I have followed with increasing distress the release of various plans for the St. John's waterfront, as shown in the downtown parking study (allowing an additional two storeys to buildings for parking) and the Fortis Building (plans for a 15-storey office tower on the waterfront).
St. John's is a unique city, both topographically, culturally and financially - probably unmatched by few, if any, other cities in the world. It is remarkable in having what must be one of the best natural harbours, in one of the most picturesque natural surroundings anywhere.
Thanks to our oil, we are on the verge of an era of financial growth that will, whether we want it or not, transform the city.
It is the responsibility of our city hall, on behalf of us, the residents, to manage this transformation in a way that will create a city and harbour that can be the envy of the world. This is a challenge that requires councillors of vision and the courage to stand up for what is the "right thing to do" for the long term, and to create a livable, attractive city, second to none.
We are fortunate to have the examples of so many waterfront cities worldwide that have made the most of their waterfronts to create such wonderful places to live. For example, Halifax, Oslo, Charleston, Baltimore, Vancouver, Auckland, Sydney, and many others - "world class" cities.
Other than Vancouver, none of these have the same natural assets that St. John's does.
Unfortunately, there are the exceptions that prove a city council without vision can allow developers to maximize their profits and pay only lip service to "the public good," and take over the waterfront primarily to benefit themselves and the few fortunate tenants that inhabit the ugly high-rise blocks that inevitably grow close to the water.
A waterfront is a one-time natural gift and should be treated as such.
Toronto is but one example of a bad waterfront development, where nobody but the developers reap the main benefit of water accessibility.
Do we really want to follow Toronto?
Some suggestions: the busy working waterfront, that will only become more active, should be looked on as an asset that is interesting to observe.
I can imagine a scheme such as a deck that covers over Harbour Drive completely, end to end. This deck would create real estate for the development of pedestrian walkways, restaurants, pubs and shopping on the "deck" level, and offices and residences on the upper two levels - creating a very high-value real estate development of high class and attractiveness. The new deck at Atlantic Place is a good start.
Also, to make the downtown a place that citizens want to go to, create a pedestrian precinct environment on Water Street that makes shopping a pleasure. The U.K., is an example of an overcrowded little island, with problems way beyond those of St. John's. One of the solutions has been to create very attractive pedestrian downtowns with parking on the outskirts, and public transport. Consequently, the U.K. has excellent, busy, livable downtowns.
There are many imaginative solutions to transform our city into something to be proud of. Imagine the attractiveness of a city where all the downtown residential properties are required to not obstruct another's view, say, on Gower, Bond and other streets. Eventually, with future developments, most residences will have that irreplaceable view yearned for by any flat land resident.
Any highrise on Water Street will take this away. Send the highrises to Pleasantville, where they could eventually create a well-planned attractive business park with all of the benefits that accrue to such an area, but still close to "the downtown."
We should invite architects, town planners, engineers and developers to participate in an international competition to let loose their imaginations on what is the best thing for the St. John's harbour, waterfront and downtown, in order to ensure a world-class city. We are blessed with many talented local artists and other professionals who could, given the opportunity, deliver some wonderful ideas to create a "made in Newfoundland" harbour and downtown plan.
We deserve no less.
Councillors, you are at a very significant point in time where your decisions will affect the future "classiness" of our city. Step up to the plate and show us residents what imaginative, fearless leaders you really are. Your grandchildren will thank you mightily.
Alun Davies, P.Eng., writes from Outer Cove.
Preserve our waterfront
I have followed with increasing distress the release of various plans for the St. John's waterfront, as shown in the downtown parking study (allowing an additional two storeys to buildings for parking) and the Fortis Building (plans for a 15-storey office tower on the waterfront).
St. John's is a unique city, both topographically, culturally and financially - probably unmatched by few, if any, other cities in the world. It is remarkable in having what must be one of the best natural harbours, in one of the most picturesque natural surroundings anywhere.
- Number of views : 11
- Rate
- Top of the page
Comments
-
- Jim
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:34:40
Davies is absolutely correct, though I am surprised that he thinks Halifax is an example to be followed. The St John's harbor front needs imaginative and sensitive development, rather than the Keith Coombs' anything goes approach. We have a valuable asset which has been abused and neglected. This has to stop.
-
- Paul
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:27:44
I agree with you Alun. People need to think about what the city looks like from the water and what an asset it will be in 100 yearts if we resist the urge to make our city look like all the rest.
-
- Alun
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:24:26
Thanks to all for your comments- much appreciated. Some clarification: 1. I am not anti-business, anti-developer. Fortis is a great Nfld. company to be proud of. I just think their development should meet the best for St. John's. 2. Pleasantville- This could be a new business park, not skyscrapers, but 3-4 storey offices in park like surroundings. With all of the potential development we need a new location to house them all. There won't be room downtown. 3. The deck - better explained as allowing the new buildings and property lines to extend over Harbour Drive and allow say 20ft public promenade the full length. Developers buy/ lease from the city, but pay for their piece of deck - it's just another floor of their building. May take 20 years to completion, but probably less. 4. Weather- the promenade might have removable sides, roof for use in winter, but still give access to the new waterfront businesses from the promenade even in winter- a new street .
-
- Craig
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:24:11
Nobody wants to build a skyscraper in Pleasantville! Please be realistic. We need to stop handcuffing people who want to set up a business in the downtown with these pie in the sky ideas. With regards to following Toronto, that city is the largest economic center in our country. Would that kind of wealth and prosperity benefit St. Johns and also rural NL? Absolutely. We do need to have certain logistical limitations on development in the downtown, but nothing to the extent that you are proposing.
-
- Ann
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:20:03
Well said
-
- Steve
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:14:18
I agree with everything except the deck idea. No one goes on the Atlantic Place deck, and it is very exposed to windy and rainy weather, whereas at least on Duckworth and Water you are sheilded somewhat by the buildings. That doesn't negate the principle you have stated, however, that high rise development does not belong in that area. People, it is two streets! Can we not just leave them at their present scale, and let the eyesores such as the old Woolworth's building be redeveloped at three or four stories? They say it can't be done based on how much you have to pay for the land, but that's because the people selling the properties are asking exorbitant prices with the hope that developers can sooner or later bamboozle a council into approving a height limit beyond the current regulations.
-
- Eugene
- - July 2nd, 2010 at 13:10:46
Except for the fact that he may find the company odious: Alun Davies for mayor!
-
- Jim
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:24:06
Davies is absolutely correct, though I am surprised that he thinks Halifax is an example to be followed. The St John's harbor front needs imaginative and sensitive development, rather than the Keith Coombs' anything goes approach. We have a valuable asset which has been abused and neglected. This has to stop.
-
- Paul
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:15:24
I agree with you Alun. People need to think about what the city looks like from the water and what an asset it will be in 100 yearts if we resist the urge to make our city look like all the rest.
-
- Alun
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:10:06
Thanks to all for your comments- much appreciated. Some clarification: 1. I am not anti-business, anti-developer. Fortis is a great Nfld. company to be proud of. I just think their development should meet the best for St. John's. 2. Pleasantville- This could be a new business park, not skyscrapers, but 3-4 storey offices in park like surroundings. With all of the potential development we need a new location to house them all. There won't be room downtown. 3. The deck - better explained as allowing the new buildings and property lines to extend over Harbour Drive and allow say 20ft public promenade the full length. Developers buy/ lease from the city, but pay for their piece of deck - it's just another floor of their building. May take 20 years to completion, but probably less. 4. Weather- the promenade might have removable sides, roof for use in winter, but still give access to the new waterfront businesses from the promenade even in winter- a new street .
-
- Craig
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:09:39
Nobody wants to build a skyscraper in Pleasantville! Please be realistic. We need to stop handcuffing people who want to set up a business in the downtown with these pie in the sky ideas. With regards to following Toronto, that city is the largest economic center in our country. Would that kind of wealth and prosperity benefit St. Johns and also rural NL? Absolutely. We do need to have certain logistical limitations on development in the downtown, but nothing to the extent that you are proposing.
-
- Ann
- - July 1st, 2010 at 20:02:30
Well said
-
- Steve
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:53:08
I agree with everything except the deck idea. No one goes on the Atlantic Place deck, and it is very exposed to windy and rainy weather, whereas at least on Duckworth and Water you are sheilded somewhat by the buildings. That doesn't negate the principle you have stated, however, that high rise development does not belong in that area. People, it is two streets! Can we not just leave them at their present scale, and let the eyesores such as the old Woolworth's building be redeveloped at three or four stories? They say it can't be done based on how much you have to pay for the land, but that's because the people selling the properties are asking exorbitant prices with the hope that developers can sooner or later bamboozle a council into approving a height limit beyond the current regulations.
-
- Eugene
- - July 1st, 2010 at 19:46:59
Except for the fact that he may find the company odious: Alun Davies for mayor!
