Municipal Election (September, 2013)

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by AllBlack

Those two examples are at extreme ends of the spectrum, AP an abomination and Fortis Place a masterpiece. I would hope that any future council would 1) deny the destruction of an entire heritage block to build another AP and 2) approve another FP on vacant land in the west end of downtown.

Major developments will be proposed and will be hotly debated by those that fall in the pro and anti development camps. I look forward to the battle, and these developments will succeed or fail in the court of public opinion, with council falling in line with the people's wishes. I think a more realistic measure of future councils are the developments that fall in between. Will they 1) approve our future 351's, Star of the Sea replacements, Marriott extensions, and MIX/Marconi condos, or 2) insist that all developments be limited to two storeys and be made of bracelets (I love that line Townie709..!! ). I think O'Leary and her fellow NDP travellers would fall in the latter category, so I'll be supporting anyone but O'Leary.

You don't have to worry about another AP being proposed....Even me (the King of Anti-Heritage) has to agree that building is ugly. The one I am talking about is lite years ahead of AP....hell its even lite years ahead of our standards here in SJ.

[SignalHillHiker]

I'm torn.

I want us to protect our heritage, and O'Leary is one of the Councillors who does that. But she is more extreme than I am. I'd have welcomed denser developments on the edges of Quidi Vidi Village, for example.

But Hanlon's obvious exasperation with O'Leary during the fence debate really made me wonder. When PoscStudent shared that tweet, I thought... well, here is someone who I know has a good head on her shoulders, who works with O'Leary and knows her better than I do, who is basically agreeing with the sentiment that O'Leary is just posturing.

[Townie709]

christopher_chafe:This is gonna start an argument but what the hell.......Does anyone here think for a second that O'Leary has a snowballs chance in hell to beat DOC. Except for Ward 2, I can not see the majority of the city voting for her. I just can't.

Sure she got a large amount of votes the last time, but that was before we saw her in action.

Unfortunately, I think she has a good chance. People see her as young and intelligent and level headed, or at least have in the past. She speaks out against things she doesn't like and some people admire her for it.

She seems to shoot down developments without thinking of solutions to the problems. She needs to find a solution to problems, not just shoot down developments.

Doc on the other hand, needs to be more vocal and take a firm stance on issues and sway the public opinion his way. O'Leary supporters like her because of her vocality. On most issues, Doc remains silent in hopes to please everyone when most would rather have a leader with guts! If doc begins to fight for his own opinions against O'Leary, and be a true leader than he will get in. If he remains silent O'Leary will win. O'Keefe can take it, he just needs to be more vocal and become a bit more of a personality. I like the guy. He has done an excellent job, and like some of our councilors, I believe, has seen the light and will only get better as time goes on. I think he deserves another term and I will be rooting for him all the way.

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I'm torn.

I want us to protect our heritage, and O'Leary is one of the Councillors who does that. But she is more extreme than I am. I'd have welcomed denser developments on the edges of Quidi Vidi Village, for example.

But Hanlon's obvious exasperation with O'Leary during the fence debate really made me wonder. When PoscStudent shared that tweet, I thought... well, here is someone who I know has a good head on her shoulders, who works with O'Leary and knows her better than I do, who is basically agreeing with the sentiment that O'Leary is just posturing.

That is why I am sad to see Debbie will not be running in September.

[SignalHillHiker]

I just wish we had a mayoral candidate who shared a real vision - or at least spoke about our city's development the way, for example, Jeddy does.

I'd vote Jeddy for mayor in a heartbeat because I have some idea how he sees our city in the future and I, for the most part, agree with it.

For Doc and O'Leary, I don't have that. I have NO idea what they envision our city being like. I know how they want to get there - one being the status quo, the other heritage protection so extreme it probably (and completely unnecessarily) equals stagnation.

Then there's the question of how much impact the mayor even has. In some respects, it's probably more influential to be a Councillor.

[Townie709]

Originally Posted by christopher_chafe

That is why I am sad to see Debbie will not be running in September.

I believe she is tired of working with certain people on council. It's a shame she's not running because she has a really great head on her shoulders.

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by Townie709

Unfortunately, I think she has a good chance. People see her as young and intelligent and level headed, or at least have in the past. She speaks out against things she doesn't like and some people admire her for it.

But, I think (or at least hope) people are beginning to realize that she is an idiot. She has no problem shooting down developments and projects, but yet she offers no solutions as to how to resolve the problem. She is not a leader, and I hope people realize that before the election.

Doc on the other hand, needs to be more vocal and take a firm stance on issues and sway the public opinion his way. O'Leary supporters like her because of her vocality. On most issues, Doc remains silent in hopes to please everyone when most would rather have a leader with balls and guts! If doc begins to fight for his own opinions against O'Leary, point out her stupidity and be a true leader than he will get in. If he remains silent and lets the she-devil spew her lies everywhere without a fight, O'Leary will win. O'Keefe can take it, he just needs to be more vocal and become a bit more of a personality. I like the guy. He has done an excellent job, and like some of our councilors, I believe, has seen the light and will only get better as time goes on. I think he deserves another term and I will be rooting for him all the way.

I would not go as far to say she is stupid, as she is not. However she is one of the most narrowminded individuals (next to Shannie Duff) that has ever been elected to Council.

We are just now starting to creap out of the s**t hole and are finally starting to become more open to big business. I for one want to see that continue.

I fear if O'Leary becomes mayor and if we get a majority of council being NDP/arts related we as a city will be royally screwed.

[Townie709]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I just wish we had a mayoral candidate who shared a real vision - or at least spoke about our city's development the way, for example, Jeddy does.

I'd vote Jeddy for mayor in a heartbeat because I have some idea how he sees our city in the future and I, for the most part, agree with it.

For Doc and O'Leary, I don't have that. I have NO idea what they envision our city being like. I know how they want to get there - one being the status quo, the other heritage protection so extreme it probably (and completely unnecessarily) equals stagnation.

Then there's the question of how much impact the mayor even has. In some respects, it's probably more influential to be a Councillor.

Who knows, maybe someday Jeddy will be mayor, but I think it's best to run as a councilor first to get his name out there.

We really do need the mayoral candidates to get their views and vision out there for people to know because right now, they have said virtually nothing about the mayoral race and the future. Are there usually debates in municipal politics here? Does it involve anything more than a few cardboard signs and an interview on open line? Sorry for my ignorance, but I've never really payed close attention to municipal politics until now

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I just wish we had a mayoral candidate who shared a real vision - or at least spoke about our city's development the way, for example, Jeddy does.

I'd vote Jeddy for mayor in a heartbeat because I have some idea how he sees our city in the future and I, for the most part, agree with it.

For Doc and O'Leary, I don't have that. I have NO idea what they envision our city being like. I know how they want to get there - one being the status quo, the other heritage protection so extreme it probably (and completely unnecessarily) equals stagnation.

Then there's the question of how much impact the mayor even has. In some respects, it's probably more influential to be a Councillor.

What we need is a Mayor who is pro-development WHILE at the same time protecting the 6 or so buildings are are true Heritage buildings.

[SignalHillHiker]

Just thinking out loud... or, rather, with my fingers...

For Doc: his statement about harbourfront developments obviously implies he would approve them. If these developments are as good as I hope they are, and we get to see them before the election, I'll have to vote for him.

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Just thinking out loud... or, rather, with my fingers...

For Doc: his statement about harbourfront developments obviously implies he would approve them. If these developments are as good as I hope they are, and we get to see them before the election, I'll have to vote for him.

even if they destroy part of the harbour drive and increase the height of AP & garage.

[jeddy1989]

Originally Posted by Townie709

Who knows, maybe someday Jeddy will be mayor, but I think it's best to run as a councilor first to get his name out there.

We really do need the mayoral candidates to get their views and vision out there for people to know because right now, they have said virtually nothing about the mayoral race and the future. Are there usually debates in municipal politics here? Does it involve anything more than a few cardboard signs and an interview on open line? Sorry for my ignorance, but I've never really payed close attention to municipal politics until now

Who knows what the future holds gotta get in there first and im gonna need a team behind me!

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by christopher_chafe

What we need is a Mayor who is pro-development WHILE at the same time protecting the 6 or so buildings are are true Heritage buildings.

I mostly disagree. I do want a mayor who is pro-development, but not at the expense of our heritage.

I'd hate to live in the type of city I imagine you want St. John's to become. It's a sacrifice to me to live in a town of just 106,000 people and I do it because what St. John's offers, what makes it unique, is so valuable to me. Our old town is why I'm here, it's why I love it.

Every time I drive down Freshwater Road and come up over the hill into the old town, I smile. That's the city I want to live in.

And it frustrates me so much that some people think we have to give that up in order to be modern. We don't. We need to grow our CBD by pushing west and north, not destroy the areas that make our city a beautiful, wonderful place to work and live for the sake of a couple of towers we could easily build elsewhere.

Old town St. John's is so unique and spectacular not because of the quality of its heritage buildings, but because of their quantity. Saving a rowhouse here and there is insufficient. We'll lose the immersive atmosphere that our beautiful old city creates.

Furthermore, even if we demolished old town completely, we'd only gain a handful of modern buildings. The Rooms alone, moved down the hill a bit, could wipe out most of our residential rowhouse district.

We need to preserve old town while growing and expanding our downtown. They're not mutually exclusive.

Knowing there are people out there who think they are is the main reason I'd be inclined to support O'Leary, just because the risk of people with those views destroying the city scares me too much.

[christopher_chafe]

One thing I do want to see out of the next council is MORE festivals. We have a diverse demographic and we need to start having events/festivals that incorporate everyone. For example........ the highlight of the summer in St. John's is NOT GSF but it is the Folk Festival a festival that caters to a select group of people.

If PEI can put off the 2nd biggest festival in Atlantic Canada each summer then we in St. John's should be able to do something as well.

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I mostly disagree. I do want a mayor who is pro-development, but not at the expense of our heritage.

I'd hate to live in the type of city I imagine you want St. John's to become. It's a sacrifice to me to live in a town of just 106,000 people and I do it because what St. John's offers, what makes it unique, is so valuable to me. Our old town is why I'm here, it's why I love it.

Every time I drive down Freshwater Road and come up over the hill into the old town, I smile. That's the city I want to live in.

And it frustrates me so much that some people think we have to give that up in order to be modern. We don't. We need to grow our CBD by pushing west and north, not destroy the areas that make our city a beautiful, wonderful place to work and live for the sake of a couple of towers we could easily build elsewhere.

Old town St. John's is so unique and spectacular not because of the quality of its heritage buildings, but because of their quantity. Saving a rowhouse here and there is insufficient. We'll lose the immersive atmosphere that our beautiful old city creates.

Furthermore, even if we demolished old town completely, we'd only gain a handful of modern buildings. The Rooms alone, moved down the hill a bit, could wipe out most of our residential rowhouse district.

We need to preserve old town while growing and expanding our downtown. They're not mutually exclusive.

I am not talking about destroying the ENTIRE OLDE Town....I am talking about 3 damn streets that is all!!!! I could care less about the streets Above Harbour Drive, Water Street and Duckworth Street. They are NOT Part of the CBD. The CBD should NOT be included in the heritage map at all.

[Townie709]

Originally Posted by christopher_chafe

I am not talking about destroying the ENTIRE OLDE Town....I am talking about 3 damn streets that is all!!!!

But those three streets really are the heart and soul of our downtown. I generally agree with modern developments in the east that don't destroy the heritage buildings but incorporate them into the tower. As long as it has a heritage facade on water street, I'm generally good with it. I would not ever support tearing down jellybean row, any of the row houses on Gower street for a modern condominium development. I don't care how tall or beautiful it is! Because if we start placing modern developments among the old we lose our sense of immersion. Now that residential neighborhoods. On water street, that is our downtown center so I would like to see parts (like the "Proposal 23" we shall call it) built, while still preserving our heritage.

[SignalHillHiker]

I agree completely with Townie709.

And I am growing more comfortable with height. Jeddy's render didn't terrify me as much as I expected, even with the tower developments in the Downtown East End.

So... 23-floors along Harbour Drive in an area that's already mostly modern... that's fine with me.

[christopher_chafe]

Originally Posted by Townie709

But those three streets really are the heart and soul of our downtown. I generally agree with modern developments in the east that don't destroy the heritage buildings but incorporate them into the tower. As long as it has a heritage facade on water street, I'm generally good with it. I would not ever support tearing down jellybean row, any of the row houses on Gower street for a modern condominium development. I don't care how tall or beautiful it is! Because if we start placing modern developments among the old we lose our sense of immersion. Now that residential neighborhoods. On water street, that is our downtown center so I would like to see parts (like the "Proposal 23" we shall call it) built, while still preserving our heritage.

Nor would I when it comes to Jelly Bean Row, however when it comes to Water Street, Duckworth Street and Harbor Drive....I say build away as they are commercial streets, and those that chose to live on the cusp of commercial activity have to be aware of just that.

[Townie709]

I agree 100% for harbour drive. Build as tall as you like on it as it is only taller, modern buildings and ugly parking lots. I say build away! Water and Duckworth. Should be preserved as well as possible, but Duckworth is a great location for more condominium/apartment development in the "gritty" parts.

[Townie709]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I agree completely with Townie709.

And I am growing more comfortable with height. Jeddy's render didn't terrify me as much as I expected, even with the tower developments in the Downtown East End.

So... 23-floors along Harbour Drive in an area that's already mostly modern... that's fine with me.

Woohoo! That's one convinced! 105,999 left to go