Sure but not on the same street a few block apart.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a Costco go in to Cooperstown in the next five to ten years.

I'm not sure I would be too worried about that. Some big spaces have come up in that area in recent years (Zellers, Future Shop) and the space has been filled.

It is still a prime location with lots of traffic. If worse comes to worse, would the city allow a conversion to office space like the old superstore?

Definitely not. There is an current app for a medium office building on Eastgate that is being denied by the RPC as it does not comply with the office policy.

Well, it's not like they always enforce the office policy.

(*cough* Conexus in Wascana *cough*)

Wascana is a lot closer to downtown than the suburbs.

True, but I would consider it more "off limits" for other reasons.

There are also the 3 complexes by the airport (though I understand not all businesses are geared toward downtown office setups).

The airport building were permitted at a time was vacancies were very low. The rules were different.

Vacancies were low, but the downtown policy was still there. They made the exception because we really didn't have much office space at all outside the core and some businesses aren't geared to that style (e.g. courier companies).

Courier companies are in warehouses not office buildings.

Yes... but that was one of the "examples" they gave when talking about how not all companies are suited for downtown space.

But...that's a terrible example. They never were downtown.

City of Regina can't enforce the office policy in Wascana... Wascana Centre Authority doesn't require the City's approval (in fact, WCA's legislative authority trumps the City's on all planning, design & improvement issues).

But yes - the City certainly has influence (and 3 Wascana Board votes), and hasn't protested the Conexus development.

IIRC, the city transferred the land in question though, without which, the proposal couldn't have gone ahead as planned.

In this case, the City happened to have a bit of control through land ownership (not policies or bylaws). If the City didn't transfer the land, the building would've just been built in a slightly different location on the College Ave Campus.
(I was going to note that WCA also has the power to expropriate land... but the legislation specifically excludes land owned by the 'participating parties' (City, Prov, and UofR) from expropriation by WCA, so that wouldn't apply).

WCA was set up to be separate from council. One of the reasons was purely financial; it can get funding provincially in a way other city parks can not. But it is ridiculous that the mayor and two of his council cronies are on that board in the first place.

Why is it ridiculous? The Province, City, & University are jointly responsible for financing & managing Wascana Centre. It would be absurd for them not to each have representation on the Board.

Conflict of interest. Right now we have a council whose main concern is the construction industry and developers. The WCA board should be focused on the park alone, not on what's going on with the rest of the city.

If that's the issue, they have a conflict of interest on City Council as well.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Acre 21 has it temporary web page up that confirms Save-On is a tenant. I am not sure what the second Co-op location is? It seems too large to be just a car wash. The Co-op gas bar is in the west corner and already has 2 buildings.

You can see the new bypass u/c in the lower right and Green Falls Landing directly west. This will also includes 25k sf of retail on the main floor.

http://www.acre21.ca/

http://www.reveraliving.com/about-re...-falls-landing