Tower 101 | 175m | 50s | Regency Developments | DER + Associates

What do you think of this project?


  • Total voters
    50
“…….owner of the property hasn’t been able to develop the site nor spend anymore money on it…..”
Are we supposed to feel sorry for Regency?
 
She's replied to my previous emails (yep, I'm one of those people who email their councillors on the regular) but that seems to be over. Perhaps it was the zeal of the newly elected that's given way to ennui now that she's settled in. Still, I'll take any response, even by an assistant, than the silence I received about that eyesore.
Maybe it is old fashioned, but it seems to me the job of a councilor is to respond and find ways to deal with problems in their area, not tell people nothing can be done and then go silent.
 

The city is working with the property owners, wanting to see the lot cleaned up, noting there is a dispute over a tax rebate given to the company for demolition because the basement was never demolished.

“But the property owners says there were concerns over the lots structural integrity if they got rid of the basement […] Saying the bigges issue is finding someone wanting to pay to devlop the lot,” said Anne Stevenson.

Dhunna adds, “Nobody is interested, because there is no demand for office, there’s no demand for residential, there’s no demand for anything downtown given the state of our downtown.”
 

The city is working with the property owners, wanting to see the lot cleaned up, noting there is a dispute over a tax rebate given to the company for demolition because the basement was never demolished.
Why the F were they given a tax rebate for demolishing such a nice building?!
 

The city is working with the property owners, wanting to see the lot cleaned up, noting there is a dispute over a tax rebate given to the company for demolition because the basement was never demolished.

“But the property owners says there were concerns over the lots structural integrity if they got rid of the basement […] Saying the bigges issue is finding someone wanting to pay to devlop the lot,” said Anne Stevenson.

Dhunna adds, “Nobody is interested, because there is no demand for office, there’s no demand for residential, there’s no demand for anything downtown given the state of our downtown.”
Geez, like you aren’t helping contribute to the state of downtown? Other developers are making a go of it too.
 

The city is working with the property owners, wanting to see the lot cleaned up, noting there is a dispute over a tax rebate given to the company for demolition because the basement was never demolished.

“But the property owners says there were concerns over the lots structural integrity if they got rid of the basement […] Saying the bigges issue is finding someone wanting to pay to devlop the lot,” said Anne Stevenson.

Dhunna adds, “Nobody is interested, because there is no demand for office, there’s no demand for residential, there’s no demand for anything downtown given the state of our downtown.”
I call BS on that last statement. If there is no demand for residential then obviously Qualico, Maclab, Langham, Cidex to only name a few are just plain dumb for building their respective buildings. Why would the spend all that money if no one will want to move into them.
 
Here, I’ll save whoever is gonna develop it a bunch of time. You can have my design. 😂

IMG_0935.jpeg
 
I call BS on that last statement. If there is no demand for residential then obviously Qualico, Maclab, Langham, Cidex to only name a few are just plain dumb for building their respective buildings. Why would the spend all that money if no one will want to move into them.
Precisely. If Qualico can build an apartment building literally across the back alley from a homeless shelter, there's no reason why you can't build something here.

Regency needs to sell this site to a more competent developer with a real vision with deeper pockets. Embarrassing
 

Back
Top