340 Parkdale Ave | 127m | 38f | Proposed - Page 12

rocketphish · #**221** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 3:21 PM**

Taggart Realty Management is proposing the redevelopment of 340 Parkdale Avenue (3 Hamilton Avenue North and 233, 229, and 223 Armstrong Street) with a 38-storey mixed-use residential tower above a 6-storey L-shaped podium, delivering 465 new residential units within a highly walkable, transit-supported neighbourhood. With a total gross floor area of 376,798 sq.ft. (35,006 sq.m.).

The site is owned entirely by Taggart and includes a mix of abutting low-rise buildings leased to tenants offering a variety of commercial type uses. The subsurface of the site is impacted by contamination resulting from a former industrial use, and remediation is required to permit any redevelopment of the site with sensitive land uses (e.g., residential). Taggart’s vision is to address the remediation requirement that has historically inhibited redevelopment of the site and to re-build the block with purposeful public realm space, meaningful architecture, and desirable uses.

The conceptual development consists of a single high-rise, mixed-use building, a single low-rise restaurant building, and public realm space in the form of a POPS.

At-grade commercial spaces are located along all four facades, with the majority situated along the south and east presenting towards Armstrong Street and Parkdale Avenue.

The access to the below-grade parking garage is located at the mid-point of the site’s Spencer Street frontage and aligns with the breezeway. The pedestrian connections through the breezeway are appropriately segregated from the ramp into the below grade parking garage. A total of 4 levels of underground parking is proposed to accommodate 322 vehicle parking spaces, with the limits of the garage extending to the property boundary on all four sides. No formal loading or short-term parking spaces are provided given the availability of street parking along the site. A total of 487 bicycle parking spaces are proposed, with 465 interior spaces intended for residents and 22 exterior spaces intended for transient site users.

Architect: Hobin Architecture

Development application:
https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applications/D02-02-26-0003/details

Location:

Siteplan:

Renderings:

Uhuniau · #**222** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 3:25 PM**

Not the takeaway, I know, but I am chortling about the orange NPCs in the renders.

skyscraperaccount · #**223** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 4:09 PM**

The Carleton survives to see another day. Lieper is in favour btw.

Thats a new back end and new side treatment on The Carleton.

Maybe some leftover panelling they are buying from Odenak

rocketphish · #**224** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 4:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

The Carleton survives to see another day. Lieper is in favour btw.

Thats a new back end and new side treatment on The Carleton.

Maybe some leftover panelling they are buying from Odenak

Well... the Carleton isn't actually surviving, but will instead be "reimagined"

Quote:

The Carleton Tavern is a long-standing community landmark and gathering place rooted in the neighbourhood’s working-class history. The tavern is not designated under the Ontario Heritage Act nor listed in the City’s Heritage Register. During pre-application consultation City heritage staff confirmed they will not move to recommend Council list the property on the City’s Heritage Register or designate it under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act in advance of the proposed Planning Act applications.

During pre-application consultation with the local Councillor and city planning and heritage staff, the owner expressed their interest in commemorating the tavern through efforts to maintain a similar type use and presence on site. The proposed conceptual development includes a new two-storey restaurant building that will have a similar look and function as the existing Carleton Tavern.

http://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%...0D01-01-26-0002%20&%20D02-02-26-0003.PDF

J.OT13 · #**225** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

The Carleton survives to see another day. Lieper is in favour btw.

What a NIMBY!!!!!! Right? Right?

Oh wait, he's in favour? Did we just break Williamoforange?

skyscraperaccount · #**226** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Well... the Carleton isn't actually surviving, but will instead be "reimagined"

Was wondering if it was fully new build.

But...it says The Carleton on it...I demand my beer and pool

J.OT13 · #**227** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 4:48 PM**

I like the overall concept of podia with only one taller tower. I like the reimagining of the Carleton (though I'd like full preservation, but obviously far from required) and hope they reuse the stone, windows, doors, wood trimming if possible. I like the general openness of the proposal. Still sad to see some old industrial with affordable commercial rent go.

J.OT13 · #**228** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 4:54 PM**

I merged the old "Artisan" thread to this since it's part of the same block.

I remember a 30 or 35 storey proposal on this site from about 15-20 years ago that was rejected, but I can't find the thread. If anyone finds it, let me know and I'll merge as well.

skyscraperaccount · #**229** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 5:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I merged the old "Artisan" thread to this since it's part of the same block.

I remember a 30 or 35 storey proposal on this site from about 15-20 years ago that was rejected, but I can't find the thread. If anyone finds it, let me know and I'll merge as well.

Attika? https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=191576

Williamoforange · #**230** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

What a NIMBY!!!!!! Right? Right?

Oh wait, he's in favour? Did we just break Williamoforange?

His literal reasoning for "Support" is that there is no argument he can make against it....his statement like for most of the projects he "Supports" isn't actual support but a deferral to the zoning bylaw.

"there is virtually no Official Plan argument that could be levelled against the Taggart proposal. This hub near a major transit station is another area intended to be developed tall and dense. Again, I’ll be focused on the details of this one rather than seeking to stop the tower."

So yeah he is still a Nimby & I have no doubt that as he LITERALLY states if he could fight this he would, regardless of the context of the site. As this site is very similar to the 403 Richmond Location, it also doesn't make your argument or his against 403 Richmond hold up, both of these projects should have gotten full throated support, hypocritical pandering

J.OT13 · #**231** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

Attika? https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=191576

That's the one, thank you! Address wasn't on the thread title, which explains why I couldn't find it.

J.OT13 · #**232** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 5:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

His literal reasoning for "Support" is that there is no argument he can make against it....his statement like for most of the projects he "Supports" isn't actual support but a deferral to the zoning bylaw.

"there is virtually no Official Plan argument that could be levelled against the Taggart proposal. This hub near a major transit station is another area intended to be developed tall and dense. Again, I’ll be focused on the details of this one rather than seeking to stop the tower."

So yeah he is still a Nimby & I have no doubt that as he LITERALLY states if he could fight this he would, regardless of the context of the site. As this site is very similar to the 403 Richmond Location, it also doesn't make your argument or his against 403 Richmond hold up, both of these projects should have gotten full throated support, hypocritical pandering

Even if he wholeheartedly supported the proposal, you would still find an argument to label him a NIMBY. A NIMBY would fight anything that's proposed, even if there was no grounds to oppose it (Club Link Golf Course in Kanata, for example).

EDIT: sorry folks, I accidentally merged 340 Parkdale into Attika instead of the other way around. I don't know how to remove the PoMo image of Attika.

skyscraperaccount · #**233** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 6:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Even if he wholeheartedly supported the proposal, you would still find an argument to label him a NIMBY. A NIMBY would fight anything that's proposed, even if there was no grounds to oppose it (Club Link Golf Course in Kanata, for example).

EDIT: sorry folks, I accidentally merged 340 Parkdale into Attika instead of the other way around. I don't know how to remove the PoMo image of Attika.

I read Lieper's comments as being words to his constituents (he IS afterall, addressing them) that boil down to, "I'm not going to help YOU oppose this as there is zero rationale, don't waste my time" rather than him saying "I'd oppose this except for those meddling zoning rules". Just my middle of the road take.

yotajoe · #**234** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 11:49 PM**

Keeping the Carleton is absurd, that place is a dive

Harley613 · #**235** Posted **Feb 13, 2026, 11:54 PM**

Love that dive bar. My Dad and I have memories from generations apart there. The gentrification of The British was a a gutpunch for both of us, I hope they don't do something similar to The Carleton with this project.

skyscraperaccount · #**236** Posted **Feb 14, 2026, 12:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harley613

Love that dive bar. My Dad and I have memories from generations apart there. The gentrification of The British was a a gutpunch for both of us, I hope they don't do something similar to The Carleton with this project.

@rocketphish pulled this quote from the webcast

The proposed conceptual development includes a new two-storey restaurant building that will have a similar look and function as the existing Carleton Tavern.

Proof Sheet · #**237** Posted **Feb 14, 2026, 3:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

@rocketphish pulled this quote from the webcast

The proposed conceptual development includes a new two-storey restaurant building that will have a similar look and function as the existing Carleton Tavern.

How can you recreate the atmosphere and grime of the current Carleton. I think they tried to do that in Toronto to a bar called the Morrissey when it had to relocate and it was an abject failure. It would be like saying that a shiny new convenience store at a gas station in the suburbs is the same as an old school urban corner store (like Kim's Convenience). Yes they both sell convenience items but the atmosphere is totally different.

Kitchissippi · #**238** Posted **Feb 14, 2026, 3:58 AM**

I bet it will be gentrified with prices to match. Genshitification.

rumple-stilts · #**239** Posted **Feb 14, 2026, 5:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I bet it will be gentrified with prices to match. Genshitification.

if you call tearing it down and building a brand new building that is made to resemble the existing Carleton Tavern (which is what the developer is proposing), gentrification, then...... yes!?

harls · #**240** Posted **Feb 16, 2026, 3:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harley613

Love that dive bar. My Dad and I have memories from generations apart there. The gentrification of The British was a a gutpunch for both of us, I hope they don't do something similar to The Carleton with this project.

I managed to visit the British before it turned into what it is today. It certainly was charming. Luckily Aylmer still has 'La Brass'.