The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread

[Pugsley]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

IOL outgrew its HQ already - couple floors worth of staff moving to 201 Crown St, which is now undergoing renos. This building was vacated when their HQ opened in 2018.

Oooooh...Wouldn't it be nice if they built a second tower? Behind the Admiral Beatty but connected to the same garage?

Never say never I guess.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

IOL outgrew its HQ already - couple floors worth of staff moving to 201 Crown St, which is now undergoing renos. This building was vacated when their HQ opened in 2018.

That's a little surprising. Aren't most large corporations still using much less office space than pre pandemic?

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by sailor734

That's a little surprising. Aren't most large corporations still using much less office space than pre pandemic?

IOL has ordered everyone back in the office by September. Seems most organizations are going this route.

[Helladog]

Originally Posted by Pugsley

Oooooh...Wouldn't it be nice if they built a second tower? Behind the Admiral Beatty but connected to the same garage?

I think the building would look much nicer with four additional stories setback a tad.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by Helladog

I think the building would look much nicer with four additional stories setback a tad.

Agreed, and I wonder, was the IOL HQ designed with any sort of upwards expansion in mind?

Also, I know Irving isn't big on renting out office space from other companies, but isn't like half of the office space in Brunswick Square currently vacant, including the entire top floor?

I think a mixed-use residential tower connected to that parking garage would be far preferable for Uptown Saint John than a second office-only tower... and perhaps such a project could be built by their cousins over at JDI.

Kent Homes seems to be getting a lot of national attention at the moment... constructing a flagship mixed-use residential tower could certainly help build upon the momentum and attention! Especially, if it was built in an attractive neo-classical style like the IOL HQ... or even better, in the neo-deco style!

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

Agreed, and I wonder, was the IOL HQ designed with any sort of upwards expansion in mind?

Also, I know Irving isn't big on renting out office space from other companies, but isn't like half of the office space in Brunswick Square currently vacant, including the entire top floor?

I think a mixed-use residential tower connected to that parking garage would be far preferable for Uptown Saint John than a second office-only tower... and perhaps such a project could be built by their cousins over at JDI.

Kent Homes seems to be getting a lot of national attention at the moment... constructing a flagship mixed-use residential tower could certainly help build upon the momentum and attention! Especially, if it was built in an attractive neo-classical style like the IOL HQ... or even better, in the neo-deco style!

Irving rented 5 or 6 floors in the Brunswick Sq office tower prior to opening new building. They also rented space in other locations, including Loch Lomand Place above BMO. Now that they need more space, they’ll use their own properties first. According to my source, this is a direct result of their business expanding and a lot more staff working for IOL now.

[darkharbour]

IOL still owns the old grocery store building on King Square, that lot would make a great development site for a new office - although I don’t want the square to become even more of an Irving courtyard than it already is.

[cdnguys]

[cdnguys]

[bingun]

With many of the proposed developments, there is often discussion of the potential tax revenue and its importance in helping to alleviate the city's infrastructure deficit and historical revenue issues. It is interesting to see the results of that from some of the larger developments that have recently finished.

Aquarius Towers (Fairville Boulevard)



Seabird Suites (Millidgeville Avenue)



The Venetian (University Avenue)



The Vistas (Technology Drive)

[DyAm00394]

New CTV Article. This rendering was obtained by CTV Atlantic.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/new-brun...-to-proposed-simms-corner-redevelopment/

[bingun]

“I saw the plan on it and I’m thinking to myself this is crazy,” says Blaine Harris, who obtained the renderings through someone with DTI. “You’re going to do a two-year build for something that could be satisfied with a roundabout.

“We don’t need a huge overpass because the overpass is only for the trains. We can cure the problem with the trains through negotiation.”

Harris thinks the renderings look to try and decrease the train disruptions on traffic in the area.

“The trains are an issue that can be cured,” Harris says. “You’re running right now two-mile-long trains. You can cut that down to a mile out of the port and run multiple throughout the day at varying low peak times. To build this kind of an infrastructure solely to get around the train tracks, in my opinion, is crazy.”

I appreciate that this guy is a barber, so his understanding of infrastructure projects and rail logistics may be limited, but this is a painful read. No amount of 'negotiation' is going to fix that intersection with the projected port growth.

Also, if I were this guy's source in DTI, I would be pretty upset he's sent this over to CTV lol. I don't think that the department will look too kindly on him showing his barber the renderings.

[adamuptownsj]

It seems excessive. A full set of highway-style ramps for the pulp mill? Five lanes on Main from Fairville Boulevard to Ready Street? Multi-storey retaining walls the whole way around? A ramp to the CUPE office?

[bingun]

Originally Posted by adamuptownsj

It seems excessive. A full set of highway-style ramps for the pulp mill? Five lanes on Main from Fairville Boulevard to Ready Street? Multi-storey retaining walls the whole way around? A ramp to the CUPE office?

This rendering is definitely the nuclear option, in my opinion. I guess the argument is that setting up like this would be the permanent fix, accommodating the rail line, the mill, and residents, and it wouldn't need changing ever again.

Selfishly, I quite like the idea of being able to drive straight coming off the bridge down Fairville Boulevard. As someone who didn't grow up in the city, I have always found the strange loop around Romano's to be a bizarre way to get to the mall.

I am also not opposed to eliminating the Wendy's/Tim's at that location. It wouldn't be approved if it were proposed currently, regardless of the changes to Simm's Corner.

Also, do my eyes deceive me, or does the rendering have a double rail track instead of the current single track?

[sailor734]

I agree it looks like a fair amount of overkill.
I see what looks like traffic lights in the second drawing. I think that could create a real mess. I had been told that a roundabout with the train tracks under it was the preferred option but who knows......

edit.....I see the double tracks too.

[Helladog]

It does seem like an excessive undertaking, but that intersection needs excessive fixing, so I think it's a big improvement over what is currently there.

Hopefully this one won't just slide away for the next decade like all the previous plans. Maybe it was good to wait for the right plan to de proposed.

[Ottawa]

Originally Posted by DyAm00394

New CTV Article. This rendering was obtained by CTV Atlantic.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/new-brun...-to-proposed-simms-corner-redevelopment/

This is why I preferred the overhead train bridge.

If you insist on the road over the rail, lower the tracks further and keep it low so that the trains eventually travel under the throughway. That would help the trains eventually get down and up from the port as well. Then just make Simms Corner into a simple roundabout to solve that crazy traffic pattern. Also, get rid of the exit into the pulp mill, unless Irving's paying the entire freight on that.

If I have said anything that seems impossible, look at the alternative being considered.

[ell]

Originally Posted by DyAm00394

New CTV Article. This rendering was obtained by CTV Atlantic.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/new-brun...-to-proposed-simms-corner-redevelopment/

While I don't object to the overall design, I worry that overbuilding the connection between Fairville Boulevard and the Reversing Falls Bridge will funnel too much traffic from the Harbour Bridge onto Chesley Drive.

To acknowledge the elephant in the room, this kind of capacity would be nice when the Harbour Bridge is under construction but hopefully that will be a lot more rare in the future...

Chesley is built like a highway but it's immediately adjacent to a residential neighbourhood; it has sidewalks on both sides, and of course, Harbour Passage. It should remain an overflow option but if Simms Corner (and eventually the Reversing Falls bridge) are made too wide, it could become the primary option for drivers who would currently prefer the Harbour Bridge.

[ell]

Originally Posted by DyAm00394

New CTV Article. This rendering was obtained by CTV Atlantic.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/atlantic/new-brun...-to-proposed-simms-corner-redevelopment/

Making this comment separately because it's a different issue:

I'm not sure why there is a dedicated lane from Bridge Road to Main Street West while there are also two west-bound lanes at the Main Street West intersection. One or two of these three lanes appear to be redundant.

Unless I'm missing something, I think this duplication could be explained by the designers forgetting that Main Street West would no longer align with Lancaster Avenue.

[Pugsley]

Originally Posted by ell

While I don't object to the overall design, I worry that overbuilding the connection between Fairville Boulevard and the Reversing Falls Bridge will funnel too much traffic from the Harbour Bridge onto Chesley Drive.

I actually think that is the goal with the design. Given the degree of investment happening on the west side there is likely going to be more traffic crossing from east to west. While I don't love the design, I think I understand the goal. I think the planners are trying make it it a higher-volume and more streamlined thoroughfare from east to west, thinking of longer-term needs. Saint John is at risk should there be any major disruption to the Harbour Bridge for any unforeseen circumstances. This helps shore up a second higher-volume artery to support growth, emergency preparedness, evacuations, etc.