[Saint John] 91 King Street | ?m | ?s | Site Prep

[Pugsley]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I approve the updated renders. A massive improvement from previous. This style fits in very nicely with the historical context of King Street, King's Square and other nearby buildings like the Irving HQ, the Imperial Theatre and the old Admiral Beatty .

Very Bostonian.

Really??? I was about to ask if it's too late to just keep the hole. I think it's hideous. I mean, if you are going to try and recreate a heritage building, at least do it right. This looks like a cheap attempt to create something that isn't even a style found in the city. So disappointed. I can't.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Pugsley

Really??? I was about to ask if it's too late to just keep the hole. I think it's hideous. I mean, if you are going to try and recreate a heritage building, at least do it right. This looks like a cheap attempt to create something that isn't even a style found in the city. So disappointed. I can't.

It's a lot better than this monstrosity (originally proposed):

[JakeNB]

My first impression was that it looked like an upside down dresser (with the legs pointing skyward), but I do agree that it appears better than the original proposal

[DyAm00394]

I like the new redesign, way better than what was originally proposed 3 years ago. You can't please everyone, at least there is finally some progress happening now.

[new kid in town]

Originally Posted by DyAm00394

Posted today by the city on social media:

That's a damn good render. Congratulations to Saint John! EnvisionSaintJohn, you guys will soon finally have your first 10+ storey building in decades (with the exception of the Quay, which haven't really started their taller ones yet).

[sailor734]

I'd agree it's much better but what was proposed before set a pretty low bar.

I really don't see the attraction of just recreating designs from 100-150 years ago. I get not wanting something that clashes horribly with it's surroundings but surely a city needs to move forward.

While I'm all for saving existing heritage buildings I don't think we need to copy them in new builds. Not all modern design is bad.

[DyAm00394]

The mayor said on Facebook that there will now be 146 units of residential, (up from the original 93). She said the design is innkeeping with our architecture and will be a major addition to our city skyline.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by DyAm00394

The mayor said on Facebook that there will now be 146 units of residential, (up from the original 93). She said the design is innkeeping with our architecture and will be a major addition to our city skyline.

56% is quite a significant increase in the number of units for only changing 2 floors of office to residential. perhaps the originally proposed grocery story on the ground floor will be residential as well?

I also wonder if the redesign hasn't seen the individual unit size shrink? An increase to 12 floors of residential from 9 shouldn't give you a 50+% increase in unit count.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by JakeNB

My first impression was that it looked like an upside down dresser (with the legs pointing skyward), but I do agree that it appears better than the original proposal

You're right. It really does look like an upside down dresser or sideboard.

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

It's a lot better than this monstrosity (originally proposed):

What, you don’t like the Los Angeles county jail look?

[homebody]

Am I miscounting or did we lose a floor from the original?

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by homebody

Am I miscounting or did we lose a floor from the original?

Hard to see the detail on the new one. I think it was always 11 floors on Charlotte and 12 on the lower part (on King) from what the old rendering shows.

Another thing I just noticed is there doesn't appear to be any balconies other than the corners of the top two floors.

[homebody]

Originally Posted by sailor734

Hard to see the detail on the new one. I think it was always 11 floors on Charlotte and 12 on the lower part (on King) from what the old rendering shows.

Another thing I just noticed is there doesn't appear to be any balconies other than the corners of the top two floors.

I actually count 13 floors in the old rendering from King. The black section at the top has two floors I believe if you zoom in.

[bridgeoftea]

Originally Posted by new kid in town

That's a damn good render. Congratulations to Saint John! EnvisionSaintJohn, you guys will soon finally have your first 10+ storey building in decades (with the exception of the Quay, which haven't really started their taller ones yet).

Anything is better than the literal hole in the ground. I actually really enjoy trying to have some old architecture inspired style. Imagine what the city would look like these days without the fire and tearing down the customs house. Everyone has been taking shots at the developer but signs are pointing in the right direction.

Fingers crossed we start seeing foundation work by next June lol

[bridgeoftea]

I'd also love to see a render of what it will look like against the skyline. Sadly I do not have the best photoshop skills to do that.
I'm guessing it'll stand out quite a lot coming in on the highway from the west side.
Then maybe 1 or 2 floors will be seen from the east side approach?

[Helladog]

I’m willing to bet those corner canards won’t make it to the final product.

[darkharbour]

Originally Posted by bridgeoftea

I'd also love to see a render of what it will look like against the skyline. Sadly I do not have the best photoshop skills to do that.
I'm guessing it'll stand out quite a lot coming in on the highway from the west side.
Then maybe 1 or 2 floors will be seen from the east side approach?

I'm curious what is up in the background of the third render in that image [furthest to the right]. The angle is directed toward the RBC building on the corner of King St., but there is clearly another tall building in the skyline behind it, but there isn't anything that tall in that are there presently. Maybe this is an idea of an infill project in the city's parking lot between Charlotte and Germain, or the development lot on the corner of Princess and Canterbury? I know it could be just an artistic liberty from the rendering, but considering that the Brunswick Square tower is missing in the other oblique view, it seems intentional to have placed any buildings in the background at all.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by Helladog

I’m willing to bet those corner canards won’t make it to the final product.

Hopefully not-- they're the only thing I don't care for. An elaborate fascia would be a good fit instead, maybe.

This is a serious improvement to the old renders overall. Hard to complain if we actually get shovels this year.

[Pugsley]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

Hopefully not-- they're the only thing I don't care for. An elaborate fascia would be a good fit instead, maybe.

Agreed, I think that is the item that I dislike as well. Overall, I feel it is a bit "meh" and perhaps an improvement over the last design but it is more of a horizontal move design-wise v. an improvement. IMHO

Would be nice if these were removed and not sure of the need to have a darker grey on the top two floors. At this stage, it might as well just resemble the Irving Oil HQ....which I do like. But everyone has their own taste.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by Pugsley

Agreed, I think that is the item that I dislike as well. Overall, I feel it is a bit "meh" and perhaps an improvement over the last design but it is more of a horizontal move design-wise v. an improvement. IMHO

Would be nice if these were removed and not sure of the need to have a darker grey on the top two floors. At this stage, it might as well just resemble the Irving Oil HQ....which I do like. But everyone has their own taste.

Agreed, the darker siding on the top two floors and the turret-like corners are completely unnecessary.