Gladstone Village [933 Gladstone Ave/1010 Somerset St] | ?m | up to 30f | U/C

[Spoonsy]

Originally Posted by phil235

Your observation is more scientific than mine, but my impression is that the park is relatively well-used most of the time. There is the playground that is usually busy, and during the day it is used for programs from the Plant Rec Centre.

splash pad and playground is super busy, for sure, but based on the concept plan they look untouched, i assume there would be lower impact on those users

i guess 5-10 years is really pushing the boundaries of "short term pain" but im obviously on board for the long term gain.

for context i live ~100m from plant rec

[Harley613]

I don't know Plouffe Park. This whole thread I was assuming it was some kind of urban oasis in the middle of Little Italy. I just checked on google maps....this whole situation is about a couple of downtrodden soccer fields?!?? How many of the NIMBYs in the neighbourhood even use those fields? People usually travel around the city to play. This is ridiculous. 'Don't take away something we don't use for ten years so that we can get some of the best sports and recreation facilities in the city in our neighbourhood, we want to see people playing soccer as we walk by! wahhhhh!!! BANANA!'

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Harley613

I don't know Plouffe Park. This whole thread I was assuming it was some kind of urban oasis in the middle of Little Italy. I just checked on google maps....this whole situation is about a couple of downtrodden soccer fields?!?? How many of the NIMBYs in the neighbourhood even use those fields? People usually travel around the city to play. This is ridiculous. 'Don't take away something we don't use for ten years so that we can get some of the best sports and recreation facilities in the city in our neighbourhood, we want to see people playing soccer as we walk by! wahhhhh!!! BANANA!'

I find this kind of comment to be equally extreme to the NIMBY comments. I think we established that the park is used, and how exactly is it “downtrodden”?

Anyone supporting intensification should also be supporting amenities like neighbourhood parks. Otherwise intensification doesn’t work. I don’t know that this is actually going to be out of commission for 7 years, but if so that is too long for a neighbourhood that is going to have several thousand new residents

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Spoonsy

splash pad and playground is super busy, for sure, but based on the concept plan they look untouched, i assume there would be lower impact on those users

i guess 5-10 years is really pushing the boundaries of "short term pain" but im obviously on board for the long term gain.

for context i live ~100m from plant rec

The splashpad & etc won't be changed as per the current plan.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by phil235

I find this kind of comment to be equally extreme to the NIMBY comments. I think we established that the park is used, and how exactly is it “downtrodden”?

Anyone supporting intensification should also be supporting amenities like neighbourhood parks. Otherwise intensification doesn’t work. I don’t know that this is actually going to be out of commission for 7 years, but if so that is too long for a neighbourhood that is going to have several thousand new residents

Supporting intensification means supporting increasing the park size not fighting to keep it the same. If the school has to be moved to another part of the site it means longer access roads for Bus drop off space. or was the idea that the school not be built at this site at all? in which case fine that does leave alot of room for more towers & housing....

The greenspace will increase by ~170% (not counting the greenspace in Village area), with the park itself increasing by ~116%.

The locals could be as easily fighting to get guarantees that the old park isn't closed until the new park is opened but as others have eluded to, there goal is likely just to stop the dev in its entirety...you know BANANAS.

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by phil235

I find this kind of comment to be equally extreme to the NIMBY comments. I think we established that the park is used, and how exactly is it “downtrodden”?

Anyone supporting intensification should also be supporting amenities like neighbourhood parks. Otherwise intensification doesn’t work. I don’t know that this is actually going to be out of commission for 7 years, but if so that is too long for a neighbourhood that is going to have several thousand new residents

Downtrodden was an extreme word. Maybe it was just a dry day when the aerial was taken for google maps. My apologies for that. I was just expecting a far more valuable green space than a couple of soccer fields considering all the hubbub. There is an immense amount of non sport greens space within easy walking distance. If I was a resident of the neighbourhood I would gladly sacrifice two soccer fields for a few years to gain the incredible facilities that are planned for my neighbourhood.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Harley613

Downtrodden was an extreme word. Maybe it was just a dry day when the aerial was taken for google maps. My apologies for that. I was just expecting a far more valuable green space than a couple of soccer fields considering all the hubbub. There is an immense amount of non sport greens space within easy walking distance. If I was a resident of the neighbourhood I would gladly sacrifice two soccer fields for a few years to gain the incredible facilities that are planned for my neighbourhood.

I would also make that sacrifice without thinking twice. You may be right that the complaints about the park are being used as an excuse to obstruct the whole project. That was definitely a tactic used by the “Friends of Lansdowne”. I just think the city needs to work harder at ensuring that an alternative is available during construction, as the initial plans did not involve closing that park. The default shouldn’t just be that the park is closed for 7 years on the promise of a better park then (if things progress on schedule).

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by Harley613

I don't know Plouffe Park. This whole thread I was assuming it was some kind of urban oasis in the middle of Little Italy. I just checked on google maps....this whole situation is about a couple of downtrodden soccer fields?!?? How many of the NIMBYs in the neighbourhood even use those fields? People usually travel around the city to play. This is ridiculous. 'Don't take away something we don't use for ten years so that we can get some of the best sports and recreation facilities in the city in our neighbourhood, we want to see people playing soccer as we walk by! wahhhhh!!! BANANA!'

That's exactly what I meant by patches of grass. And it's not like it's the only fields in the area too.

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Supporting intensification means supporting increasing the park size not fighting to keep it the same. If the school has to be moved to another part of the site it means longer access roads for Bus drop off space. or was the idea that the school not be built at this site at all? in which case fine that does leave alot of room for more towers & housing....

The greenspace will increase by ~170% (not counting the greenspace in Village area), with the park itself increasing by ~116%.

The locals could be as easily fighting to get guarantees that the old park isn't closed until the new park is opened but as others have eluded to, there goal is likely just to stop the dev in its entirety...you know BANANAS.

Exactly my point. They know this is a strong development that will bring in a lot of affordable housing with a lot of amenities, but they don't care for any of that. They would rather nothing go up, which is annoying. Sure, they won't have a direct soccer field for a few years, but they can adjust until things become better.

Originally Posted by phil235

I would also make that sacrifice without thinking twice. You may be right that the complaints about the park are being used as an excuse to obstruct the whole project. That was definitely a tactic used by the “Friends of Lansdowne”. I just think the city needs to work harder at ensuring that an alternative is available during construction, as the initial plans did not involve closing that park. The default shouldn’t just be that the park is closed for 7 years on the promise of a better park then (if things progress on schedule).

Fair point. The city should look into an alternative but if it isn't viable they need to just ignore their selfish requests to attempt to tank this development. This adds a lot of people near Lebreton. It's actually really close being near City Centre which in turn is directly beside 900 Albert. This plus Gladstone+Loretta towers by CLV will make a seamless transition from Lebreton. The western part of downtown is going to be super, super lively, and I'm all for it.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by phil235

I would also make that sacrifice without thinking twice. You may be right that the complaints about the park are being used as an excuse to obstruct the whole project. That was definitely a tactic used by the “Friends of Lansdowne”. I just think the city needs to work harder at ensuring that an alternative is available during construction, as the initial plans did not involve closing that park. The default shouldn’t just be that the park is closed for 7 years on the promise of a better park then (if things progress on schedule).

Yup, there's that too. City can promise a timeline (reasonable or not) but then blow it by years, even decades. Carling bus lanes, Baseline BRT, William Commanda Bridge, all were supposed to be done far earlier. Two of those haven't even started.

I can't think of any situation quite like this in Ottawa, but we've seen that in Gatineau, like closing the Fonderie that had soccer fields for an innovation centre that never happened. There is still no replacement for that space.

Hoping the City can listen to feedback, block out the NIMBYism and implement the sensible requests, like completing the new park before Plouffe is built over. We're talking soccer fields and basket ball courts here. Can't be that expensive or difficult to build.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

We're talking soccer fields and basket ball courts here. Can't be that expensive or difficult to build.

Exactly.

[ponyboycurtis]

Originally Posted by phil235

I find this kind of comment to be equally extreme to the NIMBY comments. I think we established that the park is used, and how exactly is it “downtrodden”?

Anyone supporting intensification should also be supporting amenities like neighbourhood parks. Otherwise intensification doesn’t work. I don’t know that this is actually going to be out of commission for 7 years, but if so that is too long for a neighbourhood that is going to have several thousand new residents

The grass at the soccer pitch is non-existent based on my casual observations. Likely because it's so well used. The pitch by my house is a lush environment in comparison and its also well used. This seems like a good problem that could be rectified with better maintenance and expanded facilities.

The park right now isn't anything special as it stands.

[OTSkyline]

There seems to be an even larger soccer field behind the Adult High School (at Gladstone and Preston) a few blocks away.

Could that soccer field not be spruced up and offered as a temp replacement while the redevelopment is going on? It's a 350m walk.

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

There seems to be an even larger soccer field behind the Adult High School (at Gladstone and Preston) a few blocks away.

Could that soccer field not be spruced up and offered as a temp replacement while the redevelopment is going on? It's a 350m walk.

Good point.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

There seems to be an even larger soccer field behind the Adult High School (at Gladstone and Preston) a few blocks away.

Could that soccer field not be spruced up and offered as a temp replacement while the redevelopment is going on? It's a 350m walk.

Maybe that’s part of the solution, but that one is already pretty busy and they should be doing more than pointing people to an existing soccer field. It’s also too far from the Plant Bath to be useful for kids programs. There should be a plan to replace the courts and playground - it’s not like we’re talking six months for the closure.

[J.OT13]

There's probably a reason why the area has so many soccer fields. They are probably all well used. I can't comprehend how a 7 year loss is considered acceptable when the solution is so simple.

[Badyouken]

Plouffe Park is definitely used but it sure could use a face lift. The plans look like this will be a net positive overall, and people are just afraid of change / can't visualize / conceptualize what the new plans will actually look like until they see it.

It'll be fine.

[J.OT13]

The title is miss-leading. It's not about the elimination of park land, but the elimination of additional parkland that was promised, and of course the loss of existing parkland for several years.

The argument that the park facilities would lose access to washrooms and changing facilities is non-sensical, as the park facilities will be adjacent to the expansion.

I disagree with the idea of placing the school at Corso Italia. School children will not be taking the train. You want residential nearest the train station. Furthermore, You want the towers on Somerset, not human scale Preston. Having eh school on Preston fills a gap in the street wall.

I agree the plan has too much parking. That should be cut in half, at the very least. That would save hundreds of millions to the City and future developers.

Overll, there's a bit too much space for cars. The surface parking on Somerset should be eliminated. The loop on Somerset could be replaced with a simple lay-by on the street. Towers could be built closer to the street to allow for more park space. The roof of the Plante expansion could become park space as well (eliminate parking for a roof top park).

No more parkland in new 1010 Somerset plan

Alayne McGregor, Centretown Buzz
August 10, 2023


The 1010 Somerset draft concept plan from Engage Ottawa (summer 2023) (Hobin Architecture)

A new city concept plan for developing the area near Somerset and Preston has highly disappointed the Dalhousie Community Association (DCA).

The association had been expecting an increase in badly-needed greenspace and recreation facilities with the 1010 Somerset development, and instead is facing the possible loss of Plouffe Park for several years.

“It’s not an acceptable solution to anything for us,” said DCA President Catherine Boucher.

Plan now open for citizen comments

The plan, unveiled by the city in late June, is now open for public comments on engage.ottawa.ca. The city is running a survey asking residents’ priorities for the site, and will also accept written comments.

The site, which runs from Somerset Street West south to Gladstone Avenue, and from slightly west of Preston Street to LRT Line 2, had been owned by the federal government. It was bought by the city under an agreement in which the southern half of the site would be developed for housing (the Gladstone Village development) by Ottawa Community Housing.

The northern half – which the concept plan covers – was supposed to include an expansion of the Plant Recreation Centre, a new location for the French public Louise Arbour School (now in a temporary location on Beech Street), more greenspace and playing fields, and affordable housing. In 2021, the city approved the Corso Italia Secondary Plan, which set out these goals and the general plan for the area.


An aerial photo of the full 1010 Somerset site.

P4X Coalition “not consulted at all”

In 2021, the DCA had teamed up with the Plant Pool Recreation Association (PPRA), the community and recreation associations in Hintonburg, and the Somerset West Community Health Centre (SWCHC) to form the P4X Coalition to push for the best use of this land. They were planning to work very closely with the city on planning the site, Boucher said.

“We were assured at the time by the head of the planning department that we would definitely be considered and that we would be consulted throughout. Essentially we have not been consulted at all.”

The one meeting the group was to have with staff in July, 2022, was cancelled and not rescheduled, she said.

“Then, all of a sudden, they’re ready to go to Engage Ottawa with essentially this proposal. We are told that Engage Ottawa is just a draft, and nothing’s etched in stone, but it’s obvious that the city has gone ahead and done a fairly significant planning exercise.”

Concept plan puts new school on top of existing park

The concept plan places the new four-storey school where Plouffe Park currently exists, and moves the greenspace further west. A bus drop-off road for the school would surround the current Plant Recreation Centre (PRC). That road and the school building appear to cut off the PRC from the new greenspace and from the new rink, meaning a loss of easy access to bathrooms and changing facilities.

The new greenspace would contain a fieldhouse, basketball courts, and an ice rink, plus a one hectare park containing two sports fields.

On Somerset, there would be three residential high rises, one of them containing affordable housing, and a two-story city facility connected to the PRC by an overhead walkway. The high rises would be 16, 20, and 25 storeys high. The city facility would contain “a mixture of cultural, recreational, and multi-purpose space.”

Boucher said the community had expected the school to be placed nearer the Corso Italia LRT station. In this area, she said, it would be more appropriately placed near Somerset Street, rather than the city facility. She also questioned why the city facility was only two stories high, when there was such a squeeze for space.

Up to 840 new car parking spots in transit-available area

The city facility is supposed to have 220 car parking spots on one level and optionally another 220 on a second level. The PRC currently has 41 surface spots. The high rises are supposed to have another 400 parking spaces on two levels.

Boucher said that amount of car parking was unnecessary given the complex would be served by regular buses on both Somerset and Preston, and was close to the Bayview LRT station. She questioned the expected audience for the facility; she was worried it would be designed to attract users from across the city, when the Dalhousie area is already deficient in recreation facilities compared to other parts of Ottawa.

No more greenspace

Most importantly, she said, this concept plan does not provide any more greenspace, despite the fact that the Gladstone Village development means a big jump in population and the area is also seriously deficient in greenspace.

Andrea Monaghan and her children Natan and Auyu and a friend explore the Orange Shirt Story walk in Plouffe Park on the 2022 National Day for Truth and Reconciliation organized by the Plant Pool Recreation Association. (Alayne McGregor/The BUZZ)
Boucher was also concerned that there would be no park for children to play in while the new complex is being built. The PPRA currently uses Plouffe Park for all its summer programs, she said.

She said the DCA and P4X will be pushing for a revised plan.

https://centretownbuzz.com/2023/08/n...somerset-plan/

[J.OT13]

Comment: Building over Plouffe Park

David Seaborn, Centretown Buzz
August 10, 2023


The lighting in the playground section of Plouffe Park displays the full glory of the park’s tree canopy last fall. (Charles Akben-Marchand/The BUZZ)

City staff are proposing major changes to Plouffe Park, and the mostly empty lands known as 1010 Somerset (west of the Plant Recreation Centre/Plouffe Park over to the LRT tracks).

These changes include building over most of Plouffe Park. These plans were developed without community input and are contrary to the City of Ottawa Official Plan provisions for the neighbourhood.

Starting in 2014, local residents, business and land owners, developers, and city staff worked together to develop the Corso Italia District Secondary Plan, balancing the needs and interests of all parties. In February 2021, City Council approved the plan to implement the agreed vision.


Plouffe Park (0.8Ha) and a further (1.2+Ha) park area; all in light green, as approved by City Council in 2021 in the Corso Italia Secondary Plan.

Under this plan, Plouffe Park would be maintained, and 1.2 hectare of additional park space added in the adjoining 1010 Somerset lands when they are developed.

But staff from the city’s Recreational, Cultural, and Facility Services (RCFS) are now proposing a different plan which does not follow the Official Plan, eliminates Plouffe Park in 2024, and provides less than the 1 hectare of green space on the 1010 Somerset lands.

The local neighbourhood is slated to see more than 25,000 new residents in the next 10 years. It already has the lowest per-capita park space in the entire city. Even with retaining the 0.8 hectare Plouffe Park and adding an additional 1.2 hectares of park, the per-capita park space will decline.

But the new proposal will not only build over Plouffe Park but also insert a loop road around the Plant Recreation Centre, further carving up the site.


The proposed road and buildings that would cover the current Plouffe Park. (David Seaborn / Hobin Architecture)

The Engage Ottawa documents do not mention that Plouffe Park would be paved over. The City staff’s proposal would see Plouffe Park closed for the construction of a new French public school in 2024 without any new parkland for seven to 10 years.

The 1010 Somerset plans have been developed in isolation from meaningful engagement with the people that live in the community and who will use the facilities. This has resulted in a proposal that forces an unnecessary choice between essential public goods (a school vs. park space), that would leave the neighbourhood without green space for a decade, and that has unnecessarily short timelines for proper consideration.

The present 1010 Somerset/ Plouffe Park concept must be revisited with an aim to properly accommodate the needs of a neighbourhood that is growing rapidly. We should work together – community, city, Ottawa Community Housing, school boards, and province – to get it right.


A satellite view (from Google Maps) of the current 1010 Somerset site. Somerset Street West is at the top, and Preston Street on the right. The green section is the area that was promised to be parkland. (David Seaborn)

What’s wrong with the 1010 Somerset concept plan

1. Losing Plouffe Park
2. Planning for Louise Arbour School on top of parkland instead of along Somerset Street or in Gladstone Village. A school located on Somerset Street with its play yards contiguous with the new parkland would be mutually beneficial. Plouffe Park is a temporary flood basin which the school board would have to pay to replace if the school was located there.
3. Getting short-changed on the size of the future park. Several buildings are shown encroaching on the park. As well, some of the parkland along the southern edge has been sold to Ottawa Community Housing.
4. A city facility that takes up too much room on the site. Park space doesn’t grow on trees. It is extremely hard to find park space in built-up areas. New buildings should be higher rather than broad; or else smaller. The facility should firstly serve the local community, and only if there is sufficient space serve a larger population.
5. Underground parking garages for 840 vehicles when this site is between two transit stations and on two major bus routes. Having a garage entrance on Oak Street is antithetical to the local nature of that residential street.
6. Isolating the Plant Recreation Centre inside a bus loop. This plan would diminish the recreational value of the Centre by preventing it from programming in adjacent outdoor space. Bus loops are for the suburbs, not downtown where land is precious.
7. Setting buildings that are along Somerset away from and below Somerset Street, instead of creating an animated street of shops and restaurants immediately adjacent and level with the Somerset Street sidewalk.

https://centretownbuzz.com/2023/08/c...-plouffe-park/

[Badyouken]

Yikes.

I didn't realize it would be this bad. The bus loop around Plant Rec Centre is ridiculous, what are they thinking?

Just getting up to speed on this, and definitely plan to comment: https://engage.ottawa.ca/1010-somerset

I use the Plant Rec Centre multiple times a week and have a vested interest in this!

[SL123]

There Seems to be a lot of ground work currently being done at Gladstone village. Does anyone know if they are working on underground utilities for the future "Village" or if this is something else entirely?