[Moncton] Downtown Developments

[in-city]

The Mix-use apartment lofts are coming along good at the corner of Botsford and Victoria.
3D rendering by Yuge





Dawn Arnold the councillor just posted a picture on her Facebook! Peoples are talking about medium density urban development. I believe this is the right solution for Moncton. In cities around the word, this type of scale for urban fabric is the recommended development by urban planners. This is especial true for a downtown that have more empty lots than developed ones.

Big or Small? Medium is the way to go.

[in-city]

The City should support this project by fixing the streets and sidewalks in the area. This would go a long way in making future projects of this type more appealing.

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbi...6&ref=bookmark

[MonctonRad]

Welcome to the forums.

I agree wholeheartedly with you. While some additional height downtown would be nice, I believe infill would be much better. A new evolving landscape of 3-5 storey mixed use buildings (commercial/retail on the ground floor & residential above), replacing the evil scourge of surface parking lots is exactly what is required to revitalize the downtown, especially between Main and St George. Of course, some taller signature buildings like the FiveFive project can be mixed into the neighbourhood for variety.

I think taller buildings should mostly be reserved for the lands south of Main St (down to and including Assomption Blvd). There is more than enough land south of Main to satisfy high rise development in the city for at least the next century. This is where the high rises belong. I think the area of downtown north of Main (at least between Queen and St George) should be developed to promote walkability. This particular building (at Botsford & Victoria) in many ways represents the future of downtown Moncton…….

[in-city]

Thanks for the warm welcome!

To promote development in the vast empty lots we have, the City needs to shift spending away from the expensive infrastructure projects such as new suburbs in Moncton North and redirecting it to fix our 100 year old u/ground services we currently have in the core. We’re the only city I know of that the real-estate value increases as you move away from the downtown. This detail makes it next to impossible for developers to build a project such as the one at 83 Botsford feasible. The same project in Halifax would be worth 5 times more thus the reason we can’t afford expensive materials here. So the problem of vinyl siding can’t truly be fixed with a by-law, we need investments in making our streetscapes more appealing to developers or suffer the plague of urban sprawl.

I was comparing historic aerial photos of Moncton to today. It’s mindboggling to see that our core was denser with lots of small buildings and trees than it is today… we’re going in the wrong direction!

[josh_cat_eyes]

They should have pretty good underground services on assumption but they made the mistake of not making the whole road 4 lanes. The Sobey's development was also a mistake and shouldn't have been allowed. Father east of Vaughan Harvey would have been fine, but not on that important corner. Actually that corner would have been a more fitting place for the events centre. If the whole area from the subway to Vaughan Harvey, and south to assumption, was developed for the project, it could completely revitalize Moncton. Think of on the corner by the subway a triangle shaped signature high rise. Between that and the arena on the corner of Vaughan Harvey and Main have a shopping mall, a new train station that is also a transit hub, a shopping mall, hotels, residential & office high rises, ground level retail, parking garages. Completely change the road layout and make it completely new. That end of downtown used to be so vibrant, there's not reason to sell it short this time.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by in-city

Thanks for the warm welcome!

To promote development in the vast empty lots we have, the City needs to shift spending away from the expensive infrastructure projects such as new suburbs in Moncton North and redirecting it to fix our 100 year old u/ground services we currently have in the core. We’re the only city I know of that the real-estate value increases as you move away from the downtown. This detail makes it next to impossible for developers to build a project such as the one at 83 Botsford feasible. The same project in Halifax would be worth 5 times more thus the reason we can’t afford expensive materials here. So the problem of vinyl siding can’t truly be fixed with a by-law, we need investments in making our streetscapes more appealing to developers or suffer the plague of urban sprawl.

I was comparing historic aerial photos of Moncton to today. It’s mindboggling to see that our core was denser with lots of small buildings and trees than it is today… we’re going in the wrong direction!

There are industries that profit from sprawl: and they are not letting go of their hold over New Brunswick's politics.
Moncton is going in the wrong direction on purpose, because of provincial decisions. Municipal efforts ultimately fail versus the Province.

Will the municipalities of this province ever gather their political wills to advocate for change? Will the voters in this province ever demand better from our policy makers in Fredericton? Do enough New Brunswickers even understand or give a damn?

I mean, for crying out loud: people bloody read the Times&Transcript and take it as credible!!. How well informed can anyone be reading such biased, dramatised, contradictory garbage?

How poorly off is New Brunswick? Well, for starters we should remind ourselves of just how monopolised it is. Reform is difficult when there is a strong private interest keeping it the same.
From a public budgetary standpoint, though, it's not the worst-off jurisdiction. I could point to other provinces that seem to be struggling more so, financially, than New Brunswick. Québec would be an obvious example, as well as many southern and midwestern American states. Nova Scotia's economic reality is comparable to New Brunswick's. I fully realise in this moment that it isn't a doom and gloom context with which we are faced. What worries me, though, is that most of these other provinces and states have what New Brunswick lacks:

- a large urban centre that hosts at least a strong minority portion of the total population;
- communities striving for inward urbanism that are actually meeting some success because their municipal laws give them authority to achieve this success;
- higher representational democracy via diversified corporate ownerships and a limit of government-private involvement and contributions to campaigns; in terms of policy making -- an approach that is scientific and generated through consensus building and ultimately: compromise.

New Brunswick isn't dealing with the causes of its debt. Its provincial politics aren't smart enough. There isn't enough community involvement. Public effort does not budge beyond reading the Times&Transcript. Ignorance won't be so bliss eventually.

NB is too rural, and unfortunately its cities are far too sprawled. On what economic legs are we to stand on soon?

The north is crumbling. Is the south next?
Hint: how's the provincial debt coming along?...

[in-city]

Consider this; see the linked PDF of the ward map of Moncton.

http://www.moncton.ca/Assets/Governm...+Map+Large.pdf

The problem is that councillors have more constituents in the suburbs then they do in-town. The map is divided like a pizza having the sharper part in the downtown and the larger part in the suburbs. This translates in having all councillors charring the responsibility but really…they need to please the suburb to get re-elected…. so no representation for city dwellers.

Moncton should have a councillor representing only the downtown if we want to see more projects like 83 Botsford or 55.

We put a lot of energy in the mega projects like the Event Centre… thinking it’s going to save us all… and attract a lot of media. But the base of the pyramid should be small developers who don’t use much public funding and contribute by paying high taxes once the project is complete.

[mylesmalley]

For what it's worth, I agree with you that we need a councillor who is focused on the core only. Where things fall down is with demographics. You have four wards in a city of ~72,000. Wards are supposed to be evenly distributed by voting population. The fact of the matter is, we just don't have 18,000 people living downtown to justify it. Based on the last census, there are only around 4,000 people there. Compare that to 4,500 in the New West End, and 11,500 people in the North West End.

On the bright side, with the provincial ridings being redrawn, we'll soon have an MLA that
covers all of downtown and the West End. Not ideal for a downtown focus, but a step in the right direction.

[josh_cat_eyes]

Why is thee only 4 wards. I would think there would be a lot more then that for a city this size.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by josh_cat_eyes

Why is thee only 4 wards. I would think there would be a lot more then that for a city this size.

There are two councillors per ward, and also two councillors elected at large to give a city council of 10 members (plus the mayor).

For what it's worth, I think it would be a good idea to have a ward for central Moncton. The boundaries however obviously would have to be larger than just the downtown core, but it would help to give the DT more of a voice at council…...

[mylesmalley]

So this was actually an interesting exercise.

This is the best I could come up with that would give an appropriately sized riding focused on downtown. Or rather, that includes downtown plus a lot of extra areas to pad the population number. Roughly speaking, it includes everything between Wheeler Blvd and Vaughan Harvey/McBeth and then south to the river, as well as Sunny Brae and the Old West End.


The total population of this ward would be 17575 based on 2011 numbers from 35 census dissemination areas. It has two hospitals, the university, and basically all of the non-retail commercial jobs in town.

[josh_cat_eyes]

Wouldn't it make more sense to have 8 wards, each ward to have 1 counsel member?

[mylesmalley]

Decades ago, we used to have multiple MLAs from a riding too. Not really sure what the rationale is for doubling up. Probably has to do with difficulty in redrawing lines. At a local level it's very easy to have a large swing in population that would throw off the balance between wards.

[in-city]

Surface parking is the culprit… but it’s a catch 22. Empty lots downtown are unpleasing and lower the value of neighboring properties. The undervalued property make it unfeasible to build unground parking… it’s cheaper to by the neighbor’s lot and park at surface... that ugly.
In most major cities, surface parking lots are not permitted downtown. It’s a short sighted argument to lobby for more parking… we should have fewer cars and more people; that would make a nice city!

To achieve this, we need more people living downtown and not use their cars to go buy a liter of milk. This would also bring more votes and shift the balance of power.

Notice the parking at 83 Botsford. Prior to construction, the surface parking could fit the same amount of cars as it currently can under and behind the building. The parking is concealed by a stone wall and what probably will be an o/h door. Not as ugly a surface parking but as efficient.

[Nashe]

We could definitely use another, newer parking garage downtown (Alma is falling apart). I know they are very expensive, however.

[in-city]

Here is a view of the new hidden parking lot to be at 83 Botsford St.



It can fit 16 cars under and behind the building.

[josh_cat_eyes]

Charlottetown is a good example of how to succeed with your downtown. I find tho with Moncton, is there isn't another east-west street between assumption and main. I think that would make a huge difference. Charlottetowns downtown is many streets and it's a grid pattern.

[CdnEh]

Originally Posted by josh_cat_eyes

Why is thee only 4 wards. I would think there would be a lot more then that for a city this size.

Not really... Saint John has 4 wards and 2 councillors per ward (same as Moncton) and St John's has 5 wards but only 1 councillor per ward and 1 more councillor in total.

Both of those cities are either the same population as Moncton or, in St. John's case slightly larger, and both have a substantially larger area to cover. (Moncton is 141.17 km2, Saint John is 315.82 km2 (More than double the size of Moncton), St John's is 446.04 km2 (more than TRIPLE the size of Moncton))

Moncton isn't special.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by CdnEh

Both of those cities are either the same population as Moncton or, in St. John's case slightly larger, and both have a substantially larger area to cover. (Moncton is 141.17 km2, Saint John is 315.82 km2 (More than double the size of Moncton), St John's is 446.04 km2 (more than TRIPLE the size of Moncton))

And in both these cases the extra land area is mostly wilderness.

Moncton oftern gets the bad wrap of being the capital of sprawl, but in many ways we are more compact than some of our Atlantic brethren........

[CdnEh]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

And in both these cases the extra land area is mostly wilderness.

Moncton oftern gets the bad wrap of being the capital of sprawl, but in many ways we are more compact than some of our Atlantic brethren........

In which case we would refer to the population comparisons, in conjunction with the area comparison.