[Moncton] Downtown Developments

[Monctoncore]

The fact that the Moncton high school is in the hands of the government, is scary, they have to many rules and restrictions.

I've been downtown during Rushhour and the on street parking doesn't affect it one bit, most people that are using the parking are already comfy in there seats at te restaurants, by the time everyone is on the road.

[CdnEh]

Originally Posted by Monctoncore

The fact that the Moncton high school is in the hands of the government, is scary, they have to many rules and restrictions.

As opposed to every other public school in the country? Are you proposing MHS become a private school?

[CdnEh]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

From CBC

New Proposals Sought for Moncton High School

The New Brunswick government is again seeking proposals from developers who want to purchase and find a new use for the 77-year-old Moncton High School.

The provincial government issued a request for proposals in April for developers to come up with a new plan for the building. But Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Claude Williams said on Thursday only one developer sent in a proposal to the provincial government.

Williams told the legislature the bid from Toronto-based OMH Holdings Inc. did not meet the provincial government’s criteria, so they are re-opening the proposal process.

The infrastructure minister did not say what was wrong with the one bid or even what the proposal was for the school. A departmental spokesperson said those plans are confidential.

Coun. Paulette Thériault, a member of the city's heritage committee, said she believes this is a temporary delay and she is confident the provincial government will find a new use for the building.

“I still continue to believe in it, I still believe that we can do this,” she said.

Liberal MLA Chris Collins, who represents the riding where the school is located, said he is worried the second request for proposals is a delaying tactic that may result in the school being demolished instead of renovated.

“The future of that beautiful building in my riding is at stake at this point,” he said.

The provincial government now expects to have a decision on the building’s future in 2013. It will be late 2014 before any developer will be able to take over the building, according to Williams.

The Gothic-style stone building, including the 1,200-seat theatre, must be preserved, according to the department.

The Department of Education announced in 2010 that a new school would be built after a series of safety problems forced students out of the school two years ago.

The provincial government has invested $2 million in repairs to make Moncton High safe as the new school is being constructed.

The new school is being built on the outskirts of the city near the Royal Oaks golf course, which has caused a significant controversy in the city.

Predictable setback

Nicolas Lambert is part of a group trying to save the school since it's the only high school in the downtown. He said he thinks there is no interest from the private sector because it's impossible to convert an old school into a profitable business venture.

“It's not a money-making opportunity and they're trying to turn this into a money making opportunity and it's not working,” he said.

He said he thinks it is impossible for the private sector to repurpose the building without a huge amount of tax dollars.

Lambert said the provincial government should have predicted this latest setback.

“I think they'll find another excuse to put this off but I think they have to stop and realize that what's best for the city is best for the taxpayers and putting students to the periphery of the city to a remote location is not good for anyone,” he said.

Personal note:

Why am I not surprised.

MHS is an architecturally distinctive building and this is why it must be preserved, but this is also what will make it a hard sell for any developer to repurpose. The need to preserve the architectural integrity of the building, as well as the requirement to maintain the auditorium will be major stumbling blocks to any developer.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that the auditorium should be saved, and the facade of the building should largely be preserved. I imagine that aside from the auditorium, the future of the building will be in upper floor condo conversions and some form of ground floor community space (art galleries, meeting spaces etc). I doubt that there is much of a commercial future for the building. This is reality. Let's all hope for the best for this fine building and for the eventual return of a downtown high school someplace else in the core......

They're going to run into the same problems they did when they closed St. Vincent's High School in Saint John in 2002.

Nobody wants to buy old, rundown, unsafe buildings with such heavy restrictions.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by CdnEh

As opposed to every other public school in the country? Are you proposing MHS become a private school?

In other provinces, municipal urban planning efforts are not so blantantly compromised. A downtown high school is a key component to a successful downtown.

It is highly unusual for a province to insist upon a school's relocation to the city's edge -- knowing it will further de-centralise the downtown -- knowing the price of gas shall continue trending upward -- knowing that the municipality cannot afford to maintain the additional infrastructure, regardless of transfers from other levels of government -- knowing that extracurricular activities will be negatively impacted, especially for poorer students -- knowing that most residents in the city oppose the relocation in the first place.

Of course public schools are a good thing; however, the issue is to ensure the location of the schools are also in the interest of the public. Moncton's municipal council should have continued fighting for the downtown's health, where the city has the greatest opportunity to grow its tax base.

[jeddy1989]

So they are just going to relocate the school? not replace it on the site?

recently in St. John's they made a plan to relocate and close and renovate many schools in the metro area .. and like in the downtown area they were just going to replace the school on site. are there any post secondary in Monctons DT? or preschool etc?

In our downtown area there is the largest high school I believe in the province and next to it a junior high (holy heart and brother rice) then across the road from that is the private catholic school attached to the /basilica

also many college sites are downtown and bishop field elementary

although many many schools have moved out of downtown to be closer to where many kids live (suburbs)

turning it private would be hard


edit: I looked it up What a beautiful school!!! I hope they do not demolish it or anything

I hope something changes in this, it would be bizarre to not have a highschool in the city core

[MonctonRad]

The relocation of MHS was a political decision by the province, and as usual, political decisions are the worst (I work in health care, and if you ever want to see cockeyed political decisions about health care priorities, come to NB).

The first choice of the provincial government was to do nothing, but MHS had fallen into such a state of disrepair that the government couldn't ignore the situation any more. In fact, they were forced into closing the school on an emergency basis and relocating the students. There was a new school just opening in the city (Northrup Frye School), so this made it easy for the government to relocate the students.

This bought them a year. They spent a couple of million dollars on emergency repairs and commissioned a study on what they should do. They did look at rebuilding on the same site, but that was a logistical problem in terms of what to do with the students during the construction period. With some imagination however, this could have been accomplished.

The consultations suggested that it might cost as much as $45M to rebuild MHS while maintaining it's architectural integrity. The province thought this too much money and began to look at alternatives.

Meanwhile, the developer of Royal Oaks (Romspen Corporation from Toronto), had been having problems with marketing their subdivision on the northern outskirts of the city. They decided that if a high school was built out there that it would increase the appeal of the neighbourhood. Thusly, they offered enough land to the government for the new school at no charge, and at the same time sweetened the deal by offering to redevelop the old school building downtown.

The government thought the problem had been solved. The free land would bring down the cost of the project and building new is always cheaper than renovating an older structure with ancient wiring etc. The preservationists woild be appeased and the high school would be built at half the price. A win-win situation. In addition, The minister in charge of the file (Claude Williams, the Supply & Services Minister) is from the adjecent riding of Kent South, and many of the anglophone students in his riding are bussed to MHS. A relocated MHS on the northern outskirts of the city would be very popular with his constituents.

Unfortunately, the house of cards began to fall apart. The government misjudged the backlash from parents in the city centre. The new school would be inconvenient for the majority of students attending. The location of the new school was beyond the serviceable boundary of the city, and services would have to be extended to the development. Finally, government rules prevented the linkage of the school construction project and the repurposing of the old MHS building (something about conflict of interest). As such, Romspens offer to repurpose the old building if given the contract to build the new school was rendered invalid.

The province thus was back at square one. MHS was to be relocated to the far edge of the city and there were no guarantees that the old school downtown wouldn't escape the wreckers ball. Even worse, factoring in the costs of road improvements and extension of services to the new school location, the overall cost of the project approached $45M, coincidentally the same amount it would have cost to refurbish Moncton High School in it's original location.

Governments being what they are though, they are incredibly resistant to admitting they had made a mistake. Rather than doing the right thing and going back to square one, they plowed ahead with the Royal Oaks location, ignoring that fact that the citizenry and civic administration thought the idea daft.

And so here we are:

There will still be one quasi downtown high school in Moncton. Harrison Trimble High sits on the northern fringes of the downtown. I suspect that when new school boundaries are drawn up after the relocated MHS opens, that most of the downtown students will end up going to Trimble. MHS will end up serving anglophone students from the east end of the city, Dieppe and rural portions of Westmorland and Kent counties.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by jeddy1989

So they are just going to relocate the school? not replace it on the site?

recently in St. John's they made a plan to relocate and close and renovate many schools in the metro area .. and like in the downtown area they were just going to replace the school on site. are there any post secondary in Monctons DT? or preschool etc?

In our downtown area there is the largest high school I believe in the province and next to it a junior high (holy heart and brother rice) then across the road from that is the private catholic school attached to the /basilica

also many college sites are downtown and bishop field elementary

although many many schools have moved out of downtown to be closer to where many kids live (suburbs)

turning it private would be hard


edit: I looked it up What a beautiful school!!! I hope they do not demolish it or anything

I hope something changes in this, it would be bizarre to not have a highschool in the city core

I am always pleased to read about the progressiveness of downtown St. John's. Having numerous schools (grade school and college) is a key component for future downtown growth

Moncton is doing the opposite, unfortunately.

The City's educational investment options: $48 million -- versus -- $80 million.

Allow me to explain, if you are willing to read about this lengthy event ...

The O’Shaughnessy Report (a study pertaining to school options, with a pro-downtown conclusion) was not followed by the government. Transport Minister Claude Williams (in 2011), said, in his opinion, a redevelopment of the downtown school cannot happen because it would cost "$10 million to just tear down the existing structure." This estimate is very incorrect. The only source quoting this figure was an engineering report on the preservation and upgrade of both the school's tower and the auditorium, which would have cost that amount. According the O’Shaughnessy Report, demolition costs would have been approximately $10 per square foot, or in total: $1.8 million. Add to this the $29 to $36 million, depending on the available budget, and you would have the cheapest possible option. The complete overhaul of the existing downtown MHS would cost $48 million.

Alright: compare that $48 million to what now must be spent. $2 million has already been spent to keep students in MHS for another two years. That capital is waste. We're known about the need for a new school for at least a decade. The budget for the basic construction of the school at Royal Oaks is $48 million, a vast ratio of which is allocated for site preparation and parking amenities required for the greater amount of vehicles needed to transport virtually all students and staff. I must note that such expenditures do not at all include site road and sewage work needed to connect the new school to the municipal sewage system, which is costing $30 million. Add to that the purchase of land at $1.5 million. Those costs do not include short-term road maintenance and additional transportation costs. We are, as of now, well above the $48 million declared by Minister Williams to the legislative assembly in July of 2011. Fully tabulated, a safe estimate of costs for the new out-of-city school will be around $80 million; however, this isn't considering long-term costs. Once this school is built, we're stuck with maintaining all of its associated infrastructure and transportation costs for many decades to come...

(I do believe the general trend for gas prices and road material prices and labour costs is upward.)

Moncton is receiving some help from the province to pay for Royal Oaks High (money, which comes from Ottawa via equalisation transfers); however, this means this provincial money isn't being used toward smart investment (i.e.: downtown events centre), nor is the money being used to shore up damaged economies in other parts of the province -- such as the north, and the City of Saint John.

Futhermore, the removal of Moncton's only downtown high school means attracting future residential and commercial developments will be an even steeper uphill battle. This is a tragedy considering the downtown is already stagnant, and hasn't been developing anything beyond basic suburban apartment buildings. Over 95% of the City's development has been outside of the core. The school's relocation is absolutely the worst kind of sprawl, and it's shameful that municipal politicians are not standing up for the City's economic future. I feel horrible for the children that must attend Royal Oaks High.

Now, how does the province justify this pricetag? According to its calculations, the construction of the school at Royal Oaks will bring the City of Moncton $1 million a year in additional revenue, which is quite a comical rationale. If -- and this is a BIG if -- 200 new homeowners purchase a home at Royal Oaks for about $300,000 each, then, well yes: the City will generate about $1 million a year. What is more likely is that most development will not go to Royal Oaks but elsewhere (the average home in Moncton costs about half of what Royal Oaks is asking), just next door beyond the city boundary where property taxes are much lower. I am being generous in assuming there is any demand in this area at all. I won’t even mention the declining value of downtown homes in proximity to the existing Moncton High. In other words, moving the school will not only cost a lot more, it will likely cause the City to lose revenue, real and potential.

Irving, by whom much of New Brunswick is monopolised, is quite thrilled about the MHS relocation. They not only get to sell more gasoline, but their construction companies have new roads and highways to maintain. This double bonus for their profits is behind why Irving-owned medias have been singing praises about the school's move. Since Irving-owned medias typically portray Moncton in a very positive light, flattering reports that outsiders see as obviously exaggerated, I find many Monctonians are often 'swooned away' from the realities of debt in favour of focusing on delights such as statistics about single-family housing construction -- statistics that would be considered good news if this were the 1960's.

I expect the troubles we're seeing in the north and in Saint John to eventually be felt in Moncton, especially if Ottawa stops increasing the amount of thrown money at New Brunswick, which enables the province to waste whatever it wants with no regard for sustainable investments. Fortunately, however, there are a good number of people in the City of Moncton who are demanding density and are voting in both municipal and provincial elections for candidates who want to bring employment and public services (such as schools) to the core.

[jeddy1989]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

I am always pleased to read about the progressiveness of downtown St. John's. Having numerous schools (grade school and college) is a key component for future downtown growth

Moncton is doing the opposite, unfortunately.

The City's educational investment options: $48 million -- versus -- $80 million.

Allow me to explain, if you are willing to read about this lengthy event ...

The O’Shaughnessy Report (a study pertaining to school options, with a pro-downtown conclusion) was not followed by the government. Transport Minister Claude Williams (in 2011), said, in his opinion, a redevelopment of the downtown school cannot happen because it would cost "$10 million to just tear down the existing structure." This estimate is very incorrect. The only source quoting this figure was an engineering report on the preservation and upgrade of both the school's tower and the auditorium, which would have cost that amount. According the O’Shaughnessy Report, demolition costs would have been approximately $10 per square foot, or in total: $1.8 million. Add to this the $29 to $36 million, depending on the available budget, and you would have the cheapest possible option. The complete overhaul of the existing downtown MHS would cost $48 million.

Alright: compare that $48 million to what now must be spent. $2 million has already been spent to keep students in MHS for another two years. That capital is waste. We're known about the need for a new school for at least a decade. The budget for the basic construction of the school at Royal Oaks is $48 million, a vast ratio of which is allocated for site preparation and parking amenities required for the greater amount of vehicles needed to transport virtually all students and staff. I must note that such expenditures do not at all include site road and sewage work needed to connect the new school to the municipal sewage system, which is costing $30 million. Add to that the purchase of land at $1.5 million. Those costs do not include short-term road maintenance and additional transportation costs. We are, as of now, well above the $48 million declared by Minister Williams to the legislative assembly in July of 2011. Fully tabulated, a safe estimate of costs for the new out-of-city school will be around $80 million; however, this isn't considering long-term costs. Once this school is built, we're stuck with maintaining all of its associated infrastructure and transportation costs for many decades to come...

(I do believe the general trend for gas prices and road material prices and labour costs is upward.)

Moncton is receiving some help from the province to pay for Royal Oaks High (money, which comes from Ottawa via equalisation transfers); however, this means this provincial money isn't being used toward smart investment (i.e.: downtown events centre), nor is the money being used to shore up damaged economies in other parts of the province -- such as the north, and the City of Saint John.

Futhermore, the removal of Moncton's only downtown high school means attracting future residential and commercial developments will be an even steeper uphill battle. This is a tragedy considering the downtown is already stagnant, and hasn't been developing anything beyond basic suburban apartment buildings. Over 95% of the City's development has been outside of the core. The school's relocation is absolutely the worst kind of sprawl, and it's shameful that municipal politicians are not standing up for the City's economic future. I feel horrible for the children that must attend Royal Oaks High.

Now, how does the province justify this pricetag? According to its calculations, the construction of the school at Royal Oaks will bring the City of Moncton $1 million a year in additional revenue, which is quite a comical rationale. If -- and this is a BIG if -- 200 new homeowners purchase a home at Royal Oaks for about $300,000 each, then, well yes: the City will generate about $1 million a year. What is more likely is that most development will not go to Royal Oaks but elsewhere (the average home in Moncton costs about half of what Royal Oaks is asking), just next door beyond the city boundary where property taxes are much lower. I am being generous in assuming there is any demand in this area at all. I won’t even mention the declining value of downtown homes in proximity to the existing Moncton High. In other words, moving the school will not only cost a lot more, it will likely cause the City to lose revenue, real and potential.

Irving, by whom much of New Brunswick is monopolised, is quite thrilled about the MHS relocation. They not only get to sell more gasoline, but their construction companies have new roads and highways to maintain. This double bonus for their profits is behind why Irving-owned medias have been singing praises about the school's move. Since Irving-owned medias typically portray Moncton in a very positive light, flattering reports that outsiders see as obviously exaggerated, I find many Monctonians are often 'swooned away' from the realities of debt in favour of focusing on delights such as statistics about single-family housing construction -- statistics that would be considered good news if this were the 1960's.

I expect the troubles we're seeing in the north and in Saint John to eventually be felt in Moncton, especially if Ottawa stops increasing the amount of thrown money at New Brunswick, which enables the province to waste whatever it wants with no regard for sustainable investments. Fortunately, however, there are a good number of people in the City of Moncton who are demanding density and are voting in both municipal and provincial elections for candidates who want to bring employment and public services (such as schools) to the core.

all i can say is ... shitty deals ...

I hope Moncton straightens this out, it's quite unfortunate .. and my sweet god how can they tear down a building like that ... if they even thought of proposing to tear such a building down in St. John's I think the citizens would be in an uproar! and community groups even getting politicians involved .. just look at what happened last month when the plan for a fence on part of St. John's harbour was announced .. they even got the federal politicians involved hahaha

can'y they sell the building .. ? .. turn it into condos or something? if they are not going to put students into it .. also it surprised me that there is real estate in a downtown that is decreasing in value :O
you guys want a loan of some of our NIMBYs for a bit? hahahha they might do some good on this situation

well I hope a more favorable solution is reached

[SignalHillHiker]

Wow, you weren't kidding. Moncton High School is gorgeous. I remember thinking so when I was there - but I'd forgotten how nice it is. It's even nicer than Bishop Feild Elementary in St. John's.

I, too, hope Moncton keeps its high school downtown. It's one of the city's few urban areas and having the high school there will, I think, make the kids into adults who are cooler and more cosmopolitan that they would be attending a cookie-cutter suburban school in the Irvingsland countryside.

[CdnEh]

Originally Posted by jeddy1989

all i can say is ... shitty deals ...

I hope Moncton straightens this out, it's quite unfortunate .. and my sweet god how can they tear down a building like that ... if they even thought of proposing to tear such a building down in St. John's I think the citizens would be in an uproar! and community groups even getting politicians involved .. just look at what happened last month when the plan for a fence on part of St. John's harbour was announced .. they even got the federal politicians involved hahaha

There really isn't much architectural history to preserve in the Moncton, unlike St. John's, Halifax or Saint John. Most of the downtown is 70s/80s, and outside that is very very retail oriented.

For this reason, there is no real protection groups or local bylaws protecting historic sites, so the few rare historical properties in Moncton really aren't paid the respect they deserve.

[mylesmalley]

Worth noting that Moncton's population in 1961 was roughly the same as the population of Saint John...in 1901, around 43,000. It's really only been since 1990 that the city has started growing at a serious rate. Considering the building practices and popular trends toward suburbia have been dominant basically the entire time that Moncton has seen growth, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the city has a relatively tiny downtown and a built form that is entirely car dependent.

It's the same reason why we don't have nearly as many historical properties as Saint John, Fredericton, Halifax or St John's. It's not so much that they were all torn down (although like all cities we have lost a lot), but that they were never built in the first place.

[MonctonRad]

Indeed, I remember reading somewhere that the population of Moncton in the 1890s was 9,000.

This is exactly why the downtown core of Moncton is so tiny. It was really a glorified town even well into the 20th century (the 1920's at least). This is the reason why the character of Moncton is so different than the other major Atlantic cities. Moncton is actually more akin to some of the more rapidly growing cities in the west than it is to it's Atlantic brethren.

Ironically, it is precisely because the built heritage of the city is so skimpy that it is so important to preserve what we have. There is a relatively small stock of buildings worthy of preservation. They should be identified and preserved for posterity.

[SignalHillHiker]

And it also gives you a great opportunity to grow in a modern and beautiful way. Looking at those aerials of Moncton, it's really only Main Street and a few buildings that you have to preserve. The rest could almost all be filled in, build up, etc.

[MonctonRad]

Precisely!

This is why I am so optimistic about the future of downtown south of Main St. There is nothing there for the heritage types to get upset about. This gives the city a tremendous opprtunity to be really creative with whatever eventually gets built there.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by jeddy1989

all i can say is ... shitty deals ...

I hope Moncton straightens this out, it's quite unfortunate .. and my sweet god how can they tear down a building like that ... if they even thought of proposing to tear such a building down in St. John's I think the citizens would be in an uproar! and community groups even getting politicians involved .. just look at what happened last month when the plan for a fence on part of St. John's harbour was announced .. they even got the federal politicians involved hahaha

can'y they sell the building .. ? .. turn it into condos or something? if they are not going to put students into it .. also it surprised me that there is real estate in a downtown that is decreasing in value :O
you guys want a loan of some of our NIMBYs for a bit? hahahha they might do some good on this situation

well I hope a more favorable solution is reached

The province is refusing to talk to Monctonians. Since education falls under provincial powers, they haven't a need to justify their decision.

There are groups in Moncton who are quite upset about the school relocation; however, city council hasn't supported these upset citizens much. One councillor even told people to "stop whining."

The Times&Transcript (Irving) newspaper, in the mean time, has been publishing pro-relocation narratives, claiming this is an incredible opportunity for the City's growth -- and that anti-relocation views are harmful to the students and harmful to the economy.

Downtown real estate is decreasing in value because the downtown is in-progress of being de-centralised. Office jobs are moving to business parks. Businesses, restaurants, and other commercial establishments are doing the same. And now, the downtown's only high school is leaving.

Quite simply: value cannot be maintained when the area is bleeding its assets.

Some people claim that downtown Moncton has so much potential......but this would be like claiming a bed-ridden, morbidly obese man who is constantly pile driving food into his mouth, apparently, has so much potential to lose weight.

Potential arrives when a changes in behaviour, or in the context of Moncton's sprawl...LAWS, occur.

I desperately want to be proven wrong about this city. I want Moncton to rise to the occasion and transform itself into an urban powerhouse for the future, instead of developing itself for the past.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Indeed, I remember reading somewhere that the population of Moncton in the 1890s was 9,000.

This is exactly why the downtown core of Moncton is so tiny. It was really a glorified town even well into the 20th century (the 1920's at least). This is the reason why the character of Moncton is so different than the other major Atlantic cities. Moncton is actually more akin to some of the more rapidly growing cities in the west than it is to it's Atlantic brethren.

Ironically, it is precisely because the built heritage of the city is so skimpy that it is so important to preserve what we have. There is a relatively small stock of buildings worthy of preservation. They should be identified and preserved for posterity.

I must respectfully disagree. Moncton exists in the same time as every other currently existing city. The municipal/provincial urban planners have access to the same studies, the same budgets, and the same long-term data. The City is choosing to ignore the lessons of the past, in terms of total car-oriented planning.

Age has little to do with current behaviour. Moncton, and more broadly all of New Brunswick, has political problems. Sprawling uncontrollably is not a prerequisite to eventually bringing density to the core.

Western Canadian cities can afford their outward growth without equalisation transfers. And even with this comparison: Western Canadian cities are still bringing considerable density to their downtowns. Vancouver is an obvious example of this.

[RyeJay]

The last I read about this proposal, it was being reduced in size; although, this was quite some time ago. Has there been any chatter about the likelihood for anything going forward for approval?

[pierremoncton]

Re: The Harper Building

This article (http://22864.vws.magma.ca/index.php?&article_id=7399) from August 2011 has two interesting quotes:

"I'm still in the negotiating process with the city," [Robichaud] said. "All I can say is that it will be up by [2012]."

"We don't want to see another delay," Mayor George LeBlanc said.

I think the extension they gave the developer was for one year, so it's theoretically been dead for a few months. The city should tell him to pack up.

[MonctonRad]

The Harper Building has also been downsized a couple of times since it was originally proposed. Now it will be about the same size as Valmond's other building on Dominion St.

Perhaps the city should wait on this parcel of land rather than just going for any building proposal at all.......

[cormiermax]

The Harper building looks horrible anyway, like a very cheap suburban styled condo block.