[Moncton] St. Bernard Place | 6 Storeys | Under Construction

[MonctonRad]

The Gradual (D)evolution of St. Bernard Place:

Version 1 - February 2021:



10 storeys, architecturally interesting and visually appealing. Designed to blend in with and respect the neighbouring St. Bernard Church.

Version 2 - January 2024



No longer architecturally interesting, but, increased height (18 storeys). No longer respects the adjacent church.

Version 3 - November 2025



A generic box, not much different than any other six storey apartment building in the core. No real aesthetic appeal.

sigh........

And a perfect example of the long and tortuous course taken for many development projects. Nearly five years with no shovels in the ground, a change of ownership, and three different designs. Will we see shovels next year???

[sailor734]

Certainly a steady decline in the desirability/attractiveness of the designs.
I agree Version 1 was by far the best of the three for that site.

[MonctonRad]

To be clear, nobody is questioning the engineering standards of a Spitfire designed building. This will be a quality development that would probably be a pleasure to live in.

The issue is the fact that Spitfire is not really an architectural firm. Their projects lack the visionary flair that help to define a city. There is no harm in having Spitfire designed buildings as part of a city's inventory. Certain buildings in certain high profile locations however deserve a better treatment.

[MonctonPerson]

Horrendous slop. What a disappointment for that location.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

To be clear, nobody is questioning the engineering standards of a Spitfire designed building. This will be a quality development that would probably be a pleasure to live in.

The issue is the fact that Spitfire is not really an architectural firm. Their projects lack the visionary flair that help to define a city. There is no harm in having Spitfire designed buildings as part of a city's inventory. Certain buildings in certain high profile locations however deserve a better treatment.

I agree but even having a full architectural firm do the design work is no guarantee of visionary flair or innovation. I would imagine a lot depends on what the developer is prepared to pay for.

Look at 99 King in Saint John. Pretty uninspired IMO and hardly showing innovation or "flair". Really just designed to mimic the 1925 Admiral Beatty and the City Market tower. A Disney version of a 100 year old building.

[jonny golden]

Re-post from Moncton thread:

This is more confirmation of how strong the Moncton rental market is, and the low CMHC vacancy rates tell the same story. The three sisters being 95% leased is more evidence of the same thing.

It makes me wonder about St. Bernard's Place, and why they would drastically reduce the scale of the building. It's obviously not market conditions, nor the cost of money. I think this developer just doesn't have the appetite to take on the larger project. Unfortunately.

[Taeolas]

Is there anything the city can do with this latest revision to encourage them to think bigger? Or is it a fait accompli now, since the original approval allowed 6 to 18 stories and such?

I'm sure people (especially Moncton locals) could contact their counsellors to express their disappointment, but it may just be preaching to the choir so to speak, with no other avenues for changing things.

[lirette]

Originally Posted by Taeolas

Is there anything the city can do with this latest revision to encourage them to think bigger? Or is it a fait accompli now, since the original approval allowed 6 to 18 stories and such?

I'm sure people (especially Moncton locals) could contact their counsellors to express their disappointment, but it may just be preaching to the choir so to speak, with no other avenues for changing things.

I feel like voices opposed to a development for its size and scale get far more attention than ones opposing it for its architectural design. There just isn't much appetite for that politically. Maybe there are some examples locally but I can't think of any. It ultimately will just delay the project further when we know the need for housing is there.

I'd love to see it but I don't think there is much in the by laws saying a building is *too boring* lol.

[Monctoncore]

Originally Posted by lirette

I feel like voices opposed to a development for its size and scale get far more attention than ones opposing it for its architectural design. There just isn't much appetite for that politically. Maybe there are some examples locally but I can't think of any. It ultimately will just delay the project further when we know the need for housing is there.

I'd love to see it but I don't think there is much in the by laws saying a building is *too boring* lol.

Exactly, they only have the no plastic siding rule. It’s not even that it’s to boring. The height honestly doesn’t bother me that much, it think being next to the church, with Tony’s on Botsford right next door, that area stretching from Main to St. George could become another awesome street. It’s more so the weird multi-tiered colouring. Who knows once it’s done, maybe it will look much better, renders are hard to get a real idea of what it will look like.

[MonctonPerson]

Originally Posted by Taeolas

Is there anything the city can do with this latest revision to encourage them to think bigger? Or is it a fait accompli now, since the original approval allowed 6 to 18 stories and such?

I'm sure people (especially Moncton locals) could contact their counsellors to express their disappointment, but it may just be preaching to the choir so to speak, with no other avenues for changing things.

I don't believe there was a range in the prior approval- and that's why it's come back to council to be rezoned. Infinity was an exception where the city approved a range.

[Leroy321]

The link for the proposal:
https://www5.moncton.ca/docs/pac/PAC/Nov_26_2025/6a_75_Botsford_Street_Avis_Public_Notice.pdf

[Patapouf26]

After reading through the proposal for amendment, I noticed it is Amico Construction that is behind it. They're behind decent projects around town - great infill, but no landmarks. They all max out at 6 stories other than Promenade 9, in Dieppe. So, it's no suprise that they would stick to their modus operandi. That being said, I'm not one to discourage a local developer of decent projects. It's just too bad it isn't someone else behind this project that is on a very central area of the core.

[MonctonGoldenTri]

What I find frustrating is that two key prime locations have been reduced from significant heights to a six-story, cookie-cutter design. This includes the well-known "tomato building" and now St. Bernard. In my opinion, these six-story designs are better suited for the outer perimeter of the downtown area, rather than its core.

[new kid in town]

Well, infill is still infill, I suppose. But like MonctonGoldenTri, I also can't help but be extremely disappointed that a height reduction happened yet again on a very prominent location. This would have been the perfect stimulus to create a proper urban corridor between St. George and Main.

[jonny golden]

Originally Posted by new kid in town

Well, infill is still infill, I suppose. But like MonctonGoldenTri, I also can't help but be extremely disappointed that a height reduction happened yet again on a very prominent location. This would have been the perfect stimulus to create a proper urban corridor between St. George and Main.

I feel the same way. A part of me feels that it's better than the vacant scrub lot that's there now, but I hate "settling". It's a missed opportunity to really boost this area of our downtown. Even the original 12 floor building would have been an excellent addition here, and far more appropriate for this location.

Two buildings downsized in a very strong rental market, with interest rates less than half what they were 18 months ago? They have their reasons I'm sure, but it's still disappointing.

[Mud]

Think they just realised their lunch would be eaten in the high-rise portion of the market by the bigger developers in town. Since they announced 18 stories the following has happened:

1. Lafford had no downtime between his developments

2. Infinity came on the scene and showed signs that they were serious

3. Ashford's plans were always sort of looming in the background waiting on infrastructure that is wrapping up

Just because the overall rental market is strong doesn't necessarily mean the demographic that would live in a 15+ floor building is unlimited.

That or it's a simple case of small developer bites off more than they can chew.

[ChampduLarge]

I share the disappointment. Moncton needs more infill that this meagre third proposal. Of the three designs, the first is by far the most attractive and would add the most residents to the area. I will say, though, that the most current proposal at street level on Botsford feels like the most accommodating of retail uses, and while the building is more or less grotesque, I actually think the ground level could be somewhat redeeming. Botsford has a lot of potential as a north-south commercial street and this will contribute to that, hopefully.

Thanks for sharing the images of the proposal over time, by the way. I bit depressing but very useful.

[darkharbour]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The Gradual (D)evolution of St. Bernard Place:


A generic box, not much different than any other six storey apartment building in the core. No real aesthetic appeal.

sigh........

And a perfect example of the long and tortuous course taken for many development projects. Nearly five years with no shovels in the ground, a change of ownership, and three different designs. Will we see shovels next year???

What is this, a residential development in Saint John?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by ChampduLarge

I share the disappointment. Moncton needs more infill that this meagre third proposal. Of the three designs, the first is by far the most attractive and would add the most residents to the area. I will say, though, that the most current proposal at street level on Botsford feels like the most accommodating of retail uses, and while the building is more or less grotesque, I actually think the ground level could be somewhat redeeming. Botsford has a lot of potential as a north-south commercial street and this will contribute to that, hopefully.

Thanks for sharing the images of the proposal over time, by the way. I bit depressing but very useful.

Thanks for being optimistic.

I think you may be right in that version #3 might have the most inviting podium for commercial/retail.

Version #1 had street facing townhomes in the podium
Version #2 had a retail podium, but renders showed mostly a blank brick wall without character.
Version #3 shows a podium with more windows and it appears the most inviting.

So, ignoring the truncated tower, the street presence of Version #3 may be better.

From whay I've heard, they have already secured a restaurant for St. Bernard Place, and it would likely be on the corner immediately across the street from Tony's Bistro. There could be some synergy there.

[MonctonDowntown]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

To be clear, nobody is questioning the engineering standards of a Spitfire designed building. This will be a quality development that would probably be a pleasure to live in.

The issue is the fact that Spitfire is not really an architectural firm. Their projects lack the visionary flair that help to define a city. There is no harm in having Spitfire designed buildings as part of a city's inventory. Certain buildings in certain high profile locations however deserve a better treatment.

100% agree.