The Parks | 146.91m | 45s | 35s | 13s | Pangman | Hariri Pontarini

What do you think of this project?

  • I like it a lot

    Votes: 70 80.5%

  • I like it

    Votes: 13 14.9%

  • I neither like nor dislike it

    Votes: 4 4.6%

  • I dislike it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I dislike it a lot

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    87
It'll be interesting to see if they are awarded funding in The Economic Recovery Construction Grant Program. I know from someone with the city that they did submit an application, but it's dicey on whether they'll be able to start soon enough to become eligible (construction needs to start by December 31, at 1159PM). I suspect that the City is skeptical, considering that the buildings on the site are still standing. And if this grant isn't awarded, I don't know if the building will be economical.
 
That gives them 3 months to startā€¦plenty of timeā€¦..Demo shouldnā€™t take more than a week. Itā€™d be incredibly disappointing if it didnā€™t go ahead
 
Last edited:
Tommy2342 said:
It'll be interesting to see if they are awarded funding in The Economic Recovery Construction Grant Program. I know from someone with the city that they did submit an application, but it's dicey on whether they'll be able to start soon enough to become eligible (construction needs to start by December 31, at 1159PM). I suspect that the City is skeptical, considering that the buildings on the site are still standing. And if this grant isn't awarded, I don't know if the building will be economical.
Click to expand...
They started planning for this well before the grant program. I imagine they weren't hedging bets on the program at the time. Hopefully that isn't the case now either.
 
Its the patented Edmonton development timeline that no other city can compete with: fence it and do nothing for a TBD amount of time, then demo (that'll only take a couple months maybe because we cant let our older buildings stand, no way), next after you hurried up to wait you sit on an empty weed filled decrepit lot (this can range in timing depending on the developer i.e. see Regency sites or our newly vacant site on Jasper 123), then a couple years later news comes out that the design has been VE'd or funding has been lost or there was an economic downturn šŸ˜
 
CaptainBL said:
Its the patented Edmonton development timeline that no other city can compete with: fence it and do nothing for a TBD amount of time, then demo (that'll only take a couple months maybe because we cant let our older buildings stand, no way), next after you hurried up to wait you sit on an empty weed filled decrepit lot (this can range in timing depending on the developer i.e. see Regency sites or our newly vacant site on Jasper 123), then a couple years later news comes out that the design has been VE'd or funding has been lost or there was an economic downturn šŸ˜
Click to expand...
Development is complicated elsewhere too.

Municipalities require various types of permits at different stages of development. Development permits/building permits being primary with sub-permits for each. The larger the building the more complex the waste, water, fire, and vehicular requirements are, that have to bet met. Once you get to building permits, consider all the sub-trades that exist, there are permits for each, sometimes multiple.

If there are any environmental concerns on the site, you can add multiple EIAs to the timeline depending on the severity of the problem in the soil.

I would argue Edmonton is likely pretty close to other cities when it comes to development - it is complicated in North America, and for good reason - the checks and balances are there for safety. We are definitely not the only place that has sites sit empty for a long time or even half built.

Don't forget about the financing and collaboration between companies that occurs behind the scenes as well.

It is really easy for us to be critical of a site that has sat for a while. Most of us here don't have to deal with the incremental process that has to take place - it is much easier to make blanket statements.
 
Last edited:
Yikes, do they take humor away and provide a virtue signaling manual for staff members? It was intended in jest to what is an obvious, oft-discussed and underlying commonality of several developments downtown, nothing more.
 
No humor tolerated, I guess. Regardless, it all does highlight that often demolition seems to be the easiest part.

The problem being, a few months later when whatever goes sideways, you can't just easily put back what was torn down. Decisions have consequences.

Now, the buildings on this particular site are small and while interesting, quirky and I would even say charming, are not that historical.

Unfortunately though, it does seem to have been the City's approach to also let people tear down things that should not be and without a guarantee or much assurance whatever a developer imagines will actually go ahead.

We are having a civic election soon, so perhaps this approach may change.
 
^ Yup. This has the right developer horsepower behind it, but regardless small things can hold these mammoth projects up for weeks with even the most skilled developers. Especially given how out of whack the global supply chains are still (that only seem to be getting worse). Material delays, equipment delays, subcontractor delays, permitting delays, funding delays, anything can blow timelines up.

I chatted briefly with the super at The Jameson today--they were supposed to have had the parking/bike lane blocked off at the end of August, they just got it this week. And then shoring got delayed today because of a line not noted by One Call...
 
Getting closer - the hoarding over the sidewalk wasn't up last time I went by.

Screenshot_20211002-093505_Messages.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top