15 des Oblats Ave [Sacred Heart Convent redevelopment] | 18m | 4f | U/C

[UrbOttawa]

new dev app for converting one of the heritage buildings to housing:

https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...2-0124/details

[vtecyo]

Originally Posted by UrbOttawa

new dev app for converting one of the heritage buildings to housing:

https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...2-0124/details

I can't tell if this is meant as "pied-a-terre" condos or their just studio rentals... as it's mostly sub 300sq/foot units, laundry in the basement, only 20 parking spaces and 291 bike spaces.

I assume it end up as mostly U of O students - or people who desperately want to live in the area - but not in the towers by Lees station - so they sacrifice space for quality.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[gosouth]

It looks like this development is intended for students at St Paul University and Ottawa U. I wouldn't be surprised if the owners of the expensive condos next door will not be happy about living beside a student housing complex.

[Ottawacurious]

From Shawn Menards newsletter
"Public Consultation on 15-17 Oblats Avenue December 5th

Our office will be holding a public meeting on the development at 15 Oblats Avenue on December 7 from 7:00 to 9:00 pm. The format will include a brief presentation on the application, with a discussion and question and answer period to follow. The application with associated plans is available on the Development Applications website. Please RSVP for the consultation on our website at: https://www.shawnmenard.ca/15oblats_2.

From Devapps
Application # D07-12-22-0124
Date Received : 2022-08-23
Addresses:
15 OBLATS, AV DES
17 OBLATS, AV DES
Status Date : 2022-09-23
Description : The proposed development is a 1,019 square metre addition to the existing building and the conversion of the existing building to rental units. A total of 284 residential units are proposed, with 20 vehicular parking spaces, 291 bicycle parking spaces, and 2,834 square metres of amenity space (indoor and outdoor)

[rocketphish]

New renderings (September 2022)

[Ottawacurious]

7-December-2022, Community Information Session notes

1. John Bernier went through the zoning by-law amendment & site plan control process
2. Lisa Dalla Rosa from Fotenn Planning & Design. Smart Living and Forum financing the project.
3. Various iterations of the proposal were discussed. As of Right massing was shown. Options included if building had demolished the current building.
4. 284 unites, 20 surface parking spots, 291 bicycle spots, 2844sq' of amenities. 80% studio (229 units)
5. Concerns raised about density (number & types of units). This proposal is addressing that by having studio, 1, 2, and 3 bdrm units.
6. The entire evening was mostly about concerns raised about parking & traffic. Parking along oblats will be removed. All parking will be given to visitors and to drop-off only. Each unit gets a bicycle storage location. "No parking is a noble objective but not a realistic one".
7. Concerns about affordability - targeting transitional renting. Utilities, furniture, equipped kitchens, internet, etc etc. all included. Help students transition from student life to work-life. Car-share will be onsite.
8. Updated proposal planned to be submitted for spring 2023.

Dana Gilbert from Forum. Previously partnered on other projects in Ottawa. Project is targeting rentals such as PhD students, young professionals, recent immigrants, and younger medical professionals. Attempting to build sustainably for this building (ie. geothermal heating). All furnishings, utilities, etc will be included. Very ESG forward. Reduce wastes. Adaptive re-use is the goal. Underground parking is very costly and isn't needed when you are trying to produce a product for rental. The rental tenants have a much lower vehicular requirement than a condo owner (//what????//).

Main Points raised:
1. Fotenn still hasn't had an opportunity to review all the comments from the public as they only received them 2 weeks ago. Some have been included in the changes - others, they have to get to yet.
2. Concern: more 2-3 bedroom units
3. Concern: better bicycle continuity/sidewalks are integrated
4. Concern: the transportation data is no longer current. City response: the data is within 5 years so is within best practices. Concern: over 1000 units since the transportation study, new school, and other shtuff. Should get new data.
5. Concern: there should be parking available. City response: to promote car share, we need to limit parking spots. It should be seen as a benefit for the community. Comment from public: "its an experiment and I don't want this to be experimented on". So, the public is asking for more parking.
6. Owner on main street says, a lot of the design takes away park area and negatively impacting the Corners on Main building. ie. losing the statue, trees, etc. Buildings are too close.
7. Business model: Minimum 1 year lease. They do not allow subleases.
8. Someone spoke about how great as a concept this is. Dean Tester is awesome And 2nd'ed by another. Yay
9. Concern that R4 does not allow amenities projection. Rather than increasing the building permit to allow a taller height, they are allowing the top floor amenities. "it allows defacto R5 for the rest of the street"


My observations: looked like most attendees were either close to being retired or were retired....and they couldn't understand how someone would ever want to live in a 250sq' apartment that is fully furnished and live w/o a car.

[Takingoff]

My observations: looked like most attendees were either close to being retired or were retired....and they couldn't understand how someone would ever want to live in a 250sq' apartment that is fully furnished and live w/o a car.[/QUOTE]

Great summary. Some people don't like change. I'm pretty sure it will proceed as proposed. Most comments were NIMBY and far from constructive. Neighbours stated that their objections could be addressed by moving an irritant to the other side of the building. Wow - I never grow old of this logic.

I understand that this much density is uncomfortable for existing residents. I'm a neighbour and prefer this development to the alternative though. This is a positve for the community if done well.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

7-December-2022, Community Information Session notes

1. John Bernier went through the zoning by-law amendment & site plan control process
2. Lisa Dalla Rosa from Fotenn Planning & Design. Smart Living and Forum financing the project.
3. Various iterations of the proposal were discussed. As of Right massing was shown. Options included if building had demolished the current building.
4. 284 unites, 20 surface parking spots, 291 bicycle spots, 2844sq' of amenities. 80% studio (229 units)
5. Concerns raised about density (number & types of units). This proposal is addressing that by having studio, 1, 2, and 3 bdrm units.
6. The entire evening was mostly about concerns raised about parking & traffic. Parking along oblats will be removed. All parking will be given to visitors and to drop-off only. Each unit gets a bicycle storage location. "No parking is a noble objective but not a realistic one".
7. Concerns about affordability - targeting transitional renting. Utilities, furniture, equipped kitchens, internet, etc etc. all included. Help students transition from student life to work-life. Car-share will be onsite.
8. Updated proposal planned to be submitted for spring 2023.

Dana Gilbert from Forum. Previously partnered on other projects in Ottawa. Project is targeting rentals such as PhD students, young professionals, recent immigrants, and younger medical professionals. Attempting to build sustainably for this building (ie. geothermal heating). All furnishings, utilities, etc will be included. Very ESG forward. Reduce wastes. Adaptive re-use is the goal. Underground parking is very costly and isn't needed when you are trying to produce a product for rental. The rental tenants have a much lower vehicular requirement than a condo owner (//what????//).

Main Points raised:
1. Fotenn still hasn't had an opportunity to review all the comments from the public as they only received them 2 weeks ago. Some have been included in the changes - others, they have to get to yet.
2. Concern: more 2-3 bedroom units
3. Concern: better bicycle continuity/sidewalks are integrated
4. Concern: the transportation data is no longer current. City response: the data is within 5 years so is within best practices. Concern: over 1000 units since the transportation study, new school, and other shtuff. Should get new data.
5. Concern: there should be parking available. City response: to promote car share, we need to limit parking spots. It should be seen as a benefit for the community. Comment from public: "its an experiment and I don't want this to be experimented on". So, the public is asking for more parking.
6. Owner on main street says, a lot of the design takes away park area and negatively impacting the Corners on Main building. ie. losing the statue, trees, etc. Buildings are too close.
7. Business model: Minimum 1 year lease. They do not allow subleases.
8. Someone spoke about how great as a concept this is. Dean Tester is awesome And 2nd'ed by another. Yay
9. Concern that R4 does not allow amenities projection. Rather than increasing the building permit to allow a taller height, they are allowing the top floor amenities. "it allows defacto R5 for the rest of the street"


My observations: looked like most attendees were either close to being retired or were retired....and they couldn't understand how someone would ever want to live in a 250sq' apartment that is fully furnished and live w/o a car.

and yet municipalities fought hard to have 3rd party appeals kept, thinking this is constructive when they eventually take it to the OLT.......

Anyway, "The rental tenants have a much lower vehicular requirement than a condo owner (//what????//)", wouldn't be surprised that data backs that statement up. Apartment complex i'm in has 200 units and maybe 110 parking spots....of which not all are filled. Also, Wonder what excuse the local councilor will give for voting against this....

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

and yet municipalities fought hard to have 3rd party appeals kept, thinking this is constructive when they eventually take it to the OLT.......

Anyway, "The rental tenants have a much lower vehicular requirement than a condo owner (//what????//)", wouldn't be surprised that data backs that statement up. Apartment complex i'm in has 200 units and maybe 110 parking spots....of which not all are filled. Also, Wonder what excuse the local councilor will give for voting against this....

These comments from neighbours I swear come from a template or a website and the blue rinse brigade just insert the name of the property in their opposition. I agree that rental parking rates and condo rates are different in terms of use but the bylaw doesn't allow you to zone etc by tenure.

Excuse the Councillor would use: This is a private sector development and not being developed by a City run/co-op/deeply affordable project being proposed by the strong organizational and project management skills of Horizon

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

and yet municipalities fought hard to have 3rd party appeals kept, thinking this is constructive when they eventually take it to the OLT.......

The Committee of Adjustment acknowledged that yesterday at the beginning of their various hearings. Only the applicant, the City and utility authorities have appeal rights.

[J.OT13]

Not a fan of the dark shade of the bulding enveloppe or the surface parking but otherwise, this is a good project. Full heritage preservation, very well integrated addition to that heritage building, somewhat limited parking. If there's one place one can live without a car, it's here, with some of the basic retail essentials and walking/cycling distance from the O-Train.

[J.OT13]

This one is now approved.

[urbanforest]

Fencing has gone up around this project. Hopefully that means work will start imminently.

[J.OT13]

Happy to see this move forward. Love seeing these heritage buildings re-purposed.

[Ottawacurious]

Work has started inside the building.

https://forumam.com/real-estate/15-17-des-oblats

[SL123]

Crane is up for this project

[J.OT13]

Assuming the interior detail was still there, I hope they'll preserve the wood work and other interior heritage aspects. Even that door 15 feet off the ground, I hope stays in place, maybe for a balcony or something.

[rocketphish]

Updated Proposal (January 2026)

Since the Zoning By-law Amendment approval on June 28, 2023, the project has proceeded to construction. During construction, significant structural challenges have been encountered. As previously discussed, the structure of the existing building is combined of wood, steel, and concrete. This has lead to complications with the retrofit of the existing building and its connection to the new building extension.

As a result of these challenges, it was determined that the rooftop amenity area is required to be removed in order for construction to progress. The removal of the rooftop amenity areas allows the applicant to continue to advance the proposed development to deliver a significant amount of new rental housing for the community, which remain supported by amenity space in other areas of the building.

In addition to the removal of the rooftop amenity space, a small interior adjustment is proposed to proposed dwelling units. In consultation with City staff, the applicant has removed one redundant washroom from each of the 2-bedroom and 3-bedroom dwelling units. No changes were made to the number or mix of proposed units, just the layouts of the 2-bedroom and 3-bedroom units. The removal of the washroom amounts to an additional 10% of livable space in those dwelling units.

The removal of the rooftop amenity area results in a reduction of 633.06 square metres of amenity space, of which 345.33 square metres is outdoor space and 287.73 square metres is indoor amenity space. Following the removal of the rooftop amenity area, the revised development proposes 1,316.3 square metres of amenity space, whereas 1,776 square metres is required for low-rise apartment dwellings.

In consultation with City staff on the proposed change to remove the amenity space, the owner was advised that a Minor Zoning By-law Amendment application was required.

Architect: Lemay Architecture

Development application:
https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...5-0094/details

[urbanforest]

Excavation is starting at the back of the building.