Letter to St. John's City Council

Dear Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Council Members,

I am writing you both in my capacity as MHA for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi and as a citizen of St. John’s who was born here and who has spent most of my life working and living in our beautiful, historic city. I am writing to say how affronted I am in both those capacities by the actions of Fortis Properties.

I have to express my great dismay at the fact that a proposal which goes so blatantly against the laws for development, not just guidelines, of the city is being passed on to the Planning Department for what I fear is serious discussion. I have to hope that the Planning Department will send this proposal on to the council with the message that it just cannot be considered. I do not believe that time should be wasted on a proposal that doesn’t even attempt to meet the requirements for development in the historic part of our city.

Fortis Properties owns land and real estate in the west end of the downtown. At least one major player in the oil industry- one of the industries that I believe would be targeted by Fortis to rent in its new proposed complex- exists very well in the west end.

I know we need office space in the downtown, and I applaud Fortis for wanting to put money into developing that space, but there is absolutely no reason why they can’t look at property they own in the west end as the place to put the building. Why not bolster that part of the downtown?

If Fortis Properties really cared about the city, why wouldn’t they come up with a proposal that would match, for example, what was done on Bonaventure Avenue where St. Patrick’s Hall used to stand. The condos that were put in that space maintain the architectural feeling of the monastery that abuts the Bonaventure Place properties.

Further, why couldn’t that be demanded of Fortis by the city if buildings need to come down, if indeed they do; and, I am not convinced that they do.

Last year, during a visit to Charleston, South Carolina, I was impressed by the fact that this historical city has maintained its history and look in its downtown because they created and stuck to a law that ensured preservation of its history through its buildings.

Nothing can be higher than four stories (I think that’s the height. It could be five.) and that rule has been maintained without fail. Charleston has built a major part of its tourism on the beauty of its architecture. They thrive without having any high buildings in the historic part of Charleston, an area much larger than our historic area.

While our look and architecture is different than that of Charleston, we have just as much need to preserve. We have just as much to be proud of. Unfortunately, we have not done the job they have. Let us save what we can.

I am not against development. It is to be welcomed. But we should not allow development that does not keep our historic spaces intact and enhanced, as has happened with much of the residential area of the downtown.

It is in the hands of the council to protect our heritage. It is in your hands to save the little we have left of the historic downtown.

People do not come to our province and city to see glass and steel, just as they don’t go to Charleston, South Carolina to see that. Do you really want people on the cruise ships coming through the Narrows to have, as their first view, the proposed Fortis development? God help us if you do.

I urge you to think this one through logically and exert your power as a council in working with developers to shape a downtown that preserves the old while encouraging a new that does not jeopardize our heritage.

Please show the people of this city that we are beyond the gross development errors of the 60’s and 70’s.

Thank you for giving serious consideration to my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Lorraine A. Michael, MHA
Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi
Leader, New Democratic Party