[St. John's] The Official Project Thread

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by Trevor3

Personally, I think the best location for condo developments would be along Elizabeth between Churchill Square and Portugal Cove road, but there's the issue of all the existing homes since its a built up area. But who knows, if someone with enough money came along...

I believe Elizabeth Tower is slated to be converted to condos, which is a start. That area is ideal for some high-density condos (if Elizabeth can be successfully expanded to 4 lanes) as most necessities are within a few minute drive from the area such as the Sobeys and Churchill Square. Schools are close and so is a nice park area.

[Architype]

^Agree that some areas of Elizabeth could be better redeveloped, and could play a more important role as a central area.
_______________________

Here is an update of the map I did some time ago, notice that there are fewer red dots and more yellow and green now. I didn't clutter the map with labels in order to just give a better overview, although some cancelled or abandoned proposals have just been replaced with new ones. However, it still shows there is an almost total absence of development in older residential areas.

[PoscStudent]

There are the condos in and around Tiffany Lane which is pretty much in that Elizabeth Avenue area.

[Architype]

There could be higher density around the University and government buildings (large employment and destination areas), Elizabeth Ave would be an ideal place for it.

[PoscStudent]

Halliday Place off Elizabeth, across from the Arts & Administrative Building, which was approved for I think 11 homes should have been approved for a condo.

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

Halliday Place off Elizabeth, across from the Arts & Administrative Building, which was approved for I think 11 homes should have been approved for a condo.

It was pretty lucky that Halliday place got approved for anything. Condos would have been a potentially nice idea, but people had always feared that cul-de-sac would just turn in to another residence. There's such a large population of students on Elizabeth Avenue West anyway, I don't think the area would have turned in to a new residence-esque place more-so than any other house along the street.

[Architype]

It's too much of a NIMBY area, they tried I think, but they wouldn't stand for it because they expected loud party loving university students to inhabit them (ugh!) - discrimination?. There is other land in that area though which may someday be redeveloped. Condos shouldn't need really large sites, elsewhere I've seen single house lots redeveloped into small multi unit buildings, making them worth several times more in value.

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by Architype

It's too much of a NIMBY area, they tried I think, but they wouldn't stand for it because they expected loud party loving university students to inhabit them (ugh!) - discrimination?. There is other land in that area though which may someday be redeveloped. Condos shouldn't need really large sites, elsewhere I've seen single house lots redeveloped into small multi unit buildings, making them worth several times more in value.

Exactly. It's exactly the same as the skate park opposition on Blackmarsh road. Sure there may be parties and whatnot, but just like at any other place, if the noise is too much after 11, call the police. Easy solution. Plus, Halliday place could be completely inhabited by medicine students for all the NIMBYs know.

[PoscStudent]

Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly

Exactly. It's exactly the same as the skate park opposition on Blackmarsh road. Sure there may be parties and whatnot, but just like at any other place, if the noise is too much after 11, call the police. Easy solution. Plus, Halliday place could be completely inhabited by medicine students for all the NIMBYs know.

I was glad to see the indoor skate park approved unanimously, people had letters of complaints because they didn't want "those people" in the their area. I cannot see how it would not be a human rights violation if council had decided not to approve it because of "those people".

As well I think there was some confusion around this before but on the news a few weeks ago they did say that there were two residences being built for MUN. Both were announced seperately and I think when they announced the second one some of us were unsure if they were re-announcing the first one or if there would be two built.

[Architype]

Isn't there a construction crane there (MUN) now?

[PoscStudent]

Originally Posted by Architype

Isn't there a construction crane there (MUN) now?

Yup! It's pretty noticeable throughout the east end area.

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

Yup! It's pretty noticeable throughout the east end area.

I think the original plan was for two houses, and was cut back to one at some point when money was tight, and is currently back at two 6-storey houses again. You can see the plans in detail on the John Hearn architect website, along with some of his other proposed projects.

[PoscStudent]

I don't understand why the city does not put proposal online? I just went to Regina's website and they list all their proposals.

[Architype]

Vancouver does too:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...apps/index.htm

(These are only ones pending approval for permits, and doesn't include proposals not at this stage or under construction etc. or most minor proposals)

This link shows all the stages and scrutinization it has to go through:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...s/glossary.htm

[PoscStudent]

Originally Posted by Architype

Vancouver does too:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...apps/index.htm

Most probably do, Regina was just the first city off the top of my head to type into google.

[statbass]

I read a blog a little while back that outlined some of the (possible) new stores going into the Stavanger/Aberdeen power centre expansion. I took a drive up by the area a few weeks back and other than the new RONA and Metro self storage nothing has been developed. I was expecting a bit more development than that! Just wondering if anyone has extra information on this?

Below is a link to the blog, I believe it's been previously posted on this thread:

http://www.signalblog.ca/?cat=174

[Marty_Mcfly]

St. John's aims for massive expansion

The City of St. John's is asking for government approval to pave the way for two major areas of expansion, with at least one neighbour not impressed with the move.

City council is asking the Newfoundland and Labrador government to rezone two swaths of land from rural to urban.

One area of land is near Kenmount Road, while the other is in the largely undeveloped Southlands area.

Deputy Mayor Shannie Duff said the request is justified "because there is huge demand and because it fits in with the general policies of the regional plan. You try to develop from the inside out."

Conception Bay South Mayor Woodrow French, however, is not keen on what he has heard about the proposed development, which he acknowledges is not much.

"At this particular point in time, I've got to be against it, because of the fact that we don't know enough about it," said French.

French said Conception Bay South is concerned that it may wind up paying for part of the development, through shares costs that would be incurred by the regional water authority.

"The impact is higher rates, way higher rates on your water. All this infrastructure — pumps, lift stations, everything else — has to be maintained," he said.

But Duff said neighbouring towns should not fear expanded development inside St. John's.

"His town will not end up paying for part of that because any additional infrastructure that we have to put in is likely to be paid for by the prospective developers," she said.

Duff said any development will need to protect watershed areas and ensure that a city policy of zero runoff from new developments is respected.

The city hopes to see development start as soon as 2012.

Development in the Southlands area has been proceeding rapidly in recent years, although residents there have complained that their needs for services, particularly recreation, have been ignored.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfou...nsion-517.html



That's a large chunk of land.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly

That's a large chunk of land.

Noted that last night when I Googlemapped the area. If all of that land were used for subdivision, how much of a potential population increase would that see for St.John's?

[PoscStudent]

Well Mount Pearl has 25,000 residents and the land St. John's wants to open is probably three times the size of Mount Pearl.

[Architype]

^ I was just trying to figure this out.


The land area they are talking about is about 5 sq miles. 5 sq miles = about 13 sq km, and St.John's overall population density is listed at about 225 per sq km, but that includes lots of vacant land. Using that figure it would be only 2,925, but in reality the density would be much higher. At typical suburban densities you might have only about 15 to 20 persons per acre. 13 sq km = 3212 acres, and that might mean over 48,000 people to over 68,000, (comparable to or more than the city of Mt.Pearl, CBS and Paradise.

The area of Mt. Pearl is listed at 6.1 sq miles, but that also includes undeveloped land.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pearl

^ Edit - did some error managment recalculation on this, which raised the figures considerably.