The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread - Page 307

cdnguys · #**6121** Posted **Jul 16, 2011, 6:07 PM**

Abbey St. Andrew's

Three Sisters Harbourfront Condos

Market Square Apartments Unraveled

Fort Howe Hotel Now Howard Johnson`s

New Law Courts

New Saint John Police Force HQ

Freak Lunchbox Candy Store on King Street

Brunswick Square Removing Concrete and Adding Brick

MonctonRad · #**6122** Posted **Jul 16, 2011, 7:04 PM**

Nice pics!

Downtown is being transformed.

Now, if only the coast guard site would move forward........

cdnguys · #**6123** Posted **Jul 16, 2011, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Nice pics!

Downtown is being transformed.

Now, if only the coast guard site would move forward........

Yes, we finally got rid of acres of surface parking for these developments - hope it continues. Just a small point however - Saint John's "downtown" is called "uptown"

- as historically the sailors exiting their ships in harbour headed "up" the hills in to the city.

Fischbob · #**6124** Posted **Jul 17, 2011, 12:33 AM**

Thanks for the pics! Sure is an exciting summer for Uptown construction!

SJTOKO · #**6125** Posted **Jul 17, 2011, 9:04 AM**

Are they going to bury the lines along Union? Seems like a logical thing to do considering the amount of construction going on. May as well kill two birds with one stone.

Fischbob · #**6126** Posted **Jul 17, 2011, 4:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJTOKO

Are they going to bury the lines along Union? Seems like a logical thing to do considering the amount of construction going on. May as well kill two birds with one stone.

My understanding is that burying above-ground infrastructure is indeed part of the current work along that section of Union.

There was a full-page ad in yesterday's TJ calling for corporate sponsorships for the proposed fieldhouse at Exhibition Park, along with a rendering of part of the exterior. There's also some additional information and graphics in a prospectus (PDF) on the Exhibition Association's website. Certainly an interesting proposal.

michael_d40 · #**6127** Posted **Jul 17, 2011, 5:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJTOKO

Are they going to bury the lines along Union? Seems like a logical thing to do considering the amount of construction going on. May as well kill two birds with one stone.

Here's a news clip from the Saint John website.

Union Street Phase 1 begins Monday

June 17, 2011

Beginning June 20, the City will undertake a number of capital infrastructure improvements to the west end of Union Street . The completed project will result in a completely rebuilt Union Street with new watermains, storm and sanitary sewers, underground electrical, new sidewalks, and lighting. The project will be done in phases and at no time will Union Street be closed completely from St. Patrick Street to Wellington Row.

SaintJohnCycling · #**6128** Posted **Jul 18, 2011, 12:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fischbob

My understanding is that burying above-ground infrastructure is indeed part of the current work along that section of Union.

There was a full-page ad in yesterday's TJ calling for corporate sponsorships for the proposed fieldhouse at Exhibition Park, along with a rendering of part of the exterior. There's also some additional information and graphics in a prospectus (PDF) on the Exhibition Association's website. Certainly an interesting proposal.

This sounds interesting. There's a lot of things I really like about the facility and I hope to learn more about the underground storm water retention system.

The only thing that I'm not sure about is their assumption that they can maintain 2500 $20 monthly walking passes. I think they'll have a hard time meeting that goal at that price. I prefer more intensive exercise, so I can't speak for walkers; but I would think that if someone wanted to walk inside on the east side, they would walk around McAllister before paying $20 a month.

If they make it cheap or free, they can sell a lot more snacks and drinks too . . .

nwalbert · #**6129** Posted **Jul 18, 2011, 5:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintJohnCycling

This sounds interesting. There's a lot of things I really like about the facility and I hope to learn more about the underground storm water retention system.

The only thing that I'm not sure about is their assumption that they can maintain 2500 $20 monthly walking passes. I think they'll have a hard time meeting that goal at that price. I prefer more intensive exercise, so I can't speak for walkers; but I would think that if someone wanted to walk inside on the east side, they would walk around McAllister before paying $20 a month.

If they make it cheap or free, they can sell a lot more snacks and drinks too . . .

Agreed, they would be better to simply ask for $20/month donations in my opinion.

JHikka · #**6130** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 11:46 AM**

So Council turned down two development proposals for Loch Lomond road that would have seen 187 homes be built, because it goes against our new municipal plan. This is good...right?

Either way Ivan Court is pretty upset about it not being approved. Whether that says something about his tenure as mayor or not is up to you to decide.

kwajo · #**6131** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 12:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregHickman

So Council turned down two development proposals for Loch Lomond road that would have seen 187 homes be built, because it goes against our new municipal plan. This is good...right?

Either way Ivan Court is pretty upset about it not being approved. Whether that says something about his tenure as mayor or not is up to you to decide.

Council absolutely did the right thing, Ivan's out to lunch for thinking the decision was "anti-development"

sjuser23 · #**6132** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 1:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwajo

Council absolutely did the right thing, Ivan's out to lunch for thinking the decision was "anti-development"

I'm not so sure Council did the right thing. This area was just outside of the artificial boundaries created by PlanSJ and its perfect infill, exactly what PlanSJ comtemplated when it talked about infill. There are serviced subdivisions on either side of these two proposed developments meaning services are there, plows are there, garbage is right there, why not have these two unconnected serviced subdivisions joined together and reduce cost of infrastructure in the area. Just because it falls just outside the made up lines of Plan SJ? They wanted this type of infill in Forest hills, this is the same hills as forest hills, just the other side of the hill.

JHikka · #**6133** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjuser23

I'm not so sure Council did the right thing....

One notable problem with this development was that it would have put an even larger traffic strain on Loch Lomond Avenue, and it's already bad enough. Being that far out of town, it isn't really that easy to just bike in, which i'm sure plenty of people would suggest doing once the residents started complaining about traffic and wait-times.

SJTOKO · #**6134** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 2:29 PM**

[youtube]6oykkUHIFn0[youtube]

michael_d40 · #**6135** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 2:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjuser23

I'm not so sure Council did the right thing. This area was just outside of the artificial boundaries created by PlanSJ and its perfect infill, exactly what PlanSJ comtemplated when it talked about infill. There are serviced subdivisions on either side of these two proposed developments meaning services are there, plows are there, garbage is right there, why not have these two unconnected serviced subdivisions joined together and reduce cost of infrastructure in the area. Just because it falls just outside the made up lines of Plan SJ? They wanted this type of infill in Forest hills, this is the same hills as forest hills, just the other side of the hill.

I completely agree. I'm sure we will see a proposal just like this again down the road for the exact same area and it will be approved. This is how we do things here. Debate and reject for a few years. Back peddle Then approve the same thing 10 years later when it's too late. Not to worry though folks! The Planning Advisory Committee just approved a Trailer Park for Heather Way. That will fix everything!

A good example is the Mile one Interchange. CBC article is saying it has increased by 70% since it was announced. from 40-70.. Well yes! That is what happens when you delay things for many years. Costs continuously increase. Not to mention you can see where the original asphalt was laid 40 years ago for this interchange when the Thruway was build and just now they are completing the interchange.

Or when we do something, make sure it's as half assed as possible and drag your heels to update it or expand. But must fight about it the entire way e.g - Trade and Convention Centre and the cruise ship terminal on Pugsley A. Now they are looking into building another terminal on Pugsley C. Wouldnt it of been easier to build a large one at once and have them connected? Nope. Must have duplicates and have the second half cost more.

Sorry for ranting guys - It's just been one of those days.

michael_d40 · #**6136** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 2:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJTOKO

[youtube]6oykkUHIFn0[youtube]

That link didn't work. Is it the property of the corner of Water and Princess? I didn't realize how nice the inside of that building was! I think it's a great price for what your getting and the location and view is amazing for potential condo owners.! I always thought a coffee shop would be a good fit for the main floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oykkUHIFn0

burtj · #**6137** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 2:41 PM**

Nice. There looks like a lot of regeneration going on. Very busy!

JHikka · #**6138** Posted **Jul 19, 2011, 5:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael_d40

Not to mention you can see where the original asphalt was laid 40 years ago for this interchange when the Thruway was build and just now they are completing the interchange.

The fact that we should have had a cloverleaf at the end of Mcallister Drive instead of that mess at the end of Rothesay Avenue and the curved bridge bugs me, and I wasn't even around when the decision was made.

flwright · #**6139** Posted **Jul 20, 2011, 2:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael_d40

Not to worry though folks! The Planning Advisory Committee just approved a Trailer Park for Heather Way. That will fix everything!

What PAC meeting were you at?! It was very clear that the mobile home park was recommended for denial, not approval. You may be ranting, but you still have to have your facts straight!

michael_d40 · #**6140** Posted **Jul 20, 2011, 2:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by flwright

What PAC meeting were you at?! It was very clear that the mobile home park was recommended for denial, not approval. You may be ranting, but you still have to have your facts straight!

Misunderstood. I bow.