[Saint John, NB] Lafford Towers at Tin Can Beach | 3x ~18 storeys | Proposed

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

It's time for Saint John's most promising yet to be built (or named) project to get its own thread.

Lafford is the most prominent and successful high rise developer in the Greater Moncton Area, and I think we're all excited to learn more about their team's ambitious proposal for Saint John's South End.

This development has the potential to be one of the city's most transformative and catalytic projects for its surrounding neighbourhood.

Here is the site below Vulcan St, at the end of Sydney and Charlotte, below:




Two relevant posts from Bingun and Sailor from back when news of this development first broke back in early February 2025:

Originally Posted by bingun

From tonight's council meeting - J.N. Lafford Realty Inc. is purchasing 324 Charlotte Street from the city (surplus land).

This is the same developer as the Three Sisters/Gateway Towers in Moncton, is it not?

What are they up to?

Originally Posted by sailor734

2.5 acres at the very end of Charlotte (fronting on Vulcan St) down towards Tin Can beach......Very interesting!


https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2646471,..._ep=EgoyMDI1MDIwNS4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

https://saintjohn.ca/sites/default/files/documents/EOI4.bid%20324%20Charlotte%20Street.pdf

Maybe Envision Saint John will finally get their wish of a high rise with ocean views.

and this very exciting update from UptownAdam posted a few days ago:

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

Credible source says the Lafford Tin Can Beach site is indeed a podium+towers, as we expected... but it's three towers, not two, and only the first+podium is planned for now. And check this out: ~18 floors. Not sure if that means the first tower is 18 and the future towers more or less, or what.

Will be very interesting to see how this development plays out. Based on the developer's track record in Moncton, I don't think anyone would be surprised if this yet to be named project is completed before the Fundy Quay.

[bingun]

For those who don't frequent that part of town often, it definitely feels like change is in the air.

The Barrack Green development is finishing up, and the new school structure is progressing well and is larger than I had imagined. Street reconstruction finishing on Sydney and about to begin on the lower stretch of Charlotte.

I am hoping the momentum continues next year with this development and then something else across the street where the Landmark was originally proposed.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by bingun

For those who don't frequent that part of town often, it definitely feels like change is in the air.

The Barrack Green development is finishing up, and the new school structure is progressing well and is larger than I had imagined. Street reconstruction finishing on Sydney and about to begin on the lower stretch of Charlotte.

I am hoping the momentum continues next year with this development and then something else across the street where the Landmark was originally proposed.

Would be good to see something actually happen with the Landmark proposal across the street.

I haven't been to Tin Can Beach in a while, but I've always felt there's potential for ambitious high projects with great ocean views in this area at the bottom of the central peninsula.

I wonder if the City would be willing to sell Lafford the former sugar refinery site, or at least part of it, as it's right there beside their property. Serious remediation efforts would be needed, obviously, but government could be willing to help fund those efforts.

[Woho]

I always thought that if the Lantic site cannot be used for buildings due to the contaminated soil, would it not make a fantastic place for a park? If the new school is just down the road and several residential developments are in the works nearby, then it would see plenty of use. Not to mention the amazing views you would have of the cruise ships coming in if the Harbour Passage could follow the water's edge similar to how it does at the Fundy Quay. The site would still need plenty of remediation, but no significant structures would be built on it.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by Woho

I always thought that if the Lantic site cannot be used for buildings due to the contaminated soil, would it not make a fantastic place for a park? If the new school is just down the road and several residential developments are in the works nearby, then it would see plenty of use. Not to mention the amazing views you would have of the cruise ships coming in if the Harbour Passage could follow the water's edge similar to how it does at the Fundy Quay. The site would still need plenty of remediation, but no significant structures would be built on it.

It's more structurally unsound than contaminated being the problem. Ancient concrete and teak pilings and fill. There's literally holes in the ground closer to the south/southwest corner. You'd have to do a LOT to make the whole space functional. Not that I disagree in principle.

I would have preferred Harbour Passage go down Charlotte, through the Tin Can Beach area where possible, then parallel the tracks to the ballfield/Emco at the south end of Wentworth, then rejoining the planned route. Broad was an odd choice given the number of driveways. Should have been rebuilt as a normal street.

Kind of plays into the bike lane thing too. Sydney and Charlotte were absolutely not necessary and will never ever see popular use. A bike lane down Crown/Broad/Lower Cove would actually make sense given the higher traffic speeds, actual deaths and injuries, low amount of street parking impacted, and existing overwide roads. Eventual Rockwood-to-Market-Square bike route would actually, possibly, maybe see users.

[sjuser23]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

It's more structurally unsound than contaminated being the problem. Ancient concrete and teak pilings and fill. There's literally holes in the ground closer to the south/southwest corner. You'd have to do a LOT to make the whole space functional. Not that I disagree in principle.

I would have preferred Harbour Passage go down Charlotte, through the Tin Can Beach area where possible, then parallel the tracks to the ballfield/Emco at the south end of Wentworth, then rejoining the planned route. Broad was an odd choice given the number of driveways. Should have been rebuilt as a normal street.

Kind of plays into the bike lane thing too. Sydney and Charlotte were absolutely not necessary and will never ever see popular use. A bike lane down Crown/Broad/Lower Cove would actually make sense given the higher traffic speeds, actual deaths and injuries, low amount of street parking impacted, and existing overwide roads. Eventual Rockwood-to-Market-Square bike route would actually, possibly, maybe see users.

Can’t we give the kids just parts of the streets next to the school to enable them to bike to school? Did you bike to school as a kid? Would you allow your kid to bike to school uptown if it wasn’t safe? Giving the kids a bike lane to the school at least gives them the chance to do it safely. I know Facebook would have us believe most sj’ers would say f**k them kids, I want to drive at 80kph wherever I want and I want to park right in front of my destination cause any inconvenience is too much. Is parking a car for 8 to 12 hours really better use of the street than giving kids a safer bike path? C’mon, let’s get over the fake bike lane rage. Move on, the city is better for it and you won’t be hurt by it.

[bingun]

Originally Posted by Woho

I always thought that if the Lantic site cannot be used for buildings due to the contaminated soil, would it not make a fantastic place for a park? If the new school is just down the road and several residential developments are in the works nearby, then it would see plenty of use. Not to mention the amazing views you would have of the cruise ships coming in if the Harbour Passage could follow the water's edge similar to how it does at the Fundy Quay. The site would still need plenty of remediation, but no significant structures would be built on it.

Where there is a will, there is a way. I am sure the federal government can cough up some more money in the name of climate resiliency and flood prevention.

I like the idea of a park or greenspace, but it makes it a tougher sell for the capital needed. Maybe there is a compromise? They could keep the coastal part as green space and make the space where the Lantic building was available for development.

I am going to sound like a crackpot, but I had thought about them building a stadium in that area, probably mostly where the port land is now. Add a hotel adjacent and some retail/residential development. Set up a CPL team and make the stadium multi-purpose for outdoor concerts and events. Free advertising from all the cruise ship passengers sailing by and a really unique location. The atmosphere uptown on game/event days would be incredible.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by sjuser23

Can’t we give the kids just parts of the streets next to the school to enable them to bike to school? Did you bike to school as a kid? Would you allow your kid to bike to school uptown if it wasn’t safe? Giving the kids a bike lane to the school at least gives them the chance to do it safely. I know Facebook would have us believe most sj’ers would say f**k them kids, I want to drive at 80kph wherever I want and I want to park right in front of my destination cause any inconvenience is too much. Is parking a car for 8 to 12 hours really better use of the street than giving kids a safer bike path? C’mon, let’s get over the fake bike lane rage. Move on, the city is better for it and you won’t be hurt by it.

Not to derail this further but I have to respond.

This is an absurd and stupid mischaracterization. I just said Crown/Broad absolutely justify bike lanes, as they're used like freeways. I live and work in the south end and mostly commute on foot. So your little 'suburban facebook boomer' comment falls flat.

Traffic down Charlotte and up Sydney rarely exceeds 30 km/h. They're one-way streets coated in stop signs. There is no safer type of street for cars and bikes to share than that. By your reasoning kids can't bike to school unless there's a bike lane from their front door to the school, which wasn't the case when I biked from Fundy Heights to Barnhill and then Saint Malachy's 20+ years ago.

Saint John's implementation of bike lanes has been poor.

• Disconnected sections across town
• Lane creation where not needed and gaps where they could easily be justified
• Millions spent for virtually no use on both sides of Main Street when a north-side-only lane would have been dramatically cheaper
• Zero study of usage once built
• Newfound speed bump zeal pushing motor vehicles into bike lanes and causing cars to block crosswalks in places
• No interest in enforcing bylaws on cyclists or ebike/scooter users breaking road rules

From what I understand Fredericton and Halifax have both done a much better job than we have. There's no evidence that Saint John sloppily aping things other places have done much better has improved anything.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

Not to derail this further but I have to respond.

This is an absurd and stupid mischaracterization. I just said Crown/Broad absolutely justify bike lanes, as they're used like freeways. I live and work in the south end and mostly commute on foot. So your little 'suburban facebook boomer' comment falls flat.

Traffic down Charlotte and up Sydney rarely exceeds 30 km/h. They're one-way streets coated in stop signs. There is no safer type of street for cars and bikes to share than that. By your reasoning kids can't bike to school unless there's a bike lane from their front door to the school, which wasn't the case when I biked from Fundy Heights to Barnhill and then Saint Malachy's 20+ years ago.


Saint John's implementation of bike lanes has been poor.

• Disconnected sections across town
• Lane creation where not needed and gaps where they could easily be justified
• Millions spent for virtually no use on both sides of Main Street when a north-side-only lane would have been dramatically cheaper
• Zero study of usage once built
• Newfound speed bump zeal pushing motor vehicles into bike lanes and causing cars to block crosswalks in places
• No interest in enforcing bylaws on cyclists or ebike/scooter users breaking road rules

From what I understand Fredericton and Halifax have both done a much better job than we have. There's no evidence that Saint John sloppily aping things other places have done much better has improved anything.

Thank you Adam, Well said. (and you saved me a bunch of two fingered typing too )

[Ire Narissis]

Fredericton's extensive multi-use paved trail network should honestly be the envy of every other N.B. municipality. It's very easy and safe to get around on a bicycle up there!

Granted, they did have the benefit of ample abandoned railbeds to get things started - and a conveniently available disused bridge! Adding a properly designed water crossing for Harbour Passage would require extensive new construction, even if it were a 'simple' addition of something like a suspended deck beneath the Harbour Bridge (imagine how people would react to another two years of Harbour Bridge construction to add such a thing, lol).

[sjuser23]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

Not to derail this further but I have to respond.

This is an absurd and stupid mischaracterization. I just said Crown/Broad absolutely justify bike lanes, as they're used like freeways. I live and work in the south end and mostly commute on foot. So your little 'suburban facebook boomer' comment falls flat.

Traffic down Charlotte and up Sydney rarely exceeds 30 km/h. They're one-way streets coated in stop signs. There is no safer type of street for cars and bikes to share than that. By your reasoning kids can't bike to school unless there's a bike lane from their front door to the school, which wasn't the case when I biked from Fundy Heights to Barnhill and then Saint Malachy's 20+ years ago.

Saint John's implementation of bike lanes has been poor.

• Disconnected sections across town
• Lane creation where not needed and gaps where they could easily be justified
• Millions spent for virtually no use on both sides of Main Street when a north-side-only lane would have been dramatically cheaper
• Zero study of usage once built
• Newfound speed bump zeal pushing motor vehicles into bike lanes and causing cars to block crosswalks in places
• No interest in enforcing bylaws on cyclists or ebike/scooter users breaking road rules

From what I understand Fredericton and Halifax have both done a much better job than we have. There's no evidence that Saint John sloppily aping things other places have done much better has improved anything.

I think bikes lanes on Charlotte and Sydney at least gives a chance for kids uptown to make their way to a safer bike route. I'd rather have this than parking. Better use of the street IMO.

Main street was a road diet project to get the lanes down from 6 to 4 to reduce speeds, bike lanes were just the excuse but the real driver is to make a better street for people to live and enjoy at the expense of commuters who don't live there.

Saint John bike network is only 50% built yet so of course it's disjointed. They build a section when opportune and other work needs to happen so it's a very efficient way to build rather than rebuilding a section of street that doesn't need it.

Speed bumps are awesome if you live on the street, if you don't live on it, you hate them. I get it.

[Pugsley]

This is better served in the Active Transportation thread.

[nwalbert]

Very exciting project. What is the next milestone?

[darkharbour]

Originally Posted by nwalbert

Very exciting project. What is the next milestone?

The thread is a bit of a misnomer, the project isn’t even “proposed” at this point, all of this is based on well-informed speculation and a land sale.

So I guess the next milestone would be a project announcement or registration of a plan with the city.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by darkharbour

The thread is a bit of a misnomer, the project isn’t even “proposed” at this point, all of this is based on well-informed speculation and a land sale.

So I guess the next milestone would be a project announcement or registration of a plan with the city.

I may have been a bit presumptive using the word “Proposed” in the title, but I think it’s a safe assumption based on the information we have so far (including posts from Lafford executives on social media).

With how long it takes us to update thread titles on here sometimes, I figured I’d save the mods the effort, but hopefully once we get an official name and more details, the title can be updated.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by bingun

envision saint john has an rfp out for a waterfront development and experience plan.

The map is interesting, including both the lantic sugar site and the recently cleared saint john energy site and parking lot on smythe street.

The output of this could guide the future of those sites.

This RFP is certainly relevant to the project being discussed in this thread.

The port’s current land use plan is outdated and due for a refresh soon, but as it stands, the city’s (top map) and port’s (bottom map) future land use plans seem to be somewhat at odds with each other, especially around the Tin Can Beach and former sugar refinery site.



https://catalogue-saintjohn.opendata.arc...ore?location=45.272150%2C-66.052750%2C14



https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6...60416/SJPA-Land-Use-Plan_final-Jun11.pdf

If the Port is able to expand a little into the former sugar refinery site, and secure federal dollars to further expand the west site docks through land reclamation, they should be more than willing to give up some land along Charlotte Street South for residential development.

Moreover, I think there’s a sound economic argument to invest in a major land reclamation project at the sugar refinery property and to the south, as outlined in the Port’s land use plans. The area in question is well connected by rail and that drastically reduces a lot of the logistical challenges for remediation and reclamation efforts.

I hope we see a plan for this area that balances port growth and development with urban growth and development. Lafford building 3 residential towers in this area would certainly help in terms urban development.

[sailor734]

I think that given his track record, having Lafford come to Saint John is probably the biggest development news since Brunswick Square and Market Square were built in the 70's/80's.
I wouldn't be completely shocked to see him have 3 18 story towers up and occupied before Fundy Quay is built out.