[Marty_Mcfly]

I've gone through some of the smaller threads on the forum and gathered some quotes for ideas for the west part of downtown. I'll keep adding to it as I go along, but if anyone else comes across anything post it here. Jeddy1989 will be talking at the Happy City event so any ideas we can give him to talk about the better! I'm sure there will be many different types of people at this event, and many may not share the same views as us. It's important that every view gets heard, council will probably be listening pretty closely to this discussion

Anyway here are a few posts, with more to come later this evening:

Originally Posted by Townie709

I agree, not in that location anyway. (even though I would still support it)

But such a proposal as Chris described (23 story office tower, 13 story residential building, 6 floors of retail, underground parking etc. would really be the ideal development to "vitalize" the west end of downtown and bring it to life. I would love to see something along those lines proposed for the Ultramar site.

As somebody mentioned before, the west end is absolutely dead after 5:00pm and is downright scary. What the west end needs is residential and most importantly, retail. That is why I believe council should be pushing for height minimums, and retail space requirements for all land/developments between the Deacon Site and Waldegrave.

Originally Posted by Copes

I also hope that the Salvation Army building stays. Properly incorporating it into a larger, taller, residential development could be really cool, and has been done elsewhere.



Obviously nothing this big is going there, but using the old fascade as a base is a really neat thing to see.

Originally Posted by Townie709

Any mayoral candidate who wishes to establish a highrise district in the west end that will not allow lowrise developments has my vote. We have at least 10 great spots aligned in a grid in the west end. One is being wasted on the stupid steele hotel which shall forever resent, another by the stubby stantec proposal and the other this possible development which I am not expecting much out of unless the zoning changes which desperately needs to happen.

I like the idea of preserving heritage buildings as the base of new towers and there's no reason why we can't do more of that. I'm sure it would be possible with the Salvation Army building, but if I was made to choose between a modern tower or that concrete block, I would choose the the modern tower any day.

Originally Posted by AnUrbanLife

I actually like the harbour light building, it's run down, but personally I think the proportions and symmetry are excellent. Not in that location though, I agree something taller with street level retail would be great.

Too bad they couldn't save that building though, move it somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Copes

I'm a big fan of the Trillium, but I feel that's exactly the type of development that people would be up in arms about if it were to go in downtown. For one, I'm quite sure its too tall. Secondly, I feel there would be resistance to the modern look in "historic downtown".

Its a shame really. I think a few buildings like that could really add to downtown, but there is just so much opposition in the city. With new buildings like the new Fortis and Deacon office buildings going up on the southwest side of the harbour, that area may be in position to become a little more modern. Meanwhile, the view of the classic St. John's waterfront could maintain its historic charm.

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

My dream for St. John's:

Right now our entire downtown core is basically a straight line along the harbourfront. There's some added visual interest because our midrise and highrise buildings aren't all lined up. But we have no curve.

If we could plan to build a few highrise buildings in the Downtown West End that basically follow the curvature of Pitts Memorial Drive (but to the southwest of it), our downtown would have a curve in it. It would look great from every possible angle, including Signal Hill, and the view from buildings constructed in this area would be basically the view from Shea Heights - gorgeous. They would be The Battery of the Downtown West End.

And that might even push us to create denser, better planned, more valuable industrial/commercial developments on Southside Road.

Originally Posted by J_Murphy

I agree with all of this. I would like the west end of water street (Job to Victoria Park) to feel like walking through the upper west side of New York or something.

Originally Posted by Townie709

I agree completely. That horrible parking lot should be developed into a modern extension of downtown. But, I see that as maybe 25 years or more down the road. What I think should happen before we extend further west, is all the land from 351, west to the Deacon Building be rezoned to have a 50m minimum at least. That will help fill in all those slum-ish areas and force developers to build up. If you look at google maps, there is already basically a grid there with many pieces of land that should be demolished and redeveloped.

Here's a diagram I did a few months ago of possible highrise development sites in the west end of downtown between Waldegrave Street and Springdale Street alone. There are also a few more spaces that I overlooked that could be added as well.


West by Newfie97, on Flickr

This is what the area looks like now...




While I do agree that the Oceanex parking lot should be developed, I think we should ensure that we use up all the land we have right now that's closer to the downtown core. I definitely see that area getting developed, just not in the near future.

Originally Posted by mrjanejacobs

I just toured the west-end area of the study area (not including the Oceanex parking) on Google street-view. This is a really cool couple blocks - I never properly appreciated it because it was/is such an undesirable area. I like how it's actually a couple blocks, somewhat gridded, narrow streets (historically scaled widths) that are not on a slope. There is a lot of potential in this area. What concerns me is a lack of planning. i don't think it's good enough to just have developers come in, one by one, building up on one parcel at a time. If they are just going to do this, then they might as well not do it at all, because it certainly won't do any favours for the livability of the area. We need urban design standards, landscape standards, public space standards - not to mention a comprehensive design strategy that will help integrate public transit, connectivity and other important elements for quality of life, like a policy requiring a minimum amount of tree planting and landscaping, not to mention a policy requiring that new buildings be built directly at the street front, unless an urban design argument can be made for creating a surface level plaza or something.

I would also propose that these buildings be maintained:



I say this just because I think they have a quality that is hyper St.John's-esque. It would be really neat to have a modern addition to the existing buildings or have some construction hover over or curiously cling to the side of these buildings. Plus small remnants of the past help maintain the character of the City. If we flatten the area - it will look like any other downtown - I don't think that is ok. I would much rather see our modern developments have a conversation with the historic buildings, rather than to antagonize or ostracize them. It doesn't have to be the this vs. that argument.

Originally Posted by jeddy1989

Council should add a nice modern pedestrian plaza/space to the west end DT, they obviously need to spruce it all up over on that side anywat, maybe they can convert one of the small parking lots or one of the streets to pedestrian only and do it up as a nice space for people to be in

Originally Posted by Architype

Christopher, IMO - I think the core can stay heritage in the east, it can expand in the west (and some in the central area), and when it runs out of flat land you can begin to develop up the hill in the west end. The steep grades do not have to be a deterrent as they were in the past. Buildings can be connected for pedestrians using systems similar to pedways, incorporating escalators, elevators etc. to overcome the grade changes if necessary. That does not mean there can be no development in the east end, but it will just be more regulated as it is now.