PDA

View Full Version : Wateridge Village development [Hemlock Rd, Codd's Rd] | U/C


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

rocketphish
Feb 10, 2022, 11:27 PM
Woof! What in the Barrhaven is that?? So much surface parking. Also the subject site doesn't match the land use map. They must be changing the road network somehow.

Yes, apparently Canada Lands has changed the road network in Phase 3.

https://i.imgur.com/03L4K9T.png

J.OT13
Feb 11, 2022, 2:36 PM
Yes, apparently Canada Lands has changed the road network in Phase 3.


"Very suburban, but not quite at the level we want. Let's amp it up a bit (adds some curves). Little more (more asphalt)... Perfect! (cul-de-sac!)"

rocketphish
Mar 21, 2022, 11:22 PM
There are cranes going up in Wateridge, visible from Montreal Rd. No, not at the Mattamy condos though.... these ones are at the OCH site on the adjacent block at 715 Mikinak. I guess they'll top-off the second one tomorrow.

https://i.imgur.com/c4HxkWI.png

Photo by me
March 21, 2022

rocketphish
Mar 22, 2022, 9:16 PM
I stopped by again this afternoon, and sure enough the second crane is up. Mattamy is on the left and OCH on the right.

https://i.imgur.com/NOSk2xU.png

https://i.imgur.com/WJYkwxo.png

Photos by me
March 22, 2022

Multi-modal
Apr 10, 2022, 3:10 AM
Here is a shot of the central pedestrian walkway / pedestrian mews in one of the older Mattamy rear-lane townhouse blocks. I like how it turned out - will be interesting to see if it is well-maintained over time.

https://i.imgur.com/luzNa62.png

The other block (the one surrounded by Squadron Crescent) where they got a 50% density increase is much worse. It just feels like so much parking - no proper amenities or pedestrian areas.

Harley613
Apr 10, 2022, 3:36 AM
Here is a shot of the central pedestrian walkway / pedestrian mews in one of the older Mattamy rear-lane townhouse blocks. I like how it turned out - will be interesting to see if it is well-maintained over time.

https://i.imgur.com/luzNa62.png

The other block (the one surrounded by Squadron Crescent) where they got a 50% density increase is much worse. It just feels like so much parking - no proper amenities or pedestrian areas.

Cool space, very Philadelphia. Too bad Canadians don't talk to their neighbours anymore and kids are glued to screens, it could be a very animated and social place.

Multi-modal
Apr 10, 2022, 3:39 AM
Cool space, very Philadelphia. Too bad Canadians don't talk to their neighbours anymore and kids are glued to screens, it could be a very animated and social place.

It really does remind you of Philadelphia. I did see some kids zipping around on their scooters through the pathways and parking areas - so maybe there is hope. I could imagine playing a wicked game of tag / hide-and-seek if I lived here as a kid.

There is also an east-west pathway too. Not as interesting, but it adds to the overall feel as a pedestrian-first place - especially compared to the other Mattamy phase.
https://i.imgur.com/o1PfEqP.png

YukonLlama
Apr 10, 2022, 6:20 PM
Nice to see some people-based development still being incorporated into this community. Despite the new construction feel, I have a lot of hope for this development. It's one of the few areas in Ottawa actually attempting to create a 15-minute neighbourhood. Hope it attracts a bit more activity once the mid-rise residential/commercial buildings get built.

DEWLine
Apr 10, 2022, 6:30 PM
Are street-name signs in place now?

waterloowarrior
Apr 10, 2022, 6:34 PM
My friend lives in a similar project in the GTA... Great spot for kids to play... Definitely lots of interaction among dog walkers or people with kids.

Shopgirl
May 8, 2022, 3:19 PM
http://https://wateridge.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/LandUsePlan_Jan26_2021.pdf

Any idea who owns the land labeled as 6? Or their plans for building? There’s been no lot releases that I’m aware of for this land, but I’m curious to hear if anyone else has heard anything. Some singles or semis would have a beautiful view of the park, if that’s the plan.

https://wateridge.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/LandUsePlan_Jan26_2021.pdf

rocketphish
May 8, 2022, 4:04 PM
http://https://wateridge.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/LandUsePlan_Jan26_2021.pdf

Any idea who owns the land labeled as 6? Or their plans for building? There’s been no lot releases that I’m aware of for this land, but I’m curious to hear if anyone else has heard anything. Some singles or semis would have a beautiful view of the park, if that’s the plan.

https://wateridge.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/LandUsePlan_Jan26_2021.pdf

Canada Lands Company still owns those blocks. That's Phase 6, which is likely still a decade away from development. Phase 1B and Phase 2 are still under construction, and they only just started selling the land in Phase 3 (with Mattamy grabbing the first available block, see post 699 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9532595&postcount=699)).

Welcome to the forum! :cheers:

YukonLlama
May 9, 2022, 9:57 PM
Was looking into some of the new Ottawa Community Housing projects and found this updated fly through of the Mikinak development:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR0AhRHEqJQ


It looks better than some of the previous photos posted here but still not really a fan of the haphazard use of colour. Most of the buildings surrounding it have very muted tones, so its going to stick out like a sore thumb.

Will at least add some nice density and additional commercial space to the area.

kwoldtimer
May 9, 2022, 10:09 PM
Was looking into some of the new Ottawa Community Housing projects and found this updated fly through of the Mikinak development:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR0AhRHEqJQ


It looks better than some of the previous photos posted here but still not really a fan of the haphazard use of colour. Most of the buildings surrounding it have very muted tones, so its going to stick out like a sore thumb.

Will at least add some nice density and additional commercial space to the area.

Or offer some welcome relief from the muted colours of the neighbours.

rocketphish
Jun 5, 2022, 1:42 AM
I went by here again yesterday. The first of the four Mattamy 360 Condos buildings (in the foreground) now has an elevator shaft and two stairwells up to the 4th floor and structural steel columns are being installed. I guess this one isn't going to be all concrete.

In the background, with the tower cranes, the OCH development seems to have most of it's foundations poured already, but nothing it rising up yet.

https://i.imgur.com/uicxtqS.png

June 3, 2022
Photo by me.

rocketphish
Jun 30, 2022, 11:57 AM
I took another look at Mattamy's 360 Condos yesterday. It seems to be moving more quickly now. And they are using an interesting pre-fab column and floor system:
https://www.peikko.ca/products/deltabeam-slim-floor-structures/overview/


https://i.imgur.com/2hguZhu.png

https://i.imgur.com/GnBqDjR.png

https://i.imgur.com/xNfRiZv.png

https://i.imgur.com/Nht0QTK.png

https://i.imgur.com/gmIMj4h.png

Photos by me
June 29, 2022

ponyboycurtis
Jun 30, 2022, 5:25 PM
That's interesting. I haven't seen a building technique like that before. Certainly not in Ottawa.

I wonder what will give the building lateral strength? Steel studs and Type X drywall?:haha:

I guess the concrete elevator shaft/stairwell is a key component to anchor the whole building.

OTownandDown
Jun 30, 2022, 5:58 PM
That's interesting. I haven't seen a building technique like that before. Certainly not in Ottawa.

I wonder what will give the building lateral strength? Steel studs and Type X drywall?:haha:

I guess the concrete elevator shaft/stairwell is a key component to anchor the whole building.

Correction, haven't seen a building technique in Ottawa *since the 1970's*.

Precast slabs can be found in plenty of apartment buildings of a bygone era.

MoreTrains
Aug 25, 2022, 7:18 PM
This neighbourhood is everything CFB Rockcliffe could/should have been.

I mean, it would have ideally remained as base housing with the selling of the lands at Uplands. Rockcliffe always had more housing units and proximity to NDHQ. Also now is right next to the Montfort which I believe is essentially half a military hospital. But I digress.

OTownandDown
Aug 25, 2022, 8:59 PM
I don't see a difference yet between this and Rockliffe? Similar density, similar car storage both in the front and the rear of most townhouses (yuck). Rockcliffe has those nice walkways thru the high-med density units, perfect for gangs and hooligans in 30 years when the place is in decline.

Rockcliffe is much, much larger? What else is the difference?

Harley613
Aug 25, 2022, 11:29 PM
I don't see a difference yet between this and Rockliffe? Similar density, similar car storage both in the front and the rear of most townhouses (yuck). Rockcliffe has those nice walkways thru the high-med density units, perfect for gangs and hooligans in 30 years when the place is in decline.

Rockcliffe is much, much larger? What else is the difference?

So far the mid to highrise part of the Rockcliffe lands have not materialized, it's mostly a bunch of 3 story towns. I never trust a community design plan until it's built out, so we'll see if it becomes anything better than it is now.

ponyboycurtis
Aug 26, 2022, 2:17 AM
So far the mid to highrise part of the Rockcliffe lands have not materialized, it's mostly a bunch of 3 story towns. I never trust a community design plan until it's built out, so we'll see if it becomes anything better than it is now.

The 3 story towns we have photos of earlier in that thread look pretty decent. The rest looks pretty blah. I haven't been there in person since they started the first phase of SFH and we took my buddies truck through some of the old roads in the winter... possibly with me tied to the trailer hitch riding a GT snow racer. The RCMP definitely didn't show up, no worries.

Greystone is definitely more urban than Wateridge by location. Wateridge despite being close to city center is surrounded by automotive hell and has no good connections.

I guess it goes to show how hard it is to artificially create an urban city center area that doesn't grow organically.

Wateridge is also far from done but I haven't been impressed by the photos so far. Greystone seems walkable. I will have to go and see it for myself, I haven't been deeper than Main st. itself.

rocketphish
Aug 26, 2022, 2:36 AM
A contrast in construction techniques. Mattamy 360 Condos on the left and OCH on the right.

https://i.imgur.com/XLG0JG5.png

https://i.imgur.com/3xRZkt9.png

https://i.imgur.com/JnALXgC.png

Photos by me
August 24, 2022

YOWetal
Aug 26, 2022, 2:19 PM
Correction, haven't seen a building technique in Ottawa *since the 1970's*.

Precast slabs can be found in plenty of apartment buildings of a bygone era.

I guess the labour for poured concrete has gotten so expensive. In Nordic countries they also use a lot of prefab though more for the facade I think.

Also maybe we can take off the former CFB from title? Think we've moved past that.

YOWetal
Aug 26, 2022, 2:23 PM
The 3 story towns we have photos of earlier in that thread look pretty decent. The rest looks pretty blah. I haven't been there in person since they started the first phase of SFH and we took my buddies truck through some of the old roads in the winter... possibly with me tied to the trailer hitch riding a GT snow racer. The RCMP definitely didn't show up, no worries.

Greystone is definitely more urban than Wateridge by location. Wateridge despite being close to city center is surrounded by automotive hell and has no good connections.

I guess it goes to show how hard it is to artificially create an urban city center area that doesn't grow organically.

Wateridge is also far from done but I haven't been impressed by the photos so far. Greystone seems walkable. I will have to go and see it for myself, I haven't been deeper than Main st. itself.

Yes. This is in best or at least most expensive part of the city. Despite the CFB Rockcliffe name Wateridge is surrounded by either "automobile hell" or actually very cheap housing which is interesting that people will buy a house on the edge of this development for much more than a few meters away in the old run down neighbourhood.

YukonLlama
Aug 26, 2022, 6:56 PM
So far the mid to highrise part of the Rockcliffe lands have not materialized, it's mostly a bunch of 3 story towns. I never trust a community design plan until it's built out, so we'll see if it becomes anything better than it is now.

Still think It's too early to tell. Based on the photos it seems that at least two blocks are going to be mid-rise and there are plans to include another three blocks of similar mid-rise mixed units. However, the fact that they kept most of the parking for the towns above ground is really disappointing. Its a car-oriented area yes, but the developers at least could have made an effort to keep it underground. What's so inviting about a parking-lot?

ponyboycurtis
Aug 26, 2022, 7:01 PM
Correction, haven't seen a building technique in Ottawa *since the 1970's*.

Precast slabs can be found in plenty of apartment buildings of a bygone era.

I was referring specifically the vertical steel post and slab setup. I feel like that has to be a new technique for Ottawa. New to me at least.

I always figured those 1970's buildings were a concrete super structure like we have now and the exterior is pre finished panels that get hung.

J.OT13
Aug 26, 2022, 8:10 PM
People argue for the Trillium extension to Riverside South as a way to build a new community around transit. Maybe we should have done that here, and service existing high-density (and densifying) areas along Rideau and Montreal on our way here.

YOWetal
Aug 27, 2022, 2:06 PM
People argue for the Trillium extension to Riverside South as a way to build a new community around transit. Maybe we should have done that here, and service existing high-density (and densifying) areas along Rideau and Montreal on our way here.

There is no additional capacity (especially $) to add any more lines but also where would it go?

lrt's friend
Aug 27, 2022, 2:53 PM
There is no additional capacity (especially $) to add any more lines but also where would it go?

I have argued that we should recreate the Rockcliffe streetcar and extend it into Wateridge and serve the employment area nearby (Montfort, NRC, etc.). Great for tourists and locals alike.

But seriously, there is no money. This is something I have spoken about elsewhere on how we are decades behind in building high quality transit, so every new community we build remains car oriented. A hopeless cycle.

We are so short of money that we can't even deliver decent bus service to a new reasonably central neighbourhood.

Despite our enormous investment in LRT, we are really making little progress in making the city less car dependent.

YOWetal
Aug 27, 2022, 5:32 PM
I have argued that we should recreate the Rockcliffe streetcar and extend it into Wateridge and serve the employment area nearby (Montfort, NRC, etc.). Great for tourists and locals alike.

But seriously, there is no money. This is something I have spoken about elsewhere on how we are decades behind in building high quality transit, so every new community we build remains car oriented. A hopeless cycle.

We are so short of money that we can't even deliver decent bus service to a new reasonably central neighbourhood.

Despite our enormous investment in LRT, we are really making little progress in making the city less car dependent.

I don't know what a surface street street car does. It's interesting that the 6 still follows the street car route all these years later but I don't think it is a well used bus or warrants more capacity.

It is interesting watching the discussion on reducing car dependency. I am skeptical we will make much progress even though personally I live downtown and barely drive. The fact is very few people who have a choice don't want a car dependent lifestyle. I'd argue the very eco-conscious crowd is even more likely to live somewhere like Stittsville or Wakefield and buy an electric car which of course is still a car.

Barring federal dollars which isn't impossible I don't see any ratepayers of Ottawa clamoring to spend more on transit.

lrt's friend
Aug 28, 2022, 2:38 AM
I don't know what a surface street street car does. It's interesting that the 6 still follows the street car route all these years later but I don't think it is a well used bus or warrants more capacity.

It is interesting watching the discussion on reducing car dependency. I am skeptical we will make much progress even though personally I live downtown and barely drive. The fact is very few people who have a choice don't want a car dependent lifestyle. I'd argue the very eco-conscious crowd is even more likely to live somewhere like Stittsville or Wakefield and buy an electric car which of course is still a car.

Barring federal dollars which isn't impossible I don't see any ratepayers of Ottawa clamoring to spend more on transit.

You are probably right and the end result is that our city will become even more car dependent. That is the trend.

Incidentally, the Rockcliffe streetcar did not follow Route 6. It followed Sussex and the Parkway through Rockcliffe and to the north end of Manor Park. Not a winner for ridership for sure at least in its original configuration, but much of the corridor through Rockcliffe had an exclusive right of way, which still exists. The point is to connect a new neighbourhood that was supposed to be transit oriented (Wateridge) and it could also serve a redeveloped Manor Park while providing a scenic route for tourists wanting to visit Rideau Hall, Rideau Falls, Rockcliffe and the Canada Space and Aviation Museum, which has next to no transit. I know it seems ridiculous but Wateridge is heading to even higher car dependence than most of the inner suburbs the way we are going.

Truenorth00
Aug 28, 2022, 5:09 PM
I don't know what a surface street street car does. It's interesting that the 6 still follows the street car route all these years later but I don't think it is a well used bus or warrants more capacity.

It is interesting watching the discussion on reducing car dependency. I am skeptical we will make much progress even though personally I live downtown and barely drive. The fact is very few people who have a choice don't want a car dependent lifestyle. I'd argue the very eco-conscious crowd is even more likely to live somewhere like Stittsville or Wakefield and buy an electric car which of course is still a car.

Barring federal dollars which isn't impossible I don't see any ratepayers of Ottawa clamoring to spend more on transit.

I don't think the outlook is this bleak. Look at all the new condo proposals. Plenty coming up with a parking to unit ratio that is less than one. There's a project under construction down the street from me that has no resident parking at all. Just bicycle parking. Sure, most of this is in the Greenbelt. But this is a notable change for even a few years ago.

Cars are getting more expensive. Ridesharing, bike paths, scooter sharing, and transit are slowly getting better. Sure they aren't perfect. But there's definitely people out there who are deciding that the $300/mo in extra mortgage for a parking spot and $800-1k per month in car ownership costs aren't worthwhile or affordable.

Wateridge isn't great. But car dependency can be kept to a moderate level there with decent bus service.

YukonLlama
Aug 28, 2022, 5:33 PM
If the city could justify a highly expensive LRT to farhaven it can build at the very least a tram-style service down Montreal/Beechwood. Waterridge plus the Manor Park redevelopment is expected to introduce least 30,000 new units to the area, not even considering all the other high-density proposals. Its a prime area to introduce rapid transit, regardless of funds; all it takes its political will and with a potential new mayor coming in, we might finally see some change.

kwoldtimer
Aug 28, 2022, 8:23 PM
If the city could justify a highly expensive LRT to farhaven it can build at the very least a tram-style service down Montreal/Beechwood. Waterridge plus the Manor Park redevelopment is expected to introduce least 30,000 new units to the area, not even considering all the other high-density proposals. Its a prime area to introduce rapid transit, regardless of funds; all it takes its political will and with a potential new mayor coming in, we might finally see some change.

Fewer than 10,000, no?

Truenorth00
Aug 28, 2022, 8:46 PM
Trams really aren't all that necessary for this level of planned development. Neighbourhoods this dense on Toronto and Montreal do just fine with good bus service. Also, with the advent of the electric bus, there's even less of a case for trams in all but the densest corridors.

lrt's friend
Aug 29, 2022, 12:50 AM
There just doesn't seem to be a desire to offer better than 30 minute service when it comes to buses into new neighbourhoods. This is not going draw many people to transit.

Truenorth00
Aug 29, 2022, 1:02 AM
There just doesn't seem to be a desire to offer better than 30 minute service when it comes to buses into new neighbourhoods. This is not going draw many people to transit.

If that's the case, it is what it is. The city can choke on cars till they get it.

rocketphish
Aug 29, 2022, 3:07 AM
Fewer than 10,000, no?

4,500 to 5,000 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3194419&postcount=3) units in Wateridge Village, housing 10,000 - 15,000 people.

3,870 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9561298&postcount=34) units in the Manor Park Estates redevelopment plan. If we assume an average of 3 people per unit as they do in Wateridge, that's 11,610 people

So that's a total of 8,370 - 8,870 units, housing 21,610 - 26,610 people.

J.OT13
Aug 29, 2022, 1:13 PM
There is no additional capacity (especially $) to add any more lines but also where would it go?

The Feds and Province unofficially support the 50/50 ask to fund the $5 Billion+ conversions of the perfectly adequate bus network to Kanata and Barrhaven. Considering the shift to work from home which will result in a significant decrease of ridership in these areas, it might be time to consider investing that money into the far denser urban Ottawa where the transit ridership has remained relatively stable despite the terrible service that cannot be improved with buses.

Trams really aren't all that necessary for this level of planned development. Neighbourhoods this dense on Toronto and Montreal do just fine with good bus service. Also, with the advent of the electric bus, there's even less of a case for trams in all but the densest corridors.

What dense areas in Toronto and Montreal aren't served by rail within walking distance?

phil235
Aug 29, 2022, 1:37 PM
The Feds and Province unofficially support the 50/50 ask to fund the $5 Billion+ conversions of the perfectly adequate bus network to Kanata and Barrhaven. Considering the shift to work from home which will result in a significant decrease of ridership in these areas, it might be time to consider investing that money into the far denser urban Ottawa where the transit ridership has remained relatively stable despite the terrible service that cannot be improved with buses.



What dense areas in Toronto and Montreal aren't served by rail within walking distance?

I completely agree that the investment versus ridership proposition is much higher in the urban areas. Unfortunately I don't see much hope for that shift in Ottawa anytime soon, given the politics of a suburban dominated council.

Unless you count streetcars in mixed traffic as rail, the King/Queen St. corridor in Toronto (Liberty Village, Bellwoods, Leslieville, Beaches) is not served by higher order transit. But I'd also argue that transit service to those areas is inadequate.

YOWetal
Aug 29, 2022, 2:07 PM
The Feds and Province unofficially support the 50/50 ask to fund the $5 Billion+ conversions of the perfectly adequate bus network to Kanata and Barrhaven. Considering the shift to work from home which will result in a significant decrease of ridership in these areas, it might be time to consider investing that money into the far denser urban Ottawa where the transit ridership has remained relatively stable despite the terrible service that cannot be improved with buses.



What dense areas in Toronto and Montreal aren't served by rail within walking distance?

Unofficial support is far from $ on the table. Politically it brings in a few swing ridings. It also benefits at least theoretically a lot more people. I think a lot of our transit development is meant to tell people who want to drive this new shiny transit project will get other people on to transit and you will see less congestion. In case of central areas that isn't an argument. You could also argue those of us in the centre won't change commuting habits as any improvement is so marginal. If it does change it's probably away from walking part way rather than from driving.

There are actually lots of much denser places than Wateridge without rail service. I'd say most of the island of Montreal is denser. I think it was always a heavy lift to densify Wateridge and bring transit there. People who want an urban life aren't going to buy there. It is suburban. Close suburban but still suburban. Even if you built a copy of Landsdowne or even Toronto's Distillery district there outside of it's borders there wouldn't be anything to walk or bike to.

J.OT13
Aug 29, 2022, 4:01 PM
We need an independent body that proposes and builds transit lines based on need and potential ridership instead of this constant political jockeying to try and get as many votes as possible by wasting Billions on empty trains. The CDPQ is an excellent example of how this can be done, with the REM designed for maximum return on investment and rejecting ridiculous extensions to farm fields proposed by the CAQ, like Chambly and Boucherville.

YOWetal
Aug 29, 2022, 4:29 PM
We need an independent body that proposes and builds transit lines based on need and potential ridership instead of this constant political jockeying to try and get as many votes as possible by wasting Billions on empty trains. The CDPQ is an excellent example of how this can be done, with the REM designed for maximum return on investment and rejecting ridiculous extensions to farm fields proposed by the CAQ, like Chambly and Boucherville.

Agree in principle. A strong mayor would help here if pro transit.
But politics is the will of people which we can't ignore including the majority who don't use transit. Cost and relieving congestion will be key for them. And spending millions to avoid them having to hear the train of course.

YukonLlama
Aug 29, 2022, 4:50 PM
Agree in principle. A strong mayor would help here if pro transit.
But politics is the will of people which we can't ignore including the majority who don't use transit. Cost and relieving congestion will be key for them. And spending millions to avoid them having to hear the train of course.

I hear what you're saying, but majority use cars because it's their only option to get around. Implementing additional **efficient** modes of transportation will naturally reduce car traffic overtime, particularly in urban areas. It's a win-win for all users, even if the mode is not used 100% of the time.

Safe cycling infrastructure will enable more people to bike to work over taking the car, which will reduce cars on the road.

Additional funding for public transit will result in more people choosing to take the LRT, tram, bus, whatever, which will reduce cars on the road.

This area is car-oriented as it is, but its proximity to downtown doesn't mean it needs to be.

rocketphish
Sep 16, 2022, 12:07 AM
The Bayview Group is proposing the development of three 9-storey apartment buildings at 1000 and 1050 Tawadina Road in Wateridge Village, offering 482 units and underground parking.

Architect: Mataj Architects Inc.


Development applications:

1000 Tawadina Road
https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applications/D07-12-22-0122/details

1050 Tawadina Road
https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applications/D07-12-22-0127/details


The documents aren't available yet, but I did just find this image and informative video:


Renderings:

https://i.imgur.com/CSShu33.png (https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5e0a4d6c780ce81e47b73233/62f3030caa0563bbcb6ce668_wateridge.jpg)
https://www.designworkseng.com/news/get-ready-ottawa

srZ0L-dmfJo


And based on this I think that these are the blocks involved:

https://i.imgur.com/b8edBgd.png

J.OT13
Sep 16, 2022, 1:30 PM
:yuck:

McDonald's Racoon
Sep 16, 2022, 2:00 PM
Do they have to be that close to the sidewalks? With so much space behind I'm sure they can add some sidewalk space for little patios or just walking room...

LRTeverywhere
Sep 16, 2022, 2:02 PM
Do they have to be that close to the sidewalks? With so much space behind I'm sure they can add some sidewalk space for little patios or just walking room...

These renders aren't super representative of the roads, this is on Hemlock Rd which has / will have cycle tracks along here so the road render isn't acurate.

rocketphish
Sep 18, 2022, 1:20 AM
Bayview intends to develop the lands known municipally as 1000/1050 Tawadina Street in the City of Ottawa as mixed-use residential and commercial development with 482 residential units with complimentary commercial and amenity uses along portions of the street frontage.

The development proposes to have a total of 482 units within the three buildings. Building 1 is proposed to have 216 residential units with 494 sq. m of commercial space at grade fronting onto Hemlock Road, as well as 312 vehicular parking spaces. Building 2 is proposed to accommodate 131 residential units with 325 sq. m of commercial space fronting onto Hemlock Rd., as well as 200 vehicular parking spaces. Building 3 will have 134 residential units with 110 sq.m. of commercial space fronting onto the City Park and Codd’s Road, as well as 197 vehicular parking spaces. Most of the parking for all three buildings is accommodated in two level below grade parking structures. A total of 252 bicycle parking spaces are provided.

Location:

https://i.imgur.com/z2QnMdw.png


Siteplan:

https://i.imgur.com/sjsUWjZ.png


Additional rendering:

https://i.imgur.com/flWdSQT.png

J.OT13
Sep 18, 2022, 11:39 AM
Holly crap that's a lot of parking!!! And what crappy looking buildings! Wateridge could end up being the ugliest and most car oriented medium density area in the entire City, nay, Metropolitan Region.

What a complete waste of what could have been an amazing opportunity for a truly urban district.

OTownandDown
Sep 19, 2022, 1:36 PM
Its as if we didn't even consider the requirements of an urban village and just hoped the developers acquiring each parcel would just volunteer their services to provide an overarching community plan. oh wait...

Holly crap that's a lot of parking!!! And what crappy looking buildings! Wateridge could end up being the ugliest and most car oriented medium density area in the entire City, nay, Metropolitan Region.

What a complete waste of what could have been an amazing opportunity for a truly urban district.

ottawasoccer
Sep 19, 2022, 1:48 PM
Holly crap that's a lot of parking!!! And what crappy looking buildings! Wateridge could end up being the ugliest and most car oriented medium density area in the entire City, nay, Metropolitan Region.

What a complete waste of what could have been an amazing opportunity for a truly urban district.


Why is that a lot of parking? It all lives underground what does it matter? If it's empty then that's the developer's problem. They're basically betting that 1 out of 3 tenants won't need a car. That's a scary risk.

Dzingle Bells
Sep 19, 2022, 2:31 PM
i looked at this site in my architecture undergrad, wonder if i could find some of the images.

this is... disappointing

lrt's friend
Sep 19, 2022, 4:45 PM
It is impossible to build a truly urban village based on our 30 minute frequency transit plans. We are almost guaranteeing double car ownership for all but single person households.

My research has revealed that the Eastview Bus Company offered better transit service (15 minute frequency) to this area when it was a temporary emergency housing shelter following World War II.

Our transportation plans dictate what we get in neighbourhood design.

J.OT13
Sep 20, 2022, 4:12 PM
Why is that a lot of parking? It all lives underground what does it matter? If it's empty then that's the developer's problem. They're basically betting that 1 out of 3 tenants won't need a car. That's a scary risk.

I think you have it reversed. It's 709 parking spots for 482 unit, so 1.47 spots per unit. We can factor in that some of those spots will be for the commercial units, so at the very least, one spot per unit.

And only 252 bicycle spots, so .52 per unit, and that's in a cyclin friendly area. To me, I feel like we should have at least two bicycle spots per unit. Account for families with three or four bikes, and others with none. On top of that, bike racks at the door should be provided for commercial units and visitors.

We're just encouraging people to won at least one car. We're encouraging driving. Units will be more expensive to account for the massive parking garage.

ponyboycurtis
Sep 22, 2022, 6:53 AM
Fact of the matter is.. this is a very isolated area. There is absolutely nothing around it that is walkable. Montreal Stroad is just a slew of strip malls around there. Newfoundland pub is the closest walkable amenity and I love the Newfy as much as the next guy but....

Your next closest amenity is the Independent. Mid-size slightly sus grocery store in a slightly sus oversized strip mall with probably the the highest bottle return Beer Store in Ontario. Granted there is the Farm-boy across the street.

Let's be real. The developers aren't silly. The demographic of people moving here are going to get into their Subaru and truck their butts down to the Loblaws and Costco along Ogilvie. Cleaner Beer Store and LCBO to boot. I hate to generalize but this neighborhood is effectively a suburb within the city. Even if we had mass transit along Montreal Stroad the catchment area would be less than ideal. Even catching a bus out of this neighborhood at the city *primo* standard of 15 minutes.. where would it bring you? St. Laurent, Gloucester mall and Rideau are all a fair distance away by bus.

I can't imagine OC Transpo doing a high frequency short turn route that circles the neighborhood and the neighborhood only and then bombs straight down Blair to connect you to Gloucester mall and its various amenities including the LRT.
That would make to much sense. Could even scoop up the folks from that proposal at Blair/Montreal.

J.OT13
Sep 22, 2022, 3:32 PM
O'Brien's Mayors Task force was the only time I've seen any sort of vague thought of connecting CFB Rockliffe to transit.

See page 21:

https://app06.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/occ/2007/06-27/trc/Mayor%27s%20Task%20Force%20on%20Transportation%20Final%20Report-english.pdf

vtecyo
Sep 23, 2022, 6:06 AM
O'Brien's Mayors Task force was the only time I've seen any sort of vague thought of connecting CFB Rockliffe to transit.

See page 21:

https://app06.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/occ/2007/06-27/trc/Mayor%27s%20Task%20Force%20on%20Transportation%20Final%20Report-english.pdf

At the very least I expect they would run a few buses along Hemlock/Beechwood towards downtown. It might parallel the #7 for bit - but I don't see a problem with that.

While they're at it - why not run a few buses up the the Aviation Parkway to St Laurent station... Given how limited access it is - it would would make for a pretty quick n/s transfer to the Confederation line at a fraction of the cost of any rail connection.

We would probably attract downtown commuters away from routes that currently creep down Montreal Road/Rideau Street to downtown. Even with the transfer to the Confederation line it might shave off some time at rush hour...

J.OT13
Sep 23, 2022, 12:25 PM
At the very least I expect they would run a few buses along Hemlock/Beechwood towards downtown. It might parallel the #7 for bit - but I don't see a problem with that.

While they're at it - why not run a few buses up the the Aviation Parkway to St Laurent station... Given how limited access it is - it would would make for a pretty quick n/s transfer to the Confederation line at a fraction of the cost of any rail connection.

We would probably attract downtown commuters away from routes that currently creep down Montreal Road/Rideau Street to downtown. Even with the transfer to the Confederation line it might shave off some time at rush hour...

Agreed. Aviation Parkway is underutilized. One of the reasons I'd like to see the new Kettle Island Bridge that would include a new transit spine between secteur La Cité in Gatineau and Blair.

vtecyo
Sep 23, 2022, 10:13 PM
Agreed. Aviation Parkway is underutilized. One of the reasons I'd like to see the new Kettle Island Bridge that would include a new transit spine between secteur La Cité in Gatineau and Blair.

:cheers:

Multi-modal
Oct 3, 2022, 1:38 AM
Mattamy Homes apartments:
https://i.imgur.com/4aSiGTf.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/psHEcan.jpg

Mattamy Homes apartments (right) & OCH project (left):
https://i.imgur.com/GSz8yey.jpg

Uniform apartments (west of Wanaki and north of Hemlock)
https://i.imgur.com/Cp6N2KH.jpg

Multi-modal
Oct 3, 2022, 1:43 AM
I think you have it reversed. It's 709 parking spots for 482 unit, so 1.47 spots per unit. We can factor in that some of those spots will be for the commercial units, so at the very least, one spot per unit.

And only 252 bicycle spots, so .52 per unit, and that's in a cyclin friendly area. To me, I feel like we should have at least two bicycle spots per unit. Account for families with three or four bikes, and others with none. On top of that, bike racks at the door should be provided for commercial units and visitors.

We're just encouraging people to won at least one car. We're encouraging driving. Units will be more expensive to account for the massive parking garage.

I looked into this a little bit more, and while the Planning Rationale says 709 parking spaces, the TIA, Site Plan, and Application Summary all indicate 457 parking spaces. 457 spaces makes more sense to me given that all the documents indicate only 2 levels of underground parking.

That equates to 0.95 spaces per unit (including visitor/commercial spaces).

J.OT13
Oct 3, 2022, 1:32 PM
I looked into this a little bit more, and while the Planning Rationale says 709 parking spaces, the TIA, Site Plan, and Application Summary all indicate 457 parking spaces. 457 spaces makes more sense to me given that all the documents indicate only 2 levels of underground parking.

That equates to 0.95 spaces per unit (including visitor/commercial spaces).

Better, but still a bit much.