[St. John's] The Official Project Thread - Page 528

SignalHillHiker · #**10541** Posted **Sep 16, 2015, 8:41 PM**

And, also... it's a damn hole in the ground. Even the old Fortis Building looks better.

jthetzel · #**10542** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 1:46 AM**

At the Refresh Water Street Public Forum tonight, Mary Bishop and Greg Sheppard, from Halifax-based CBCL, gave an overview of the Water Street project. The St. John's civil engineering and landscape architecture firm Tract Consulting also participated. Councillors Galgay, Hickman, and Lane were present.

Sheppard reviewed the time-line for the underground infrastructure replacement. Preliminary planning will wrap-up October of this year and a plan will be presented to Council in November for discussion and approval. The project will consist of five phases with each phase taking about a year to complete. Tendering for the first phase will take place February 2016 with construction beginning April 2016. Tentatively, work will begin at the west end of Water Street and work east.

Bishop led a discussion of street-level improvements. A number of ideas were put forth by the public audience, many of which are on the Engage St. John's website: http://engagestjohns.ca/water-street...ider-sidewalks . The staff seem especially excited about flexible streets, where movable bollards allow sidewalks (and outdoor seating) to expand into street-side parking during summer, and be reclaimed for parking during winter. Parkettes (small, moveable, seasonal greenspace) could also be created in these expandable areas. Flexible streets might facilitate converting segments of Water Street to pedestrian malls (bi-monthly, weekends only, or seasonally). There was also some talk about geothermal heated sidewalks (apparently the new Fortis building is heated to some degree by geothermal energy). However, without a cost estimate for heated sidewalks, it is difficult to have a productive debate on their merit. Another idea was to provide a free GoBus-like shuttle that would loop along Water and Duckworth to encourage people to park in the garages.

City staff and the consulting firms will continue to gather ideas for street-level improvements through September. A concept plan will be drafted in October and presented to Council in November.

SignalHillHiker · #**10543** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 12:09 PM**

Nice. Streetcars instead of a Go Bus would be great. Even on the same small route.

J_Murphy · #**10544** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 12:46 PM**

I have to commend the City for putting so much effort into getting public input and seeming committed to minimizing negative impacts on businesses.

I just hope at the end of all this, it was worth while and the street doesn't end up looking just like it does now, except with new asphalt and concrete.

PoscStudent · #**10545** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 1:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_Murphy

I have to commend the City for putting so much effort into getting public input and seeming committed to minimizing negative impacts on businesses.

I just hope at the end of all this, it was worth while and the street doesn't end up looking just like it does now, except with new asphalt and concrete.

According to businesses the city hasn't done a great job of engaging with them, with some asking for the city to push back the project by a year. Chris Andrews was on OpenLine this morning saying that businesses downtown may not find out until 6 weeks before whether their businesses will be impacted this coming year or not. The city has yet to decide which area of Water Street they will start with first.

jjavman · #**10546** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 1:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

I see a very simple and effective solution that may be painful but it would have a drastic effect on downtown IMO...get rid of vehicle street parking on Water Street and use some of that extra space to increase the walk-able area. By eliminating parking on water street not only would you increase the amount of walkable space you would also cut down on the bumper to bumper traffic as half the amount of traffic on that road at any given time is simply people looking for parking spots. Also while you are increasing the width of the sidewalks you could "fancyify" them and the lighting. Add some bike racks/park benches/small plants/extra garbage and recycling cans along the sidewalk. Allow restaurants to add patios in front.

This would probably also make snow clearing easier in the winter.

If anyone argues "but!..but the parking!" you are just effectively advocating for the status quo.

not only get rid of parking, institute "pedestrian only" aka Sparks Street Mall or sections of Old Montreal. This could be a world class ancient seaport tourist destination. Imagine arriving on cruise ship and seeing a cobblestoned pedestrian mall with pretty shops and flowers. Isn't this what businesses should be striving for? Would it not increase their business, with an easy walking flow back and forth the street to restaurants, pubs, and shops? The loss of parking spaces relative to what's available in garages is relatively small. Think BIG councilors!

rthomasd · #**10547** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 2:14 PM**

Agreed, the City does make an effort to inform and engage the public. The problem seems to start as soon as the projects start, and then the City takes a back-seat to the developer/contractor/crews who don't seem to have any concept of time-scale or project management. I can't think of a single recent project that was completed on time or without a followup-tear-up - Elizabeth Ave, didn't know there was rock under the street (delay), forgot where driveways were (re-do sidewalks). How many years did it take to do Craigmiller Ave, Water Street West, Portugal Cove Road, Cashin Ave, Allendale Road (still torn up ), etc.

I have no faith that the City can keep this project on schedule ( or on budget) and it will result in the loss of several businesses on Water Street.

J_Murphy · #**10548** Posted **Sep 17, 2015, 2:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

According to businesses the city hasn't done a great job of engaging with them, with some asking for the city to push back the project by a year. Chris Andrews was on OpenLine this morning saying that businesses downtown may not find out until 6 weeks before whether their businesses will be impacted this coming year or not. The city has yet to decide which area of Water Street they will start with first.

Well this work was only announced a couple of months ago and it is a huge piece of work. It is going to take a lot of time to engage with all the business owners on Water Street. Pushing the work off is only prolonging it. It isn't going to start until next year so there is still time to get input. I foresee they will end up giving businesses tax breaks. I believe they did that when they were working further west on Water street before.

SignalHillHiker · #**10549** Posted **Sep 21, 2015, 7:36 PM**

Via CBC on FB.

Prescott/Water ALT.

PoscStudent · #**10550** Posted **Sep 21, 2015, 11:56 PM**

Wish they had added some colour, but the design is cool

SignalHillHiker · #**10551** Posted **Sep 27, 2015, 8:09 PM**

From the agenda for tomorrow's council meeting.

J_Murphy · #**10552** Posted **Sep 28, 2015, 10:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

From the agenda for tomorrow's council meeting.

There has to be a better image available than this.

I noticed an excavator parked next to the building on McBrides Hill and a contractors sign up. Looks like work is proceeding.

Horsell · #**10553** Posted **Sep 28, 2015, 5:38 PM**

Yes, it is encouraging to see men and equipment at the MIX site finally, hopefully we will see the final result in 12 to 18 months. I’m not sure what the overall project schedule might be but that doesn’t seem unreasonable…does it? More than likely it will be next summer before we see the extension and additional floors take shape, that is when we will know they are really serious.

The only outstanding issue these days seems to be the material to be used for part of the façade. I am not an engineer nor construction specialist but I find it interesting that there is so much emphasis lately on these metal panels….see JAG, Brine condos, CONA (Prince Philip Campus), Taxation center. Obviously they are cost effective and can be quite attractive in their own way, however there must be some issue with durability. The material proposed for MIX is rated at a 40 year life span, what then after that, simply replace them? Maybe in some cases that is to be considered the useful life of the building, who knows.

Personally I would prefer to see a material more in line with the existing concrete façade of the MIX but I guess that is “old school”. Seems to me like the Heritage Committee is starting to go soft on heritage with this and other concessions (ie: Alt) lately. Maybe they are just getting worn down and like so many others just want to get on with seeing something, anything, constructed downtown.

Perhaps, instead of the Heritage Advisory Committee (which only advises and has no real clout) there should be a specific set of guidelines that are not subject to interpretation and variances. I am not saying that have to be a narrow set of guidelines, but rather specific so that it is understood from the beginning what is and is not acceptable.

SignalHillHiker · #**10554** Posted **Sep 28, 2015, 7:58 PM**

Yeah. Faux heritage can be worse than a modern building. Just look at Rawlin's Cross. That building on the corner used to be covered in black plastic-like material. It was gorgeous. Now it's a faux-heritage mess. It looks cobbled together from 3-4 different buildings. It looks like a Central Slum remnant.

That said... our heritage isn't great. Our commercial buildings are as plain as they come. Water Street's old brick facades would be for warehouses in any other city of our age. They're simply, plain, poor, not ornate. Likewise... our clapboard rowhouses are saved only by elaborate woodwork and bright colours. They're still cheap, easily made. Lio calls them hen cages.

So for us, it's the immersiveness of heritage that's the draw. It's being able to stand on Gower Street, squint, look in all directions, and feel you're living in 1892. That's what makes us special. And even a single, individual modern building - in the wrong location - can ruin that.

So we need some great protections, but they have to be reasonable.

SignalHillHiker · #**10555** Posted **Sep 29, 2015, 9:45 PM**

Via CBC on FB.

JCE · #**10556** Posted **Sep 30, 2015, 12:30 AM**

J_Murphy · #**10557** Posted **Sep 30, 2015, 4:58 PM**

I really hate to complain about the new look for MIX, but I really don't like it. I think the old design looked much better. I'm glad to see some progress and happy that this building is finally being done, but I'm slightly disappointed.

Horsell · #**10558** Posted **Sep 30, 2015, 7:10 PM**

Re: Salvation Army buildings...one down one to go. The one that is gone wasn't much to look at anyway but it would have been nice (I'm saying that as if it is gone too) to have retained the facade of the other building and incorporated it into whatever will rise from the ashes...whenever that might be. For now I guess we will just have to be content with another parking lot.

I still say that the "great master plan" of the City should stipulate that there be MINIMUM building heights of at least 7 or 8 stories...maybe even higher... in that area of downtown in order to maximize the use of very valuable land.

PoscStudent · #**10559** Posted **Sep 30, 2015, 11:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_Murphy

I really hate to complain about the new look for MIX, but I really don't like it. I think the old design looked much better. I'm glad to see some progress and happy that this building is finally being done, but I'm slightly disappointed.

I don't know mind it but the other proposal was better.

Horsell · #**10560** Posted **Oct 6, 2015, 1:23 PM**

This week’s council agenda was a bit of a yawn but I guess we can’t expect every week to contain announcements of new developments. There are so many projects currently on the books that aren’t going anywhere soon that it seems unlikely there will be anything big in the near future.

I was really hoping we would have seen some movement on the Hilton project this summer but I guess that isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. The Star of The Sea didn’t go anywhere beyond the excavation.

Hopefully developers are just taking a breather and over the winter will reassess their markets and maybe move forward with things next year. I’d be hard pressed to think of which project might be the next out of the gate but if I had to put my money on one it might be the Alt Hotel. Just a feeling