The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread

[wingweaver84]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

Lorneville opposition to industrial park at 800 signatures. Ignoring them is imperative. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...tion-1.7263744

Interestingly, the city is extending water services- presumably from Spruce Lake- so this isn't a warehouse with ~30 employees being proposed. Must be a serious industrial user.

This link about the expansion is useful: https://shapeyourcitysaintjohn.ca/sp...1pvfkJT1AATNHQ

And why exactly is it "imperative to ignore them"? I'm willing to bet that many of the people in support of the expansion have never been to or don't live in Lorneville. That community not only holds a lot of history-it was settled by Irish immigrants at least as early as the 1840s-but it also holds personal memories for me,even though I myself have never lived there,nor have I had any reason to be there for ten years now.

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by wingweaver84

And why exactly is it "imperative to ignore them"? I'm willing to bet that many of the people in support of the expansion have never been to or don't live in Lorneville. That community not only holds a lot of history-it was settled by Irish immigrants at least as early as the 1840s-but it also holds personal memories for me,even though I myself have never lived there,nor have I had any reason to be there for ten years now.

I don’t agree with “ignoring them”, but the problem is the rhetoric and misinformation flying out of the gate before the information session. For example, 30m buffer zone doesn’t mean industry will be 30m from a residential property. The 30m is the extremity of the proposed industrial zone. Look at King William Rd - no industry is going to locate 1 to 1.5 km into the property to abut a residential property. I also have fond memories of the Lorneville area, but think it’s a stretch that they can lay claim to the whole neck of the area (especially with Coleson Cove as the anchor at the end of the neck). It’s a classic knee jerk reaction without having all of the information. That area will be one of the three growth engines of the SJ economy over the next 20 years so the question is should a few hundred unaffected people derail that.

[JakeNB]

Next year is a civic election year; don’t bet on the esteemed members of council doing anything that might be unpopular.

[TitleRequired]

Originally Posted by JakeNB

Next year is a civic election year; don’t bet on the esteemed members of council doing anything that might be unpopular.

The electorate only remembers the last 3 months...

[TitleRequired]

Originally Posted by wingweaver84

And why exactly is it "imperative to ignore them"? I'm willing to bet that many of the people in support of the expansion have never been to or don't live in Lorneville. That community not only holds a lot of history-it was settled by Irish immigrants at least as early as the 1840s-but it also holds personal memories for me,even though I myself have never lived there,nor have I had any reason to be there for ten years now.

Depends if the reasons are based on fact or feelings.

I would instead suggest smell, noise limits and setbacks to manage any consequence of the development.

Zoning can be about managing nuisances -- if the opponents provided a measurable road forward that the project (?) could move forward they would have a better chance in modifying the parameters, and its eventual impact.

[DyAm00394]

A few interesting Committee Of The Whole items at tonight's council meeting

- 17.4 "construction license agreement for 99 King Street".

- 17.5 and 17.5.1 "Retail Drive Re-alignment agreements".

- 17.6 "Sale of portion of Somerset acres to Housing NB".

- 17.7 "Rapid Housing initiative Barracks Green".


Edit: Updating with the full descriptions said at the meeting:

- 17.4 "construction license agreement for 99 King Street". “The city enter into a license agreement with WL Holdings Inc. over a portion of PID 39420, known as South-Market Street, to permit the construction of a new building located at 99 King Street”.

- 17.5 and 17.5.1 "Retail Drive Re-alignment agreements". “17.5 = The city enter into the 2nd amending agreement with Clear View Homes Limited and Orion MC Inc. 17.5.1 = Financial contribution agreement 26 Retail Drive for securing vacant possession of lands required for the Retail Drive Re-alignment project”.

- 17.6 "Sale of portion of Somerset acres to Housing NB". “City enter into an agreement of purchase and sale of portion PID 00046359 containing an approximate area of 11,364 square meters “.

- 17.7 "Rapid Housing initiative Barracks Green". “City enter an amended and reinstated contribution agreement with Kaleidoscope Social Impact Inc. Purpose of reflecting change of contractor and change of funding structure. The city also discharge the mortgage on the rectory property, PID 55242242. In addition the city enter into a contribution agreement, with a contribution of $257,790 to assist in closing the funding gap of the Barrack Green Residence project”.

[cdnguys]

[adamuptownsj]

I wonder if they'll actually complete Arlington Crescent or if this is just someone getting a good deal on already-serviced lots and developing accordingly? There's a lot more land to be unlocked if they aren't afraid of road building: https://paol-efel.snb.ca/paol.html?v...n&pan=06737168 I presume the northern corner lot will be MUR. https://paol-efel.snb.ca/paol.html?v...n&pan=06267422

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

I wonder if they'll actually complete Arlington Crescent or if this is just someone getting a good deal on already-serviced lots and developing accordingly? There's a lot more land to be unlocked if they aren't afraid of road building: https://paol-efel.snb.ca/paol.html?v...n&pan=06737168 I presume the northern corner lot will be MUR. https://paol-efel.snb.ca/paol.html?v...n&pan=06267422

It’s Black Fox builders who built out Colter Street - they seem to be moving fast with their builds so I wouldn’t be surprised if they complete the crescent.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by TitleRequired

The electorate only remembers the last 3 months...

If they allow green zones for tent encampments within residential neighbourhoods people are definitely going to look into who made those decisions.

[bridgeoftea]

Some of the buildings at the westmorland homes have been moved and cleared out.
There was a guy in a hi-vis doing surveys with some cones out where the road alignment will be. Exciting times!

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by bridgeoftea

Some of the buildings at the westmorland homes have been moved and cleared out.
There was a guy in a hi-vis doing surveys with some cones out where the road alignment will be. Exciting times!

Great to see but it is ridiculous that this situation was allowed to happen in the first place.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by sailor734

Great to see but it is ridiculous that this situation was allowed to happen in the first place.

You're opposed to the realignment of Ashburn Lake and Retail? Why, exactly?

There's no homeless camp here, if you're conflating recent posts. The homes in question are Westmoreland Homes' show mini-homes. They're moving to another Rothesay Avenue location. Not sure where, exactly.

[bridgeoftea]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

You're opposed to the realignment of Ashburn Lake and Retail? Why, exactly?

There's no homeless camp here, if you're conflating recent posts. The homes in question are Westmoreland Homes' show mini-homes. They're moving to another Rothesay Avenue location. Not sure where, exactly.

I think they might have meant why on earth did they put up 2 lights that close together in the first place. Comically terrible decision that I've not seen anywhere else in Canada before.

[dhottawa729]

Originally Posted by bridgeoftea

I think they might have meant why on earth did they put up 2 lights that close together in the first place. Comically terrible decision that I've not seen anywhere else in Canada before.

P.Eng. traffic engineer here!
This happens occasionally and is a symptom of old road alignments and property constraints, but becomes a necessity when it is unsafe to make a left turn from either sidestreet without traffic signals. It can be done safely if the signals are coordinated and the downstream signal head is a special refracted lens type that cannot be seen until you are very close to the upstream set so that a motorist doesn’t get ambiguous information. Careful analysis goes into the timing plan to ensure vehicles do not get “trapped” between the two signals, and there is usually enough storage to accommodate that occurrence, but can be mitigated with a longer amber clearance interval on the downstream signal.

Another example in Canada:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/AvbshcWEBPk5...s.preview.copy

[DyAm00394]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

They're moving to another Rothesay Avenue location. Not sure where, exactly.

They are moved to the property of the old Fundy Line Motel that was torn down. Their office and some homes are already moved and set up there.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by bridgeoftea

I think they might have meant why on earth did they put up 2 lights that close together in the first place. Comically terrible decision that I've not seen anywhere else in Canada before.

It's not the worst intersection in Saint John, let alone the country, but the fix is overdue.

IIRC the issue is Ashburn/Rothesay preceded the highway; when bisected, the southern portion of Ashburn became Ashburn Lake. When Retail was built later, it followed existing ROW and didn't expropriate the land currently occupied by Westmoreland Homes. Thus, two lights. In the early 2010s someone stupidly replaced the short, left-turning lane from Ashburn Lake onto Rothesay with an asphalt berm. Before East Point was built out, this was just annoying. Now, it's brutal. Should they have realigned Retail around the same time Costco was built? Absolutely. Now is better than never, of course.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

You're opposed to the realignment of Ashburn Lake and Retail? Why, exactly?

There's no homeless camp here, if you're conflating recent posts. The homes in question are Westmoreland Homes' show mini-homes. They're moving to another Rothesay Avenue location. Not sure where, exactly.

Not opposed at all. It is long overdue My comment was that the city should never have allowed Retail Dr. to join Rothesay Ave where it does in the first place.

Nothing to do in anyway with Homeless camps.