[Moncton] Downtown Developments

[jonny golden]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I would carry on with Tannery Place North as is, as to not upset the symmetry of massing with Tannery Place South. I would wonder however, given the current commercial real estate climate, if it would not be prudent (in the future) to consider proceeding with a third apartment building next to the Goodlife gym rather than the planned office building.

If this were to happen, there is no reason why the third building couldn't be taller, say 10-12 storeys, and perhaps of a different architectural style. This potential third building would after all lie on the other side of Ivan Rand Drive and thus would be somewhat physically removed from the other two buildings. This would not upset the overall styling of this neighbourhood.

As for the fourth building which will face Main Street; this is still several years off in the future. Present plans are for a hotel. Maybe at that point, such plans would make sense again.

I agree with the points MonctonRad makes. I'm pretty sure they'll make Tannery Place North 6 floors to match the existing building, maintaining symmetry. However, changing the overall plans to build a third apartment building instead of an office building would seem to make good business sense in light of the market. If that's the direction they decide to go, then a taller building across Ivan Rand would be fine. I wonder if they'd consider including some condos for sale on the upper floors? 55 Queen & Bella Casa used this model.

[Feneant]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-subway-block-building-future-1.5917145

You have anything to do with that MonctonRad?

It's a long winded article about the Subway block with the conclusion being 'We have no plan in mind, keep staring at this eyesore'. And yes, I know they say after the pandemic things will hopeully move but considering how insanely hot the real estate market has been, it's clearly an excuse. I went to my office for the first time in a year yesterday and I didn't recognize the place with all the new construction taking place between Vaughan Harvey and Highfield so you can't tell me the 'economic situation' is impacting only this 1 single building in town.

[MonctonRad]

Perhaps, indirectly, yes.

Main stream media often pays attention to social media for ideas. I can't tell you the number of times a topic comes up for discussion here on SSP (or other local social media), only to see it become a story in the T&T or on CBC within a few days. It's a well established pattern.

[MonctonRad]

That's a well written and thorough article on CBC regarding the Subway Block (and the Flat Iron Building). It details the problem with developing the site.

The crucial one is that there is now an ordinance against building residential properties within 30M of a railway track - 30 metres!!!. That's a pretty wide swath of undevelopable land extending through the downtown core of the city!

The owner (Seville Properties) originally had grand plans for this entire city block - an eight storey mixed use building.

Steeves said his company's previous plans for the Subway Block called for keeping the facade, but replacing much of the structure with new concrete and steel construction.

A restaurant would occupy the main floor, and affordable residential units would make up the seven floors above.

With the new city development rules adopted after the Lac Magantic disaster, this essentially makes it impossible to do anything with this entire block (given it's triangular shape and the close proximity of the rail line along the rear of the property). The city has shot itself in the foot, and the owner is left with a worthless property (that he is still paying property tax on).

The city is partially responsible for the current sad state of the Subway Block. It is inherent upon the city the sit down with the property owner and come up with a plan for this property so that a coherent redevelopment plan can be established.

This property is far too prominent in the downtown core to allow to continue lying fallow. At least the Higgins Block had viable commercial activity on the ground floor, even with the boarded up windows upstairs. The Subway Block is completely derelict and an absolute black hole in the city's core. Something must be done.

[mylesmalley]

30m seems like a lot, but in reality, the land affected isn't quite as huge as it would seem based on a quick Google maps search. Most of the property in that strip through the core is taken up by commercial uses and by the railroad ROW.

The ALC building is 30 meters from the outside edge of the track. The closest any part of Transcript building gets is 20 meters. Avenir Centre, 40m.

[MonctonRad]

Agreed, but nearly the entire triangular block that the Flat Iron Building and the Subway Block lie on falls within 30M of the CNR right of way.



The blue line on the above image would be the 30M mark. The only part of the block lying outside the 30M mark is a small portion of the Tandem Law Building.

What Seville Properties wanted to do is to build an eight storey building with the upper seven levels being affordable residential. Obviously with the new city ordinance, this is impossible. Commercial use could still be permitted (I think), but with the current commercial real estate market, the chances of any development dumping a large quantity of new commercial square footage on the market succeeding would be highly questionable, especially since the heritage designation means that the construction costs would be much higher than in new construction.

Seville Properties hands are basically tied. Residential construction is currently prohibited. Commercial construction would likely not be viable. Seville is thus stuck with a stranded asset that it must continue paying property tax on. And the city is stuck with a rapidly deteriorating highly visible property in the heart of the downtown core which will increasingly become an embarrassment to the entire populace.

Creative solutions are necessary to rectify the situation.

[David_99]

There's a new Times article on it today with basically the same info as the CBC article. The owner admits it's not a top priority right now because his company is wrapped up in bigger projects. "It's a smaller project for us, but it could eat up a lot of our time."

[adamuptownsj]

So is *all* or just *new* residential construction prohibited within 30m? Could the existing upper floors be turned into apartments?

T&T comments have a 'former CN employee' saying the rail line should be removed... which is fascinating. Let's hope she never had decision making powers. Good Lord.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

So is *all* or just *new* residential construction prohibited within 30m? Could the existing upper floors be turned into apartments?

I think the costs of heritage restoration are so prohibitive that the only way that it could be economically viable is if it were part of a larger development, in this case the entire city block, and would consist of facade preservation and construction of a new midsized building to generate the rental income necessary to fund the heritage restoration component of the project.

To just fix up the building to allow for second and third floor condos or apartments probably would not be worthwhile economically - at least if you wanted to do the project correctly.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by David_99

There's a new Times article on it today with basically the same info as the CBC article. The owner admits it's not a top priority right now because his company is wrapped up in bigger projects. "It's a smaller project for us, but it could eat up a lot of our time."

I read that article in today's (Saturday's) newspaper. The most interesting information is that the city is well aware of the "challenges" facing the property owner and seem to be willing to meet with him anytime to see what could be done to help him (within allowable limits) in dealing with his problems.




CBC photos

This issue is of great concern to the city because they are well aware of the prominent location of the Flat Iron Building and the Subway Block in the downtown core. All pedestrian foot traffic between the west and east ends of downtown is funnelled underneath the CNR overpass, and thus passes these two buildings. In addition, these two buildings are architecturally unique, and contribute a certain well worn urban aesthetic to this part of the downtown. I am particularly fond of the triangular Flat Iron Building myself, and it reminds me of the type of urban architecture you might find in a much larger city.

The main issue therefore is how can the city help Seville Properties???

Apparently the ban on (new) residential development within 30M of a railway track is probably untouchable. From the T&T article, it seems this is a new national standard adopted by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities after the Lac Megantic disaster. Seville Properties original plan for an eight storey mixed used development (with facade preservation) is therefore off the table.

A larger commercial/office building is also unlikely because it will likely take the commercial real estate market at least a decade to recover after the pandemic. I sincerely don't think the Flat Iron and Subway Block buildings can wait this long for restoration - their decline is beginning to rapidly accelerate.

As such, the only remaining possibility is to restore these two buildings as is, to create ground floor retail/restaurant/commercial space with upper level offices or apartments. There is nothing wrong with this approach, but it might be too costly to justify the expense. This is where the city (and possibly the province) could step in.

If heritage restoration is something the city actually wants to actively promote, then it may have to find some mechanism to help with the costs of this. Properties with a heritage designation (like these two buildings) currently have an albatross around their necks. They are more expensive to own and operate, and they have to maintain their historical appearance and style whenever upgrades or renovations are considered. All other things being equal, developers therefore tend to avoid heritage properties. In order to get around this point, creative solutions might need to be considered, such as public subsidization of construction, maintenance and repair, so long as the intent of such activities is to maintain the architectural and cultural integrity of the property. If not direct subsidization, then perhaps the municipal property tax rate on well maintained heritage properties should be lowered, so long as the property continues to be maintained to acceptable standards.

Thought?????

[PEI highway guy]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I read that article in today's (Saturday's) newspaper. The most interesting information is that the city is well aware of the "challenges" facing the property owner and seem to be willing to meet with him anytime to see what could be done to help him (within allowable limits) in dealing with his problems.




CBC photos

This issue is of great concern to the city because they are well aware of the prominent location of the Flat Iron Building and the Subway Block in the downtown core. All pedestrian foot traffic between the west and east ends of downtown is funnelled underneath the CNR overpass, and thus passes these two buildings. In addition, these two buildings are architecturally unique, and contribute a certain well worn urban aesthetic to this part of the downtown. I am particularly fond of the triangular Flat Iron Building myself, and it reminds me of the type of urban architecture you might find in a much larger city.

The main issue therefore is how can the city help Seville Properties???

Apparently the ban on (new) residential development within 30M of a railway track is probably untouchable. From the T&T article, it seems this is a new national standard adopted by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities after the Lac Megantic disaster. Seville Properties original plan for an eight storey mixed used development (with facade preservation) is therefore off the table.

A larger commercial/office building is also unlikely because it will likely take the commercial real estate market at least a decade to recover after the pandemic. I sincerely don't think the Flat Iron and Subway Block buildings can wait this long for restoration - their decline is beginning to rapidly accelerate.

As such, the only remaining possibility is to restore these two buildings as is, to create ground floor retail/restaurant/commercial space with upper level offices or apartments. There is nothing wrong with this approach, but it might be too costly to justify the expense. This is where the city (and possibly the province) could step in.

If heritage restoration is something the city actually wants to actively promote, then it may have to find some mechanism to help with the costs of this. Properties with a heritage designation (like these two buildings) currently have an albatross around their necks. They are more expensive to own and operate, and they have to maintain their historical appearance and style whenever upgrades or renovations are considered. All other things being equal, developers therefore tend to avoid heritage properties. In order to get around this point, creative solutions might need to be considered, such as public subsidization of construction, maintenance and repair, so long as the intent of such activities is to maintain the architectural and cultural integrity of the property. If not direct subsidization, then perhaps the municipal property tax rate on well maintained heritage properties should be lowered, so long as the property continues to be maintained to acceptable standards.

Thought?????

AS a kid this building/ stores were quite prominent in the city. A place called Cloggs i believe, was a very high end jeweler, withy clocks and a busy watch repair business. When you mom said hands in your pocket, do not touch anything, you knew she meant business. I am not sure what can be done, however up to the mid 70's that block was a bustling beehive of activity. It truly saddens me to see the pictures. Zellers/Woolworths then Woolco were across the street. Crandalls studio and a Chinese food spot were closer to the light towards the mid town.

Many say it is an eyesore and it is, however, it was not always this way. The building the subway was seen as progress when completed. it is man made The tracks used to level with Main Street in the early 1900's.

[jonny golden]

I can't see the City of Moncton or the provincial government directly subsidizing construction or maintenance costs for this project. I think a property tax break would be more likely. As the building is in such poor condition, the high cost of restoring/renovating it makes the project a no-go at this time. With 8 floors, the income would have justified the cost. It's too bad they couldn't get an exception to allow that project to go ahead. It's a complex situation that has no easy solution. I don't think we'll see anything happening in the foreseeable future.

[josh_cat_eyes]

Does the new 30m restrictions say anything about a hotel? With it being really close to the Avenir Centre it would be a good place for a hotel potentially.

[Ifyoubuildit]

Originally Posted by josh_cat_eyes

Does the new 30m restrictions say anything about a hotel? With it being really close to the Avenir Centre it would be a good place for a hotel potentially.

Does the 30m buffer go away at a certain height? If so, maybe one could build a two story parkade (beside the track) and then go vertical with residential once you were above the tracks.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Ifyoubuildit

Does the 30m buffer go away at a certain height? If so, maybe one could build a two story parkade (beside the track) and then go vertical with residential once you were above the tracks.

I don't imagine. If you had a derailment and fire, would you really want to be trapped in your eighth floor apartment awaiting rescue, while the flames lick at the base of your building???

[MonctonRad]

To be clear, the 30M rule applies to new construction. Heritage restoration (even for residential) is still allowed. There is no reason why upper level residential restoration and conversion could't still take place in the Subway Block, just so long as there isn't any additional new construction as part of the project.

And, also to be clear, the risk of a significant derailment in the core is pretty small. Passing trains have a speed limit when moving through the downtown. These trains also are mostly carrying container traffic from Halterm, and automobiles from the Autoport in Halifax. This type of cargo is non flammable.

The oil trains to Saint John do pass through Moncton, but only pass through the CNR main line in the MID Industrial Park around the CNR Hump Yard area.

[Ifyoubuildit]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I don't imagine. If you had a derailment and fire, would you really want to be trapped in your eighth floor apartment awaiting rescue, while the flames lick at the base of your building???

Presumably it would be made of concrete, steel and have fire suppression systems, with multiple points of exit like all buildings must have....but yes not ideal.

[Riberview]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The oil trains to Saint John do pass through Moncton, but only pass through the CNR main line in the MID Industrial Park around the CNR Hump Yard area.

The line that runs through downtown is the main line to and from Halifax.
If you watched the trains go through here, you would be surprised at the chemicals shipped through at all hours of the day and night. Watch for placards on the sides of cars, to identify hazardous materials. These include but are not limited to bulk fuel oils, and bulk gasses.

Ticking time bomb is an understatement.. and the fact that these are allowed to run through a downtown amazes me.
When you consider initial isolation zones in the event of a spill, let alone explosion and fire, 30 meters is nowhere near enough. Think kilometers.

Building up in this buffer is not the answer.

[BlackYear]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Thought?????

Yes, and you're not going to like it.

I've lived in the downtown area all my life and I'm in my 50's. I do remember Crandall's, the Chinese restaurant (it was the fanciest one in MCT at the time), and the other merchants. However, I've never been a fan of this building or block, except maybe the Flat Iron triangular building.

In any case, the building in question has always been an eyesore for me. There is nothing here that appeals to me. There is no significant historical value here in my opinion. The Flat Iron yes, this one, no.

The whole block has inconsistent curb appeal. From a unique triangular building, a run down ugly building which is on the verge of being condemned, a small semi modern 80's building with solarium front, another ugly small building with unappealing horizontal metal siding, and a nice modern corner brick building.

I would like to see this building torn down and replaced with a common area filled with trees, water fountain and park benches.

This will open up the hidden Flat Iron building and allow it to shine. Yes, some updates will be needed to Flat Iron, but that should encourage the building owner. It would compliment a common area filled with a couple of food cart vendors, tables with umbrellas, maybe a musical busker and so on.

If the heritage group want to save this piece of junk building, then buy it from the owner and fix it. Good luck. If not, then the city should buy it from the owner at market value, tear it down and do it up with the above common area. I can't see anyone spending the most likely $million+ to bring this building up to code and make something out of it for profits down the road.

And I agree with Riberview, these chemical tanks should not be coming through the downtown core. All of these type of cargo should be redirected outside of the core. In fact, the only type of trains that should be allowed in the city core are passenger trains, period, no exceptions.

That's it!

[riverviewer]

Originally Posted by Riberview

Building up in this buffer is not the answer.

when they are rebuilding the entrance to Centennial park and refreshing the antiques on display there, maybe they can add the façade of that heritage building and the truck eating subway to that outside museum on St George.