HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > St. John's


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 11:28 PM
displacednewfie displacednewfie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Edmonton,Alberta(work) St. John's, NL (where my heart is)
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
Well that does sound both ignorant and cynical..

*************************

Anyone hear whether or not this was approved? I'm pretty sure we all know the answer anyway haha
Wasn't supposed to be, but after the mess that the Heritage Folk kicked up over the Twisted Sister proposal and how the latest incarnation of the Halifax City Council killed SKYE Halifax, the fact that they ended up with nothing more than a gravel parking lot looks good on both of them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 11:35 PM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
Just saw on the CBC liveblog that the AP hotel was unanimously approved by city council. Now it goes to the province for approval and then another public meeting.

Can anyone explain to me why the province has to grant approval for an extension of an existing property in downtown St. John's? Seems to me that those kind of decisions should be made by the city alone and not have to be processed by the province. Any development in the city should be the city's responsibility, not the province's. It only needlessly slows down the pace of development. This must be one area of which mayor O'Keefe was referring to when he said the city relations with the province are archaic and need to be updated to give the city greater authority over what goes on within its borders.
Just thought I'd bring this over to the next page
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 11:57 PM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 7,169
Provincial approval AND another meeting? Another meeting about what???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 12:19 AM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly View Post
Provincial approval AND another meeting? Another meeting about what???
I really don't know... I'm confused too
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 12:20 AM
Horsell's Avatar
Horsell Horsell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
Just saw on the CBC liveblog that the AP hotel was unanimously approved by city council. Now it goes to the province for approval and then another public meeting.

Can anyone explain to me why the province has to grant approval for an extension of an existing property in downtown St. John's? Seems to me that those kind of decisions should be made by the city alone and not have to be processed by the province. Any development in the city should be the city's responsibility, not the province's. It only needlessly slows down the pace of development. This must be one area of which mayor O'Keefe was referring to when he said the city relations with the province are archaic and need to be updated to give the city greater authority over what goes on within its borders.
For clarification, the hotel has not yet been approved, what has been approved is a motion to ask the province to amend the municipal plan to designate that zone "parking and other uses" and to increase the height limit.
The Province always has to approve (ie: rubber stamp) any changes to these planning regulations.
There would have been no talk of this if it had been within the existing zoning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 12:26 AM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 7,169
This is why developments disappear. There's just too much back and forth for anything to get approved
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 12:58 AM
Horsell's Avatar
Horsell Horsell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly View Post
This is why developments disappear. There's just too much back and forth for anything to get approved
This is true, and the main reason we need a new municipal plan.
If you know what the rules are and you play by them then the process is much smoother, and quicker.
Even with the new plan there might still be an occasional need for amendments but hopefully they will be few and far between.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 12:06 PM
J.A.I.L.'s Avatar
J.A.I.L. J.A.I.L. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 45
Atlantic Place Hotel A Go!

St. John's City Council is moving forward with the process of adding three additional storeys atop the Atlantic Place parking garage, to be occupied by a hotel. A public meeting was held October 29th to discuss the amendments. Those in attendance were generally in favour of the project.
Mayor Dennis O'Keefe says the new structure would be a positive change both aesthetically and functionally.
He says the building is not very attractive, as is. He says this proposal will provide a high-end hotel, enhance the harbour side of Water Street, and make the downtown more attractive.
The only consistent public concern is that 50 parking spaces would be lost to the redevelopment. But, Councillor Sandy Hickman says those spaces will be regained.
He says the lost 50 spaces will be regained with the opening of two additional garages.

http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?...40628&latest=1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2014, 8:07 PM
Horsell's Avatar
Horsell Horsell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 636
The next step in the Atlantic Place Garage saga will take place next week (Jan 15th) when the proposed hotel extension goes to an independent hearing on the proposed amendments. I wonder if this will get the same lukewarm turnout as the public hearing held back in November.

This hearing will be one of the last chances to put forward any objections to this site specific amendment.

I don’t understand why there is so little objection to this proposal, is it because concerned citizens feel beaten down or what is it. Maybe everyone loves the neon design for our formerly historic waterfront.

There are probably a few developers keeping a keen eye on this to see if it sets a precedent for allowing an eleven story wall along the waterfront. Why wouldn’t Fortis come back at some point and resurrect their original proposal, pointing out that “you allowed the other guys to go to 11 stories”. What about the “rumored” proposal for the Bowring property, maybe allowing 11 stories or more may make that attractive?

I know I’m going to get some flack from a few of you because I object to this but it doesn’t mean I’m anti-development, quite the contrary. I’d like to see more, even taller, developments in the right places. I just don’t think this is the right place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2014, 2:24 AM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 7,169
I'm still curious to see a final rendering of the building design that wasn't created in MS paint by a 5-year-old child.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2014, 1:54 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Sin Jaaawnz, Newf'nland
Posts: 34,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsell View Post
The next step in the Atlantic Place Garage saga will take place next week (Jan 15th) when the proposed hotel extension goes to an independent hearing on the proposed amendments. I wonder if this will get the same lukewarm turnout as the public hearing held back in November.

This hearing will be one of the last chances to put forward any objections to this site specific amendment.

I don’t understand why there is so little objection to this proposal, is it because concerned citizens feel beaten down or what is it. Maybe everyone loves the neon design for our formerly historic waterfront.

There are probably a few developers keeping a keen eye on this to see if it sets a precedent for allowing an eleven story wall along the waterfront. Why wouldn’t Fortis come back at some point and resurrect their original proposal, pointing out that “you allowed the other guys to go to 11 stories”. What about the “rumored” proposal for the Bowring property, maybe allowing 11 stories or more may make that attractive?

I know I’m going to get some flack from a few of you because I object to this but it doesn’t mean I’m anti-development, quite the contrary. I’d like to see more, even taller, developments in the right places. I just don’t think this is the right place.
Oh, no flack. We usually agree.

And I know that my approval for this proposal is simply a result of being blinded by hatred for what's currently there.

I'd never support this proposal as a fresh start.

But that parking garage... enough. I can't handle it. It and the blank side of the old Fortis Building ruin many angles of St. John's for me. I never photograph them.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2014, 8:21 PM
Horsell's Avatar
Horsell Horsell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker View Post
....And I know that my approval for this proposal is simply a result of being blinded by hatred for what's currently there.

I'd never support this proposal as a fresh start.

But that parking garage... enough. I can't handle it......
I think that if there was a choice to tear down the garage and put something new there (even the same height) we would probably all be in favour, accept for the fact that 700 parking spaces (or some number) would be lost.

My biggest objection to all this is not so much the hotel design (even though I don’t think it fits well) but the way the city is manipulating the zoning.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the City used to run the AP garage and some how it has ended up in the hands of SONCO Group. I think they originally approached the city and wanted to redevelop the whole site. I’m not sure with what. Faced with the prospect of losing parking the City is now trying to come to a compromise with the owner to let them build up and get better value for their property, thus the amendment based on the “historical use of the site for parking”.

The site is presently zoned “Commercial Central Retail”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2014, 11:05 PM
jeddy1989's Avatar
jeddy1989 jeddy1989 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 2,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsell View Post
I think that if there was a choice to tear down the garage and put something new there (even the same height) we would probably all be in favour, accept for the fact that 700 parking spaces (or some number) would be lost.

My biggest objection to all this is not so much the hotel design (even though I don’t think it fits well) but the way the city is manipulating the zoning.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the City used to run the AP garage and some how it has ended up in the hands of SONCO Group. I think they originally approached the city and wanted to redevelop the whole site. I’m not sure with what. Faced with the prospect of losing parking the City is now trying to come to a compromise with the owner to let them build up and get better value for their property, thus the amendment based on the “historical use of the site for parking”.

The site is presently zoned “Commercial Central Retail”
The parking structure was for sale a couple of years ago, I'm not sure who owned it prior but it was advertised and we posted about it (I'm not sure if I can find the ad in the threads)

Here's Happy City's post about it (it was in the summer of 2011)
https://www.facebook.com/HappyCity/p...42850665755787

Here's an article from the Scope back when this was going on:

Quote:
Also, City Hall has recently moved to rezone the recently up-for-sale Atlantic Place Parking Garage into a new “parking only” zone. This will protect this prime parking stock from a buyer who may wish to convert the garage into something else.
While it’s great that the city wants to encourage new parking spaces, it is difficult to include interior parking in new buildings downtown. The logistics of making room for cars is difficult: developers and their designers often struggle to squeeze ample parking into buildings, whose small downtown footprints might not allow enough room for turning radii, ramps, wheelchair accessible spots near entrances, and easy street access. And for many urban citizens, parking spaces may be seen as undesirable–otherwise empty space that could be used for something else.
- See more at: http://thescope.ca/city/fulltilt/no-....F8LhUN2U.dpuf
http://thescope.ca/city/fulltilt/no-parking
__________________
-Where Once They Stood-
-We Stand-
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2014, 2:58 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is online now
♒︎ Empirically Canadian
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 🍁 Canada
Posts: 11,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeddy1989 View Post
The parking structure was for sale a couple of years ago, I'm not sure who owned it prior but it was advertised and we posted about it (I'm not sure if I can find the ad in the threads)

Here's Happy City's post about it (it was in the summer of 2011)
https://www.facebook.com/HappyCity/p...42850665755787

Here's an article from the Scope back when this was going on:


http://thescope.ca/city/fulltilt/no-parking


From: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...45930&page=115




Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Jan 11, 2014, 1:13 AM
jeddy1989's Avatar
jeddy1989 jeddy1989 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 2,711
Here's a bit more supporting that the hotel will be ALT by Groupe Germain


http://www.groupegermain.com/data/pdf/g-business.pdf
__________________
-Where Once They Stood-
-We Stand-
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Jan 11, 2014, 8:39 PM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,775
I could definitely see it being an ALT hotel especially with the use of color. What would be really nice is if we had an ALT hotel attached to the airport similar to the one recently built in Halifax. That's two things our airport needs. An attached hotel and a parking garage because sprawling parking out for miles is extremely inconvenient especially with our weather plus we have nowhere to expand now and an attached hotel for the convenience of passengers. I feel like both of this things will be necessary sooner rather than later especially if westjet uses us as it's European pit stop as it expands.

I don't think the attached hotel will be coming soon though because of that "Holiday Inn Express coming soon" sign. The poor comfort inn now has no access to the airport from the road they're on.. I can't imagine they'll be open much longer after the holiday inn opens
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2014, 12:41 AM
overboard overboard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 68
The rendering for this hotel doesn't really suit the ALT Hotel vibe, at least based on the one I visited in Halifax. Maybe they're going for something different though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2014, 3:41 PM
mrjanejacobs's Avatar
mrjanejacobs mrjanejacobs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
I could definitely see it being an ALT hotel especially with the use of color. What would be really nice is if we had an ALT hotel attached to the airport similar to the one recently built in Halifax. That's two things our airport needs. An attached hotel and a parking garage because sprawling parking out for miles is extremely inconvenient especially with our weather plus we have nowhere to expand now and an attached hotel for the convenience of passengers. I feel like both of this things will be necessary sooner rather than later especially if westjet uses us as it's European pit stop as it expands.

I don't think the attached hotel will be coming soon though because of that "Holiday Inn Express coming soon" sign. The poor comfort inn now has no access to the airport from the road they're on.. I can't imagine they'll be open much longer after the holiday inn opens
There's lots of room for the airport to continue expanding. Where did you get that idea?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2014, 5:19 PM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjanejacobs View Post
There's lots of room for the airport to continue expanding. Where did you get that idea?
I never said there was no room for the airport to expand. I was referring to surface parking lots which now extend from the airport terminal to the houses on radio range road.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2014, 7:52 PM
Horsell's Avatar
Horsell Horsell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 636
It looks as if the AP garage expansion has cleared another hurdle in the approval process. The commissioner's report from the latest Public Meeting was approved by Council this past Monday. I'm not sure but there may be one other step to go through.

I can't believe that there hasn't been more objection to this, have people just given up on trying to protect what's left of that part of Water St.?

One interesting objection was from the owner of the property on the east side of Baird's cove. It wasn't so much an objection as a question why this particular proponent would be allowed to increase the height in order to "generate additional income for the owner" and whether or not in the future he would be given the same consideration to do something with his property to generate more income.

I would have to agree with him on this one, as I sure the courts would as well if it was ever challenged. The precedent will now be set to allow any property on Water St. to increase in height and bulk so as to "increase income for the owner".
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 > St. John's
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:57 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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