[Architype]

^ Actually, there is always stuff to report on, much of the time it's things getting turned down and not built.

Leo's Lane condo project voted down
Owners brought to tears by announcement
TARA MULLOWNEY
The Telegram

Classic Cafe co-owner Fred Reardon literally shed tears of joy as he sat in the gallery during Monday's St. John's city council meeting.

Reardon and business partner David Heffernan attended the meeting to witness first-hand what council voted to do about the proposed Leo's Lane condo complex, which would have blocked the view of the Narrows from large windows and deck of the cafe, located on Duckworth Street.

When council voted to reject the proposal, Reardon and Heffernan were overjoyed.

"It really brought me to tears, I was so emotional and happy," Reardon told The Telegram after the meeting.

"Our customers comment on the view all the time - I see them come in and the first thing they do is look out the window and almost miss their chair as they try to sit down."

Developer Brian Babb and PHB Group architects had originally proposed an eight-storey, 12-unit condo structure, to be built east of the Journey's End hotel and backing onto the existing Cavendish Place Condominiums. In order to approve the proposal, city council would have had to rezone the area from industrial land use district to commercial central mixed zone and make discretionary amendments for the building's height and maximum floor area ration.

A public meeting was held on the proposal in November, and residents of Cavendish Place voiced their concerns the building would ruin their views. The developer changed his proposal in response to the concerns, and submitted a new plan, which reduced the number of condos from 12 units to 10 and lowering the height by five feet. The developers also added 10 on-site parking spaces to the design.

A second public meeting was held on Feb. 7, and Reardon and Heffernan - who hadn't been aware of the previous meeting - attended it, along with about 20 others. Cavendish residents still had concerns about their view, as well as possible structural and foundation damage to their building, and the Classic Cafe owners made it known that their view, an important part of the restaurant's success, would be obliterated.

"We got the report back from the architect, and it turns out that the view from the Classic Cafe would be pretty well destroyed, eliminated by this development, even at the reduced five feet," Coun. Shannie Duff, who chaired the second meeting, said Monday. "It is my feeling that since this is requiring a rezoning and it requires two separate discretionary amendments regarding the height and the (floor area ratio), that it is not fair to create a situation where a benefit given to one developer destroys or seriously negatively impacts the value of another property."

Coun. Frank Galgay, who represents the downtown area, originally agreed with the proposed development, but said he had changed his mind. He presented council with a petition opposing the condos containing more than 300 names, which had been given to him by Reardon and Heffernan.

"I did go down and I sat at the table of the Classic Cafe and I looked out and saw this beautiful view of the Narrows of St. John's," he said. "For the condominiums to go there as they were presented would have a detrimental effect on the business of the two gentlemen who own that specific business. Not only that, it would be lost to the residents of St. John's who frequent that particular restaurant.

"We're not against development - in the past year we've approved eight developments - but this one, in all conscience, I dwelled on it and mulled it over and looked at the pros and cons, and I think we're making the right decision in saving this very beautiful view of St. John's."

http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=109472&sc=82




Image from city website.

Land Use Assessment Report – Proposed 8 Storey, 12 Unit Residential Condominium Building

It is a small site with limited alternative potential. It is abutted on one side by Journey’s End, an
8 storey structure and backs into the side of a hill and the foundation structure for Cavendish
Place Condominiums. As opposed to what would be the situation for most other sites in the
downtown, development of an 8 storey structure will have only a small impact on private views,
the image of the downtown as seen from the harbour and other vantage points, and no impact on
public views. Approval in terms of these unique qualities should not be seen as a precedent for
other downtown sites.
The project also makes good urban design sense. It redevelops a difficult derelict property,
utilizes existing municipal infrastructure, and will help strengthen the residential component of
the downtown.

Leo’s Lane Condominium will be visible from many key vantage points in and around the
harbour. Because of its surroundings and the proposed materials and colours, it will not have an
adverse impact on the image and mosaic of the downtown. It will be seen next to an 8 storey
hotel and against a mixed background of hillside and concrete foundations. The proposed muted
colours blend with neighbouring buildings and the surroundings.

There will be no impact on public views. Although the project falls within the view sheds of
several public views that are identified in the Public Views Study, its roof line is well below
buildings on Duckworth Street, and is not in the view plane.

http://www.stjohns.ca/csj/NewsDetails?id=639

My take on this:
Basically, this development was turned down to protect the view of one restaurant. It's a fact of life that every time something gets built some view is affected. Maybe there were legitimate issues with the surrounding structures, but, regarding the view, you could say that if you don't want to lose a view, you can buy the land. St. John's is therefore left with an empty lot where there could be a place for people to live. The top of this building would have been lower than everything surrounding it because it is at the bottom of the hill. Also, there are no heritage buildings left on this particular block, the last one, a warehouse, was torn down a year or so ago. I truly love views and heritage, but every row of Victorian houses, and every old building on Water Street is also blocking the view from somewhere. The population of downtown, and the city in general has been decreasing or barely holding it's own for years, even as the city continues to devour acres and acres of forest or agricultural land in the suburbs. This puts more and more pressure on the city services as everything from transit and roads to snowclearing becomes more expensive to maintain. If you want a thriving sustainable city, there are some small sacrifices to be made.

I'm not in favour of replacing heritage areas with high-rises. But I think the city must have zones where livable walkable communities can be created for the 21st century in order to be suatainable. That generally means higher density and getting away from suburban development as an easy and cheaper method for growth.