The Official Moncton, NB Project Thread

[MonctonRad]

According to the "newspaper that shall not be named", the Moncton city engineering department has come up with a plan to try and satisfy Louis Leger and DMCI regarding the downtown short term parking issue.

The plan would see the creation of an additional 200 on street parking spaces near Main Street and would maintain two way traffic on Main. It sounds like many of the parking spaces would be created on side streets but that some new spaces on Main itself would also be provided.

If two way traffic on Main is to be preserved, then it would appear that the wide brick pedestrian sidewalks and downtown patios that help to define Main Street would have to be sacrificed. I can't see any other possible way that on street parking on Main could be provided.

This might be an acceptable compromise if well designed, but I still think that on street parking on Main Street would only add to the traffic congestion in the area, especially when cars try to maneuvre into the (presumed) parallel parking spots. I still believe there is no place for on street parking on Main.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

In any event, this potential solution is apparently not good enough for our esteemed local newspaper and the "idiotors" (I feel justified in calling them this since I used to be an editor myself - of my medical school newspaper) wrote a nice idiotorial today basically stating that the only solution is to either make Main one way, or to permanently create a pedestrian mall on Main Street!!!
:

Let me repeat:

- Main Street is the only direct east/west route through the downtown core. Moncton is built on an east/west axis. Most traffic therefore travels east or west. To deprive the city of it's only direct route through the core would lead to greatly increased traffic congestion at rush hour, would cause many suburbanites to avoid the area entirely and would cause significant confusion to casual visitors and tourists to the city.

The point has already been made that diverting traffic to the side streets could create a nightmare when freight trains pass through the downtown. Main Street has the subway which is a pretty efficient underpass under the CN main line. All the other streets in the core have level crossings. A 150 car freight train can take some time to transit the downtown. It doesn't take much to create gridlock and even a 5-10 minute delay to wait for a train to pass can cause a bottleneck that would take a large amount of time to clear up, especially at rush hour!

If you want to look at a worst of the worst case scenario, think of diverted traffic flow to the side streets at rush hour, a 150 car freight train, resultant gridlock and a coincident fire in the downtown core that emergency responders can't get to because all the roads have been blocked. I wonder if DMCI has thought of that one!

While Louis Leger's agitiation for on street parking may be popular with some downtown businesses (like Keating's and their proverbial obese and short-of-breath patrons who won't walk more than half a block for their pack of smokes), it may not be popular with others. Specifically, any sort of proposal leading to one way traffic would be a nightmare for downtown hoteliers. I'm sure that the managers of the Delta Beausejour, Marriott and the Crowne Plaza appreciate the fact that there is relatively easy access to their facilities for people not generally familiar with the area.

Finally, I find it most peculiar that a city that is becoming so heavily invested in "active transportation" would cave so easily to a small group of downtown businessmen who insist that their patrons not have to walk any more than 10 steps to their front door. I would think the city should be encouraging people to park their cars on nearby side streets and walk a block or two to their destination. Certainly this is the healther option, is it not?

Again, rather than providing more on street parking, the city needs to get rid of the oceans of long term surface parking in the core and replace it with a number of strategically located parking garages. This strategy would help to densify the core, provide sufficient short and long term parking, and would maintain efficient traffic flow. A win/win/win solution.

Additional downtown parking garages would also help to make the core more attractive to new businesses thinking of locating there. If a 10,000 seat events centre gets built downtown, sufficient parking will be necessary to service this facility,but this cannot be done at the expense of efficient traffic flow!!!. People want to be able to travel downtown easily, find a convenient parking spot and then be able to get back home again efficiently after the event. If traffic flow and parking issues are not carefully addressed at the time of construction of the events centre, then the success of this facility could seriously be imperilled!!

On street parking on Main Street just doesn't cut it. If you want to fix the problem then do it right. Leave Main Street alone, increase Assomption Blvd to a full four lanes and build some downtown parking garages. It's the only way!!

[NBNYer]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

According to the [I][COLOR="Red"]

The plan would see the creation of an additional 200 on street parking spaces near Main Street and would maintain two way traffic on Main. It sounds like many of the parking spaces would be created on side streets but that some new spaces on Main itself would also be provided.

If two way traffic on Main is to be preserved, then it would appear that the wide brick pedestrian sidewalks and downtown patios that help to define Main Street would have to be sacrificed. I can't see any other possible way that on street parking on Main could be provided.

This might be an acceptable compromise if well designed, but I still think that on street parking on Main Street would only add to the traffic congestion in the area, especially when cars try to maneuvre into the (presumed) parallel parking spots. I still believe there is no place for on street parking on Main.

I really doubt that they will sacrifice the wide sidewalks/terraces. Main has several dedicated turning lanes, maybe those will get axed to make the street 2 lanes only throughout. Not a bad compromise, but it's still gonna have at least some negative effect on traffic.

Parking garages make for a lot of close, readily available spaces downtown, with less of a negative impact on local traffic (i.e. parallel parking). Ironically, the abundance of cheap parking downtown is what is driving away private investments into parking garages. We know of at least one company that backtracked on their plans for a garage due to this (mentioned a while back in this thread). This action by city hall is not helping.

Also, Assomption should have been built as 4-lanes.

[BlackYear]

Perhaps these businesses like Reid's Newsstand and Keaton's are advocating this idiotic one way Main street as a last ditch effort to save their businesses.

Reid's:

Perhaps Reid's is coming to the realization that the paper & magazine business in the year 2012 is not what it used to be...you know, online digital content, eReaders, tablets, laptops, a dying market with a dying clientele, etc.

And, charging a supreme price for coffee isn't going to help either. Reid's coffee is now Moncton's 2nd most expensive. Starbucks being the most. Sorry Reid's, I used to be a regular coffee buyer at your store, and you have now lost me as a customer, and you can keep your day old bagels.

Besides that, who knows what's going to happen to this store with Aquilini's recent land purchase of the whole block. Reid's owner may want to be careful what he wish for.

Keaton's:
Probably another last ditch effort as well. Actually, I'm surprised this store has lasted this long. Again, their dying market and dying clientele, smoking bans all over the place, new generation of healthy living minded folks along with a dying socially accepted activity, may be too much for a smoke shop to bare. Good luck to ya.

If Reid's & Keaton's have been able to survive for all of these years, then why haven't they demanded Main street parking on day one. Why wait 20 years? Let me guess...

[mylesmalley]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

This is a cheap, untrue stereotype.

This is also the forum equivalent of talking about others behind their backs, because I doubt Ontarian attendance to the Moncton forum based on the fact that this is a skyscraper website.

You may return to your retail updates.

Get over yourself.

[mylesmalley]

If you had a parking garage at city hall, behind Assumption Place or at Rogers, and one off Gordon St by the train tracks like we've talked about before, you would have about a 3 minute walk to every office building and store downtown. Get the day-long parkers off of street-side spaces, and improve a few areas to add more spots for the people who just flat-out refuse to park in garages.

Who pays for all of this? Who knows!

The other alternative, and this is why i've been pushing hard to have the events centre put behind Assumption, is if you build a massive garage associated with that building, it'll function as parking for events and also as space for the office crowd downtown. At 5pm, the place empties out and at 8pm it fills right back up again. Instead of having a garage that sits empty 50%, you could probably have one closer to 30% vacant over a 24h period. That hugely increases your margins and makes it a lot easier to justify a bigger building.

[pierremoncton]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

While Louis Leger's agitiation for on street parking may be popular with some downtown businesses (like Keating's and their proverbial obese and short-of-breath patrons who won't walk more than half a block for their pack of smokes), it may not be popular with others. Specifically, any sort of proposal leading to one way traffic would be a nightmare for downtown hoteliers. I'm sure that the managers of the Delta Beausejour, Marriott and the Crowne Plaza appreciate the fact that there is relatively easy access to their facilities for people not generally familiar with the area.

Finally, I find it most peculiar that a city that is becoming so heavily invested in "active transportation" would cave so easily to a small group of downtown businessmen who insist that their patrons not have to walk any more than 10 steps to their front door. I would think the city should be encouraging people to park their cars on nearby side streets and walk a block or two to their destination. Certainly this is the healther option, is it not?

Nicely put. Also surprised that the city would bend over for a cigarette shop.

I think you've made some convincing arguments against making Main St a one-way street or pedestrian mall, but I think there would be no harm in giving it a shot. If it's a disaster, then just repaint a few lines and switch a few signs back. There's no real infrastructure changes, so it's all low cost. Shediac Rd and Salisbury Rd users made bike lanes sound like the apocalypse too, and we now know that those fears were unjustified (though I agree that it's much more likely that Main St as a one-way would fail).

--

Originally Posted by mylesmalley

Get over yourself.

I thought his comment was justified. No need to put down other parts of the country. He's also quite right in saying no one from Toronto is reading up on the 'skyscrapers' going up in Moncton.

--

In other news, there was an article in L'Étoile in which it was stated that it is 'very likely' that, as a result of their upcoming strategic meetings, school district 1 (French) will be requesting the construction of two new schools because enrollment keeps increasing: one in Moncton and one in Dieppe. This is in addition to the new Moncton North school that's under construction. It didn't specify what grades would be involved. If two more French schools are needed, then we'll probably be hearing from the English district as well, because anglo:franco growth is about 2:1.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by pierremoncton

I thought his comment was justified. No need to put down other parts of the country. He's also quite right in saying no one from Toronto is reading up on the 'skyscrapers' going up in Moncton.

I didn't get the impression that Myles was putting "Upper Canadians" down. I thought he was just making a joke. As usual, in a text driven forum, shades of irony and dry humour can sometimes be lost on the reader.

RyeJay on the other hand is very condescending, opinionated and destructive in his posts on the Moncton and Saint John threads. I definitely got the impression from him that he thought Ontarians wouldn't bother debasing themselves to visit our thread. That doing so would be beneath them. His comment about "returning to your retail updates" also was below the belt; as if we had nothing better to discuss on our forum.

Despite Ryejay's elitism, I consider SSP a development based forum and most topics dealing with urban issues, civic planning and business development is fair game. This includes (horrors) the possibility of new retailing establishments coming to the market.

[mylesmalley]

Testing out the one way plan isn't a bad bad idea necessarily, but there are a few things that need to be considered.

Unless another parallel street is converted to the opposite direction, we're going to have a net loss in lanes going east-west. One or two lanes isn't a huge deal, but it will force all the traffic that used to use the lost lanes onto other streets. Queen/Gordon isn't well equipped to handle it because of the stop signs every three blocks. St George is pretty busy as it is. Assomption could take the load, but beyond Albert, it has no access at all to Main.

Being the primary bus route through the city, Main would create some real scheduling headaches. I expect a lot of stops would and routes would need adjusting.

Moreover, I wonder whether it will really have a lasting impact. Putting an extra 100 spots or whatever the goal is along Main might alleviate things a bit, but it isn't going to solve anything long term. In fact, it'd probably just delay the inevitable push toward higher density parking options.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by mylesmalley

Being the primary bus route through the city, Main would create some real scheduling headaches. I expect a lot of stops would and routes would need adjusting.

Another excellent point. A one way Main Street would mean that the city's downtown bus routes would have to be completely redrawn and new bus stops created on Queen or Gordon (etc). This whole thing needs to be considered very carefully. A one way Main Street just wouldn't work....

Originally Posted by mylesmalley

Moreover, I wonder whether it will really have a lasting impact. Putting an extra 100 spots or whatever the goal is along Main might alleviate things a bit, but it isn't going to solve anything long term. In fact, it'd probably just delay the inevitable push toward higher density parking options.

Precisely. Adding a couple of hundred new on street parking spots in the core is the equivalent of fiddling while Rome burns. It just isn't a viable long term solution. What we need is the Big Fix:

- a downtown events centre
- integrated and nearby multistorey parking structures
- integrated downtown transit hub
- a downtown traffic grid that actually works

If we had this, more downtown commercial and residential development would be sure to follow.

Let's put this issue of a one way Main Street with on street parking to bed once and for all. It wouldn't work and is not a viable long term solution to the problems of the core.

[MonctonRad]

porchmouse took this photo about a week ago.



In the meantime the Quiznos at Lounsbury's Plaza has opened for business.

Also, there is another new store in the process of opening at Lounsbury's (close to the new Bank of Montreal branch). It's called Mobiliers Mondial Salotti , and appears to be a very avant garde European style furniture store. It will be interesting to see how well they do in our market....

It is a Quebec chain. They have a website www.mondialesalotti.com, which I cannot view because it requires an updated version of flash that my ancient computer will not support....

[mmmatt]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

It is a Quebec chain. They have a website www.mondialesalotti.com, which I cannot view because it requires an updated version of flash that my ancient computer will not support....

haha didn't you say you are a doctor??

Anyways, the website shows that its a very upscale furniture store...really nice stuff. That area is turning into a one stop furniture shop... Mayberries and Wicker Emporium are also in that plaza and sell more "rustic" furniture. Of course the powerhouse 2 floor Loundsburys is there as well...and Burnaby&co and Wheatons nearby...

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by mmmatt

haha didn't you say you are a doctor??

Yes, but I'm also an old fart, set in my ways and generally pretty cheap. This computer refuses to die and my general point of view is that "if it ain't broke, don't replace it".

Originally Posted by mmmatt

Anyways, the website shows that its a very upscale furniture store...really nice stuff. That area is turning into a one stop furniture shop... Mayberries and Wicker Emporium are also in that plaza and sell more "rustic" furniture. Of course the powerhouse 2 floor Loundsburys is there as well...and Burnaby&co and Wheatons nearby...

You're quite right about NW Moncton being the place to be to buy new furniture, but you forgot the Sears Home store and Aaron's on your list.

[C_Boy]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Yes, but I'm also an old fart, set in my ways and generally pretty cheap. This computer refuses to die and my general point of view is that "if it ain't broke, don't replace it".

You're quite right about NW Moncton being the place to be to buy new furniture, but you forgot the Sears Home store and Aaron's on your list.

Furniturama

[mmmatt]

Originally Posted by C_Boy

Furniturama

Thats below hwy 15 so it doesn't qualify for NW Moncton furniture district sorry...

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I didn't get the impression that Myles was putting "Upper Canadians" down. I thought he was just making a joke. As usual, in a text driven forum, shades of irony and dry humour can sometimes be lost on the reader.

RyeJay on the other hand is very condescending, opinionated and destructive in his posts on the Moncton and Saint John threads. I definitely got the impression from him that he thought Ontarians wouldn't bother debasing themselves to visit our thread. That doing so would be beneath them. His comment about "returning to your retail updates" also was below the belt; as if we had nothing better to discuss on our forum.

Despite Ryejay's elitism, I consider SSP a development based forum and most topics dealing with urban issues, civic planning and business development is fair game. This includes (horrors) the possibility of new retailing establishments coming to the market.

He made a joke about Upper Canadians, so I reminded Myles that his identity can be joked about as well. I’m doing it to his face, though.

It’s quite easy for me to compose a litany of horrible adjectives for the emotional, irrational, and stubborn people with whom I disagree. I would debate (to use a softer word than ‘argue’) that I’m perhaps a bit more to the point and less around the edges when discussing important issues currently happening to the cities I care about.

I am always quite vocal in promoting all the wonder qualities of Moncton and Saint John to visitors and to my friends who inquire. I am not anti-New Brunswick; I love this province. And this is why I’m blunt. Bluntness is a necessity when facing opposing opinions based on ego and pride through personal and regional identity that bloat the conversation so much that the core issues cannot be struck.

My sense of urgency is not from a higher than thou elitism stance, but my sense of urgency definitely is motivated by my fears of the province’s well-being. Most of my family resides here. Most of my friendships started here. This is why I'm critical.

[mylesmalley]

Make fun of the Maritimes all you like. Here's a link to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Note how there's no protection against being offended, which goes both ways.

Beyond that, I have nothing more to say on the topic.

[C_Boy]

Originally Posted by mmmatt

Thats below hwy 15 so it doesn't qualify for NW Moncton furniture district sorry...

I know... but I figured since Monctonrad threw in Aarons wich is about 400m away, I would mention it

[MonctonRad]

from CBC

Moncton Museum closes for renovations

New Moncton Museum and Transportation Centre will open in summer 2013
CBC News Posted: Feb 27, 2012 10:28 AM AT Last Updated: Feb 27, 2012 10:25 AM AT

The Moncton Museum is closing its doors on Monday for the next year while it builds a new addition to the centre.

Construction will start in March on the area of the museum that will become the new Transportation Discovery Centre.

The new centre will explore the past, present and future of Maritime rail, road, and air transportation. The renovated museum is scheduled to open in the summer of 2013.

Brenda Orr, the senior heritage officer for Moncton, said it was necessary to shut down the museum for a year so the construction could begin.

"The museum itself is on a very small site in terms of the footprint, so of course this whole property is going to become a construction zone,” she said.

But Orr said just because the museum is closed to the public, it will still be active in the community.

She said programs will be carried out at the Thomas Williams House and other off-site locations.

"We'll be around and we want to be out in the community of course generating lots of buzz and talk about the Transportation Discovery Centre leading up to its opening,” she said.

Orr said staff will still be working at the museum so people can call to find out what's going on.

The renovated site will also include a gift shop, cafe and an interior plaza, which will feature the 1911 facade of the former city hall.

The Moncton Museum holds a collection of artifacts and photographs about the region's history

[alienc]

In the TT on Saturday was an update on residential development in Riverview, I will summarize it here (since I wouldn't want to be accused of copying content from behind the paywall)!

- The necessary approvals were secured from the GMPDC for the construction of a 3-storey, 50-unit Apartment building, to be called Point Park Residence. This is to be constructed on a vacant piece of land bounded by Point Park, Hillsborough and Nowlan (this is directly across the street from the Petro Canada)

Centre of the map located here

- Approval was granted for the construction of 3 12-unit Condo buildings on a new street to be called Patmar Court. This is to be located near the Toboggan hill on the south side of Gunningsville Blvd.

[MonctonRad]

This article is from a legitimate website not currently hidden behind the Brunswick News paywall:


MHS plan means growth for Moncton

Monday, February 27, 2012
Times & Transcript
By: Brent Mazerolle

Highway, water and sewer infrastructure will need to be improved for new school location

As reported in last Thursday's Times & Transcript, the Greater Moncton Planning District Commission will recommend Moncton city council endorse a new conditional rezoning agreement for the Royal Oaks housing development when it votes on the matter March 19.

At the heart of the GMPDC's recommendation, developed by the commission's planning staff and approved by a 10-7 vote of the body's commissioners, is the idea the City of Moncton could secure cost sharing agreements with both the subdivision's developer Romspen Mortgage Investment Corporation and with the Province of New Brunswick.

As most know by now, the provincial government's involvement in what would normally be a two party negotiation is that the Department of Education and Early Childhood has bought a 35 acre parcel of land within the development to build a high school to replace the Depression era Moncton High School.

Under the Community Planning Act, the Province of New Brunswick is exempt from municipal zoning laws and a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, Christina Winsor, told the Times & Transcript February 7, 'we are absolutely committed to building the new state-of-the-art high school there.'

However, as the planning commissioners were told by their professional staff, the provincial government has said, 'it wants to be part of the process.' All three parties - city, developer and province - have confirmed they are indeed already proceeding with those negotiations.

How those costs might be divided won't be known until a cost-benefit analysis is presented to city council at the public hearing on March 19.

But what is already available are the estimates on what those costs might be and when they might be incurred. Here then is a closer look at what is being negotiated.

The information comes from reports prepared by the developer's Moncton consultant Jim Scott, but they have been reviewd by the City of Moncton's engineering staff.

'The numbers are reasonable,' says Jack MacDonald, the general manager of Moncton's Engineering and Environmental Services department.

It's important to note some work will be taking place with or without further residential development in the area.

MacDonald told council earlier this month the provincial and federal governments already have some improvements in the works for where Highway 2, the Trans-Canada Highway, meets Elmwood Drive.

As well, the city has other considerations for that intersection connected to further development of Caledonia Industrial Estates.

Of the work related to Royal Oaks, Scott emphasizes, 'if we're talking about infrastructure costs, we have to know that we're not going to do it all in one day, and the costs are not all in one day.' The goal in such plans of course is that the city see added costs offset by added revenues from the property taxes that come from development.

Scott's company Collabplan rolls out work over the next 20 years, assuming Royal Oaks reaches full buildout in the next 25 years.

First, 'the TCH where it meets Elmwood Drive is an issue now,' Scott says, estimating the cost of improvements at just shy of $2 million. That, however, is the project between the province and feds that MacDonald spoke of.

In the zero to five year window, the city must up the pressure of the water in the Royal Oaks area. A booster pump is required at an estimated cost of $1 million. As previously reported, it would be needed as soon as the long stalled Royal Oaks starts up again, especially since the City of Moncton is already committed to allowing about 650 more homes under an existing agreement.

As well, though Canadian standards say Elmwood Drive doesn't yet have the traffic to absolutely require upgrades including bike lanes and sidewalks, the fact that the next big development in the area could be a school has the developer and the province and city talking about adding those amenities sooner rather than later.

Also needed imminently, regardless of added development, is a $1.3 million fix to an existing sanitary line problem.

In the 5-10 year window, there's a downstream sewer issue that would be required under the existing agreement with Royal Oaks. A big ticket item is forecast for about eight years from now, an $11.5 million improvement of Elmwood Drive, near the main entrance to Irishtown Nature Park but it is again something required by current growth patterns in the area including the Pine Tree development and anticipation of buildout in the existing Royal Oaks.

According to Scott's calculations, no significant work would be required in the 10-15 year window, assuming other work has followed the anticipated pace of development, but in the 15-20 year mark between 2027 and 2032, there would need to be another $10 million worth of upgrades further out along Elmwood, in the Tankville area.

There are smaller projects, like, for instance, a $550,000 sanitary line upgrade on faraway Toombs Street near the old Humphrey Woolen Mill that will be needed in part because of large scale development at Royal Oaks.

All told, between 2012 and 2030, Scott's numbers add up to $34.4 million. Of that, $17.5 million are 'existing problem projects,' as his report puts it, and $16.9 million are projects required to support the new development.

All of what's been broken down here will of course only happen if Moncton council approves the rezoning agreement.

Council could reject the agreement because expanding the city's service boundary runs contrary to the goals of Moncton's municipal plan. That would prevent housing from being built, but as stated, it might not prevent the construction of the school. Also, creating a new agreement gives the city a chance to impose conditions on the developer under section 101 of the Community Planning Act. Because the developer and the province want the city to expand its service area, the city has the right to demand they help pay for work off-site, whereas developers in normal circumstances, i.e. inside established service boundaries, are required only to do work on their own sites.

It would be then be up to the provincial government to decide whether it will go ahead without the rezoning or continue with its plans. Education Minister Jody Carr and Supply and Services Minister Claude Williams have both said the repairs done to the old Moncton High School were a temporary fix and that they would have a new high school ready for students by September 2013, a timeline that's already getting tight.

As well, the land for the school has been bought and already cleared, and money has already been spent on planning the new school, and while some design work could surely be applied to a building ultimately erected elsewhere, other parts of the process are site specific.

Personal note - it may be true that the city will be able to leverage monies from the private developer and from the province to help with the infrastructure costs, but this does not negate the fact that this infrastructure investment would not otherwise have been necessary for many years, and the relocation of MHS to Royal Oaks is going to cost considerably more than if the school had instead been built someplace closer to the city (like say the vision lands). This is still a bad deal for the taxpayer and will contribute to unnecessary urban sprawl, this already in the city considered by many to be the sprawl capital of Atlantic Canada. I know that the city is powerless to do anything about this situation, but I still find the whole thing very frustrating. I guess all the city can do is make the best of a bad bargain and negotiate the pants off the province and Romspen.