Irving Oil development and a swap in land use priorities

Today the Saint John Port Authority announced a deal with Irving Oil that would see IOL develop a "world headquarters" site on long wharf to accommodate the planned growth of the company and provide improved access to the waterfront for the public.

The news was celebrated at an announcement at the Trade and Convention Centre this morning by a large audience of supporters who also learned that the Port Authority would gain ownership of the former Lantic Sugar refinery site and the other end of the harbour, with the approval of City Council.

Files from the announcement can be downloaded here:

• Long Wharf Irving Oil Announcement (Media Release)
• Artist Concepts - Irving Oil Building on Long Wharf

Saint John Mayoral Debate 2008

The 5 candidates for mayor debated last Friday May 2, 2008 and much of it has been recorded and posted on youtube for all to view. Links to the sectioned pieces of video are listed below. As well, bellow the video links are links to news articles covering the debate and issues that arose from it.

• Opening Statement - Ivan Court
• Opening Statement - John Ferguson
• Opening Statement - Michelle Hooton
• Opening Statement - Norm McFarlane
• Opening Statement - Mike Richardson
• Pension - John Ferguson
• Pension - Michelle Hooton
• Pension - Norm McFarlane
• Pension - Mike Richardson
• Pension - Ivan Court
• Transparency - Michelle Hooton
• Transparency - Norm McFarlane
• Transparency - Mike Richardson
• Transparency - Ivan Court
• Transparency - John Ferguson
• Water - Norm McFarlane
• Water - Mike Richardson
  
• Water - Ivan Court
  
• Water - John Ferguson
  
• Water - Michelle Hooton
• Housing - Mike Richardson
• Housing - Ivan Court
• Housing - John Ferguson
• Housing - Michelle Hooton
• Housing - Norm McFarlane
• Leadership - Ivan Court
• Leadership - John Ferguson
• Leadership - Michelle Hooton
• Leadership - Norm McFarlane
• Leadership - Mike Richardson
• Management Reviews - John Ferguson
• Management Reviews - Michelle Hooton
• Management Reviews - Norm McFarlane
• Management Reviews - Mike Richardson
• Management Reviews - Ivan Court
• Taxes - Michelle Hooton
• Taxes - Norm McFarlane
• Taxes - Mike Richardson
• Taxes - Ivan Court
• Taxes - John Ferguson
• Spending - Norm McFarlane
• Spending - Mike Richardson
• Spending - Ivan Court
• Spending - John Ferguson
• Spending - Michelle Hooton
• Budget - Mike Richardson
• Budget - Ivan Court
• Budget - John Ferguson
• Budget - Michelle Hooton
• Budget - Norm McFarlane
  
• Closing Statement - Ivan Court
• Closing Statement - Mike Richardson
• Closing Statement - Michelle Hooton
• Closing Statement - Norm McFarlane
• Closing Statement - John Ferguson

Links to articles and releases related to the debate:

• Treatment Water quality tops list of concerns of citizens heading into municipal election [May 5]
  
• Campaign Mayoral candidates trade accusations as heated words fly [May 3]
• A night of smears, accusations - just like council [May 3]
• Mudslinging takes place at mayor's debate [May 3]
  
• More to be added if they are posted online...
  

Setting the record straight on LNG

The LNG tax deal has been a contentious issue in Saint John; it has divided our community and set an unfair precedent for special back room deals.

Here is the record:

4 Councilors consistently voted against the LNG tax deal – Hooton, Court, Tait and Titus. Hooton and Court are now both running for Mayor.

• March 14, 2005 – Hooton, Court, Tait and Titus voted NO to the tax deal.
• March 29, 2005 – Motion to cancel the LNG tax deal. MOTION DEFEATED. Hooton, Court, Tait and Titus are the only councilors to vote in favour of the motion.
• April 29, 2005 – Motion to receive more details on the back room tax deal. MOTION PASSED.
• June 20, 2005 – Hooton, Court, Tait and Titus voted to inform the Province that Bill 70 was not as requested by Council. MOTION DEFEATED.

Detailed information on these motions is available at the Common Clerk's Office in City Hall.

Creativity, Thoughtfulness and Openness in Saint John

In an attempt to come up with a solution for the area of Saint John north of Union Street that does not cost so much and offend so many visions for our city's present and future, hundreds of citizens have joined together in various groups to come up with creative and thoughtful solutions that are surprisingly similar and have resulted in two similar visions. They are also, surprisingly, much different from what the City and the current Mayor and some Councillors are proposing.

The first is a vision document from Uptown Saint John that is the result of decades of thoughtful study of what works in other cities and what works for Saint John. With a real development opportunity and the public money that accompanies it, Uptown Saint John knows exactly how to invest in their constituency to realize the greatest opportunity for wealth creation and quality of place. The Uptown Saint John vision can be downloaded here.

The second is a vision from a group of citizens, listed below, who have contributed to the City's "consultation process" on this development but wish for their views to be shared publicly rather than guarded and filtered by the City's consultants. The views were shared to such an extent that the broad themes could be distilled into one document that they all felt comfortable putting their name to. The citizen vision document can be downloaded here. The list of names of supporters of this document are as follows:

• Steve Alexander
• Sandra Bell
• Hazel Braithwaite
• Peter & Hazel Brodkorb
• Peter Buckland
• Earle Campbell
• Anne Compton
• Signe Gurholt
• Rick Hatchette
• Grant Heckman
• Benita Hutchison
• Leona Laracey
• Greg Marquis
• Elizabeth McGahan
• Bob McVicar
• Deborah Payne
• Joan Pierce
• Richard Purdy
• Jeff Roach
• Peter Smit
• Margaret-Anne Smith
• Christiane Vaillancourt
• John Wallace
• Kathryn Wilson

Why Justice Complex and Police Station Should NOT Be Built Together

In its haste to build a police station and a justice complex in record time and with record funds, required examinations of logic and purpose may be lost and worth reconsidering. Local resident and community leader John Wallace recently wrote an opinion piece [Sunday, March 02, 2008 2:48 PM] to friends, family, and colleagues in building a better Saint John, from his perspective gathered from decades of practicing law, that is worth examination:

Following yesterday's public session, I've had further thoughts that I believe are highly relevant to this whole issue and I thought I would pass them along to you - here goes.

First of all, I would hope that everyone who has become involved in all of this would agree that the ultimate conclusion of this North of Union public debate must reflect, on balance, what's in the best long term interests of our City.

No one group should expect to get everything that it wants, and particularly so, if those wants would be inconsistent with achieving that over-riding public interest objective.

For the reasons I have previously outlined, I am convinced that the inclusion of the proposed new police station on the North of Union Site (bounded by Union, Hazen and Carleton Streets and Wellington Row) and connected by underground tunnel to the new justice building, would significantly negate our City's ability to maximize the tremendous residential, social, cultural and economic benefits that this Site could otherwise provide in the much needed revitalization of our uptown core.

For that reason alone, I believe the City's current proposed site for the police station should be rejected and it should be built elsewhere (possibly on the east side Carleton Street, down to Sewell and Station Streets or on the former Downey Motors site on Crown Street).

As I understand it, the arrangement being presently proposed as between the City and the Province would see each of them share equally in the capital and operating costs for the detention cells that would be located in the new police station, as well as for the underground connecting tunnel that would be dedicated exclusively to the movement of prisoners.

First of all, there should be absolutely no reason why the City and Province would not want to also share the use, and associated costs, of detention cells that could be included in a new police station built on another site. The only difference would be that the costs of constructing the proposed underground tunnel would be saved and prisoners would be moved to the new justice building by using police security vehicles (this would be same the way prisoners would continue to be moved to and from the provincial jail that's located on the Black River Road).

There would obviously be costs associated with moving prisoners by vehicle, but as would be the case with the proposed dedicated tunnel, these costs could also be shared by the City and Province, and as a consequence the considerable capital and operating costs of the tunnel would be eliminated.

Surely, our political leaders would not allow the tremendous community benefits that the North of Union Site could otherwise provide to our City, to be lost over the construction of a prisoner tunnel.

In this regard, should it not be our first priority to focus our collective energies, thoughts and public expenditures on the safe, healthy, productive and environmentally responsible movement of our citizens within a revitalized uptown Saint John?

Undoubtedly, in the bigger community picture of things and over the long term, wouldn't the requirement to move prisoners to and from the courthouse by vehicle, seem to be a relatively minor and inconsequential compromise?

Something else that has to be clearly recognized and represented in all of this is that (to use a much quoted phrase) - "justice must not only be done, it must always seem to be done" (or something like that). Our courts and all of the members of the judiciary must always be representative of the reality that our judicial system provides equal justice for all - it must always be, and be seen, as entirely unbiased and not in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, appearing to favour the interests of law enforcement officials over the interests of the accused.

In this regard, the proposal to physically "knit " the police station together with the courthouse by means a tunnel that would be dedicated exclusvely to the movement of prisoners as between the two, would create what would not only appear to be, but what would be in fact, one physically integrated law enforcement system that includes only our police department and the courts. Although they are obviously anything but ideal and need to be replaced, even the existing police and court facilities located in City Hall (which includes many other public activities) do not appear as one consolidated, and solitary legal enforcement unit.

Our courts are not, and can never, either directly or indirectly, be considered by our citizens as an extension or part of the police department.

The real and perceived independence of our judiciary is, and must always be, at the heart of our judicial system.

There are times in our haste, as we try to create as many operating and cost efficiencies as possible, that we have to stop, stand back and see if we have somehow drifted away and gotten off the track in some principled and fundamental way. In my view, this is clearly one of those times that this has occurred.

Mayor and Council should reach a conclusion on this North of Union issue that will enable our City to maximize, to the greatest extent possible, all of the potential benefits that this Site can possibly provide, while at the same time and in a reasonable and balanced manner, addresses the needs and requirements of our police department.

Regards,

John

North of Union Consultation

On February 6, 2008 the City Manager's Office provided a document that condensed responses to the City of Saint John Community Feedback form after an information session the previous week (January 30, 2008) on the proposed development.

The same week an article appeared in the paper titled Police HQ 'pretty much designed' - Architect says public has less chance to affect the project which outlined the design process of large projects and the work and likely costs required to make any changes to this plan based on the stage of the process presented at the Jan30 information session. This challenges the notion that the City's "public consultation process" on this issue is more than public relations management as their plans are unlikely to be moved significantly if the will of the public is to do so.

1. The original feedback form can be obtained and completed here.
   
2. A pdf of the condensed responses can be downloaded here (originally provided in doc format).
3. On Feb12 Mayor Norm McFarlane circulated an email outlining next steps of the process.
   

On Feb18 The city circulated another email with more details and a broad outline of the status of the development and the consultation process to date that can be downloaded here.

Other news articles related to the process are as follows [Most recent first. Return for future additions]:

• Opposite opinions - Hooton would hand project to next council, Court says it's time to move forward [Mar14]
  
• Proceed with police headquarters north of Union, restaurateur says [Mar14]
  
• Public agenda undermined public consultations [TJ Editorial, Mar14]: "This project has involved one betrayal of the public after another, from council's initial failure to issue a request for proposals, to its hidden deliberations and secret land acquisitions. The mayor's refusal to answer a direct question in open council session - is the site of the police headquarters open for discussion? - may have been the crowning insult."
  
• Residents frustrated with process - Audience members surprised to learn about condition of sale for Aliant property [Mar13]: "Many were floored when Beckett noted during the later stages of the meeting that the police station had to be part of the north of Union development because it was a condition of sale of a large piece of real estate the city is purchasing from Aliant."
  
• Are residents being consulted or managed? [Mar13]: "The city has hurried the public through four meetings at a rate of two per week. Each meeting is a different format and content. All are called on short notice. The city refused to reschedule the Saturday meeting at the beginning of spring break. The intent is clearly to discourage participation."
  
• Mayor not budging on police HQ - It's 'cut and dried' new station will be included in north of Union project [Mar11]: "The mayor rejects the idea that the public was not involved in selecting the north of Union location."
  
• North of Union's potential (and related North of union commentary signees) [Mar11]: "The city's current plans involve demolishing most of the heritage buildings on the site, placing a large parking garage along Union Street, and locating a police station somewhere on the site, possibly involving the eviction of the Saint John Arts Centre and the inappropriate reuse of the Carnegie Building. None of these ideas are conducive to the widely held goals of growing the population, revitalizing the uptown core, protecting and integrating our considerable but finite heritage assets, and generally making the centre of Saint John a thriving, growing, people-friendly place."
  
• What's council's stand on community values? [TJ Editorial, Mar10]: "Saint John will be better served if their proposals are taken into consideration than if council insists on placing the police headquarters North of Union. The idea is to build the uptown community, not just a structure."
  
• Move municipal planning up the public agenda [TJ Editorial, Mar8]: "Much of the acrimony and expense over the North of Union development could have been avoided if council had followed a responsible governance process."
  
• Don't forget the poor - New police headquarters and courthouses could eliminate or add much-needed housing [Mar8]
  
• Looking for a home - Jewish community would like to build new facility in justice complex area [Mar6]: "Levine, who is in charge of the synagogue's search committee, said he would like to find a spot that is relatively close to the waterfront, so the museum can continue to take advantage of foot traffic."
  
• A win for Y and city [Mar5]: "With enough imagination, the Y-police headquarters flip could turn into the kind of success story the community is yearning for - including the generations to come."
  
• Art Centre's future is at stake [Mar3]
  
• Will council listen to an expert planner? [Mar3]: "It shouldn't take an international authority to convince council that this project is backward, when so many residents have been saying so for months."
  
• Researchers report to council March 17 - Dalhousie students lead discussions at police-justice sessions [Mar3]
  
• Tait subjects himself to more ridicule [Mar3]: "It's clear from the letter Tait wants the headquarters built as quickly as possible."
  
• Officials dreaming about high-rise heaven - Public workshops today will focus on potential private development [Mar1]: "The hope is that developers will be interested in the area because of access to the parking garage and pedway, as well as the site's proximity to the uptown."
  
• Urban plans can go awry [Feb29]: "...consider this: at one point in the 1950s, there was serious thought given to the idea of tearing down the Old City Market, in favour of a parking facility."
  
• North of Union plan 'backward' [Feb29]: "A crowd of about 200 at the city's Heritage Gala Awards gave a New York-based urban critic a thunderous ovation Thursday night as she blasted the city's current plans for north of Union Street. 'It is so backward I can't begin to tell you'."
  
• Heritage official stands up for historic buildings [Feb27]: "Bezanson told the crowd that because the neighbourhood survived the Great Fire it is the only place in Saint John where one can trace the entire architectural history of the city."
  
• Why destroy this stately city landmark? [Feb25]: "Our Carnegie building - described by poor, baffled councillor Glen Tait as a "heritage-like structure," whatever that may possibly be intended to mean - is a grand, stately community gathering place, refitted at considerable public expense as an arts centre."
  
• Uptown SJ finds solution for police HQ impasse [Feb23]: "There are significant cultural assets on site now that can be used to achieve an investment climate, says Uptown general manager Peter Asimakos. "This is not about making a living museum of a bunch of heritage properties," he said."
• Explore Our Past, Discover Your Future [Feb23]: "We've a number of shortsighted city officials who see these simply as old buildings standing in the way of progress and are more interested in replacing historic treasures with steel, concrete and green space that can be found in any city in the world, all in the name of 'urban renewal'."
  
• Panic tactics miss the mark [TJ Editorial, Feb22]: "We believe residents can judge for themselves whose proposals would be most detrimental to the city's interests. Let's drop the innuendo, and start debating the project's details."
• Why other police HQ sites didn't make the grade [Feb21]
  
• 'We know we can afford it' - Treasurer says worst-case scenario would see six-cent increase in tax rate [Feb21]
  
• Arts centre move worth mulling: Tait [Feb21]
  
• Table Debate on Union Street [TJ Editorial, Feb21]
  
• North of Union - The great debate [Feb20]: "It will be alive from 9 to 5...It won't flow into the vitality of the uptown area as a whole..."
• The Old Boys' Club is out of touch [Feb20]: "While the mayor and half of council try to impose their plans on Saint John, the city is under a boil order because parts of its water system predate Confederation. Which is the priority issue?"
• Wanted: More details on police HQ project [Feb20]: "There's no way officials haven't seen estimates to arrive at $20 million for the police headquarters. The lack of details smacks too much of old boys' club secrecy and doesn't fit in with the open, transparent process Saint Johners have been promised."
  
• Realtor mystified why his proposed site for police HQ not pursued [Feb20]: "The whole thing is rather disgusting that it was done behind closed doors, without any input from the citizens of Saint John"
  
• Leave arts centre alone: supporters - Gallery owner fears Carnegie building could become nothing but a 'concrete ghetto' [Feb20]: "If you take the arts centre out this place, it will really become a concrete ghetto where nobody wants to be at night"
• Police HQ not fixed: city official - The closer facility is to justice building the less expensive it is, says deputy city manager [Feb19]: "There are no plans to relocate the police facility"
• Tempers flare at council over north of Union project [Feb19]
• Councillor would move arts centre - Tait proposes incorporating Carnegie building into police-justice complex [Feb19]: "Tait's submission is one of several on the council agenda concerning the north of Union project. The councillor also has a submission saying that "the Arts Board as well as others" have had discussions that could affect the project."
  
• Councillor would move arts centre - Tait proposes incorporating Carnegie building into police-justice complex [Feb18]: "Tait said incorporating the Carnegie building into the police station would make the design more palatable to 'some of the critics'"
  
• Draw up a new development plan [TJ Editorial, Feb14]
  
• Don't judge a book by its cover - Y president [Feb14]: "The Y wants to see what will happen in the area north of Union Street and also at the old Coast Guard site, she said. If the developers of the area along Union Street welcome some sort of community involvement it could be a good home for the Y, and make the area more welcoming after dark"
• Start the project over - Businesswoman plans petition if the city doesn't start development from scratch [Feb14]: "The process the city has taken to promote its proposed development is akin to fitting some of the public's ideas into what has already been 'planned, bought and paid for'"
  
• Take time 'to do it right' - North of Union no place for police station, says former waterfront partnership head [Feb13]: "In other words, the only thing we can talk about is how many trees there will be or whether it will be brick or precast concrete"
• Preserve the heritage of Canada's first city [TJ Editorial, Feb13]: "The preservation of the Gothic Arches, the construction of modern offices and stores within an historic block in Centerbeam Place, and the renovation of upper floors into loft apartments have demonstrated that this city's heritage buildings are not an impediment to growth, but a source of beauty and pride as significant today as when they were first constructed."
• Others watching city - Heritage Canada Foundation urges Saint John to build on its ‘remarkable’ record [Feb12]: "It's the number of buildings that would be affected that we are concerned about," says Natalie Bull. "We're not being critical of Saint John at all at this point."
• Sessions set for February, March [Feb09]: "Feedback will provide input for developing a set of principles - physical, environmental, social, arts and culture - that will guide the development"
• Wanted: a real public consultation process [Feb09]: "But we live here. Who is better qualified to determine our future?"
• Nothing cast in stone - Firing back at critics, police official says plans for a new HQ could change [Feb09]: "Mayor Norm McFarlane insists everything except site location is up for discussion. 'It's a full, open process,' he said. 'Everything is on the table.'"
• Union Street: get it right [TJ Editorial, Feb08]: "If there isn't room for good ideas like including the Elizabeth Fry Society or a transportation hub, Saint Johners will know the "consultation" was just for show."
• Police HQ 'pretty much designed' - Architect says public has less chance to affect the project [Feb08]: "Normally, if you're going to spend $300,000, you would like some input. In an ideal world, you'd get input along the way before that money was spent."
  
• Include transportation hub in complex: cyclists - Community group says parking garage should have large bus stop with sheltered bike racks [Feb07]: "The group's proposal says the city seems to be at odds with its own vision statement, which reads, in part, 'Life without a car is entirely possible.'"
• City is sending mixed signals [TJ Editorial, Feb07]: "How can you trust someone who asks for your opinion, then behaves as though it doesn't matter?"
• Deciding to change site of HQ could be costly: police chief - More than $300,000 has been spent on building's design work [Feb06]: "Those invoices are specific to design development for that site," police chief Allen Bodechon said Tuesday. "That money would be lost."
• Some citizens skeptical - Residents wonder if city's mind made up, but next phase said to be more interactive [Feb04]: "What we have here is unique. We should maintain the integrity of what we have. We don't have to be like everybody else."
• Listen to the Public [TJ Editorial, Feb04]: "Saint Johners care deeply about this project, from the need to provide police with adequate headquarters to the renewal of an uptown block that has seen better days. Very few people are opposed on principle. Most just want to understand what the project will entail and to ensure it is the right development for the need, the cost and the area."
• A nice start - now let's see some more action [Feb02]: "Some people felt the one-on-one format wasn't perfect and there were some who just wanted to hear what others had to say about it," he said. "But I think the city is genuinely interested in hearing what we have to say."
• Decisions of Monumental Proportions [Feb02]: "Just ask yourself this question: In what way will the current plans for the development of north of Union add to your quality of life?"
• Selling north of Union - Consultant might not be familiar to many Saint Johners, but his influence runs deep [Feb02]
• North of Union officials facing A monumental task [Feb01]: "Citizens of Saint John have enough examples of poorly conceived urban renewal schemes and awfully maintained city infrastructure to be a tad cynical when they see nice drawings, full of trees and pedestrians spaces."
• Saint Johners anxious to give views [Jan31]: "A lot of the information that was presented today is information that is already known and it wasn't new information to me. I saw new pictures, but there wasn't a lot of new information and to me this was just a total sham. I think it's really unfortunate that citizens of this city are being isolated from the discussion process."
• Project details unveiled [Jan31]: "It's not just about widening Union Street," he said. "It is providing opportunity for continually enhancing growth as the city moves ahead."
• North of Union public consultation [Timeline - Jan22]
• Nothing in stone - Council's final decision on project won't come until after hearing from public [Jan22]

What Does Saint John Have in Common with Mississauga?

One evening in November in Mississauga Jan Gehl, an architect and expert on public space from Denmark, and Ken Greenberg, an urban designer gave an address that echoed a discussion currently taking place in Saint John, New Brunswick into how we want our city to be planned. A full commentary by Craig MacBride who attended the address can be found here.

Amoung the relevant highlights:

• "All the answers to planning are in the human body." Gehl separated urban design into two categories: five-kilometre-per-hour architecture, made for pedestrians, and sixty-kilometre-per-hour architecture, made for cars. Re: five-kilometre-per-hour architecture - "We see it in all the old cities. It's the architecture of small spaces." Re: sixty-kilometre-per-hour architecture - "There are no details because you're too far away from them anyway...There's nothing much to being a human being in this environment."
• Public spaces are split into three zones: market space, meeting space, and connection space. Connection space is made up of areas used to get from one space to another, and those spaces have taken over the urban landscape in places like Mississauga (and is central to Saint John's current planning) . Most of our infrastructure is there to facilitate moving from point A to point B.
• "The greatest interest of human beings is other human beings."
• "The way to hit all these birds with one stone is to plan for pedestrians and bicycles," Gehl said.
• "There hasn't been a place in the world where they've built more roads and they haven't had more traffic." Trying to cure traffic congestion by adding more capacity is like trying to cure obesity by loosening your belt.
• Re: the environmental component of planning a city: "This is not a frill. This is actually fundamental for our survival."
• Big projects do not make a city. Instead, Mississauga should focus on small, five-kilometre-per-hour projects.

Chartwell Report - Vision 2015 Deficiencies

The "Chartwell Report" (Operational Review Program - Final Report) that has been referred to many times as the basis for the City of Saint John's Vision 2015 is available in full and can be obtained by following the links below:

Operational Review Program - Final Report, September 2005
Appendix E - Program and Service Profiles
Appendix F - BCQuick Municipal Value Gauge

Why is this important? It appears that what was recommended in the report and what is being implemented through Vision 2015 are vastly different and may, instead of bringing a stronger voice for the citizens of the city and more efficient operations, produce the opposite. There is one main difference that will produce two very serious results:

1. The report recommends that the City be run by committees of citizens with at least one representative of Council on each committee. The difference is that Vision 2015 plans to create these committees but there will be no citizens on them, instead they will be made up entirely of Council members. The result will be that we will not have a process that receives its direction from the citizens of Saint John, as is the promise of Vision 2015.

2. The recommendations to each committee will now be coming from the committee Chairs (Council members) and not from City staff members, which removes responsibility from City staff. Council members, with a political approach to the City's matters, will have full authority over what matters are dealt with by these committees and ultimately Council. Thus City staff will need to appeal to these Chairs to have issues that need addressing throughout city hall in their capacities as experts in their field.

To begin examining this, a look at page 83 will give an explanation of the complications and inefficiencies of the current structure.

Page 87 to page 89 is also an interesting section and the last paragraph at the bottom of page 88 should be noted for the phrase "that at least one member of Common Council be appointed..." Based on that statement and its context, one must consider if the intention was to have the new committees made up totally of Council Members, as many City Council members have claimed was the intention and is the plan for Vision 2015.

The suggestion by Vision 2015 is that citizens will have more time to present to the various "council committees" because the rules will be less stringent. However, since all power will rest with Council through these committees that they will control, one can decide for themselves if this will be a more efficient system based on the current performance of Council.

A news report on the public presentation to Council of Vision 2015 by the citizen's advisory group is also available for a bit of history on the issue. As well, an editorial media release can be obtained that outlines the public position of the City group promoting Vision 2015.

Buildings will come down, mayor insists

Mayor Norm McFarlane says structures will be levelled, no matter what community says, reports the Telegraph-Journal (John Mazerolle, Telegraph-Journal, Published Monday December 31st, 2007, Appeared on page C1). An excerpt:

Mayor Norm McFarlane says the buildings the city intends to buy as part of the police-justice complex north of Union Street will be torn down, regardless of what the community says during the public consultation process.

"The buildings are going," the mayor said during a telephone interview Saturday.

"The site is done and council has agreed the buildings are going. ... It's not a heritage area and the buildings are going. The public consultation is to look at how it's going to look with the parkway, the walkway, all of that."

Read the full article online.

Buildings Expected to Be Destroyed Despite Reassurances

According to the Telegraph-Journal (Dave MacLean, Telegraph-Journal, Published Thursday January 3rd, 2008, Appeared on page C1), The head of the local Jewish community says he believes the city's synagogue will be demolished after it's purchased by the city, even though Mayor Norm McFarlane said Tuesday it will remain standing. Read the full article online.

The comments follow those made by the mayor a few days earlier in which he announced the synagogue would not be used for the planned development. Story got it wrong: mayor.

The original article that presented the original comments the Mayor made can be found here.

Images of the synagogue can be viewed here and here.

Impressive Architecture Has A Major Impact in Smaller Cities

As outlined in a recent Times Transcript article, Impressive museum buildings not limited to big cities alone, the impact of excellent architecture would have a major impact on a community like Saint John where it will be noticed and acknowledged in a bigger way than it would be in a big city.

Excerpts from the article are quoted below and images of the buildings discussed, all located in small cities, can be found here:

1. Fayetteville Museum of Art, Fayetteville, North Carolina
2. Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao, Spain
3. Art Museum of Western Virginia, Roanoke, Virginia
4. Crystal Bridges Museum, Bentonville, Arkansas

"...Yet they're the latest to strive for more than a simple container in designing a new art museum, instead seeking a signature building that will attract both attention and tourists.

"It speaks volumes about the people that live there, where they're going and what they're thinking about their economic development, their situation in the world," said Tom Grubb, the director of the North Carolina museum..."Then we realized it's a project that really, regardless of the size, it changes the life of a whole community," Norten said in an interview from his office in Mexico City. "It has a huge impact on a community.

A big project in a very big city can have very little impact, but in a community like that, it would be great..."

Partnership will build courthouse

Province to seek proposals from developers to build $47-million structure at former Y location and lease new complex back to government

Read full article here

"The large building will have a significant impact on the look of the city, and it's hoped the complete police-justice project will revitalize an often tired-looking Union Street. As Justice Minister and Attorney General T.J. Burke put it, "It will transform the face of the city and the skyline of uptown Saint John.""

Local columnist, Herb Duncan, entered the debate with his article, Police-Justice Complex: A Thorn Among Roses, in which he discusses what very few have - Is a police-justice complex appropriate for uptown Saint John. In their efforts to be "pro-development", other opponents to this development have focused on design, heritage conservation, and other details but Mr. Duncan's perspective is very interesting for his support for uptown cultural-type development of which a police-justice complex does not fit.

Reusing Heritage Buildings

“It’s ironic that, as a culture, we let heritage buildings end up in landfills while we religiously recycle our pop cans,” says Natalie Bull, executive director of the Heritage Canada Foundation. “The greenest building is the one that already exists!”

Read the full Natalie Bull interview on Culture.ca

An article in the Ottawa Citizen last year, The Making of Mediocre, outlines the reasons why it is often difficult to get development approval in a heritage district and why that matters.

Should Saint John Be Built for Cars or People?

The Planning Department in Saint John's City Hall is currently planning to widen a portion of Union Street to four lanes to accommodate better flow of automobile traffic.

There is an ongoing debate in North America between those who believe we need to build our cities to move automobiles as effectively as possible, such as Seattle attempted to do after referendums in the early 70s, and those who believe cities should be built with a focus on pedestrian use supported by effective public transit options as Vancouver attempted to do after similar referendums in the early 70s. It would be wise to investigate which of those two cities were successful and if their citizens are pleased with the outcomes.

The image below shows a walkable district of Vancouver, a city whose "highways" are no larger than 4 lanes, its blocks are short, its developers feature a property's proximity to transit and walkability factors at the top of their list, and its largest infrastructure investments are in public transportation:

The image below shows Seattle with its 16 lane highways built at approximately the same time that Vancouver made a conscious decision not to plan its city for the free flow of cars but to build it to encourage people to live close to where they work. In Vancouver, the result is a city that has inspired a movement positively referred to as "Vancouverism" whose principles are being emulated in cities such as Chicago, Manhattan, and San Francisco.

This article from the southern USA features this debate in the city of Charlotte: http://www.charlotte.com/someck/story/387324.html. There is plenty of information captured on the topic through this organization: http://www.walkableamerica.org/

Uptown Saint John is currently considered a very walkable city and other communities, such as Portland, Oregon, have actually designed their downtown areas with smaller than normal city blocks modeled after cities like Saint John to improve walkability.

To be sure, to a certain extent, walkability does come at the expense of traffic flow. However, there is a choice to be made either in favour of quality of life for the people and families who live in the city (currently 8000 in Saint John's south end with hopes to double that through the current boom) or in favour of ease of transport for those who visit it.

Articles related to this topic:

• (Brisbane, AU) Make way for foot traffic - "Renewal of suburban centres is likely to require a return to much older and more sustainable principles of urban design, architecture and transport in coming years."

Can New Developments Mix with Old?

In the ongoing discussion of the value of heritage buildings within a community that requires new development, good examples of this mix will be posted here to illustrate that an "either/or" decision must not necessarily be made with a tear-down and rebuild approach to new developments. Instead, there are countless examples where the beauty and character provided to a community by its existing building stock have been preserved while new developments have been constructed to meet the growing needs of the community.

Two examples below are taken from Montreal, a city famous for both its history/heritage and its modernity. The following two photographs depict the HSBC building in Montreal where the new development incorporated beautiful heritage buildings within the tower structure, preserving the milieu of the neighbourhood while introducing a striking modern structure:


Again in Montreal, the photograph below depicts the Alcan building, another modern structure which was also built in a manner that incorporates and respects a heritage structure: