The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by DevelopmentAndy

It's a working port and those sites mostly are needed for future expansion of the port. I assume that the cruise ships come for the "old city" and some new development is not going to be something better than a vacant lot. It is unfortunate that some of the old structures could not be saved. On my last time to the east coast I could not believe how many structures in Saint John had come down, that building that was for sale near the cruise ship terminals, Gothic Arches, Simms among others. It looks tidier than decay but that old industrial and commercial city feel is what made it attractive. It seems to be losing it bit by bit.

It's a working port with over 300 acres of land, and it can continue to work, grow, and profit with slightly less than 300 acres too. It's a bit of a false narrative, to say the least, to suggest the port couldn't continue to be productive, or even more productive, with a slightly smaller footprint. While the waterfront of Lower Cove Terminal might be off limits for non port developments, the end of Lower Cover Loop and the street front of Charlotte Street south of Broad St. come off it! There's no justification to keep this land so under-utilized, messy, and just downright grimy. The port administers all kinds of other land, also under-utilized, where they could store all this junk instead.

Btw, the former sugar refinery site not federally owned port land, it's owned by the city. However, it has some serious structural and environmental issues that need to be addressed and remediated before any sort of residential or mixed use development could occur there... still absolutely worth the investment, but we'd need the feds and province to step up and help make it possible. It's pretty grim that Lantic Sugar was basically left off the hook completely for causing serious environmental contamination at the site, but also not at all surprising, unfortunately.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by sailor734

I think the chances of Saint John getting a flight to a US east coast city are somewhere between slim and none. Fredericton couldn't make it work and Moncton hasn't seen the service return post pandemic.

The best we can hope for realistically is a second carrier (WestJet or Porter are the only candidates that would give access to onward connections) to provide service to Montreal, Toronto and/or Ottawa. The increased number of flights would improve convenience and having more than one carrier would force AC to compete on pricing.

With WestJet continuing its retrenchment in Atlantic Canada, likely Porter is the only bet for YSJ; unless WestJet adds a seasonal summer 2-3x weekly flight to Calgary.

[DevelopmentAndy]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

It's a working port with over 300 acres of land, and tt can continue to work, grow, and profit with slightly less than 300 acres too. It's a bit of a false narrative, to say the least, to suggest the port couldn't continue to be productive, or even more productive, with a slightly smaller footprint. While the waterfront of Lower Cove Terminal might be off limits for non port developments, the end of Lower Cover Loop and the street front of Charlotte Street south of Broad St. come off it! There's no justification to keep this land so under-utilized, messy, and just downright grimy. The port administers all kinds of other land, also under-utilized, where they could store all this junk instead.

Btw, the former sugar refinery site not federally owned port land, it's owned by the city. However, it has some serious structural and environmental issues that need to be addressed and remediated before any sort of residential or mixed use development could occur there... still absolutely worth the investment, but we'd need the feds and province to step up and help make it possible. It's pretty grim that Lantic Sugar was basically left off the hook completely for causing serious environmental contamination at the site, but also not at all surprising, unfortunately.

Not worth the investment unless Saint John has suddenly become very wealthy or land values are like Toronto or Vancouver, which they are not. I think it is best for the future to just leave all port lands in case they are needed for the port expansion. Saint John is a very (probably too) large city in km2 with lots of room for expansion. What would be really good is for those cruise ships to scram. They are a burden on the economy overall. The port on a world scale or even the larger North American ports is quite small and if it booms again I am not sure there is actually a lot of land. A decent sized port is hundreds of acres. I guess it depends on what people want for the economy.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

An airport located midway between Saint John and Fredericton would be a 30 minute drive from Saint John, and Fredericton.

I’d say it being last on the list speaks volumes… it’s not just the facilities and infrastructure, it’s the location including the inclement weather. The government should take a look at Pugley’s well thought out proposal and actually study the idea of a combined Fredericton-Saint John airport,l.

Their last study that suggested sticking with the current three airport model for Saint John, Fredericton, and Moncton was full of holes, full of redactions, and more about justifying the current model of 3 main airports than genuinely studying the benefits of a combined airport. The report rightly shot down the idea of a combined airport for all three cities, as a 60+ minute to the airport for all three cities would be ridiculous. But it seems like that report didn’t even bother studying a combined Fredericton-Saint John airport, which remains a highly logical solution.

Of course the CEO’s of YSJ and YFC don’t like the idea of either airport shutting down in favour of a new one, but it’s not like they wouldn’t get offered a golden parachute or new high ranking position at the new airport anyways.

The combined Saint John and Fredericton metro areas far outweigh Metro Moncton, and will continue to into the foreseeable future. The idea of a combined Freddy/SJ airport just makes way too much sense to not at least study. People in KV might not exactly love the idea, but we’ve had enough of the tail wagging the dog here in the Saint John Region for decades now as it is. Even for the KV crowd, a combined airport with more flights, affordable prices, and less inclement weather would be more than worth the extra 30 minutes it would take for them to get to the new airport versus their current quick jaunt to YSJ.

I get that business travellers don’t really care about the price of flights out of YSJ, and that many of them live in KV and really like the short drive. But again, we can’t let the tail wag the dog. Most people flying in and out of Saint John are not business travellers, and with more flights and more routes at a new, combined airport, even more of the travellers would be tourists coming to New Brunswick.

For all that it would cost to turn YSJ into “real” international airport, it makes way more sense to just build a new one midway between Fredericton and Saint John and do it proper from scratch. The long term benefits far outweigh the short term costs.

As for YSJ’s current building and infrastructure, it could be easily converted to a cargo focussed airport with room for general aviation and charter flights.

Lastly, it would just be great to remove the Saint John/St. John’s confusion regarding our current airport. Anyone in Saint John that’s ever had someone fly into town to visit can attest that we must stress and make abundantly clear that they must make sure they’re flying into Saint John’s airport and not St. John’s airport. A combined Fredericton-Saint John airport nips that problem in the bud, one and for all.

Please get off the St. John's vs. Saint John soapbox. Where's your data which shows the confusion between the two? In anything, it's Saint John being spelled as St. John which is the issue.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by DevelopmentAndy

Not worth the investment unless Saint John has suddenly become very wealthy or land values are like Toronto or Vancouver, which they are not. I think it is best for the future to just leave all port lands in case they are needed for the port expansion. Saint John is a very (probably too) large city in km2 with lots of room for expansion. What would be really good is for those cruise ships to scram. They are a burden on the economy overall. The port on a world scale or even the larger North American ports is quite small and if it booms again I am not sure there is actually a lot of land. A decent sized port is hundreds of acres. I guess it depends on what people want for the economy.

Over 300 acres is hundreds of acres... 270 acres is hundreds of acres.

The whole idea behind jumping on Trudeau's idea while he's still in office, is that it could be an exclusively federally funded development. Port operations could be built into a mixed used development on federally administered port lands. I think you're trying to present a bit of a false dichotomy here.

As for the for the former sugar refinery site, I gotta disagree. It's absolutely worth the investment, it's prime waterfront real-estate, we don't need to be reaching Toronto or Vancouver levels of land value for harbour front real estate to suddenly be worth remediating and addressing structural issues.

As for the cruse ships "scramming" and being overall burden on the economy, you're going to have to back that up with some further explanation and some sources. Did you even listen to the CBC Information Morning interview with Port Saint John's CEO? He said there's lots of room for growth, but we're still limited by the population size of the city and province. I'm all for continued port expansion, but to suggest there's not enough land, or that they couldn't continue a very solid growth trajectory with a slightly smaller footprint is just ridiculous.

Take a closer look at the google street view at the end of Lower Cove Loop and down Charlotte Street. There's nothing essential going on there, and never will be. It's completely under-utilized. A 10 storey apartment building could up up there and have ample room for that junk in the underground parking, not that they'd actually have to keep storing all that crap there. It's an eyesore, non critical to their operations, and probably the most logical place to build housing in terms of under-utilized federally owned port lands, other than directly on top of the cruise ship terminals, which you seem to think are a drag on our economy.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

Please get off the St. John's vs. Saint John soapbox. Where's your data which shows the confusion between the two? In anything, it's Saint John being spelled as St. John which is the issue.

Here you go again, zeroing in on the indisputable fact that Saint John and St. John's have almost identical names, falsely claiming the cities rarely get confused outside of Atlantic Canada, and ignoring absolutely everything else quoted in my post.

The two SJ's might not get confused very often within Atlantic Canada, but they absolutely do outside of Atlantic Canada. Saint John and Saint John's... St. John and St. John's, what part don't you understand is confusing? Again, it would be like if there was a Fort McMurray, AB, and a Ft. McMurray's, SK or MB, both known for their oil and gas industries.

Anyone in either SJ can attest to past experiences when they've had friends fly in to visit from outside the Atlantic Canada, that they must stress to their friends to book a flight to Saint John, not St. John's, or vice versa. Moreover, I'm sure the many frequent flyers on this forum can tell you how many times their flight attendants have said "Saint John's" on flights to YSJ before.

As for where my data is coming from, it's from personal experiences offline and online, as well as some very basic googling involving. Here's a relevant google search given the name of this forum: St. John's Skyline. I even went incognito and turned on my VPN to a US location to try and make the results less influenced by my location and search history... notice the results are mostly images of the Saint John, NB skyline?

If that's what the results are from the most sophisticated search engine in human history, a literal machine, what the hell do you think the average person west of New Brunswick thinks when they hear Saint John and St. John's? You really don't think they're not at all confused by two relatively small Atlantic Canadian cities with nearly identical names? Please.

Where's your data which shows that there isn't confusion between the two cities?

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

Now that's a great pic!

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

With WestJet continuing its retrenchment in Atlantic Canada, likely Porter is the only bet for YSJ; unless WestJet adds a seasonal summer 2-3x weekly flight to Calgary.

Agreed. I just included WestJet for form's sake. The chances of them doing a 180 on their "Western focus" policy seem pretty remote.

Porter is the only other player in Canadian aviation that has a significant North American route network. Add the fact that YHU (where Porter is building a significant new terminal) is showing YSJ as a coming destination in 2025 and Porter seems more likely.

Unfortunately, as I mentioned in the airports forum. Pascan also uses YHU and rumours are that any service between YSJ and YHU next year will be them. Hopefully those rumours will turn out to be wrong.

[DevelopmentAndy]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

Over 300 acres is hundreds of acres... 270 acres is hundreds of acres.

The whole idea behind jumping on Trudeau's idea while he's still in office, is that it could be an exclusively federally funded development. Port operations could be built into a mixed used development on federally administered port lands. I think you're trying to present a bit of a false dichotomy here.

As for the for the former sugar refinery site, I gotta disagree. It's absolutely worth the investment, it's prime waterfront real-estate, we don't need to be reaching Toronto or Vancouver levels of land value for harbour front real estate to suddenly be worth remediating and addressing structural issues.

As for the cruse ships "scramming" and being overall burden on the economy, you're going to have to back that up with some further explanation and some sources. Did you even listen to the CBC Information Morning interview with Port Saint John's CEO? He said there's lots of room for growth, but we're still limited by the population size of the city and province. I'm all for continued port expansion, but to suggest there's not enough land, or that they couldn't continue a very solid growth trajectory with a slightly smaller footprint is just ridiculous.

Take a closer look at the google street view at the end of Lower Cove Loop and down Charlotte Street. There's nothing essential going on there, and never will be. It's completely under-utilized. A 10 storey apartment building could up up there and have ample room for that junk in the underground parking, not that they'd actually have to keep storing all that crap there. It's an eyesore, non critical to their operations, and probably the most logical place to build housing in terms of under-utilized federally owned port lands, other than directly on top of the cruise ship terminals, which you seem to think are a drag on our economy.

It's not Trudeau's idea. It's actually PP's bad idea that Trudope is now parroting. Mixed use development on port lands is not really consistent with a working port.

On the sugar refinery site, I am not believing that. I have done it on a much smaller site and it gets quite expensive fast and has many unknowns and I don't think the land value is there. If it was developers would already be trying to negotiate something with the city.

I am not going to disparage the port staff but I am not believing they are envisioning a world class port operation which could be a possibility. There is a lot of land in Saint John so why limit this possibility and introduce NIMBYs into the port lands.

As for the cruise ships, I would like to know if they are offloading their sewage to the city system and taking water at reduced rates/free. These companies are a blight on most places they visit and give the false impression that they are creating positive economic activity when really they are just sucking our resources. Who paid for those ugly cruise ship terminals anyway? My principal source is a person I am not naming who explained in detail to me how these cruise ships are a mugs game and not a desirable "economic activity". There is info on the net about it,

[DyAm00394]

An update was given at last night’s council meeting about the new north end school, (Ropewalk Road), and south end school, (next to Rainbow Park).

- Construction of the community hubs for both schools are a go.

- Site preparation work for the south end school, (including the demolition of some houses on St James Street), will proceed this spring and summer.

- North end school will open September 2027 as previously announced by the province.

- They also just submitted a planning application to the city to rezone the properties they’ve acquired surrounding Rainbow Park to enable construction of the south end school.

- The memorial will remain in Rainbow Park at an alternate location.

- The city is in discussions with the school board about the use of parts of Rainbow Park.

- Public engagement will be taking place about the new south end school and Rainbow Park enhancements in the month of July.

[DyAm00394]

The Saint John Trade and Convention Centre will be under new management for the first time in over 40 years. City council has voted to award a venue management contract to OVG360 (same company managing TD Station). The agreement with Hilton Saint John expires on June 30th 2024.

"For the first time in 40 years, a new company will be in charge of the Saint John Trade and Convention Centre.

During Monday’s regular meeting, city council voted to award a venue management contract to OVG360.

The recommendation from city staff followed a public request for proposals that was put out earlier this year.

“The Venue Management Agreement being recommended is a modern and comprehensive agreement,” staff said in a report to council.

“OVG has outlined a growth strategy and will provide expertise and focus on the regional conference center being a world class facility.”

An internationally-recognized leader in arena and venue management, OVG360 was also selected to operate and manage TD Station last year.

Hilton Saint John has managed the Saint John Trade and Convention Centre since it first opened in 1984. Its agreement with the city expires on June 30."

https://www.country94.ca/2024/06/11/new-company-to-manage-saint-john-trade-and-convention-centre/

[sailor734]

I had occasion to be on the Hampton Road today in Rothesay and noticed these two apartment buildings on the corner of HillCrest Dr.. They have caught my eye before due to the fact they are attractive and seem to fit the area.

With peaked roofs, cupolas, inset balconies and grey shingles/wide white trim they have a very Cape Cod vibe . They are also well landscaped with decent setbacks, lawns and a 10-12'cedar hedge providing some privacy from the Hampton Rd.

They strike me as a great example of putting 3-4 floor multi unit building in an established residential neighbourhood and doing it the right way.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.3926973,...!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205409&entry=ttu

It's also smart the way they wall mounted the heat pumps up high so save balcony floor space.

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by sailor734

I had occasion to be on the Hampton Road today in Rothesay and noticed these two apartment buildings on the corner of HillCrest Dr.. They have caught my eye before due to the fact they are attractive and seem to fit the area.

With peaked roofs, cupolas, inset balconies and grey shingles/wide white trim they have a very Cape Cod vibe . They are also well landscaped with decent setbacks, lawns and a 10-12'cedar hedge providing some privacy from the Hampton Rd.

They strike me as a great example of putting 3-4 floor multi unit building in an established residential neighbourhood and doing it the right way.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.3926973,...!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205409&entry=ttu

It's also smart the way they wall mounted the heat pumps up high so save balcony floor space.

They are nice - actually are condos

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

They are nice - actually are condos

Ah, I see. I guess that explains why the landscaping is so nice.

[adamuptownsj]

Minor beef, but I just learned SJ's street tree planting policy is bizarre. No trees cut down (due to damage, infrastructure needs, etc) are replanted unless a whole block is being rebuilt, and basically all that gets planted is Norway maple and linden. Just lazy, it's not absurdly expensive to destroy a stump and plant something a) endemic and b) a little sturdier than the 5 year old saplings we tend to get.

[sailor734]

Given today's political environment that seems shockingly "Un-green". Maybe they should take some of the funds earmarked for building unused/underused bike lanes and put it towards urban reforestation.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by sailor734

Given today's political environment that seems shockingly "Un-green". Maybe they should take some of the funds earmarked for building unused/underused bike lanes and put it towards urban reforestation.

I'm no tree-hugger but watching Fredericton shred elms in Officer's Square because it was 'too expensive' to inoculate them genuinely hurt.

Lindens and Norway maples don't even make good street trees due to the way their roots spread. Half of what we plant in SJ is directly under power lines, ensuring the tree will be mutilated by untrained city crews or chopped down when it inevitably interferes.

New subdivisions are often totally denuded even if they feature relatively substantial lawns, and nothing is planted when they're completed.

Dieppe seems to have its head on straight.

[OliverD]

Here in Fredericton the city cut a tree down in front of my house and replaced it that fall. Same thing happened with a few other trees on my street, and they plant a variety of types based on the location. For example I have another one that's below a power line, I forget the species but it's one that won't grow very tall. Fredericton also has an open database of all of the street trees that they own which is pretty neat. https://data-fredericton.opendata.arcgis...?location=45.958387%2C-66.651800%2C13.82

[darkharbour]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

Minor beef, but I just learned SJ's street tree planting policy is bizarre. No trees cut down (due to damage, infrastructure needs, etc) are replanted unless a whole block is being rebuilt, and basically all that gets planted is Norway maple and linden. Just lazy, it's not absurdly expensive to destroy a stump and plant something a) endemic and b) a little sturdier than the 5 year old saplings we tend to get.

Are you sure about that? I thought that they stopped planting Norway Maples a number of years ago and switched to native maple stock and other types of deciduous trees. They have adopted a variety of plans, including the Climate Change Adaptation Plan, that outline native tree choices, and they have also received tree planting grants from outside sources over the past number of years that have similar requirements. Lindens are fine as street trees IMO, they grow fast, have a decent lifespan, deal with environmental conditions well, and have a good reputation. There are lots of other options though, so like anything with the environment it is better to go with diversity over single-species.

The city has a number of professional arborists on staff, I would be surprised if they were making poor tree choices.

[adamuptownsj]

Originally Posted by darkharbour

Are you sure about that? I thought that they stopped planting Norway Maples a number of years ago and switched to native maple stock and other types of deciduous trees. They have adopted a variety of plans, including the Climate Change Adaptation Plan, that outline native tree choices, and they have also received tree planting grants from outside sources over the past number of years that have similar requirements. Lindens are fine as street trees IMO, they grow fast, have a decent lifespan, deal with environmental conditions well, and have a good reputation. There are lots of other options though, so like anything with the environment it is better to go with diversity over single-species.

The city has a number of professional arborists on staff, I would be surprised if they were making poor tree choices.

My dad was an ornamental horticulturalist and I've picked up some skills from him. The city's tree management is not good. All the recently rebuilt blocks uptown have trees under power lines, trees planted within 10' of existing trees in yards, no sense. They should also be shelling out for older saplings that can take more of a beating in the winter. Anything on the south side of the street spends its life in heavy shade where setbacks are minimal and end up kind of stunted.

Even King Square got maples to replace storm damage. We need a much greater variety. If they're starting to move towards native-heavy planting, good, but it doesn't seem to be in full effect yet.

Lindens have wide-spreading and deep root networks which can screw up anything from water mains to sidewalks; plus they're prone to growing incredibly wide which results, uptown at least, in having to chop them back from front facades regularly. They also hang much lower than most cars are tall. They're also barely native to NB. I like how quick they grow and how dense, but they need active management.