I think the city should pay for this, it has nothing to do with the mall.
I wonder who owns the overpass

Nothing prevents the mall from demolishing the parking structure once it reaches end of its life. Then build residential towers in its place.

Sorry but why would the city pay for anything to connect a private development being built on a highway offramp to a private shopping mall just so that its resident can exit safely? If the city were to do anything it would be to deny this project from proceeding in the first place as it's in such a ridiculous location that the only thing that could possibly save it would be such a massive road diet on the surrounding arterials that the cost would simply be prohibitive.

A better idea.

Their grand plan was originally for commercial space here, but these days the trendy thing is residential for sure.
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=172002

Morguard signed St. Laurent's death warrant when they cancelled the second floor expansion project just as Rideau and Bayshore announced their expansions. Some slippery new tiles and modernized doorframes were not enough to keep the mall relevant. Sears leaving was the nail in the coffin. If they had invested properly when planned they would have stayed relevant but it's pretty much an East end Carlingwood at this point.

Thanks for the photos Curtis! If anyone lives in the ward it would be a good item for the councillor to pressure the mall on, assuming these are all private roads

I think an improved connection would have to be looked at with a new master plan for the mall and also with input from the plans for the surrounding area. The LRT station is beyond hostile to anybody who lives in the area and wants to approach on foot. Surrounded by a sea of parking lots with no pedestrian thoroughfares on all sides. You just have to jaywalk your way through the entire thing and watch out for reverse lights.

Bayshore and Place D'Orleans are the same way. The expectation is that you would arrive by car. While you can easily arrive at any of these malls by public transit.. tough titty for anyone that lives in the neighborhood.

Even with Bayshore renovating their parking garage a few years back there isn't really a proper pedestrian walkway connecting you from the sidewalk to the entrances.

How do we keep making these mistakes over and over again? Why does the world have such a massive dislike for pedestrians and cyclists?

There is a huge sidewalk with Bollards running along the main road entrance/exit to the parking garage connecting the central entrance of Bayshore Shopping Centre to Bayshore Drive for pedestrians.

I have to correct you here. I didn't say the city should pay to provide access to the mall. The city should pay for infrastructure linking to the LRT station. This is one of the big transfer station and it barely has any connectivity to the neighborhood it's in. Improve connectivity from across St-Laurent Blvd. doesn't only benefit the new planned development, but also hotels/motels, commercial, offices, restaurants.

Also, the off ramp stops at Labelle st.
The new development is being built along Lemieux St. which isn't an off-ramp and is adjacent to a mall access road/bridge. We have to stop saying this project is built inside or on a Hwy on/off-ramp because this is misleading. You create the image that the development will be built inside a very high speed traffic area, and people will associate the proximity to the hwy traffic jam at the split. I may add, the only vehicles able to use the nearby off-ramp are coming from the 174. The 417 vehicles have all been diverted to Innes and aviation parkway exits.

But it shouldn't be about a trend. It should be about diversifying and building sustainable developments. All high density development should be a form of mixed use.

Live/Work/Play

This type of diversity helps making this economically sustainable and strong long term. If you can live in one tower, work in another, and entertain yourself all within the shopping mall property, this is pretty much guarantied revenue for the property owners. (Morguard)

I was driving past on the 417 yesterday and looks like there are construction activities on that bridge right now?

Add Gloucester Centre to that, and no doubt nearly every other mall except Rideau.

That's been going on for a while now. Unrelated to this project, just a simple rehab probably.

Yup. You can see it here. The entrance from the west (under the transit walkway) isn't horrible, though it isn't great either.

I agree that it isn't as good as if there were street front mall entrances on Bayshore drive, but they are working with a mall that was designed in the early 70's (the peak of car culture).

You would be correct. My friend lives on Bayshore dr and when I walk to the mall tend to enter the garage from the corner of Woodridge and Bayshore. It's the quickest line and I don't have to walk on the noisy sidewalk that is full sun and no shade. It never once occured to me to walk along the whole sidewalk and then turn into the CAR entrance haha

I will also have to walk back my previous statement about St.Laurent. I was there again yesterday, last of my 3 dentist appts thank god.

The door below the food court actually has a sidewalk on both sides of the driveway. The only catch being once you reach St. Laurent there are no marked pedestrian crossings and drivers are very aggressive on the stop sign exit as the lane they are sharing is part of the highway onramp. That being said you could just choose your sidewalk of preference upon leaving the mall door. All 4 curbs are lowered. Not much reason to cut back the other way at the main road.

Outside the Hudson Bay entrance though, the entire row of accessibility parking is surrounded by raised curbs on all sides save for 1 lowered curb in front of the door. You have no choice but to walk in the traffic lanes if you can't make it up onto the curb in the parking aisle.

I also noted that the parking deck is undergoing maintenance. The top level and 1st deck area below the top (roughly half) have jackposts and such. So I would expect this parking structure to be torn down anytime soon. It was built in the mid 90s.

So in conclusion.. mall and transit access from this proposal won't actually be that bad.. I literally walked it out myself yesterday save for crossing St.Laurent blvd.

You would exit the building... Turn left and walk 30/50 meters... Cross the intersection at Lemieux... Turn right for 25 metered ish.. and then you can begin walking on the sidewalk adjacent to the entrance area without having to cross the traffic.

At this point you would be sheltered from rain and snow and the parking lot isn't very deep before you hit the door under the food court. It's an all way stop with marked crossings and flush curbs. The walk from that door to the transit area isn't that bad.

You can walk out up top and be level with the bus platform or... There is an escalator to do down to the train and underpass to the bus platform. If memory serves there is also an elevator in from of Sport Chek.

Going through the mall is marginally longer than walking up and around the backside but not terribly so and you would have shelter for most of the route.

Certainly a better walk than someone coming from Overbrook.

1209 St. Laurent Boulevard & 1200 Lemieux Street was purchased by 1209 St Laurent GP Inc. (Fengate Capital Management) from 12401304 Canada Inc. for $15,125,000 or $329 per square foot. It is zoned Transit Oriented Development.

http://www.juteaujohnsoncomba.com/ne...uary-Sales.pdf

This was part of my commute during LRT construction. Sucked.


I live in this area and will turn into Lemieux as a shortcut, cutting through the Holiday Inn lot sometimes. And I will be the first to say that it's not strictly necessary. And is kind of dangerous with high speed traffic coming off the Queensway.

The best thing they could do is just demolish the road to the back of the mall and turn Lemieux into a one way street. Connection to the mall should strictly me a pedestrian/cyclist bridge.

Is that construction on the south side of the bridge some sort of pedestrian improvement?

When I was there having a look it didn't seem like the bridge was being widened in any way. I think it will just be a refurbished bridge.

There wouldn't be any reason or room to have pedestrians on that side as it's barely tenable on the same side that's (connected) to the mall.

This project is at the UDRP this afternoon at 1:30pm. Link to watch is here - https://ottawa-ca.zoom.us/j/83922264891

Passcode is 574927

UDRP report from September:

1209 ST. LAURENT BOULEVARD AND 1200 LEMIEUX STREET | Formal Review | Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control Application | 1209 St. Laurent Limited Partnership; Canderel; Fengate Asset Management; rla / architecture; Fotenn Planning + Design

Summary

• The Panel recognizes the importance of the site and its potential to be a precedent-setting and is cognizant of the challenges, including access, due to the site being on a transportation island.
• The Panel appreciates the improvements made to the project, including the expansion of the pedestrian network and completion of the sidewalks.
• The Panel believes the elegant design will transform the corner, as this area has high pedestrian movement given its proximity to St. Laurent Shopping Mall.
• The Panel supports the site's overall composition and the towers' disposition. However, the Panel questions whether the podium should wrap around the highway portion and believes improvements could be made to allow more sunlight to enter the courtyard and open up the sky views.

Massing and Articulation

• Given the precedent-setting nature of the project, the Panel believes the façade facing St; Laurent Boulevard should be studied further as the towers are very similar in expression. The Panel also believes the podium is one floor too tall.
• The Panel is concerned that the height of the podium facing south casts shadows onto the courtyard. Further analysis of the space is needed and the proponent should consider reducing the podium height to provide more natural light into the courtyard.
• Consideration should be given to the views of the towers from the highway. The Panel recommends providing more separation distance between the towers to increase the step back on St. Laurent to improve the public realm. The proponent should also consider moving the east tower further east, to take advantage of the curved roadway.
• The proponent should consider a different tower-podium expression on St. Laurent Boulevard to strengthen its relationship with the surrounding context; for example, the podium could have a similar expression to the building across from Lemieux Street.
• The Panel believes the proponent should study how the podium's base meets the ground on St. Laurent Boulevard, as it has an unnatural appearance. There was a suggestion to introduce exposed columns, ground floor programming and amenities at the base of the tower to address the site's dynamism and to improve the tower's relationship to with the street.
• The proponent should consider tapering down the eastmost tower to differentiate the massing and to have the tallest tower on St. Laurent.
• The project floor plates should be no more than 750 square metres.
• The proponent should consider introducing at-grade units.

Site's Circulation

• The Panel recommends the proponent emphasize the pedestrian strategy and minimize vehicular movement by relocating the drop-off area below grade, tucking the ramp under Tower B and providing additional amenity areas for residents, making the courtyard more pedestrian friendly.
• The Panel appreciates the lobby at the upper level and the step down to St. Laurent Boulevard and notes there is an opportunity to create a strong sense of arrival at the intersection. The proponent should consider integrating Labelle Street and creating a feature at the crosswalk on St. Laurent Boulevard.

Materiality

• The deep cuts in the fabric of the white podium are appreciated, but the Panel is concerned that some of the details might be lost during the construction stage, resulting in the façade appearing less dynamic. The proponent should consider using warm materials as they might be more forgiving. The Panel considers that a combination of warm tones in the podium with a lighter colour in the tower might be more appropriate as surrounding buildings are red and orange brick.
• The Panel appreciates the light precast material but cautions that a dark precast panel might not be appropriate in a climate with long grey winters.

https://ottawa.ca/en/planning-develo...1-c874d7b56f56