The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread

[uptownres]

Yup, construction on the parking garage began yesterday at 7AM. JDI sent in building inspectors in adjacent buildings along King St E to do pre-inspections (presumably for liability reasons).

[kwajo]

Inspectors also have gone through the buildings on Sydney Street [numbers 28 to 36] in advance of a sale to [probably] Irving Oil, so expect some news eventually on those properties.

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by kwajo

Inspectors also have gone through the buildings on Sydney Street [numbers 28 to 36] in advance of a sale to [probably] Irving Oil, so expect some news eventually on those properties.

To be torn down ???

[saintjohnirish☘]

Originally Posted by kwajo

Inspectors also have gone through the buildings on Sydney Street [numbers 28 to 36] in advance of a sale to [probably] Irving Oil, so expect some news eventually on those properties.

Horrifying

[uptownres]

Originally Posted by kwajo

Inspectors also have gone through the buildings on Sydney Street [numbers 28 to 36] in advance of a sale to [probably] Irving Oil, so expect some news eventually on those properties.

Those are gorgeous buildings. I'd be horrified if the city allowed them to demolish them.

[saintjohnirish☘]

Why would Irving buy these? I didn't even think they were for sale

Can they for once, just — right off

Speaking of those arseholes, SJers really need to get behind Shirley on this one. As should all NBers


New agency should reassess all properties, Saint John deputy mayor says


Saint John's deputy mayor is welcoming news an independent organization will take over property tax assessments in New Brunswick.

Shirley McAlary has been one of the leaders in the city's push for reform of the property tax system.

The announcement Monday by Premier Brian Gallant followed revelations reported by CBC News that Service New Brunswick invented renovation amounts for 2,048 homeowners with large assessment increases this spring, allowing it to evade a legal 10 per cent cap on increases on the homes' property tax bills.

"We feel and have felt that there's a number of industries that perhaps are not assessed correctly," said McAlary, who would like to see the proposed new authority begin its job with a clean slate.

"Would this agency consider reviewing all properties in the province?"

The city's municipal government has been at the forefront of the push to reform the province's tax assessment system, going so far in January as to hire academics Enid Slack and Harry Kitchen to study whether the tax burden "is fair and equitable" when it comes to the division between commercial, industrial, residential and institutional properties.

The two Ontario-based experts will be paid $25,000 to do the study and make recommendations.

Their report is expected in December.

In May 2016, council voted unanimously to ask the provincial government to repeal a special property tax deal for the Canaport LNG terminal.

McAlary was the author of the motion, which passed unanimously.

While the Gallant government agreed to the request, it then slashed the appraised value of the property by $202 million, a reduction that saves Irving Oil about $5.5 million in property taxes it would have owed the city under the earlier valuation of $299 million, which would have generated a tax bill of $8 million.

The Irving Oil refinery is assessed at $98 million.

A six-week "maintenance and infrastructure" turnaround at the refinery in the fall of 2016 was valued by the company at $135 million.

Irving Oil's busy oil-by-rail terminal on nearby Bayside Drive is assessed at $1.28 million, while the Tim Hortons across the street gets a higher tax bill, with an assessment of $1.4 million.

As investigation by CBC reporter Robert Jones found Saint John homeowners now pay about 61 per cent of city taxes, up from 55 per cent in 2000.

Another city councillor, John MacKenzie, said the new assessment agency must be truly independent of the provincial government.

If you're going to change the way of doing it, it can't be an illusion," MacKenzie said. "It can't be just making it look like you're making change. It's got have a different structure altogether, I think."

Mayor Don Darling could not be reached Tuesday for comment.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by uptownres

Those are gorgeous buildings. I'd be horrified if the city allowed them to demolish them.

Seems unlikely to me.

[kwajo]

It's pretty clear from statements they have made in the media [see quote below] that IOL is going to build a parking garage in the block between Leinster and King Street East. They already bought most of it last last year, as shown in red in this image, so maybe they just want the other properties in order to use some of the back end of the lots? Either that or they plan on keeping the facades and building parking behind them.

“Some them are coming more into a solution than others, including the potential for a parking structure close to the building so that employees have the opportunity to park close to home,"

http://huddle.today/a-look-inside-the-construction-of-the-new-irving-oil-hq/

[UptownJeff]

People need to calm down and stop jumping to conclusions. That whole block along Sydney is protected and I've neither heard nor seen anything to indicate that anything is being torn down. As far as a parking structure in the surface lot behind the fire station......good for them! I don't see any other people lined up to develop anything in that area and if they want to spend their money I say bring it on.

[Helladog]

Considering how close that is to JDIs proposed parking structure, it's a shame they couldn't join forces and make just one big garage instead of two.

[cdnguys]

IOL has always welcomed parking in their lot during non business hours. Would be a boon to the uptown if the general public could use their new parking garage too - such an easy walk to Imperial, city market and restaurants. Maybe they'll even go farther and allow it as a designated snow ban garage. I'm more excited about the surface lots these 2 garages free up and hopefully they'll be divested to developers

[kwajo]

Originally Posted by UptownJeff

People need to calm down and stop jumping to conclusions. That whole block along Sydney is protected and I've neither heard nor seen anything to indicate that anything is being torn down. As far as a parking structure in the surface lot behind the fire station......good for them! I don't see any other people lined up to develop anything in that area and if they want to spend their money I say bring it on.

Just to be clear, I never jumped to the conclusion that they would be torn down, but it is a [possible] negative IMO to have too many properties owned by a single entity in any neighbourhood of any city, especially one with generational poverty issues where diversified home ownership goes a long way to improving a community's resiliency and capacity for growth.

As for the parking garage, my concerns are the same as those I have about the JDI garage nearby. While parking structures are great in the sense that they should theoretically free up empty lots for development, that also highlights two other problems: 1) neither JDI or Irving Oil have never shown willingness to divest properties of any kind, limiting any potential in-fill to the city owned parking lots or the odd private lot in the area, 2) parking structures in an urban area should never be single-use structures, which the JDI one will be and the IOL one will potentially be. That block of King Street East is a critical piece for bridging the gap between the rest of the street and the Uptown and should have a strong development of mixed commercial, residential and retail uses along both King Street East and Leinster. We're talking about a block that borders on two of the nicest urban parks in Atlantic Canada (King's Square and the Loyalist Burial Ground) and contains some of our finest historical buildings (the courthouse and fire hall) and it should be leveraged as prime real estate to grow on Saint John's already phenomenal core, not simply provide parking.

Obviously we have yet to see or hear anything about plans for the block - which is also a concern IMO, as community consultation seems to be off the radar - so maybe it will be a large, mixed-use development with good urban form that respects the streetscape while still solving Irving's parking "problems". I reserve judgment until we are presented something concrete, I am merely stating my desire to see an already good development become a great one.

[saintjohnirish☘]

Jellybeans are gone, with no notice. Last I heard this week a developer was ready to save them.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by saintjohnirish☘

Jellybeans are gone, with no notice. Last I heard this week a developer was ready to save them.

Like how developers were willing to save them for the past X number of years?

I don't see the big issue with Jellybeans are why people fawned over them as much as they did outside of them generally being historic and having a recognizable name. SJ has such a large crop of historic properties throughout the peninsula i'm not entirely heartbroken losing these.

[saintjohnirish☘]

Fair enough, but with so much vacant space on the south-central, the new development would be better suited to already empty space rather than tearing these down.

[WharfRat]

Originally Posted by saintjohnirish☘

Jellybeans are gone, with no notice. Last I heard this week a developer was ready to save them.

That is a real shame…. these buildings survived the Great Fire and predated confederation, seems worthy of a little attention IMO.

The National Trust of Canada will need an update I guess.

http://www.nationaltrustcanada.ca/issues...ick/wellington-row-%E2%80%9Cjellybean-ho

[Helladog]

While it's a shame to lose buildings such as these with some historical significance, no developer put forward a serious plan to save them, and the city did give notice that they were going to be removed. It was only after this period that somebody decided to say they may be interested in doing something with them, which is too late.

The city picked up these properties years ago when Peel Plaza was supposed to be a bigger development. Does anyone know what condition they were in at that point? Were they in much better shape back then? If so, then it's the city's fault, if not, it was the previous owner's.

[Scarface]

Originally Posted by Helladog

While it's a shame to lose buildings such as these with some historical significance, no developer put forward a serious plan to save them, and the city did give notice that they were going to be removed. It was only after this period that somebody decided to say they may be interested in doing something with them, which is too late.

The city picked up these properties years ago when Peel Plaza was supposed to be a bigger development. Does anyone know what condition they were in at that point? Were they in much better shape back then? If so, then it's the city's fault, if not, it was the previous owner's.

I don't remember them being in good shape they just got worst without any upkeep being done. From what I remember of the Jelly bean houses.

[Whaler]

These so called Jelly Bean Houses ( stolen from St.John's NL) were ready to fall down. They were slums when the last people lived there. Fire traps and didn't meet the building code. So any improvements would cost well over what a new building would cost.
This was the right decision no question at all. There is a new building planned for this site and it will be welcomed.

[kwajo]

Originally Posted by Whaler

These so called Jelly Bean Houses ( stolen from St.John's NL) were ready to fall down. They were slums when the last people lived there. Fire traps and didn't meet the building code. So any improvements would cost well over what a new building would cost.
This was the right decision no question at all. There is a new building planned for this site and it will be welcomed.

You have a fairly loose definition of a 'slum' if you consider those buildings to be worthy of the term. I know people who lived there in the past 5-10 years who were perfectly happy; sure they needed improvements but so do virtually all heritage buildings.

Personally, the biggest issue I have with the demolition of these buildings has more to do with process and transparency than the loss of the buildings themselves. Whether or not it was the right decision to tear them down, without a clearly articulated plan for the lot's redevelopment, it is foolish for anyone to expect the community's support.