Development Rumours - Page 9

Townie709 · #**161** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by statbass

There is nothing of sorts mentioned on the agenda for today's meeting. So if this development does exist, it looks like it won't be unveiled today.

I think it's time to give up and admit that we were majorly trolled.. Oh well, we still have the Atlantic Place parking garage development and the possible future Hilton residential to look forward to. I also wouldn't count out the possibility of Fortis proposing something facing Harbour Drive next to the Fortis Building either. Whether it's this fall or 5 years from now, I imagine they will eventually push to have something built there. It really is an ugly parking lot. I would much rather look at a highrise than a dirty parking lot and the run down backs of buildings.

Fortis, if you read this, here's my personal list of what to include if you ever decide to propose something for that site again..

-Preserving the heritage facades is a MUST. Whether it is keeping or refurbishing what is currently there, or creating a new authentic heritage facade, there must be something that will blend perfectly with the heritage nature of Water Street.

- Set it back from water street towards Harbour Drive to minimize the visual impact from the Water Street side.

- Better design than an obese box. I understand trying to blend it with the Fortis Building, but please, something more modern, unique, and thin than the original proposal as it will be in one of the most photographed blocks in the city.

-Disguise parking garage so that it is unrecognizable as a garage

-If there is any kind of extra space around the building, plant trees, install benches and picnic tables ect. Don't follow the example set by the Scotia Center.

- Ideally, IMO, between 14 and 18 stories. Something that is taller than the Fortis Building, but not so tall as to impose too much on the heritage nature of the East End of DT.

-Retail on the Water Street side is a MUST.

I've mentioned this list many times before, and I know you're probably all tired of hearing me talk about fantasy proposals.. but if something like what I described was proposed, I would definitely support it. (As would most residents of St. John's who live outside the Jellybean District..)

rwspencer38 · #**162** Posted **Mar 12, 2013, 6:43 PM**

^^^

Would you like fries with that?

Townie709 · #**163** Posted **Mar 12, 2013, 7:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwspencer38

^^^

Would you like fries with that?

Gladly!

Architype · #**164** Posted **Mar 12, 2013, 8:29 PM**

Going back to Mr Chafe's rumoured development, I noticed after reading some of the posts again, that he mentioned the rumoured development would be built right over Harbour Drive, thus cutting off the street, bisecting it into two sections. Did anyone catch that?

That would never happen I guess, but I thought, if it did, why not just build above the street and let the traffic flow under it. The purpose of this was so that it could be a development like Kings Wharf in Halifax, which will jut out into the harbour. At least that's "some vision" b'y !

BigRedSpecial · #**165** Posted **Mar 12, 2013, 9:15 PM**

I caught that when I was lurking, but wasn't sure if I read it right... no way in hell that would be approved

Townie709 · #**166** Posted **Mar 12, 2013, 9:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRedSpecial

I caught that when I was lurking, but wasn't sure if I read it right... no way in hell that would be approved

I agree, not in that location anyway. (even though I would still support it)

But such a proposal as Chris described (23 story office tower, 13 story residential building, 6 floors of retail, underground parking etc. would really be the ideal development to "vitalize" the west end of downtown and bring it to life. I would love to see something along those lines proposed for the Ultramar site.

As somebody mentioned before, the west end is absolutely dead after 5:00pm and is downright scary. What the west end needs is residential and most importantly, retail. That is why I believe council should be pushing for height minimums, and retail space requirements for all land/developments between the Deacon Site and Waldegrave.

rwspencer38 · #**167** Posted **Mar 13, 2013, 1:51 AM**

One of the early designs for 351 had the building going over harbour drive. The purpose was to have almost a water front wall for the building and have harbour go through the building!

Interesting how things change

Townie709 · #**168** Posted **Mar 13, 2013, 2:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwspencer38

One of the early designs for 351 had the building going over harbour drive. The purpose was to have almost a water front wall for the building and have harbour go through the building!

Interesting how things change

Very cool! I never knew that! I imagine, most projects are "simplified" for cost reasons. As cool as constructing a building with a street going through it would be, I can't imagine it's very cost effective

Marty_Mcfly · #**169** Posted **Mar 13, 2013, 2:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Townie709

Very cool! I never knew that! I imagine, most projects are "simplified" for cost reasons. As cool as constructing a building with a street going through it would be, I can't imagine it's very cost effective

Oh how it would be nice to have an unlimited supply of money. You could design the most breathtaking building ever and have no worries. Siiigh. My dream scenario (kind of like having the cheat codes for sim city

)

mrjanejacobs · #**170** Posted **Mar 17, 2013, 6:14 PM**

If there's money to be made then the money to build an extravagant building will emerge... we really shouldn't set our standards low because we don't think we're worthy of a building with some architectural integrity. ha

A325 · #**171** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 3:17 PM**

I noticed a drill rig drilling boreholes in the parking lot between the Harbour Light and Salvation Army building (DT west end) this morning.

I knew they were tearing down the Harbour Light and making a surface parking lot until they decide what to do in the future but now they must be planning a new building for that site right away

statbass · #**172** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 3:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by A325

I noticed a drill rig drilling boreholes in the parking lot between the Harbour Light and Salvation Army building (DT west end) this morning.

I knew they were tearing down the Harbour Light and making a surface parking lot until they decide what to do in the future but now they must be planning a new building for that site right away

Is that where the new Steele hotel is going?

Arrakis · #**173** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 4:40 PM**

Nope. Steele Hotels is going right next door to The Magic Wok Restaurant on Water Street. Foundations are already laid for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by statbass

Is that where the new Steele hotel is going?

statbass · #**174** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 5:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrakis

Nope. Steele Hotels is going right next door to The Magic Wok Restaurant on Water Street. Foundations are already laid for it.

Hmmm... I'm interested to know what will be going the aforementioned location. I'm sure everyone else is in the same boat.

Townie709 · #**175** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 6:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by A325

I noticed a drill rig drilling boreholes in the parking lot between the Harbour Light and Salvation Army building (DT west end) this morning.

I knew they were tearing down the Harbour Light and making a surface parking lot until they decide what to do in the future but now they must be planning a new building for that site right away

So, Just to clear things up.. this is the site we're looking at?

and the ugly building on the right will be torn down? Just wondering if the salvation army building is included in this site. I wouldn't mind seeing it go, but it would also be cool if they incorporated it into a new design.

This would be a great site for a nice tall and skinny residential tower! I have little hope that whatever is built will be over 6 stories though. This is the reason council needs height minimums in the west end.

Copes · #**176** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 6:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Townie709

So, Just to clear things up.. this is the site we're looking at?

and the ugly building on the right will be torn down? Just wondering if the salvation army building is included in this site. I wouldn't mind seeing it go, but it would also be cool if they incorporated it into a new design.

This would be a great site for a nice tall and skinny residential tower! I have little hope that whatever is built will be over 6 stories though. This is the reason council needs height minimums in the west end.

I also hope that the Salvation Army building stays. Properly incorporating it into a larger, taller, residential development could be really cool, and has been done elsewhere.

Obviously nothing this big is going there, but using the old fascade as a base is a really neat thing to see.

jeddy1989 · #**177** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 6:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Townie709

So, Just to clear things up.. this is the site we're looking at?

and the ugly building on the right will be torn down? Just wondering if the salvation army building is included in this site. I wouldn't mind seeing it go, but it would also be cool if they incorporated it into a new design.

This would be a great site for a nice tall and skinny residential tower! I have little hope that whatever is built will be over 6 stories though. This is the reason council needs height minimums in the west end.

I'd hate to see more and more of the West end DT chipped away by low rises :/ people need to realize that when the area in the west end of DT is gobbled up by low rises .. where do you think they will propose high rises?

we need to make things clearer.. if it is a low rise there wont even be a public meeting where we can voice our opinion :S we need to stay on top of this to ensure we do what we need to do before it's too late for this site as well ... I hope someone is cluing in here

jeddy1989 · #**178** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Copes

I also hope that the Salvation Army building stays. Properly incorporating it into a larger, taller, residential development could be really cool, and has been done elsewhere.

Obviously nothing this big is going there, but using the old fascade as a base is a really neat thing to see.

awesome .. I love the concept for that area! there is ZERO reason why we can't have skinny talls like that

SignalHillHiker · #**179** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 6:49 PM**

Reminds of the Groupe Germain in Winnipeg.

And we definitely should be keeping our historic fascades. That should be the core component of our heritage preservation rules. That should be the ONE rule that NEVER gets bent.

Townie709 · #**180** Posted **Mar 18, 2013, 6:56 PM**

Any mayoral candidate who wishes to establish a highrise district in the west end that will not allow lowrise developments has my vote. We have at least 10 great spots aligned in a grid in the west end. One is being wasted on the stupid steele hotel which shall forever resent, another by the stubby stantec proposal and the other this possible development which I am not expecting much out of unless the zoning changes which desperately needs to happen.

I like the idea of preserving heritage buildings as the base of new towers and there's no reason why we can't do more of that. I'm sure it would be possible with the Salvation Army building, but if I was made to choose between a modern tower or that concrete block, I would choose the the modern tower any day.