[St. John's] Metro East End Development

[jthetzel]

At the upcoming Council meeting on Tuesday, the Deputy City Manager will recommend demolition of the house at 6 Fort Waldegrave Path in the Battery for new construction (see page 85 of http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/...28R%292pdf.pdf ). This is the colorful yellow house on the footpath that descends from Battery Road to Outer Battery Road:



Another view from the MUN Intangible Cultural Heritage Inventory:



Taken on it's own, the structure is not architecturally significant (few structures in the Battery are), though it contributes significantly to the character of the Battery. The Battery Development Guide permits redevelopment, so long as construction keeps with the architectural character of the area (page 21 of http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/...ne%20Study.pdf ) and does not obstruct existing views (page 19 ibid.). The Deputy City Manager's report suggests that the involved developer is respecting those constraints.

I guess I can't think of any convincing reason within the existing guidelines to not demolish the house (other than why build a new house when you have a structurally sound and interesting old house already there), but I will miss it's sudden yellowness while meandering down that footpath. I also wish City Council would require an approved development plan prior to demolishing structures in heritage areas. I worry this could become an unsightly empty lot while proposed development is delayed for an unknowable period of time.

Vaguely related, a group of musicians calling themselves The 6 Fort Waldegrave lived in and recorded an album in the house in 2009. They have a YouTube video showing a bit of the house's interior ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NZhiquy29c ), and the album can be listened to here: http://6fortwaldegrave.rpmchallenge.com/ .

[J_Murphy]

A local developer is looking to rezone 315 Torbay Road to accommodate over 40 townhouses.



REB Holdings Inc. have put forward an application to rezone the land from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density to allow for the development to proceed. The applicant wants each of the 43 townhouses to be three storeys high. The property, consisting of 8,100 square meters, has frontage on Stirling Crescent.



The developers now must prepare a Land Use Assessment Report, and a public meeting will be arranged before council officially votes on rezoning.

http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?...56611&latest=1

[Horsell]

This is the second proposal for that property in the past couple of years. I liked the first one better, a series of 4 story buildings. This new proposal is essentially a parking lot ringed by very narrow townhomes, I doubt if there will be much in terms of vegetation.
I don't see the folks on Stirling Cres accepting this without a fight. I think the first proposal had access from Torbay Rd.

[J_Murphy]

Originally Posted by Horsell

This is the second proposal for that property in the past couple of years. I liked the first one better, a series of 4 story buildings. This new proposal is essentially a parking lot ringed by very narrow townhomes, I doubt if there will be much in terms of vegetation.
I don't see the folks on Stirling Cres accepting this without a fight. I think the first proposal had access from Torbay Rd.

Guaranteed they will fight it. If I'm not mistaken, the first proposal was fought because the buildings were too high and would invade on privacy, and the usual traffic concerns. People will fight anything in this city and are more content with vacant lots that do nothing but gather litter.

There is also another story in the news of a group of people from a street in the east end that are protesting the installation of sidewalks.

[jthetzel]

Originally Posted by J_Murphy

There is also another story in the news of a group of people from a street in the east end that are protesting the installation of sidewalks.

The Parsonage Drive anti-sidewalk movement is slightly entertaining. Residents don't want sidewalks placed because a handful of shrubberies will be murdered. They claim Parsonage is exempt from sidewalks because standard cul-de-sacs are not required to have sidewalks under development regulations. However, standard cul-de-sacs are only supposed to be 200 meters long with less than 25 units. Parsonage is, apparently, 700 meters long, has 65 units, and feeds two additional cul-de-sacs of its own.

Staff sees this as cut and dry: Parsonage is not a standard cul-de-sac and is clearly meant to have sidewalks under development regulations. Breen probably feels he has to vote against the sidewalks because the petitioners are of his district. Hann ponders the wisdom of voting against staff recommendations, especially when the regulations are clear, but apparently others vote against it anyway. The vote is split. Someone mentions that O'Keefe has a family member living on Parsonage and maybe that constitutes a conflict of interest.

The looming oppression of the mandated sidewalk on the freedom-and-shrubbery-loving residents of Parsonage befuddles Council, who dutifully defers the matter to a later time.

[J_Murphy]

Originally Posted by jthetzel

The looming oppression of the mandated sidewalk on the freedom-and-shrubbery-loving residents of Parsonage befuddles Council, who dutifully defers the matter to a later time.

[Horsell]

The difference between Parsonage Place and most other places in the City is the fact that the average house price is about $800k, or better.
I’m surprised to hear that sidewalks aren’t required on smaller cul de sacs, I live on one with 17 homes and we have sidewalks all the way around. A bloody waste of money to put them there and maintain them. The only real purpose I see is to protect the city from liability as a result of careless snow clearing.
High maintenance concrete sidewalks aren’t necessary on most residential streets, period, and there are many examples in St. John’s and Mt. Pearl where there are none. Look at the money the city spends every year replacing a few feet here and a few feet there, a very costly, labor intensive process.
Ironically there are parts of the city where there should be sidewalks yet there are none. (the south side of Mundy Pond Rd comes to mind).
Perhaps the city should rethink the requirements for sidewalks…this may be a good time, but I doubt it.

[jthetzel]

Looks like renovations have begun on the Four Sisters: https://www.facebook.com/NLHistoricT...282087464103:0 .

[Horsell]

A strange item in the council Agenda for next week. The owners of the property where Golf Town etc. is on White Rose Way wants relief on the number of required parking spaces. It states that “In July 2015 the applicant again submitted an application to begin construction of Building C
from the approved site plan. The revised site plan indicated the site will provide 342 parking
stalls”
It sounds like they are ready to finish that strip mall but in order to do so have to get approval to provide less than the required parking spaces. I hope this is granted quickly because from what I have seen there is more than ample parking for that location. I wonder what new stores will be in the final addition?

[jthetzel]

Originally Posted by Horsell

It sounds like they are ready to finish that strip mall but in order to do so have to get approval to provide less than the required parking spaces. I hope this is granted quickly because from what I have seen there is more than ample parking for that location.

In this case, the property owner might be unsuccessful. His argument is that, currently, the time of peak volume varies for each store and does not overlap, thus less overall parking is needed. But Council could reasonably counter that the store tenants will change and more overall parking will be needed in the future. The minimum parking requirements are clearly defined and the owner is not lacking in space.

Generally, however, I agree that parking requirements at these box stores at the city's periphery need to be reduced. Here is an interesting article arguing that most retail developments are wasteful with unused parking space: http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ter-christmas/ . The author notes municipal parking regulations are disconnected from actual needs. On Black Friday, many lots are half empty. Even if lots were near capacity at peak volume days like Black Friday, they would still be mostly empty the other 362 days of the year. Asphalt doesn't pay taxes and makes it very difficult to walk from one store to another.

According to St. John's Development Regulations (page 88 of http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/...t%202015_0.pdf ), a retail store requires one parking space per 15 square meters of floor area. The average Walmart in Canada is about 9,500 square meters. In St. John's, that Walmart would require roughly 634 parking spots. Subjectively, that feels high, and I don't recall ever seeing the lot at the Stavanger Walmart even a quarter full (CostCo does get quite full, but nothing is stopping a private company from exceeding the minimum requirement). It'd be interesting to know whether the one lot per 15 square meters requirement resulted from specific study of St. John's parking needs or was copied from a more generic source.

This academic paper seems to get at where minimum parking requirements come from, but I haven't read it yet: Shoup DC, 1999. The trouble with minimum parking requirements ( http://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/Trouble.pdf ).

[jthetzel]

Drawings of the proposed Alt Hotel at 123 Water Street in the upcoming agenda ( beginning page 20: http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/...015%28R%29.pdf ).

[Architype]

^ It's a nice clean and modern looking design, in keeping with their brand. Personally, I like it.

[jthetzel]

Originally Posted by Architype

^ It's a nice clean and modern looking design, in keeping with their brand. Personally, I like it.

I agree. It keeps with the brand, but is distinguishably unique to St. John's (not a cookie-cutter airport hotel). The outdoor seating (and all east-facing rooms) will have terrific views of the narrows.

[jthetzel]

Current renderings of the Temperance Street condominiums from the upcoming agenda ( beginning page 21: http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/...015%28R%29.pdf ).

[jthetzel]

Originally Posted by jthetzel

Current renderings of the Temperance Street condominiums from the upcoming agenda ( beginning page 21: http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/...015%28R%29.pdf ).

Also, the Heritage Advisory Committee approved the proposal. Barring the ongoing litigation over the drafts and deposits, the development should move forward.

[Arrakis]

The Luxus Boutique Hotel on Water Street has their website live now. A few concept photos on there of the proposed interior. Will make a nice addition to this end of Water Street along with the Alt Hotel (if that actually happens).

http://www.theluxus.ca/

[Arrakis]

I know it's prob listed in one of the threads here but what is brand of the gas station that is going on the corner of Torbay Rd and Hebron Way across the street from Harvey's Restaurant? It's pretty big based on the number of canopy pylons they have erected there.
Irving and North Atlantic are nearby so it's not them. Is it another Shell?

[SC1986]

ultramar

[colinpeddle]

It has a drive-thru, do we know what's in there? Looks almost like the McDonalds McCafe colors.

[Horsell]

I drove by the site of the proposed "micro" hotel at the corner of Water St and Temperance today and noticed that they are doing additional excavation and site work. Good to see progress but what the heck were they waiting until winter for?!? Bankers???