Fortis Properties Corp. is expected to submit an application to the City of St. John's "in the nearer term" for a major downtown development project, a company official confirmed Thursday.
But the proposed development is unrelated to a company decision to evict the four tenants of the Martin Royal Building at 157-163 Water St., said Gail Tucker, manager of corporate communications with Fortis.
There have been rumblings for many months that Fortis, a major player in the commercial real-estate sector, is hoping to construct a 15-storey office tower on Water Street, west of the Fortis Building.
But such a structure would violate the city's current zoning criteria, which state buildings cannot exceed 15 metres, or four storeys, in height.
Tucker would not confirm the company's intentions, but said, "we are looking at development options for our Water Street site."
She said details will be released once an application is made to the city's planning department.
Tucker confirmed the company is attempting to amend the leases of the four businesses currently occupying the Martin Royal Building. The company wants the building vacated by the end of March.
"This is not driven, or directly related to, any potential development considerations we have ongoing, as is being suggested," Tucker stated.
Tucker cited "fire suppression issues" as the reason for the action. She said a recent inspection of the nearly century-old building found the sprinkler system is inadequate and poses a safety concern.
"Our previous understanding that the building was meeting the appropriate requirements was incorrect. Once we were made aware of that, we notified our tenants immediately and began looking at our options," she explained.
Tucker said interim safety measures have been implemented, but added, "it is most prudent that we work to vacate the building."
Tucker couldn't say what's in store for the four-storey, wooden structure, but later seemed to hint that the building's future may have been in question, regardless of any issues with the sprinkler system.
"Obviously, any information we have learned from this particular building issue would be considered as part of a larger plan. But I want to make clear this issue is not driven by potential development considerations. This is an issue with that particular building," she said.
Two of the four occupants of the building - First Western Boutique and The Asian Variety Store - are retail outlets. Attempts to speak with the owners were unsuccessful.
The building is also home to dance and music studios, and is the former location of the Windsock Lounge.
News that the company is attempting to amend the leases is raising alarm bells among Fortis tenants in nearby buildings.
Peg Norman, the owner of the Travel Bug at 155 Water St., expects she'll receive similar notice from the company in the coming months.
Norman has been an outspoken opponent of the company's plans for the site, and worries that Fortis plans to empty all the buildings, board them up and leave the street abandoned until the city approves its development plans.
"This is the worst kind of corporate citizenship," she said.
Norman has been fighting to keep any new development within the current guidelines.
"What Fortis is going to be asking for is for that piece of paper to be torn up and thrown out the window," she said, adding other developers have been abiding by the rules, and Fortis should do the same.
Norman said such a large building would further erode the downtown's appeal, harm the vibrant retail sector and add to an already challenging parking problem.
She said Fortis should instead work to beautify and enhance the existing buildings, which would add to the area's historic significance. She said it should consider an alternative location for its office tower, such as land it owns adjacent to the Delta Hotel.
"Why do they want to steal the view from so many people in the city? I expect better of Fortis. I expect them to be better corporate citizens than that," she said.
Norman and others are planning to stage a public meeting in the coming days to spotlight development issues in the downtown.
Ward 2 Coun. Frank Galgay, who chairs the planning and housing committee, could not be reached for comment.
troberts@thetelegram.com
Fortis eyeing major project
Eviction notices have been sent by Fortis Properties to tenants at the Martin Royal Building at 157-163 Water St. Photo by Joe Gibbons/The Telegram
-
Published on
January 15, 2010
- Published on July 1, 2010
-
Terry Roberts
Pending Water Street evictions not related to proposed office tower: company
Fortis Properties Corp. is expected to submit an application to the City of St. John's "in the nearer term" for a major downtown development project, a company official confirmed Thursday.
But the proposed development is unrelated to a company decision to evict the four tenants of the Martin Royal Building at 157-163 Water St., said Gail Tucker, manager of corporate communications with Fortis.
- Rate
- Top of the page
Comments
-
- Whatever Bud
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:04:59
The businesses that are being evicted have been around for some time. The buildings in question are only an eyesore because they are located in such close proximity to the real eyesore the Fortis Building itself. Instead of allowing this type of development,why doesn't the City force the demolition of such eyesores as the old Telephone Building on McBrides/Duckworth,the old Woolworth's for example. Another thing that boggles my mind is how gas stations can have huge gas spills,close the station,cordon off the land,pay the property tax(then write it off so it costs them nothing) and never clean up the mess they have left behind.Lots of those around : Cornwall/Glenridge, Hamilton Av,Freshwater RD (next to Suzuki),etc etc.
-
- Citizen
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:04:05
Anything that was 'heritage' in downtown St. John's (Water Street) has long been demolished. Is it better to have vacant buildings that are eyesores and fire hazards than some 21st century development? I say go for the development. No matter what you build or where you build it in this city, someone has a beef - either the view is blocked, traffic is a problem, there are schools in the area and I could go on with excuses for blocking development of this city. City Council needs to look a lot further into the future in every aspect of their business from granting building permits to planning roads for 20 years from now.
-
- briny 69
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:03:44
nothing is going to happen any where as long as shannie is on council
-
- Gord
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:02:53
Looks like Fortis has dispatched a few drones to pose as regular ol' taxpayers in this discussion thread. Try not to be so obvious, folks.
There are other areas in the downtown core that could accommodate an office tower... it's simply not appropriate for that stretch of Water St.
Cities that value their architectural uniqueness reap major benefits. That's not an anti-development sentiment at all.
No more 'Atlantic Places'! -
- Cornergirl
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:02:07
One must remember that Fortis grew from the profits of all NL Power users so it is a company that we helped create & yes I believe they should be better corporate citizens. What do you want to see the habour for anyway? Because it's better than looking at glass towers-(it will be mostly glass as all other tall buildings are).
-
- Ryan
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:57
The height restrictions here are incredibly dumb.
-
- Jim
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:40
Kudos to Peg Norman and her stand. Why does the city have development rules if a company like Fortis can ignore them by going from 4 to 15 stories? Only a blind person can say that another 15 story building will not affect view planes. Of course, saying that the historic buildings in question are eyesores is another indication of blindness. St. John's has a unique downtown area and I do not want to see it become a pale imitation of Toronto.
-
- Anne
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:32
I support Peg Norman's view 100 %.
Keep downtown historic, with character.
The oldest city in North America you say?
Old world charm matters in this world of cloning. -
- Keepin' It Real
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:32
Welcome to Downtown St. John's, where it's 1949 forever!
-
- Justin
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:13
It is so frustrating to have politicians like Shannie Duff in office. Let's embrace this economic boom and allow the Province to make the transition from poverty to prosperity. I am all for preserving the heritage appeal of St. John's, but let's be honest - most of the office space downtown signifies decades of unemployment, so why not allow Fortis to build a state of the art tower which clearly depicts the advancement we have made in this Province? Think about the jobs that will be created from building a 15 storey office tower! Class A office space downtown is now comparable in price to Bay Street because our idiot politicians have not allowed the supply base to grow. Is this positive for business? Clearly not! There is no way lease rates in St. John's should be comparable to TO. They are artifically inflated!
As a NL'er I am not proposing that we allow the skyline to look like NYC, but these zoning restrictions have to be addressed somehow. -
- Frank
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:02
What do Newfoundlanders have against old buildings? Against the idea of preserving heritage?
Is it because the city burns down every fifty years that we don't have an appreciation for architectural history?
Reminds me of the fella chopping up his table into firewood in an old Al Clouston joke. -
- Taxpayer ll
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:01:00
What is with this Peg Norman person? She hasn't even received an eviction notice yet she is out there saying that Fortis is going to board buildings up and leave them to rot. I mean what is this person's real agenda?
Fortis, and Fortis properties are one of the true, real success stories to come out of this province. They own companies all over the world, and they employ thousands of people. They even maintain their head office here in NL, which many companies their size would never do.
Those buildings mentioned in the article are eyesores, and I think that that part of Water street needs a boost.
The Fortis building that is there is 14 or 15 stories as is, so how would building another one of the same size affect view planes?
This town is so very anti-development, when the Duffs and the Galgays get a hold of this the whole plan will probably come to a screeching halt anyway. Most cities in the world that are growing and developing have larger buildings in the downtown core, why is it that development here is always met with dismay? The downtown is rundown and dirty, and any new development should be welcomed, not shunned. -
- Poscstudent
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:00:19
Yeah let downtown stay old and dirty, give the office towers and the thousands of jobs that go with them to Halifax, everyone knows St. John's don't need anymore jobs.
-
- John
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:00:09
Gail Tucker, manager of corporate communications with Fortis. is just a talking head for the company. She only babbles what she is given to her to read. What's happening here is, Fortis is floating a trial balloon to see what the reaction is to the plan. It won't get approval because the city will have applicant's downtown applying to construct 15 story buildings, everywhere. There's too much traffic congestion on Water St. now, daytime traffic is impossible, not to mention parking. As for the sprinkler system excuse, that's really what it is. What kind of issues can a sprinkler system have ? It's just a grid of pipes with sprinkler heads attached. It's not the the space shuttle. That was laughable when I read that.
The only issue I can think of with a sprinkler system is to re-weld a connection, you don't need to evacuate the building. Just remember Fortis is the company that just increased our hydro rates 4.4 per cent. -
- Frank
- - July 2, 2010 at 15:00:03
I'm amazed at many of the sentiments here, and indeed of Fortis. This city and province benefit hugely from having an attractive and historically significant area by the waterfront. The uniqueness of this is what makes us special and brings a huge amount of tourism and business here. St. John's relationship to the harbour is its soul: historically, aesthetically, and for all the people who live and visit there. Destroying that is cutting our own throats economically and culturally. Make no mistake, destroying it is what we be doing. The precedent set will end this ongoing battle forever.
We are blessed with a huge, expanding area to develop in all over the city. Why choose to ruin an important part of the city instead of improving some other part? There is no reason not for this to be a win-win situation for everyone. Why are we doing this to ourselves? -
- Sounding
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:58:16
Amazed at all the pro office tower crowd here. Must all live in Mt Pearl or Paradise far away from the ugly skyline this will produce.
-
- Robb
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:57:32
If you build it, they will come......those words could not be truer than they are now........What's up with trying to develop a beautiful downtown core......my wife recently visited Halifax, and could not get over how clean and beautiful their city is....they have nice big buildings...everything looks nice.......and if I hear the comment taking away a view one more time I will scream.....waht a bunch of crap......so what they are saying is that if you want to build something, you will have to check with everyone to make sure they can see things...??...how silly.........you can never buy a house or a piece of land that guarantees a view forever....!!!!......so let Fortis do what they do best.....take out those eye sores of yesteryear, and put something nice there.....enough said.
-
- Jordan
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:56:48
I agree with development and I'd like to see this go ahead, hopfully Fortis considers the back of the building that faces Harbour Drive in the development and make it look nice. I don't understand though why the west side of Water Street isn't being developed, lots of land no historic buildings.
-
- Townie
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:56:03
The anti-business comments of the previous posters are to be expected I guess. As to the fact that the existing buildings are run down, who was it that owned them wasn't it Fortis. I wonder if Fortis puts up a new building there how fast they will let it become rundown as well. After all we can only go by past experience of the company.
-
- Andrew
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:55:58
Yes, lets turn downtown St. John's into another douchebag filled office space.Tourist will love getting off their cruise to have the sky filled with buildings they can't enter. Have some sense and stop being corporate tools.
-
- Dave in NL
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:55:19
The anti-development regulations were all drafted and re-assessed by local architectural firms not qualified for larger buildings....no wonder the consistent recommendation is always less than 15 meters. That being, too small to attract mainland competition. Look at the former Janeway Property building....even Fougere had to partner with a mainland firm to tackle a bigger project. Proof positive.
-
- tom
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:55:16
How is the economy of St. Johns going to grow if every time a multi-million dollar project is proposed it meets protest and red tape from the granolas of our city. Build the project and build another one across the other side of the Fortis building in that dirty empty space thats been held up by Shannie and the anti-development fools FOR years!
-
- Dave
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:54:15
It is reasonable to be vocal about this before the proposal is submitted because Fortis has been doing their own legwork in preparation.
It is reasonable to expect companies to follow existing regulations because they level the playing field: other developers *do* follow them. We must enforce them.
It is reasonable to have height restrictions that preserve a unique and beautiful view. Halifax does not have the same views.
Finally, the benefits to Fortis to build there are: they already own the land; a large building in front of a desired view is a great billboard; and a great view from an office helps in hiring top-level employees. -
- apples
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:52:09
Build something big and beautiful. We don't need another eyesore like the old rat infested Woolworths building in the westend.
Unfortunately, Shannie will do whatever she can to squat any proposed development unless it results in more Jellybean houses.... -
- Dakey
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:51:47
Peg Norman should not be commenting on the loss of retail space or lack of parking until Forthis's plans are filed with the city. She has no idea whether or not parking will be included in the plan. Retail space could be included on the first floor of the building. As far as the loss of views is concerned, the existing Fortis building and TD building are already up so how many views will actually be lost?
-
- Ian
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:50:33
If you have the money we all know anyone can get past any zoning. zoning criteria just seems to be a way for the city to get more money out of developers and has nothing to do with keep up any standards for our city. And we all know where that extra money goes with our council.
-
- Politically Incorrect
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:49:43
Right on Taxpayer! Who indeed is Peg Norman, a citizen presenting her concerns? Imagine members of the public with their hidden agendas having the impertinence to even question the motives of a multi-national! This kind of effrontery is a danger to democracy (corporate style). Fortis properties is successful, therefore they should be given carte blanche to do whatever they want. Great logic Taxpayer. They can do what they want in (and to) Belize, why not Newfoundland? The privledged minority must be protected from the excesses of the unwashed masses. Thanks again, Taxpayer.
-
- Jon
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:48:31
Sorry...can't do that...someone living up on Victoria Street might lose their view of the harbour!
-
- Brian
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:47:03
What's the matter Peg? Missing your spotlight?
Yes, God knows we are all sorry about what happened to you, but it's time to move on now and stop using your illness to advance your political aspirations, don't you think?
(For those who think she's just an unkown withc sincere motives, Google her) -
- Taxpayer ll
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:46:16
Politically Incorrect, I guess once again you must be correct. Yes, let's leave the old run down buildings, the graffitii the garbage, and the rest. We must keep downtown St. John's looking like the run down ruin it is. We must not try to improve it, we need to keep it looking like it is, yes that's the way to do it.
By the way, from what I've read the majority of the people of Belize are very, very happy with Fortis, and what they have done for this part of the world. For many years this area was plagued with poor power delivery, which stymied their growth, and perpetuated the poverty, and misery of these people. Now they are begininig to get their tourist industry, and some farming back on track, due to the availability of dependable electricity, for the first time in their history.
It is people like you, who would like to keep the people of Belize in darkness, and the people of St. John's in the 19th century. -
- Gord
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:45:39
How interesting that Taxpayer II Electric Bogaloo just happened to have read something somewhere about Belize, and about how much good Fortis has done for them. It's almost as if this average taxpayer type person had Fortis's talking points given to them by head office!
Must be a very well-read average taxpayer type person. -
- build it
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:45:39
The city of anti-developement will find some way to put the kybosh to that.
-
- Mike
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:45:24
But why build in a new area when they can revitalize existing buildings. Let Fortis file there plans and see what happens. The anti development crowd are the ones keeping fire traps like the woolworths building still around. Travel a few places and you can see that other cities have development along with keeping the heritage. Why are we so different? St. John's has become a city of urban sprawl
-
- Gord
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:45:01
Taxpayer II sure has read a lot of information about Fortis! Gosh. Well, it's good to have such an informed discussion.
-
- Politically Incorrect
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:44:47
I agree Build it. I look forward to a skyline that is is graced by a similar development that was opposed by the 'anti-development' crowd: the Atlantic Place car park. Maybe then we will, like Toronto, be beneficiaries of the Hollywood studios using St. John's as a cheap stand-in for Akron or Duluth.
-
- Andrew
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:44:41
This sounds too much like a development plan for downtown...Sorry Fortis, we don't allow that sort of thing around here....Hey Shannie?
-
- Steve
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:43:16
I currently live downtown and am not oppossed to development, but the planned location makes little sense. There is ample vacant space on Water Street west (near the Delta, Convention Centre, Oceanex) that would be a better location for this building. Also there are numerous empty buildings (CBC, old NL Power, Bargain Shop) that are sitting vacant and decaying throughout the downtown. Why not consider doing something with these buildings.
Given the small size of our Harbour we can cannot compare ourselves to Halifax, they have the benefit of a large harbour front that allows for a historic district while also having space for office towers.
Look at how hideous the current Fortis Building is, do you really want another one of those on our water front? Why doesn't Fortis give that monstrosity a face lift, then we'll talk about a new building. -
- stjgirl
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:41:39
Can we at least wait to pass judgement until we hear the actual facts on the development from Fortis when they submit the application to the city.
-
- Busy
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:41:21
Why is it that developers want to tear down existig vital buildings to build in the same spot? Cant they just build it somewhere where no building exists? Isnt this a waste (not to mention bad for the economy). They did the same thing in Corner Brook. Tore down vital building, evicting tenants, to build a new city hall, when they could have built it somewhere else, saving the former building. I dont get it? Is it just me?
-
- J
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:40:40
Lets cross our fingers that this gets build. if not you can bet the economy of this city and province will be screwed.
-
- Taxpayer ll
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:40:26
What really makes the naysayers sound ridiculous to me is the Harvey offshore operation a few doors up. I have to laugh when people talk about the beauty of St.John's waterfront when one of the first things visitors see is a gigantic pile of salt, next to a bunch of rusty trucks and offshore containers.
As for the present Fortis bldg. I read that the proposal includes a complete renovation of that bldg. as well, with retail space on the main floor, with a shopping plaza, retaurant space etc. -
- John
- - July 2, 2010 at 14:40:13
I am not complaining about Fortis until I have the facts. Why do someone not buy up the old Woolworth Building, Tear it down and put up a large Office building, No height restrictions and enough parking spaces for all who use the building. You would rid the city of a eye sore and have a beautiful high Rise. Get with the times...
-
- Whatever Bud
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:54:46
The businesses that are being evicted have been around for some time. The buildings in question are only an eyesore because they are located in such close proximity to the real eyesore the Fortis Building itself. Instead of allowing this type of development,why doesn't the City force the demolition of such eyesores as the old Telephone Building on McBrides/Duckworth,the old Woolworth's for example. Another thing that boggles my mind is how gas stations can have huge gas spills,close the station,cordon off the land,pay the property tax(then write it off so it costs them nothing) and never clean up the mess they have left behind.Lots of those around : Cornwall/Glenridge, Hamilton Av,Freshwater RD (next to Suzuki),etc etc.
-
- Citizen
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:53:09
Anything that was 'heritage' in downtown St. John's (Water Street) has long been demolished. Is it better to have vacant buildings that are eyesores and fire hazards than some 21st century development? I say go for the development. No matter what you build or where you build it in this city, someone has a beef - either the view is blocked, traffic is a problem, there are schools in the area and I could go on with excuses for blocking development of this city. City Council needs to look a lot further into the future in every aspect of their business from granting building permits to planning roads for 20 years from now.
-
- briny 69
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:52:32
nothing is going to happen any where as long as shannie is on council
-
- Gord
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:51:54
Looks like Fortis has dispatched a few drones to pose as regular ol' taxpayers in this discussion thread. Try not to be so obvious, folks.
There are other areas in the downtown core that could accommodate an office tower... it's simply not appropriate for that stretch of Water St.
Cities that value their architectural uniqueness reap major benefits. That's not an anti-development sentiment at all.
No more 'Atlantic Places'! -
- Cornergirl
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:50:53
One must remember that Fortis grew from the profits of all NL Power users so it is a company that we helped create & yes I believe they should be better corporate citizens. What do you want to see the habour for anyway? Because it's better than looking at glass towers-(it will be mostly glass as all other tall buildings are).
-
- Ryan
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:50:38
The height restrictions here are incredibly dumb.
-
- Jim
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:50:20
Kudos to Peg Norman and her stand. Why does the city have development rules if a company like Fortis can ignore them by going from 4 to 15 stories? Only a blind person can say that another 15 story building will not affect view planes. Of course, saying that the historic buildings in question are eyesores is another indication of blindness. St. John's has a unique downtown area and I do not want to see it become a pale imitation of Toronto.
-
- Anne
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:50:06
I support Peg Norman's view 100 %.
Keep downtown historic, with character.
The oldest city in North America you say?
Old world charm matters in this world of cloning. -
- Keepin' It Real
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:50:06
Welcome to Downtown St. John's, where it's 1949 forever!
-
- Justin
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:49:34
It is so frustrating to have politicians like Shannie Duff in office. Let's embrace this economic boom and allow the Province to make the transition from poverty to prosperity. I am all for preserving the heritage appeal of St. John's, but let's be honest - most of the office space downtown signifies decades of unemployment, so why not allow Fortis to build a state of the art tower which clearly depicts the advancement we have made in this Province? Think about the jobs that will be created from building a 15 storey office tower! Class A office space downtown is now comparable in price to Bay Street because our idiot politicians have not allowed the supply base to grow. Is this positive for business? Clearly not! There is no way lease rates in St. John's should be comparable to TO. They are artifically inflated!
As a NL'er I am not proposing that we allow the skyline to look like NYC, but these zoning restrictions have to be addressed somehow. -
- Frank
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:49:16
What do Newfoundlanders have against old buildings? Against the idea of preserving heritage?
Is it because the city burns down every fifty years that we don't have an appreciation for architectural history?
Reminds me of the fella chopping up his table into firewood in an old Al Clouston joke. -
- Taxpayer ll
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:49:14
What is with this Peg Norman person? She hasn't even received an eviction notice yet she is out there saying that Fortis is going to board buildings up and leave them to rot. I mean what is this person's real agenda?
Fortis, and Fortis properties are one of the true, real success stories to come out of this province. They own companies all over the world, and they employ thousands of people. They even maintain their head office here in NL, which many companies their size would never do.
Those buildings mentioned in the article are eyesores, and I think that that part of Water street needs a boost.
The Fortis building that is there is 14 or 15 stories as is, so how would building another one of the same size affect view planes?
This town is so very anti-development, when the Duffs and the Galgays get a hold of this the whole plan will probably come to a screeching halt anyway. Most cities in the world that are growing and developing have larger buildings in the downtown core, why is it that development here is always met with dismay? The downtown is rundown and dirty, and any new development should be welcomed, not shunned. -
- Poscstudent
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:48:03
Yeah let downtown stay old and dirty, give the office towers and the thousands of jobs that go with them to Halifax, everyone knows St. John's don't need anymore jobs.
-
- John
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:47:49
Gail Tucker, manager of corporate communications with Fortis. is just a talking head for the company. She only babbles what she is given to her to read. What's happening here is, Fortis is floating a trial balloon to see what the reaction is to the plan. It won't get approval because the city will have applicant's downtown applying to construct 15 story buildings, everywhere. There's too much traffic congestion on Water St. now, daytime traffic is impossible, not to mention parking. As for the sprinkler system excuse, that's really what it is. What kind of issues can a sprinkler system have ? It's just a grid of pipes with sprinkler heads attached. It's not the the space shuttle. That was laughable when I read that.
The only issue I can think of with a sprinkler system is to re-weld a connection, you don't need to evacuate the building. Just remember Fortis is the company that just increased our hydro rates 4.4 per cent. -
- Frank
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:47:38
I'm amazed at many of the sentiments here, and indeed of Fortis. This city and province benefit hugely from having an attractive and historically significant area by the waterfront. The uniqueness of this is what makes us special and brings a huge amount of tourism and business here. St. John's relationship to the harbour is its soul: historically, aesthetically, and for all the people who live and visit there. Destroying that is cutting our own throats economically and culturally. Make no mistake, destroying it is what we be doing. The precedent set will end this ongoing battle forever.
We are blessed with a huge, expanding area to develop in all over the city. Why choose to ruin an important part of the city instead of improving some other part? There is no reason not for this to be a win-win situation for everyone. Why are we doing this to ourselves? -
- Sounding
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:46:13
Amazed at all the pro office tower crowd here. Must all live in Mt Pearl or Paradise far away from the ugly skyline this will produce.
-
- Robb
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:45:04
If you build it, they will come......those words could not be truer than they are now........What's up with trying to develop a beautiful downtown core......my wife recently visited Halifax, and could not get over how clean and beautiful their city is....they have nice big buildings...everything looks nice.......and if I hear the comment taking away a view one more time I will scream.....waht a bunch of crap......so what they are saying is that if you want to build something, you will have to check with everyone to make sure they can see things...??...how silly.........you can never buy a house or a piece of land that guarantees a view forever....!!!!......so let Fortis do what they do best.....take out those eye sores of yesteryear, and put something nice there.....enough said.
-
- Jordan
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:43:58
I agree with development and I'd like to see this go ahead, hopfully Fortis considers the back of the building that faces Harbour Drive in the development and make it look nice. I don't understand though why the west side of Water Street isn't being developed, lots of land no historic buildings.
-
- Townie
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:42:45
The anti-business comments of the previous posters are to be expected I guess. As to the fact that the existing buildings are run down, who was it that owned them wasn't it Fortis. I wonder if Fortis puts up a new building there how fast they will let it become rundown as well. After all we can only go by past experience of the company.
-
- Andrew
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:42:36
Yes, lets turn downtown St. John's into another douchebag filled office space.Tourist will love getting off their cruise to have the sky filled with buildings they can't enter. Have some sense and stop being corporate tools.
-
- Dave in NL
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:41:30
The anti-development regulations were all drafted and re-assessed by local architectural firms not qualified for larger buildings....no wonder the consistent recommendation is always less than 15 meters. That being, too small to attract mainland competition. Look at the former Janeway Property building....even Fougere had to partner with a mainland firm to tackle a bigger project. Proof positive.
-
- tom
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:41:25
How is the economy of St. Johns going to grow if every time a multi-million dollar project is proposed it meets protest and red tape from the granolas of our city. Build the project and build another one across the other side of the Fortis building in that dirty empty space thats been held up by Shannie and the anti-development fools FOR years!
-
- Dave
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:39:47
It is reasonable to be vocal about this before the proposal is submitted because Fortis has been doing their own legwork in preparation.
It is reasonable to expect companies to follow existing regulations because they level the playing field: other developers *do* follow them. We must enforce them.
It is reasonable to have height restrictions that preserve a unique and beautiful view. Halifax does not have the same views.
Finally, the benefits to Fortis to build there are: they already own the land; a large building in front of a desired view is a great billboard; and a great view from an office helps in hiring top-level employees. -
- apples
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:36:14
Build something big and beautiful. We don't need another eyesore like the old rat infested Woolworths building in the westend.
Unfortunately, Shannie will do whatever she can to squat any proposed development unless it results in more Jellybean houses.... -
- Dakey
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:35:38
Peg Norman should not be commenting on the loss of retail space or lack of parking until Forthis's plans are filed with the city. She has no idea whether or not parking will be included in the plan. Retail space could be included on the first floor of the building. As far as the loss of views is concerned, the existing Fortis building and TD building are already up so how many views will actually be lost?
-
- Ian
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:33:24
If you have the money we all know anyone can get past any zoning. zoning criteria just seems to be a way for the city to get more money out of developers and has nothing to do with keep up any standards for our city. And we all know where that extra money goes with our council.
-
- Politically Incorrect
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:31:57
Right on Taxpayer! Who indeed is Peg Norman, a citizen presenting her concerns? Imagine members of the public with their hidden agendas having the impertinence to even question the motives of a multi-national! This kind of effrontery is a danger to democracy (corporate style). Fortis properties is successful, therefore they should be given carte blanche to do whatever they want. Great logic Taxpayer. They can do what they want in (and to) Belize, why not Newfoundland? The privledged minority must be protected from the excesses of the unwashed masses. Thanks again, Taxpayer.
-
- Jon
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:29:56
Sorry...can't do that...someone living up on Victoria Street might lose their view of the harbour!
-
- Brian
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:27:22
What's the matter Peg? Missing your spotlight?
Yes, God knows we are all sorry about what happened to you, but it's time to move on now and stop using your illness to advance your political aspirations, don't you think?
(For those who think she's just an unkown withc sincere motives, Google her) -
- Taxpayer ll
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:26:14
Politically Incorrect, I guess once again you must be correct. Yes, let's leave the old run down buildings, the graffitii the garbage, and the rest. We must keep downtown St. John's looking like the run down ruin it is. We must not try to improve it, we need to keep it looking like it is, yes that's the way to do it.
By the way, from what I've read the majority of the people of Belize are very, very happy with Fortis, and what they have done for this part of the world. For many years this area was plagued with poor power delivery, which stymied their growth, and perpetuated the poverty, and misery of these people. Now they are begininig to get their tourist industry, and some farming back on track, due to the availability of dependable electricity, for the first time in their history.
It is people like you, who would like to keep the people of Belize in darkness, and the people of St. John's in the 19th century. -
- Gord
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:25:16
How interesting that Taxpayer II Electric Bogaloo just happened to have read something somewhere about Belize, and about how much good Fortis has done for them. It's almost as if this average taxpayer type person had Fortis's talking points given to them by head office!
Must be a very well-read average taxpayer type person. -
- build it
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:25:16
The city of anti-developement will find some way to put the kybosh to that.
-
- Mike
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:24:53
But why build in a new area when they can revitalize existing buildings. Let Fortis file there plans and see what happens. The anti development crowd are the ones keeping fire traps like the woolworths building still around. Travel a few places and you can see that other cities have development along with keeping the heritage. Why are we so different? St. John's has become a city of urban sprawl
-
- Gord
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:24:17
Taxpayer II sure has read a lot of information about Fortis! Gosh. Well, it's good to have such an informed discussion.
-
- Politically Incorrect
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:23:54
I agree Build it. I look forward to a skyline that is is graced by a similar development that was opposed by the 'anti-development' crowd: the Atlantic Place car park. Maybe then we will, like Toronto, be beneficiaries of the Hollywood studios using St. John's as a cheap stand-in for Akron or Duluth.
-
- Andrew
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:23:43
This sounds too much like a development plan for downtown...Sorry Fortis, we don't allow that sort of thing around here....Hey Shannie?
-
- Steve
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:21:09
I currently live downtown and am not oppossed to development, but the planned location makes little sense. There is ample vacant space on Water Street west (near the Delta, Convention Centre, Oceanex) that would be a better location for this building. Also there are numerous empty buildings (CBC, old NL Power, Bargain Shop) that are sitting vacant and decaying throughout the downtown. Why not consider doing something with these buildings.
Given the small size of our Harbour we can cannot compare ourselves to Halifax, they have the benefit of a large harbour front that allows for a historic district while also having space for office towers.
Look at how hideous the current Fortis Building is, do you really want another one of those on our water front? Why doesn't Fortis give that monstrosity a face lift, then we'll talk about a new building. -
- stjgirl
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:18:19
Can we at least wait to pass judgement until we hear the actual facts on the development from Fortis when they submit the application to the city.
-
- Busy
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:17:45
Why is it that developers want to tear down existig vital buildings to build in the same spot? Cant they just build it somewhere where no building exists? Isnt this a waste (not to mention bad for the economy). They did the same thing in Corner Brook. Tore down vital building, evicting tenants, to build a new city hall, when they could have built it somewhere else, saving the former building. I dont get it? Is it just me?
-
- J
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:16:49
Lets cross our fingers that this gets build. if not you can bet the economy of this city and province will be screwed.
-
- Taxpayer ll
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:16:25
What really makes the naysayers sound ridiculous to me is the Harvey offshore operation a few doors up. I have to laugh when people talk about the beauty of St.John's waterfront when one of the first things visitors see is a gigantic pile of salt, next to a bunch of rusty trucks and offshore containers.
As for the present Fortis bldg. I read that the proposal includes a complete renovation of that bldg. as well, with retail space on the main floor, with a shopping plaza, retaurant space etc. -
- John
- - July 1, 2010 at 21:16:03
I am not complaining about Fortis until I have the facts. Why do someone not buy up the old Woolworth Building, Tear it down and put up a large Office building, No height restrictions and enough parking spaces for all who use the building. You would rid the city of a eye sore and have a beautiful high Rise. Get with the times...
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
