WCA regulations force Brandt out of this deal, and instead CNIB partners with two or three other non-profit organizations and in turn receives public grant money from the province to build the exact same building they were planning on building with Brandt, would you then support the plan? Say, with CNIB on the first floor, Open Door Society on the second floor and the Regina Food Bank on the third floor. How would your perception of this plan change, if at all?

[Drofmab]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

You're right, I'll be careful with the wording from now on.

Another hypothetical question for those against the CNIB deal: If public pressure and WCA regulations force Brandt out of this deal, and instead CNIB partners with two or three other non-profit organizations and in turn receives public grant money from the province to build the exact same building they were planning on building with Brandt, would you then support the plan? Say, with CNIB on the first floor, Open Door Society on the second floor and the Regina Food Bank on the third floor. How would your perception of this plan change, if at all?

I'm not completely against the CNIB/Brandt deal, I just have very, very strong reservations.

If they could find the money to rebuild with other non-profit partners, I'd prefer that over Brandt. I'm just doubtful that there is public money available for a rebuild, and I can't think of any non-profits in town that could afford to shell out that kind of capital without really cutting corners in other areas.

Other than bringing money to the table, Brandt in no way fits the Master Plan (granted, neither does Conexus' head office). I wouldn't even mind a larger building - in keeping with WCA's guidelines - if it were a number of non-profits aligned with Wascana Centre's "Enlargement of Educational & Research Opportunities" purpose... so, RODS could fit, certain Cancer Society educational/research work could fit, perhaps Ignite Adult Learning, etc. Still feels like putting a square peg in a round hole - and many of these organizations should be able to find more accessible & affordable space outside of Wascana.

[StealthGirl]

D, I share your reservations. Wascana Park is really a treasure and once we start cutting into it, we don't get that back. I don't want big parking lots in the park. I'm tired of the Master Plans, whether for downtown or WCA, not being worth the time it took to draft them.

In other news, the new P3 public schools were named tonight --- Ecole Harbour Landing School, Ecole Wascana Plains School (Greens on Gardiner) and Plainsview School (Rosewood). Schools are set to open in Fall 2017. They are not 50-50 Public/Catholic, but something more like a 70-30 division in the school portion. (All have daycare space included.)

http://www.rbe.sk.ca/news/2016/09/new-joint-school-names-announced

[pappcam]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

This was a joke.

After "hundreds" of name submissions and deserving people of the school board and community being considered, they chose the name of the Harbour Landing school to be.... "Harbour Landing School".

Thanks for coming out, RBE. I don't think you could have played this one any safer.

Naming a school after the community is perfectly acceptable to me. There are plenty of other ways of commemorating people or things like street names and parks.

[StealthGirl]

Originally Posted by pappcam

Naming a school after the community is perfectly acceptable to me. There are plenty of other ways of commemorating people or things like street names and parks.

It really lacks imagination in an area that has a lot of great street names and park names. Honestly I have to admit I expected they were going to give Aboriginal names to the schools because that seems to be the big focus lately. I also wondered if they went very safe because of the recurring griping about the name of Davin School. (Davin wrote the report recommending residential schools, but also founded and edited the Regina Leader.)

[cutterp]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

This was a joke.

After "hundreds" of name submissions and deserving people of the school board and community being considered, they chose the name of the Harbour Landing school to be.... "Harbour Landing School".

Thanks for coming out, RBE. I don't think you could have played this one any safer.

There are other schools named after their communities. I fell this is like voting. If you didn't submit a name for consideration. How can you really complain?

If you did submit one, I'd be curious what it was. I'm not going to say I am happy with the names, but naming them like this is not that horrific.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by StealthGirl

It really lacks imagination in an area that has a lot of great street names and park names. Honestly I have to admit I expected they were going to give Aboriginal names to the schools because that seems to be the big focus lately. I also wondered if they went very safe because of the recurring griping about the name of Davin School. (Davin wrote the report recommending residential schools, but also founded and edited the Regina Leader.)

I am pretty sure this was part of it and further that the committee just could not agree so went with the safest options.

[Draftsman]

Well, my school was named after the street... Grant Road school.

For the record, Grant Road and Gordon Road were named after a former Regina mayor and MLA for Regina South and Regina Whitmore Park, Gordon Grant. He must have been proud standing on the corner of Gordon (&) Grant. At the time it was built, Gordon Road only went from Grant Road to Albert Street. It was many years before it became a major east-west roadway through south Regina.

But I agree, ecole Harbour Landing School is a pretty lame name.

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Draftsman

Well, my school was named after the street... Grant Road school.

Yeah I went there too. Join the Facebook group!

And in effect, it was kind of named for a person, even though the term "Road" was added into the school name.

Originally Posted by Draftsman

For the record, Grant Road and Gordon Road were named after a former Regina mayor and MLA for Regina South and Regina Whitmore Park, Gordon Grant

Have there been any other streets in Regina named after someone's first name? I can't think of any other examples. There's plenty where the person's full name is used (Jim Cairns Boulevard) but there's never a Jim Street.

[WhitmorePark]

Originally Posted by Draftsman

Well, my school was named after the street... Grant Road school.

For the record, Grant Road and Gordon Road were named after a former Regina mayor and MLA for Regina South and Regina Whitmore Park, Gordon Grant. He must have been proud standing on the corner of Gordon (&) Grant. At the time it was built, Gordon Road only went from Grant Road to Albert Street. It was many years before it became a major east-west roadway through south Regina.

As someone who grew up on Grant Road, went to Grant Road School and lives on Grant Drive now, I am kind of blown away I never knew this. Thanks for sharing!

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

Have there been any other streets in Regina named after someone's first name? I can't think of any other examples. There's plenty where the person's full name is used (Jim Cairns Boulevard) but there's never a Jim Street.

Albert Street and Victoria Avenue.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Albert Street and Victoria Avenue.

Haha. Philip Rd, Rupert St, Leopold Cres....

[Dan0myte]

Haha, ok, p0wned.

But Gordon Grant wasn't English royalty. Any other locals being honoured on a first name basis?

[wacko]

Originally Posted by Stormer

Haha. Philip Rd, Rupert St, Leopold Cres....

I can only hope that Leopold Crescent was named after Queen Victoria's youngest son Prince Leopold, and not King Leopold II of Belgium, who was responsible for millions of deaths in the Belgian Congo. Naming after the latter would likely be a controversy exceeding that of Davin.

I assume Rupert St is named after Prince Rupert of the the Rhine, the first governor of the Hudson's Bay Company?