Saskatoon Construction III

[Antigonish]

I should also mention that the bus routes should be configured into "temporary" routes in the short-term to increase headway during school hours, not just rush hour. Walter Murray and Holy Cross have about ~2,500 students between them on that block of Taylor near Preston with the majority of students who go there live in Wildwood, Lakeridge, Lakewood, etc which is too far to walk or reasonably bike to school but the complaints I've heard is that it can take an hour for students to catch a bus home because of overcrowding and lack of frequency. Same thing in Stonebridge. So what's the holdup?

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Antigonish

I live less than a block off 8th Street about right in the middle between Clarence and Cumberland. If I take the bus back from downtown/Broadway I can still exit via a stop right near my street but with the BRT-lite plan I wouldn't have a choice but to walk ~5 minutes in either direction to take the new bus with little to any actual improvement between trip time or frequency. It completely misses the point and fails miserably.

I will point out that this is how BRT is supposed to work: with fewer stops and wider stop spacing, the bus should be much faster which should make up for the walking time. However, this is why it is important to run both express and local service, so that mobility-challenged people and people taking short, local trips can still use the transit service that best serves them. I think express services usually have stop spacings of around 1 km, while local services stop every block or two (200m - 400m).

I'm not against any of the transit improvements, or even the price tag. I just hate that this is being branded as BRT. Add the downtown dedicated lanes and call them system-wide improvements (since a large number of the existing routes travel through downtown). Buy additional vehicles and launch an express service (someone riding from Centre Mall to Midtown really does not need 23 stops in-between). Add some better bus shelters and call them passenger improvements (with Saskatoon's weather, most bus stops should have walls, a roof, and an on-demand heater anyway).

But if you add all these half measures and call them BRT, what are residents going to say when you come back for the additional $350M needed to implement full-BRT on line one? Or when you try to launch lines two and three?

[Brutopian]

According to SREDA's Q3 2023 Economic Dashboard, the 2023 POPULATION ESTIMATE for the SASKATOON CMA is 364,167.

[Saskabusher]

Wow! I remember it being 145,000 when I was in high school, according to the phone book at the time!

People love having babies in Saskatoon and it's a great place to raise kids. Also we've got pretty good immigration numbers. It shouldn't take many more years to hit 400,000!

(I miss the trolley buses- they were so fun to go bumper shining on...).

On the topic of bus routes/branding, I'd like to open a private 3/4 sized, 4-bus fleet, with a dedicated route going from the University to the downtown apartment core to the downtown business core to Broadway to the University, as a circuit. Two buses going in each direction. Extended hours, from 8pm to 1am, one bus in each direction on weekends. Work, study, play and live safely and conveniently all nearby, of course only for those nearby, but that's a choice that could become an option with better infrastructure and planning.

[asdfgh]

Well this should be interesting. Like anything development related, I imagine it will take a while to start seeing actually buildings going up, but this definitely seems like it will allow for a lot more options for development, particularly around the rapid transit corridors.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...sity-1.7038367

Three of the recommendations direct administration to write zoning bylaw amendments to:

- Allow up to four residential units on a property in a residential zoning district, as long as development standards are met, and sewer and water infrastructure can accommodate them.
- Permit four-storey multiple unit developments within 800 metres of bus rapid transit system corridors.
- Remove parking requirements from designated areas and have the motion be considered by the planning, development and community services committee next month.

[Saskabusher]

The worst thing I read is Donaver saying, "We've been working on changes for years...". And that's why he voted against finally making a decision? What a fat cat! I'm not saying with proof, but tell me he doesn't like the endless luncheons at the Parktown and Bess as they 'discuss' changes to bylaws for years(!) on the public dime. Disgusting, man. Then Block chimes in and votes no, too, in one of the most critical areas for workable density in the city. They should both move out to Duck Lake.

[roryn1]

Originally Posted by Saskabusher

The worst thing I read is Donaver saying, "We've been working on changes for years...". And that's why he voted against finally making a decision? What a fat cat! I'm not saying with proof, but tell me he doesn't like the endless luncheons at the Parktown and Bess as they 'discuss' changes to bylaws for years(!) on the public dime. Disgusting, man. Then Block chimes in and votes no, too, in one of the most critical areas for workable density in the city. They should both move out to Duck Lake.

It’s encouraging to hear the proposal was approved. Prior to my relocation to Calgary, I had a discussion with Councillor Block of the downtown/nutana area. She expressed significant concern for the affluent residents of Nutana, aligning more with their interests, as well as for the retired (nimby) community who seem resistant to progress and economic development. This recent vote highlights a concerning trend towards superficiality, overshadowing broader economic and political issues of the district that other downtowns aren’t experiencing as they grow faster than ours. The stark contrast between her very small portion of Nutana area and the rest of her oddly population-low downtown district raises questions about the logic of government merging these distinct regions into a single voting bloc. This amalgamation seems counterintuitive, especially when considering actions from her bias against urban density. It is working against the natural land area that should have people, when it is being represented by a former news anchor councillor who, ironically, advocates against density while living in a less dense area.

[Justanothermember]

Originally Posted by asdfgh

Well this should be interesting. Like anything development related, I imagine it will take a while to start seeing actually buildings going up, but this definitely seems like it will allow for a lot more options for development, particularly around the rapid transit corridors.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...sity-1.7038367

Three of the recommendations direct administration to write zoning bylaw amendments to:

- Allow up to four residential units on a property in a residential zoning district, as long as development standards are met, and sewer and water infrastructure can accommodate them.
- Permit four-storey multiple unit developments within 800 metres of bus rapid transit system corridors.
- Remove parking requirements from designated areas and have the motion be considered by the planning, development and community services committee next month.

These zoning by-laws amendments are getting approved in cities all across Canada as a requirement from the Crown in order to qualify for the HAF.

[FarmerHaight]

These changes are a good thing for Saskatoon, although I am concerned that "Allow up to four residential units on a property in a residential zoning district, as long as development standards are met" means parking minimums, height restrictions, FAR, and other restrictive zoning measures will hamstring the impact of these changes.

Saskatoon's growth plan includes a significant amount of infill development. If these changes mean those infill projects are low-rise apartments and townhouses instead of one-for-one single family home replacements, Saskatoon will be a more sustainable and vibrant city.

[Echoes]

Originally Posted by roryn1

It’s encouraging to hear the proposal was approved. Prior to my relocation to Calgary, I had a discussion with Councillor Block of the downtown/nutana area. She expressed significant concern for the affluent residents of Nutana, aligning more with their interests, as well as for the retired (nimby) community who seem resistant to progress and economic development. This recent vote highlights a concerning trend towards superficiality, overshadowing broader economic and political issues of the district that other downtowns aren’t experiencing as they grow faster than ours. The stark contrast between her very small portion of Nutana area and the rest of her oddly population-low downtown district raises questions about the logic of government merging these distinct regions into a single voting bloc. This amalgamation seems counterintuitive, especially when considering actions from her bias against urban density. It is working against the natural land area that should have people, when it is being represented by a former news anchor councillor who, ironically, advocates against density while living in a less dense area.

This honestly isn't fair to Block. She's voted in favour and spoken in favour of multiple high density rezonings in Nutana and elsewhere in her ward. Yes, she cast a vote against this proposal last week, but you paint with too broad of a brush.

[mmx]

This council must be off its rocker if it thinks yet another 4% hike in the mill rate is going to get the pitchforks coming at them retracted.

[phone]

Are there pitchforks? I seem to recall this type of discourse being raised on certain websites during this council's first term, and every incumbent running for council was re-elected.

[Crisis]

^^^^Agreed. There was lots of talk & speculation about a housecleaning, but there was really no change in the makeup of council. The difference I see this time is that the talk of big changes in council has started much earlier and there are rumours about Charlie not running for Mayor again. Not counting any chicken, though,

[prairieguy]

I am going to come to the defence of Councilor Block as well. I live in Varsity View and have attended a fair number of the community input meetings on infill and density in our neighborhood. There is a very passionate and vocal president of the Community Association that always comes across as anti density (impact character of neighborhood...blah, blah, blah). Ms Block has had to deal with a strong and vocal NIMBY presence, while trying to balance increasing density. The times I have heard her speak at these meetings, I always get the impression she supports seeing the city core by more densified and reduce urban sprawl.
Just my opinion from attending these meetings....

[phone]

If pitchforks should be aimed anywhere regarding the municipal budget (not that pitchforks are a helpful means of problem solving), it should be at the province for keeping the city in a straightjacket by not allowing it to run deficits like a normal government.

[The S'toon Goon]

I talked to someone who recently put in a bid for their scope of work on the Meridian project on Spadina so it would seem they are pressing on with the project. He says It's 19 floors which I think was consistent with the original rendering. I can't recall if the contention on this project was due to its height or its design or just the fact it's in between two nice looking churches. In any case I look forward to hopefully seeing some shovels hit the dirt sooner than later!

[phone]

The controversy surrounding that project with respect to its proximity to the churches rings as totally out of touch with reality. If heritage advocates appreciate these churches for what they contribute to the city in terms of architecture, sense of place and history, use as performing arts venues, and in their conventional religious function, then they should be clicking their heels at the fact that a developer is prepared to come in and make major long term financial contributions to a church organization, who I am fairly certain is facing ever-dwindling membership and attendance.

Knox Tower ensures that Knox United Church will continue on as a functioning, maintained space for decades to come to be enjoyed both by the church community at the city at large, and helps to guard against the risk that it might go the way of Third Avenue United and be purchased by a church organization who has no intention of sharing the space with the broader community. Knox has essentially picked up the mantle of Third Avenue United as the go-to non-TCU downtown classical performing arts space and it would be an utter shame to lose it.

Anyone who is still moaning over the fact that it will interrupt the skyline or whatever needs a reality check.

[Saskabusher]

Great news about Knox tower movement! The original proposal had design issues with the extension of balconies, too, but hey, they're in the air!

If the tenders are on the grill, I can't wait for some juicy render updates. That spot fills a skyline hole perfectly from many angles, and at a decent height.

Phone is absolutely right about the importance of working together to find solutions for preservation. It's ridiculous to sit there at an old heritage desk, sobbing over a Saskatoon postcard from 1952. The church itself, in cooperation with the developer, initiated this project for mutual benefits. Time for the Christening!

[Saskabusher]

Any movement at the top of the Broadway Bridge on the 8-story office building? That's going to look good from the Westside. Both Knox and this one would really add updates to the views. If someone knew someone with a community garden plot there, and it got renewed for the summer of 2024, well that would give us a clue not wanted. If the plots are already cancelled, the building could sprout anytime. Those viewing new tenders could send us a welcomed hint when noticed.

[phone]

Originally Posted by Saskabusher

Any movement at the top of the Broadway Bridge on the 8-story office building? That's going to look good from the Westside. Both Knox and this one would really add updates to the views. If someone knew someone with a community garden plot there, and it got renewed for the summer of 2024, well that would give us a clue not wanted. If the plots are already cancelled, the building could sprout anytime. Those viewing new tenders could send us a welcomed hint when noticed.

I can confirm that the community garden plots are cancelled.