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

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    46
.crystalised. said:
I know how you feel. Maybe Pearl was a lucky fluke? ;)🤣

When did the name of this project become "Tower 101"?
Click to expand...

Tower 101 is the name given on DER's site, as well as what was on the EDC materials. It's been that name for a while, I only just got around to updating it here.

Having worked with Regency pretty closely, my impression is that though their projects tend to be very large, they have only really completed a small number of them, and thus they aren't a terribly experienced company yet.
 
bodsbods9090 said:
Fair enough. I forgot that they are doing the Holyrood site.

Guess I'm just a little miffed that some prominent sites are being left untouched right now, The Emerald being one.
Click to expand...
My best guess is that they saw that Morguard might get going on the Bonnie Doon Redevelopment and wanted to beat them to the punch for the Bonnie Doon area.

That said, it does not excuse leaving other sites in disarray. It says a lot about a developer and their care for the community versus themselves on how they maintain their site. Haynes Homes is an infill builder here in the city that maintains very clean sites, yet still runs a successful business. The larger you get, the more you should be required to do in my opinion. Obviously, that isn't always the case in the corporate world. I wish the city would regulate sites that are waiting for construction better. Look at the Arlington site downtown as a worse example than Emerald.
 
@westcoastjos Sadly, the best tool that the City would have had to enforce this - the ability to apply higher property taxes to underdeveloped and derelict sites - evaporated when the UCP decided to shred the city charters that had been in the works for 5 or 6 years.
 
Daveography said:
@westcoastjos Sadly, the best tool that the City would have had to enforce this - the ability to apply higher property taxes to underdeveloped and derelict sites - evaporated when the UCP decided to shred the city charters that had been in the works for 5 or 6 years.
Click to expand...
Could they not create a bylaw to enforce this? I am not aware of the provincial legislation that governs bylaws, so no idea if this would be feasible from a legal perspective.
 
@westcoastjos Someone smarter than me would have to explain the rationale, but apparently taxation is a more powerful tool to encourage development of derelict sites than bylaws and enforcement, and the city's taxation powers are extremely limited by the MGA.
 
Daveography said:
@westcoastjos Someone smarter than me would have to explain the rationale, but apparently taxation is a more powerful tool to encourage development of derelict sites than bylaws and enforcement, and the city's taxation powers are extremely limited by the MGA.
Click to expand...
If that is the case, I imagine that the enforcement fees for bylaws are even more tightly controlled then. Makes sense. Thanks for the info!
 
westcoastjos said:
My best guess is that they saw that Morguard might get going on the Bonnie Doon Redevelopment and wanted to beat them to the punch for the Bonnie Doon area.

That said, it does not excuse leaving other sites in disarray. It says a lot about a developer and their care for the community versus themselves on how they maintain their site. Haynes Homes is an infill builder here in the city that maintains very clean sites, yet still runs a successful business. The larger you get, the more you should be required to do in my opinion. Obviously, that isn't always the case in the corporate world. I wish the city would regulate sites that are waiting for construction better. Look at the Arlington site downtown as a worse example than Emerald.
Click to expand...
Liked x1,000
 
Ok @.crystalised. you have convinced me -- I want to change my name for the edifice to Tegler Spirelette (and thereby move my worst case scenario name-ranking-wise up to eight-and-a-half). See the old dog can learn new tricks.
 
Sorry, if you actually read the Pho King rules to the naming contest @archited, (101, verse 11), "you're not allowed to change your "name, vote, guess,..."
AND if you post a name change you are immediately disqualified from the said contest"

Skyrise E can be a tough club at times.

My vote is Hat 1o1
🥳
 
OK @Kaizen -- you have forced me to declare a Donald Trump over-ride making me automatically the winner (or is it "wiener" -- I can't distinctly remember -- anyway it is something starting with "W" -- not the "Bush"). So I see you have thrown your "Hat" into the ring -- how plagiaristic!
 
How about Dystopia Sky?

Where the building is a state of the art detention centre for those questioning the Vision Zero initiative. It will have an observation deck at floor 98. Except instead of being filled with tourists, it would house an advanced AI and advanced radar technology to capture hundreds of speeders at once up to 56 kms away.
 
Stevey_G said:
How about Dystopia Sky?

Where the building is a state of the art detention centre for those questioning the Vision Zero initiative. It will have an observation deck at floor 98. Except instead of being filled with tourists, it would house an advanced AI and advanced radar technology to capture hundreds of speeders at once up to 56 kms away.
Click to expand...
As long as it comes with a giant ear to monitor and enforce decibel levels as well, I'm sold.

Perhaps the tower will resemble a 600m "big sister" version of the Toll Building. And the mechanical level screening will take 2,000 years to finish (to be completed by one volunteer who is not afraid of heights nor pro bono work).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top