HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6901  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2015, 3:16 PM
Franco401 Franco401 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by spring lake View Post
I not a native Frederictonian. Please forgive my lack historical reference here. These are my thoughts:

When I first came here in 2013, I was impressed. Finding a city with a harmonious “built environment” is like finding a needle in the proverbial haystack these days.

Some people in city planning seemingly want to mar what is unique about Fredericton. Lately, they are allowing structures that are more symbols of developer greed, and detract from the local neighborhood. There is a new very large, bulky apartment building that you see on the right when going over the Westmorland bridge to the North side. It is on St Mary’s St., and dwarfs the nearby lovely homes in that riverside neighborhood. (The other dominating building on the north side of the river is Southview. I wonder who allowed that eyesore).

There is a new mid-rise going up on west Queen Street and the developers supposedly bought the land from the city for $1. That new building is massive compared to the other structures in the city. Yes, there are other buildings as tall, but the new building is broader. It likely has more square footage than any other building in the city. I understand that mayor Woodside likes development for the sake of development alone; the "any development is good” mentality. What does this building add to the city beyond the tax income? It does not contribute aesthetically. I have lived in South Florida and I am used to developers getting their way with ugly structures on waterfronts, but why allow that here?

I can see a more modest structure on the site making a contribution to the city. Some of those in power here must think that bigger is better. Too bad they are eager to mimic places that are not as nice.
Well first off, I want to say that Royale T Suites (the massive one you mentioned) is the type of development that we should always want. I don't see any problem with a building that has such a massive amount of floor space, especially when it adds to the skyline so much.

Secondly, the main problem is the way development happens here. There aren't that many of them, so the small gang can get away with anything.

Southview is an unfortunate example of this, but it isn't normally an issue since the last huge boom occurred in the 90s, and most of it occurred in the suburbs. With the massive amount of sprawl that occcured in that time, the city was more than willing to let developers build not-necessarily-pretty condos and apartments just about wherever they pleased. In that context (combined with my previous complaints that apartments in Fredericton usually look like this instead of this) Southview seems like a pretty great way to go.

Last edited by Franco401; Aug 28, 2015 at 9:41 PM. Reason: formatting
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6902  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2015, 3:38 PM
Freddypop's Avatar
Freddypop Freddypop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Go Pats!
Posts: 2,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by spring lake View Post
I not a native Frederictonian. Please forgive my lack historical reference here. These are my thoughts:

When I first came here in 2013, I was impressed. Finding a city with a harmonious “built environment” is like finding a needle in the proverbial haystack these days.

Some people in city planning seemingly want to mar what is unique about Fredericton. Lately, they are allowing structures that are more symbols of developer greed, and detract from the local neighborhood. There is a new very large, bulky apartment building that you see on the right when going over the Westmorland bridge to the North side. It is on St Mary’s St., and dwarfs the nearby lovely homes in that riverside neighborhood. (The other dominating building on the north side of the river is Southview. I wonder who allowed that eyesore).

There is a new mid-rise going up on west Queen Street and the developers supposedly bought the land from the city for $1. That new building is massive compared to the other structures in the city. Yes, there are other buildings as tall, but the new building is broader. It likely has more square footage than any other building in the city. I understand that mayor Woodside likes development for the sake of development alone; the "any development is good” mentality. What does this building add to the city beyond the tax income? It does not contribute aesthetically. I have lived in South Florida and I am used to developers getting their way with ugly structures on waterfronts, but why allow that here?

I can see a more modest structure on the site making a contribution to the city. Some of those in power here must think that bigger is better. Too bad they are eager to mimic places that are not as nice.
Appreciate and respect your comments. Will try and bring a historical perspective to my comments. Re the specific developments on the northside to which you refer....Those developments rose out of a long period of decline for those areas (decades). No one was willing to make new investments in those areas and there was a significant decline in individuals/families wanting to live there. Given the option of further decline I for one was pleased that council decided to proceed with those plans. I will also be happy when the former strip club land develops per plans. Additionally these are just the first of changes in those areas based on the municipal plan. Over time you will see a wider range of mixed housing. Keep in mind that this is an area in transition.

Regarding the downtown building....That land was also vacant for decades and developers where never enthusiastic about building there due to a number of reasons which would impact their bottom line. Principle among those reasons was the land was the former city dump and it floods every 2 -3 years. The reason that city provided the land to that developer for $1 was that it was going to cost at least a million if not more just to prep the land for development. The process that the city went through to have a builder commit to that land was through "an Expression of Interest". I seem to recall they placed that expression nationally on more than one occasion. Not many takers due to the reasons listed above. The main objective was to have more people live downtown and this project and the adjacent Westpointe project accomplishes that. Smaller venues are more traditional but the developer would require a specific number of apartments to make it worth while. I too would have preferred something more fitting to that area but am satisfied that council made the correct decision. A parking lot it no longer is.

Last edited by Freddypop; Aug 28, 2015 at 8:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6903  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2015, 6:13 PM
Dr.Devon Dr.Devon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 94
Freddypop - thanks for the overview - pretty much said what I would have said exactly - but I didn't feel I had the time to convey it properly.

Spring Lake - your opinions are welcomed and, as a native Frederictonion, the more people who 'give a shit', from here or not, the better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6904  
Old Posted Aug 30, 2015, 3:13 PM
OliverD OliverD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by spring lake View Post
I not a native Frederictonian. Please forgive my lack of historical reference here. These are my thoughts:

When I first came here in 2013, I was impressed. Finding a city with a harmonious “built environment” is like finding a needle in the proverbial haystack these days.

Some people in city planning seemingly want to mar what is unique about Fredericton. Lately, they are allowing structures that are more symbols of developer greed, and detract from the local neighborhood. There is a new very large, bulky apartment building that you see on the right when going over the Westmorland bridge to the North side. It is on St Mary’s St., and dwarfs the nearby lovely homes in that riverside neighborhood. (The other dominating building on the north side of the river is Southview. I wonder who allowed that eyesore).

There is a new mid-rise going up on west Queen Street and the developers supposedly bought the land from the city for $1. That new building is massive compared to the other structures in the city. Yes, there are other buildings as tall, but the new building is broader. It likely has more square footage than any other building in the city. I understand that mayor Woodside likes development for the sake of development alone; the "any development is good” mentality. What does this building add to the city beyond the tax income? It does not contribute aesthetically. I have lived in South Florida and I am used to developers getting their way with ugly structures on waterfronts, but why allow that here?

I can see a more modest structure on the site making a contribution to the city. Some of those in power here must think that bigger is better. Too bad they are eager to mimic places that are not as nice.
I've lived in Fredericton since 1999. When I arrived here, there were very few condo buildings or townhouses because you could buy a small home for under $100k - sometimes well under. As the housing market rallied, people began to be priced out of single family homes and construction of low-rise condos, garden homes, and townhouses increased throughout the city.

A single family homes often isn't a realistic option for people who want to live in or near the city centre and thus we are seeing these larger developments. I applaud them because they are bringing density to our downtown, which makes for a more vibrant downtown with more shopping, entertainment, and dining options.

That said, I will say that many of the buildings being constructed lack visual appeal. While the Westpointe building looks quite nice I'm concerned that the Royale T Suites (worst name ever!) will be quite ugly. I do wish that developers would more often hire good architects.

I don't really see an issue with the apartment building you mention on St. Mary's Street. It isn't directly adjacent to any single family homes and also borders a commercial property. That area of Devon has always had a mix of developments and having an apartment building near older single family homes is pretty typical no matter what city you're in.

The apartments on Queen Street are near existing apartments buildings so they fit in well in my opinion.

When you talk about developer greed I think we need to contextualize exactly what it takes to generate a profit. As mentioned above, the land for Royale T. Suites was basically given to the developer but the cost just to prepare the land for construction was over $1M. To justify that expenditure you need a large building.

I really like the vision that Fredericton has for its downtown. It will take decades to truly realize but it's great to see the city doing long term planning. Having more residents in the downtown area is a critical step in the process and hopefully it won't be too long before we see a new Playhouse, a redevelopment of the old Playhouse, a new hotel adjacent to the convention centre, and development of the Irving lands at Regent and King.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6905  
Old Posted Aug 30, 2015, 8:29 PM
Franco401 Franco401 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 1,203
Forest Hill Road water main repair is complete, now open to all traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6906  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 12:36 PM
Taeolas Taeolas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 3,960
Weather permitting, the roundabout opens in 2 weeks.

From the sounds of it, paving is basically done. They just need to add the lines this week and signage next week.

There will be info kiosks at the Regent Mall.

Trucks and large vehicles are expected to use both lanes as they go through, so cars need to yield to them.

What I find a bit interesting is that the tone on the CBC comments has shifted, from "It will be chaos!" to "It's about damn time we started doing these"/"Are Freddie's so stupid they can't use something the rest of the world (and the rest of the province) uses?".

I'm looking forward to seeing this in action once it opens up. As I mentioned earlier, I just got back from Scotland, and the roundabouts on the major roads up there (including 2 and 3 lane roundabouts) worked very nicely overall, even when crazy north american drivers who don't know how to use them were thrown into the mix. (By the end of the trip, my mom/our driver, was starting to get the hang of them)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6907  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 1:00 PM
OliverD OliverD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,798
^ Drove by this morning and there is still some paving to be done.

This weekend I saw a sign advertising a new development called City Squire Estates in the area between Patience Lane, Rainsford Lane, and Prospect (across from the Shannex campus). Looks like it will consist of apartment/condo buildings and more duplexes. Can't find any reference to it online though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6908  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 4:36 PM
Blue Blazer's Avatar
Blue Blazer Blue Blazer is offline
The Sheriff
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Fredericton NB
Posts: 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeolas View Post
Weather permitting, the roundabout opens in 2 weeks.

From the sounds of it, paving is basically done. They just need to add the lines this week and signage next week.

There will be info kiosks at the Regent Mall.

Trucks and large vehicles are expected to use both lanes as they go through, so cars need to yield to them.

What I find a bit interesting is that the tone on the CBC comments has shifted, from "It will be chaos!" to "It's about damn time we started doing these"/"Are Freddie's so stupid they can't use something the rest of the world (and the rest of the province) uses?".

I'm looking forward to seeing this in action once it opens up. As I mentioned earlier, I just got back from Scotland, and the roundabouts on the major roads up there (including 2 and 3 lane roundabouts) worked very nicely overall, even when crazy north american drivers who don't know how to use them were thrown into the mix. (By the end of the trip, my mom/our driver, was starting to get the hang of them)

Did you take any pictures of the round abouts in Scotland ? and also how was the public transit in Scotland. How does it compare to it here ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6909  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 4:56 PM
Taeolas Taeolas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 3,960
No pics of the roundabouts off hand, but I'm sure they're a dime a dozen; street view would show them just as easily. Some of the busiest roundabouts were controlled by traffic lights; they'd stop traffic in the loop to let more cars enter the roundabout. If Smythe/Route 8 ever gets that busy (in 20+ years) that might be a solution they could consider, but I doubt we'll ever need that.

If you rent a car over there make sure you get the GPS unless you are familiar with the area; roads are too narrow and badly marked to get by with just maps. A GPS is worth it.

Transit was what you would expect for a major city. Tram line available to the downtown (Princess street) from the Airport. All day bus service available for £4/person. All Evening service for £3. Trains leaving to the rest of the UK and outlying areas of the city all the time, and bus service to the towns and other cities all the time. (One company was advertising 50 trips/day to Glasgow for £8 IIRC). All in all, on par with what I remember in Ottawa. (And Apples to Rugby balls for comparing to a small city like Freddy, or other Maritime cities)

Edinburgh itself is a tight city. Take Freddy, keep its city limits and put 10x the population in it, while keeping the building height 10 stories and under, and you'd have that Scottish city. Oh and add a Major Tourist attraction right smack dab in the middle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6910  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 5:31 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is offline
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 34,342
Yes, driving is Scotland is an adventure. Lots of single track roads in the Highlands (with passing pull outs), so you have to keep your wits about you.

The main secondary roads are really narrow, with barely a couple of cm between your rear view mirror and the car in the opposite lane. To compound things, usually there are curbs on the roads, even in the countryside, so it's impossible to pull over out of the way.......

Frequently 18 wheel lorries have to back up to make a sharp turn in urban areas. That can be an adventure if you are following them!

The first time we saw a multilane roundabout at the intersection of two major motorways (near Perth if I remember), we nearly freaked out.
__________________
Go 'Cats Go
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6911  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 6:13 PM
Taeolas Taeolas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 3,960
Thankfully the GPS managed to mostly keep us on 2 Lane roads that, while 2 lane, were wide enough for 2 vehicles to pass. (just keep to your lane tight).

There was one point going to Fyve that it sent us down a (paved) farming lane over the hills to the village; but that was the only GPS-related 'fun' we had. Thankfully we didn't encounter anyone coming the other direction.

And yes, most of the roads have curbs, something mom (the driver) realized often since we'd shout out every time she bumped one.

The two lane roundabouts were strange at first, and I know we 'broke' the roundabout rules more than a few times, (ie going to the 2nd exit when in the outer lane), but by the end of the trip we got the hang of them mostly. I got used to just pointing at where she had to exit and telling her to hug left or right depending on the lane, and she only cut lanes off (Exiting to the left lane of the exit from the inner lane of the roundabout) a handful of times.

Driving on the Scottish roads do really make you appreciate both how wide our roads are, and that maybe our roads might be a bit TOO wide.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6912  
Old Posted Sep 1, 2015, 2:54 PM
OliverD OliverD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,798
Someone sent me this pic of the Riverview Arms taken in the '70s. This bar/restaurant was located on Waterloo Row under the Princess Margaret Bridge.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6913  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 1:42 PM
OliverD OliverD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,798
There's a proposal before the PAC to convert the The City Motel into an assisted living facility. It looks like the building would get a significant facelift and addition: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/B2.pdf

Proposed four unit townhouse to replace an older house that was torn down on Charlotte Street recently: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/D2.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6914  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 2:28 PM
Taeolas Taeolas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 3,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverD View Post
There's a proposal before the PAC to convert the The City Motel into an assisted living facility. It looks like the building would get a significant facelift and addition: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/B2.pdf
That'll be quite the facelift. From the looks of it, they would be adding another floor to the building and adding a new extension along the Regent leg of the lot.

It is in a good spot; handy to the hospital and to shopping. But I wonder if that corner might be too busy for that sort of development.

In any case, it should be a good improvement to the area.

I do wonder if they will replace/upgrade the sign, or just remove it entirely (since it's not in the renders). That location is an advertising gold mine that I doubt the owners would want to leave untapped. Put in a proper LED sign (like the NBEX has now) would really modernize it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6915  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 2:29 PM
cl812's Avatar
cl812 cl812 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 1,512
That is a huge improvement over the existing building!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6916  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 3:16 PM
Franco401 Franco401 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverD View Post
There's a proposal before the PAC to convert the The City Motel into an assisted living facility. It looks like the building would get a significant facelift and addition: [url]http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygovernment/resources/B2.pdf[/url
YES. That building is one of the worst in the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6917  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 3:31 PM
Blue Blazer's Avatar
Blue Blazer Blue Blazer is offline
The Sheriff
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Fredericton NB
Posts: 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverD View Post
There's a proposal before the PAC to convert the The City Motel into an assisted living facility. It looks like the building would get a significant facelift and addition: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/B2.pdf

Proposed four unit townhouse to replace an older house that was torn down on Charlotte Street recently: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/D2.pdf

That will be interesting. That motel (City Motel) is some run down and not used by many. Except them crazy adult parties. It would be nice to see them clean that up some
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6918  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 3:39 PM
Scarface Scarface is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverD View Post
There's a proposal before the PAC to convert the The City Motel into an assisted living facility. It looks like the building would get a significant facelift and addition: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/B2.pdf

Proposed four unit townhouse to replace an older house that was torn down on Charlotte Street recently: http://www.fredericton.ca/en/citygov...sources/D2.pdf
Both proposals look a lot better then what is currently at those locations I'm glad to see that old motel might be used for something useful, and as for the now empty lot that would be transformed into what would look to be 4 family sized units.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6919  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 5:20 PM
KnoxfordGuy's Avatar
KnoxfordGuy KnoxfordGuy is offline
New Brunswick booster!
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Fredericton, New Brunswick
Posts: 1,619
I live in the apartment building behind the motel and I wonder if my building will be affected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6920  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2015, 5:39 PM
Taeolas Taeolas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 3,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnoxfordGuy View Post
I live in the apartment building behind the motel and I wonder if my building will be affected.
Looks like it bends around it. The extension will take up the current Hotel parking lot that runs along Regent. I guess an Assisted Living Home has less parking requirements than the hotel does, letting them do a bigger building.

If you have a view at the end of the apartments, then you won't any more; but otherwise it shouldn't really affect you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:57 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.