[kcantor]

^
i think that might cause some short term embarrassment and then it would disappear all too quickly. how many times can how many people write letters noone else sees and how many times will the media report something that only gets momentary exposure when they do. both become “out of sight, out of mind” too quickly to be truly effective.

for there to be enough shame for someone to actually respond to it, it needs to be ongoing every day until there is an acceptable response.

 

[Edmcowboy11]

^
i think that might cause some short term embarrassment and then it would disappear all too quickly. how many times can how many people write letters noone else sees and how many times will the media report something that only gets momentary exposure when they do. both become “out of sight, out of mind” too quickly to be truly effective.

for there to be enough shame for someone to actually respond to it, it needs to be ongoing every day until there is an acceptable response.

I agree.

Reminds me of the property on the corner of 82 ave and 91 street. It was only a small strip mall that was there, but it was demolished to leave the empty lot. The owner of the property apparently resides in the U.S. so of course never sees the property, so also could care less about the site.

 

[Clearshades]

If Regency as developers are this messy, i cant imagine the products will be that great overall. One's reputation is base on one's actions. My wallet will say no to Regency when time to buy my retirement condo. Ultimately, we have the power and if we care for our city. Developers such as Ken would win over me much easier. I'm just the type that remembers.

 

[Stevey_G]

^
or maybe the site should have large signage on it saying “this blight is brought to you by regency. we’re embarrassed, they should be too.” the city insists on “development permit signage”, this could be “demolition permit signage”.

Masochist

 

[Clearshades]

Not yet, but if we all pooled our brains together, it will be...

 

[thommyjo]

I wish they had left the BMO building empty rather than this mess haha. What sort of bylaws or zoning laws do other cities have to prevent this sort of stuff?

I don't want this site prematurely developed...its probably the most prime office/mixed use site in the city. Deserves a 50+ story beauty. Not some lame twin to hsbc. But if the market isn't ready for that, what's the best short term solution? Grass and fence? Or temporary parks?

 

[IanO]

The presence of the previous and beauty of the old buildings will be hard to match.

I love the idea of height at this location, but it needs to be of high quality and not 'Edmontonized'.

 

[northlands]

Last time I went by, my favourite part of this site was the big hole in the ground with only a single panel of chain link fence just thrown over top to cover it.

 

[_urbanite]

Last time I went by, my favourite part of this site was the big hole in the ground with only a single panel of chain link fence just thrown over top to cover it.

That's the Regency way!
They have the dubious distinction of owning not 1, but 2 fenced in lots in prime locations
Downtown and in Oliver with no Indication of when they'll be developed.
At least this one doesn't have a swamp in it

 

[ION]

The cities arts communities should get together with all these abandoned tower sites and do some sort of urbanist festival on all these spaces... Or at least come up with temporary food truck spaces on these sites ala Portland... Washington + 4th has like 40 of 'em on one block... And with indoor dining off limits for a while....

 

[Stevey_G]

Having holes where once functioning buildings stood within our downtown is every Edmontonian's birthright; one which I feared was robbed from us when that Calgarian developer filled our Boyle Hole with a Tower!

Fortunately, some local developers respect and appreciate what these holes mean to some of us.

 

[David A]

Having holes where once functioning buildings stood within our downtown is every Edmontonian's birthright; one which I feared was robbed from us when that Calgarian developer filled our Boyle Hole with a Tower!

Fortunately, some local developers respect and appreciate what these holes mean to some of us.

You would think local developers might have some sense of shame or care about their reputation more, but unfortunately I think there are a few that are impervious to that.

I might be more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on the 101 St site, if it were not for the fact the one in Oliver was even worse and seemingly abandoned for longer.

I wish at least if they don't have the capability to move forward with anything, they would just sell them to some who would. There are good prime locations and deserve better.

 

[Clearshades]

At this stage, I would like them to sell to serious contenders or quickly finalize a design and commence the podium immediately akin to ID.

If we allow this in the future, I want a provissions guarantee clause to build regardless of circumstances. Oops, we had this or that problem don't cut it no more. This is as bad as Dub and Arlington..

 

[CaptainBL]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/bank-of-montreal-edmonton-regency-1.4485756#:~:text=Despite%20several%20years%20of%20debate,saving%20buildings%2C%22%20McKeen%20said.&text=%22It's%20not%20a%20broad%20or,or%20ingrained%20value%20in%20Edmonton.%22

Some rich quotes for a laugh in this if you go back in time and revisit the January 2018 article:

"You're seeing a lot less opposition to density and height than you used to a decade ago" - Yep and a lot more opposition towards leaving your neglected, unattended and derelict holes around downtown
"Plans for the site are far from finalized " - Yes, its 2021 and we can definitely tell they are still far from finalized
"Everybody knows it's one of the premier corners in the core of our city" - Yet you and Regency have left it in the abhorrent embarrassing condition it has been for 3 years now
"Regency aims to complete the demolition by April and then build an underground parkade...The company aims to start building the tower in mid- to late 2019" - Nope. In fact, has the site been tended to since demolition?

Should mail this article to Mr. Dhunna, the King promoter of Regency given Regency's actions over the past years have not aged well and quite frankly speak louder than his words.

 

[Avenuer]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/bank-of-montreal-edmonton-regency-1.4485756#:~:text=Despite%20several%20years%20of%20debate,saving%20buildings%2C%22%20McKeen%20said.&text=%22It's%20not%20a%20broad%20or,or%20ingrained%20value%20in%20Edmonton.%22

Some rich quotes for a laugh in this if you go back in time and revisit the January 2018 article:

"You're seeing a lot less opposition to density and height than you used to a decade ago" - Yep and a lot more opposition towards leaving your neglected, unattended and derelict holes around downtown
"Plans for the site are far from finalized " - Yes, its 2021 and we can definitely tell they are still far from finalized
"Everybody knows it's one of the premier corners in the core of our city" - Yet you and Regency have left it in the abhorrent embarrassing condition it has been for 3 years now
"Regency aims to complete the demolition by April and then build an underground parkade...The company aims to start building the tower in mid- to late 2019" - Nope. In fact, has the site been tended to since demolition?

Should mail this article to Mr. Dhunna, the King promoter of Regency given Regency's actions over the past years have not aged well and quite frankly speak louder than his words.

@IanO seemed quite bullish on Regency doing something at the time, so maybe he could provide some insight? Surely, we have many better developers/builders than that outfit (i.e. Westrich, Edgar, Cidex, Cantiro, etc.)