Hyatt House [110 York St] | 60m | 17f | Approved
 

Would this be in addition to the apartment tower of the original proposal? I note the massive blank wall on the east side ....

She's gorgeous :gaah:

Yes, it seems so:

"Malhotra also said Claridge is still planning to build a 22-storey tower with 282 condo units on adjacent property at 137 and 141 George St. that now contains a parking lot, but wouldn’t put a timeline on the project."

http://www.obj.ca/article/claridge-p...-byward-market

As for the massive blank wall... If they are building to the lot line then they aren't allowed to have windows.

110 York St | 59m | 19f | Proposed
 

Development application:
https://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans...appId=__A1O8XQ

Site:

https://i.imgur.com/c4mo88U.png


Renderings:

https://i.imgur.com/spGK01t.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/W1AnB8S.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/a6d5X2q.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/EPPAC6f.jpg


Floorplans:

https://i.imgur.com/fi20vs8.png

https://i.imgur.com/7fnAZDI.png

Mediocre design aside, the Andaz at least stood out with a height between the low-rise ByWard Market and the 27 storey Rideau wall. It created depth. Now we'll have a bunch of buildings of the same height tacker-on to one another on that block. Why does Claridge hate Ottawa?

Claridge designs are so mediocre that its laughable. They are an embarrassment to this city.

So... there are some windows on that side of the current building, which I assume are attached to guestrooms, how will Claridge be handling that?

Will they get rid of those rooms altogether?

I believe that there's an "alcove" between the buildings on the side facing George St. Not much of a view, but still a window.

Ah ok, makes sense.

It would really suck to get a room on that side as a guest.

Sad to see the building on that side (left of the pic below) go. It's not an architectural gem, but it's still a handsome building. Looking at the one floor extension over that building's current location, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to keep it. At lest the front part.

I realize that this is probably more about building a full-size parking garage.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/ece...rOttawatr9.JPG
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...ticle33332686/

Please, Claridge, execute a significantly better level of quality with the exterior fit and finish on this second phase.

The fit and finish will be whatever is left in the parts bin from the previous couple of projects. Andaz 2 will be a hybrid of Icon and the new tower between Bank and Elgin:p

Here's the typical floorplan, in which you can see that there will be 3 rooms in the southeast corner of each floor of the original tower that will now look out onto the blank side of the new tower.

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

So the buildings won't be linked in anyway? I understand the floors containing room (maybe), but you would think the main floor would be linked.

Will it even be part of the Andaz or a different hotel brand. If that's the case, Hyatt must be pissed.

If this is basically a new building (as opposed to an addition to an existing one), I am hopeful that it is rejected. I am displeased with how Claridge has produced disappointing after disappointing building in many prominent locations around Ottawa. The architectural design (including materials) for this building are really unappealling that a second or third building - with the same height, even - would not be a positive addition for the Market.

The reason why Claridge was allowed to even build this in the first place was because they demolished the original building and rebuilt it at the same height (is phase 2 approved?). This new proposal is not a part of the Union du Canada replacement/ was not in the agreement. It should be rejected on whatever ground the City can muster. It's not heritage and the height exceeds what zoning permits (correct me if I'm wrong about that and if the City would be stricter for what's built in the Byward Market). The OBJ article say the height for the site is 50m and the addition is 59.5... But the property on which the addition would be built is separate from the Andaz building, meaning it surely can't be 50m as well? If they are expected to replace "heritage" buildings in character and height, then this doesn't fit that criterion. :???:

I would like the City to put their foot down and tell Claridge, "No!" to this proposal.

I was in the Market this weekend for the first time in a long time; it really is a gorgeous area, vibrant, colourful, busy.

But it never ceases to amaze me how freaking ugly the Andaz building is. It looks nothing like what Claridge showed us in its renderings. It doesn't integrate well with its surroundings and sticks out like a sore thumb. Plainly put, it's a disgrace!

In fact, that old 1950's two-storey building next door that Claridge wants to demolish has more character than the Andaz.

The City needs to start taking a harder stance on Claridge proposals. It's sad that they can get away with such atrocities...

I'm confused (as I normally am with Claridge)...

So they're going to block the view for those three existing rooms (in grey) in order to build out three additional rooms (in yellow...6, 7 & 8) only so that the 'future tower' can ALSO block the view of THOSE three rooms!?!?

Blocking views, that pretty much always happens no matter what so I'm not too concerned about that.

I actually don't think the Andaz turned out that bad. Yes, they could've used better materials on the exterior, but it's grown on me. And I don't find it sticks any more than the previous building did. I think the new building sticks out less. The design is a lot more simple.

Andaz Hotel Extension [116 York St] | 17 fl | 59.6 m | U/C
 

When I saw the front elevation I thought "oh, that's not too bad"

Clicking through the entire design brief, I'm convinced this may be the ugliest building I've ever seen.

So they are building a 20cm taller twin of the Andaz.

And I agree... the first picture of the front looked great... then I saw the side views. But I have seen worse.

Ew. Really hope this one gets redesigned.

I gotta say that I really dislike when developers build right to the property line and leave an ugly blank wall on the side of the building. I get it that one day development could occur on the adjacent property, which would cover up the blank spot, but until then it just looks so hideous and lazy to look at. The OCD part of me much prefers a nice, clean, finished look on all sides of the building.

I don't understand the thinking of the hotel here. I haven't been in a hotel before where I could look into my neighbour's room? Also what is the intention here? So when the adjacent properties are built up those v-shape returns will allow sunlight to penetrate the 20 stories to the rooms below? Or will you just rely on the neighbour to turn on their light in the morning and cast a warm glow through your window?

Once again, the old insurance building, derided for its brutalism, is way more interesting, clean, elegant, and well-designed than this ridiculous addition to the market. Is this what architecture schools are churning out these days?

Curious as to why they would choose an architect who seemingly specializes in stucco suburban hotels for a location in one of the most prominent and urban neighbourhoods of Ottawa :shrug:

http://www.saplysarchitects.ca/wp-co...6-1024x683.jpg

http://www.saplysarchitects.ca/wp-co...1-1024x768.jpg

http://www.saplysarchitects.ca/wp-co...n-1024x575.jpg

http://www.saplysarchitects.ca/completed-projects/

Yuck. Even a wall of spandrel would be better than this.

Yeah, not a great design but I do like how it fills up another empty lot in the Byward Market. Also, at least it looks pretty "urban"... Not like they built 5 story suburban designs in the market.

Can you imagine how this corner will look though if this, the Andaz Part. 2 and the "Andaz part. 3 condo edition" go through and get built? All pretty ugly, all basically lot line to lot line, in that same corner. It would look so ugly and crammed :yuck:

Panned by the urban design review panel

https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/plann...es-andaz-hotel

Good!

Because...Ottawa. (why is Vancouver's condo king in charge of the Chateau Laurier expansion)?

Garbage like this, and its turd neighbour Andaz wouldn't fly in any of the best and oldest commercial parts of Montreal, Boston, UES/UWS Manhattan, or many other cities. It's really a shame design standards here are non-existent.

They also tore into Trinity Station pretty heavily (a bit further down the page).

Are UDRP's recommendations binding in any way?

Bayview Ottawa Holdings Ltd. is proposing the development of a 17-storey hotel under the Hampton Inn by Hilton brand, at 116 York Street. The proposal includes a two-storey podium housing hotel functions including: the lobby, lounge area, dining area, and fitness centre. The third-storey, within the tower, will include several meeting rooms. A terrace with a mix of deciduous and evergreen vegetation is proposed on the northern edge of the podium, facing York Street. A café is proposed on the ground floor which will serve hotel guests and pedestrians on York Street. Approximately 16 guest suites will be accommodated on each floor, for a total of 224 suites over the 14 floors of the hotel tower. The tower is stepped back from York Street by 6 m, with this step back housing the terrace.

Development application:
https://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans...appId=__A6AX5W

Streetview:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.42918...thumbfov%3D100

Site:

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1775/4...79cb45ee_o.jpg


Rendering/Elevation:

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1817/3...aeb10763_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1819/4...a66ea55c_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/942/42...8fc50b21_o.jpg


Floorplans:

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1819/4...e1758cd7_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1779/4...ac24a540_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/929/43...09146feb_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1796/4...c3bbfabd_o.jpg

Proposed Hilton hotel in ByWard Market would add more downtown guest rooms

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: August 10, 2018

https://postmediaottawacitizen2.file...trip=all&w=750

Hundreds of more hotel rooms could being added to Ottawa’s central area, once criticized for not having enough guest accommodations for a bustling tourist city.

Bayview Ottawa Holdings, a hotel development and management company, is proposing to build at 17-storey hotel at 116 York St. in the ByWard Market. The hotel would be branded as a Hampton Inn by Hilton, according to a planning application submitted to the city.

The 224-room hotel would take the place of a surface parking lot. The hotel would have 63 underground parking spots for hotel guests; the company believes most guests will arrive by means other than personal vehicles, such as ride-ordering businesses or transit.

The company will need to get council’s permission for the hotel since the proposed height exceeds zoning and the property is in a heritage conservation district. There are different height maximums for the property, but current zoning at the tallest points is around 21.5 metres and 50 metres. The company wants the maximum to be 59.6 metres in both areas.

After construction of the new convention centre, now called the Shaw Centre, there was a concern that the city didn’t have enough hotel capacity to handle major events, especially heading into the action-packed 2017 celebration year for Canada’s 150th birthday.

But in recent years, new hotels have been constructed in the downtown area, including Le Germain Hotels’ accommodations in the new Arts Court complex and on Slater Street. New hotels have also opened outside of the core.

Development plans by big hotel companies apparently aren’t scuttled by alternative accommodation platforms like Airbnb.

Claridge Homes also has plans to add a 19-storey, 136-unit tower to the Andaz hotel, which is operated by Hyatt and directly next door to the Bayview Ottawa Holdings property.

The Bayview application is on track to be considered by council’s planning committee in November.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...wn-guest-rooms

This is even more 1990's looking than Andaz

Imagine the awesome view of this that East Market Phase 1 residents will have! (barf)

Note: No windows face that way. The windows are oriented towards each other, or if you're lucky, a blank wall.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1796/4...c3bbfabd_o.jpg

Based on these layouts, you can literally watch your neighbour in bed.

They did, but still seem open to it's existence once refined.

Some of the suggestions were well founded. I liked the idea to:

Respond to the geometry of the site and consider designed a ‘Flat Iron’ style building as the east tower. This provides an opportunity to bring a unique, slender design quality to the east tower, while establishing a clear identity to the site.

However, how this one tower would relate to 2 other square towers (should they remain) would be a question...

The Great Wall of Rideau is being replicated on York. Absolutely terrible!

And now we're getting too many tall buildings in the Market. I get the first Andaz; it was replacing a building taller than anything else in the area that many considered an eyesore (with a few calling it historic) with a slightly taller, modern building. You could argue it was "grandfathered". And though the design ended up being disappointing, at least the height was well balanced, sitting between the low-rise Market and and the high-rise Rideau. It stood out in the skyline and created layering.

But the Claridge condo tower approved next door at the Honnest Lawyer site should never have been approved. Andaz 2 and this Hampton Inn just push this bad precedent. Now we'll just have 4+ mediocre towers of just about the same height clustered together.

Hope this one and Hampton Inn are rejected.

Non-binding, but informs staff comments/recommendations

Hilton + Andaz addition

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1771/...86fe4b47_b.jpgPhoto by me (kinda)

Well amalgamating these renders was incredibly easy considering the architects for the Hilton took literally just took the andaz addition rendering and added their building. Hopefully we'll get much better revisions for both - but I won't hold my breath.

Cross posted in the Ugly Canada thread

Why do they hate Ottawa?

How is it acceptable for something like this in one of the most prominent, historic, and tourist-centric areas of our city? It's like architects spend so much time and effort on their Calgary proposals and for Ottawa they just wipe their ass on their drafting table and submit that to the city. I guess it's part of the price we pay for so many height restrictions; these buildings just aren't worth the money that their taller counterparts in other cities are worth.

Appealed to LPAT
https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDe...spx?n=PL190492

I am all for more height as most people on here naturally are. In this location it is not really appropriate. Regardless more height would not have changed this design. They see a market niche for a modern but affordable hotel room in the city so are coming with the Hampton Inn brand which is one of their cheapest brands. They will absolutely crush the Marriott which offers horrible rooms at crazy high prices because of its location and chain status. Nobody staying there cares what it looks like so only we can force them to make a good design.

Recommended for refusal
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...box=1578954101

http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/agdoc...&itemid=397420

The developer is not a campaign contributor to the current members of the Watson Club therefore, recommended for refusal?

Don't get me wrong, it's a terrible project, but so are the Claridge proposals on the same block. An obvious case of double standards.

City planning staff recommend council refuse hotel proposal in ByWard Market

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: January 13, 2020

City planners have sent a rare refusal recommendation to council’s planning committee, arguing that a proposed 17-storey hotel wouldn’t be compatible with an area of the ByWard Market.

Bayview Ottawa Holdings filed a development application 2018 for a hotel at 116 York St., east of Dalhousie Street, hoping to open the 224-room hotel under the Hampton Inn brand.

In a report published Monday ahead of a planning committee meeting on Jan. 23, the planning department tells councillors they should refuse the application because the scale of the hotel wouldn’t fit with the surrounding neighbourhood.

It’s rare to see staff recommending council refuse a development application in a report to the planning committee. By the time reports get to the planning committee, there has usually been enough time for the developer, planning staff and the councillor to hammer out an acceptable path forward.

While a hotel is a permitted use for the property, the developer wants zoning bylaw amendments to the rules protecting heritage, building height and loading space provisions.

Planning staff think it would be a bad idea to allow those amendments for the location of the proposed development.

The city’s urban design guidelines suggest highrise buildings should be on lots of at least 1,800 square metres, but the developer’s proposal would build a hotel on a 1,016-square-metre lot. Plus, the development wouldn’t meet the minimum setbacks from other towers planned in future projects, the report says.

“This potential condition will have direct quality of life impacts for pedestrians and for residents on adjacent properties, with no access to light at the rear or sides and create issues of air flow and adverse wind conditions,” the report says.

Planners also don’t like that there would be a wide loading and parking garage entrance off York Street since the street is eyed as an important pedestrian route.

The city planning report criticizes the scale, massing and height for not working well with neighbouring properties and heritage buildings.

The proposed hotel would require a heritage application because the property would be in a heritage conservation district, but the city hasn’t received a heritage application. According to the report, city heritage staff already agree that the proposed hotel isn’t compatible with the heritage district.

Sameer Gulamani, vice-president and counsel for Bayview, said the company believes there’s a need for more hotel rooms in the area.

“We chose this site because we really love the ByWard Market,” Gualmani said in an interview, adding that the company is trying to do a project that’s “sensitive” to the community.

“We intend to contribute and add to the market and not take anything away from the heritage nature of that market.”

The decision will likely be out of council’s hands.

The developer has already filed an appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal since council didn’t make a decision on the application within the legislated timeline. Council needs to record a position, anyway.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...-byward-market