Park River Properties Design Inspiration

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by bartlebooth

It's great that you're proactively looking for input from people in the community before putting pen to paper (so to speak).

For me, I'd love to see that you really push the idea of TOD. This probably requires some risk given Ottawa's car obsessed nature, but too many developers claim a project is TOD without making much effort to really do it (good connection to transit, good street level interaction for humans - not cars, reduced parking for private vehicles, family sized units as mentioned above etc...). Much less parking than what the city requires! Even 20% for TOD.

From a design perspective, it's difficult to articulate what should occur because we don't know the site but it'd be great to see a bold statement from an architecture firm that isn't located in Ottawa. I'd love to see you push the status quo. At the end of the day, you're proposing a massive building that will impact the city for a damn long time. It'd be fun to see something out of the ordinary. If someone came to visit this city for the first time, would they want to go see your building?

I second this. So many developers claim to be doing TOD, but all they're really doing is building a typical highrise building with far too much car parking. TOD is about lifestyles that do not involve having cars, and relying on a walkable urban area and access to rapid transit (as it's sited beside a transit station). I'm curious to know where this site in Vanier is that is beside rapid transit...

Personally, I think 40-storeys is too much, especially for Vanier; maybe 20 floors? Focus on high-quality materials and the experience of the pedestrians along the street and what they see and interact with. Aim for human scale in design! On a commercial main street, I'd go with a 3-4 storey podium. Too often we do first floors that have too high a ceiling (it's typical for 4.5m), but that's not conducive to good urban environments (it's for cars in the middle of the street, but isn't human scaled). I would say go for around 3.5m for the retail. Vancouver does a good job with this, and here's a good example of a 3-storey podium where the first floor height is reasonable for main streets. Material-wise, I would do something different. But the height and massing of this building is quite good. This building could be interesting. These buildings and materials (wood and brick with some glass) make fore a human scale feel.

I would also recommend avoiding a lot/ only white, blacks, greys. Go for some colour! We need it, especially with our grey, overcast, depressing winters. Colours are stimulating. This could be colourful balconies, colourful glazing , or colourful cladding (highlights, etc.).

If you got an architect not from Ottawa, but even one from Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, or Japan (if you got Emmanuelle Moureaux to design the colourful podium I would die).

Also, larger units. People are feeling claustrophobic during this pandemic and are finding their condos and apartments don't provide enough room to live in. We need good size units, even though developers prefer more, smaller ones to make more money. Even having some good size balconies or terraces, more than 2 bedroom units, bedrooms that can accomodate furniture beyond a queen size bed. Apartments and condos don't really need more than one bathroom, to be honest; and they need more kitchen and counter space for cooking and storing cookware.

Consider Ottawa's weather as well in the design. Some units with lots of glass can be colder, and more surfaces means more areas that need insulation due to increased heat loss. That said, I love what they did with Jameson House in Vancouver's upper floors.

Depending on the site, having a podium with retail along the street and townhouses along other streets can be nice to provide multiple types of housing for different kinds of families. Vancouver does this a lot.

These buildings in Portland can be interesting to considering massings and scales: building 1, building 2, building 3 (for shape, not massing), building 4 (2-3 storey along main street, midrise in back.

[DTcrawler]

Others have already provided some great feedback. Personally, as long as you don't go with another variation of the blocky, Soviet-like, charcoal-and-beige brick eyesores that already plague this city, I'll be more than happy. The most important thing is to follow through on the renderings with high quality materials when construction comes around.

I have a lot of respect for what you're doing. It's so refreshing to see this from a developer. Keep up the great work.

[ParkRiverProperties]

This is great feedback. For clarity - this project is not in Vanier - the previous post was referencing our project at 200 Baribeau.

A lot to take in on your post - very much appreciate that you took the time to do so. It will be a few months before we have any sort of concepts to review. We will continue to collect feedback and hopefully we have something that is well received!

Originally Posted by Urbanarchit

I second this. So many developers claim to be doing TOD, but all they're really doing is building a typical highrise building with far too much car parking. TOD is about lifestyles that do not involve having cars, and relying on a walkable urban area and access to rapid transit (as it's sited beside a transit station). I'm curious to know where this site in Vanier is that is beside rapid transit...

Personally, I think 40-storeys is too much, especially for Vanier; maybe 20 floors? Focus on high-quality materials and the experience of the pedestrians along the street and what they see and interact with. Aim for human scale in design! On a commercial main street, I'd go with a 3-4 storey podium. Too often we do first floors that have too high a ceiling (it's typical for 4.5m), but that's not conducive to good urban environments (it's for cars in the middle of the street, but isn't human scaled). I would say go for around 3.5m for the retail. Vancouver does a good job with this, and here's a good example of a 3-storey podium where the first floor height is reasonable for main streets. Material-wise, I would do something different. But the height and massing of this building is quite good. This building could be interesting. These buildings and materials (wood and brick with some glass) make fore a human scale feel.

I would also recommend avoiding yellows, blacks, greys. Go for some colour! We need it, especially with our grey, overcast, depressing winters. Colours are stimulating. This could be colourful balconies, colourful glazing , or colourful cladding (highlights, etc.).

If you got an architect not from Ottawa, but even one from Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, or Japan (if you got Emmanuelle Moureaux to design the colourful podium I would die).

Also, larger units. People are feeling claustrophobic during this pandemic and are finding their condos and apartments don't provide enough room to live in. We need good size units, even though developers prefer more, smaller ones to make more money. Even having some good size balconies or terraces, more than 2 bedroom units, bedrooms that can accomodate furniture beyond a queen size bed. Apartments and condos don't really need more than one bathroom, to be honest; and they need more kitchen and counter space for cooking and storing cookware.

Consider Ottawa's weather as well in the design. Some units with lots of glass can be colder, and more surfaces means more areas that need insulation due to increased heat loss. That said, I love what they did with Jameson House in Vancouver's upper floors.

Depending on the site, having a podium with retail along the street and townhouses along other streets can be nice to provide multiple types of housing for different kinds of families. Vancouver does this a lot.

These buildings in Portland can be interesting to considering massings and scales: building 1, building 2, building 3 (for shape, not massing), building 4 (2-3 storey along main street, midrize in back.

[ParkRiverProperties]

Much appreciated. We hope that we can exceed your expectations!. Thanks for your taking the time!

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

Others have already provided some great feedback. Personally, as long as you don't go with another variation of the blocky, Soviet-like, charcoal-and-beige brick eyesores that already plague this city, I'll be more than happy. The most important thing is to follow through on the renderings with high quality materials when construction comes around.

I have a lot of respect for what you're doing. It's so refreshing to see this from a developer. Keep up the great work.

[Wooderson]

Thanks for the opportunity to comment. I would add a vote to the roofline comments, and in addition look for quality finishing materials in a elegant symmetrical design. Avoiding cliché gadget architectural elements to try and add interest to an otherwise inexpensive design would be good to see as well.

Depending on the specifics on the location and what is possible, a wide sidewalk/setback to make a pleasant pedestrian experience (buried power lines and room for a patio/café/small plaza a plus).

For inspiration, I'll come in from the top rope with a pic of Project Commodore in NYC:

[RideauRat]

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Yon...!4d-79.4077637



It's so rare (if not the first time) that the actual developer is on the forum (let's be honest this forum isn't the most appealing at first and difficult to use at times) thanks for being on the front lines. I Was in Toronto for the weekend and was fascinated by how Sheppard and Yonge literally towers over anything existing in Ottawa. I'm not a fan of the "look at Toronto" approach but any modern building on this strip can change an Ottawa TOD zone for the good, especially the Emerald park towers.

[Dzingle Bells]

First, as others have already said, big kudos to your team for being so proactive in soliciting feedback.

I'm going to ramble a bit and some of what I say will likely have already been captured in other posts above.

TOD/15 Minute Neighbourhood
We all know that the city is, rightly, pushing for a focus on TOD and 15-minute neighbourhoods. I'd love if you could really lean into this idea. Prioritize pedestrian and cycling access to your project. Make it EASY for people to choose to bike, take transit or walk rather than take a car. What does this look like?
- Bike storage on the main floor. Maybe even accessible without having to get off your bike?
- Provide a seamless and accessible connection to the transit station.
- If someone does need to drive, can it at least be using a car-sharing service? Could you partner with Communauto to have a couple of spots in your building?

Building Design
- COLOUR. Don't just slap it on some panels to try and make the facade exciting. Use it as part of the concept.
- If the balconies are going to be tiny then is it really worth it? Personally, I think a nice Juliette balcony plus a substantial common amenity space is better.

Public Realm/Ground Floor
- Try to make as much of the building as possible have an active use at grade. I don't consider private amenity space as this even though a lot of municipalities do.
- Have ground-oriented units (townhouses) with a nice little yard at grade. Like this - https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6502...7i16384!8i8192

Unit Design
- Please try to make sure all units a REALLY usable. Think about how someone would live in the unit. A lot of condo units these days check off all the boxes for having everything one needs but the unit doesn't work.
- Two-floor units? These are so much more appealing to families.
- Skip stop units? This allows for cross ventilation and less public circulation.
- Storage! People need storage space IN their units. It's not convenient to always have to go to your storage locker in the basement. You could also have storage lockers on your residential floors in dead space.

Architects!
Some (mainly Toronto) architects that I think do great work and would be amazing to have in Ottawa:
- gh3 https://www.gh3.ca/
- Partisans https://partisans.com/
- Perkins&Will (they have an Ottawa office too) https://perkinswill.com/
- SvN (they have planners and landscape architects on staff as well)https://svn-ap.com/
- Saucier + Perotte http://saucierperrotte.com/en
- Superkul https://superkul.ca/
- Hariri Pontarini Architects (with the right client, AKA you, I think HPA is great) https://hariripontarini.com/

That's some ideas for now! Looking forward to contributing more as the project evolves.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Urbanarchit

Personally, I think 40-storeys is too much, especially for Vanier; maybe 20 floors? Focus on high-quality materials and the experience of the pedestrians along the street and what they see and interact with. Aim for human scale in design!

If you got an architect not from Ottawa, but even one from Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, or Japan (if you got Emmanuelle Moureaux to design the colourful podium I would die).

Consider Ottawa's weather as well in the design. Some units with lots of glass can be colder, and more surfaces means more areas that need insulation due to increased heat loss. That said, I love what they did with Jameson House in Vancouver's upper floors.

I humbly disagree. The notion that a +20 storey building is more human scale than a 40 storey building is inaccurate. The first 1-3 storey's matters most, after 10-15 storey's there is little to no difference from the curb view. I say reach for the stars.

Ottawa has many very capable architects including large international firms. Unfortunately most of the local developers are requesting bargain basement designs. I don't think that is reflective of ALL the local architects.

I would love to see an impressive all-glass curtain wall condo constructed in Ottawa in the right context. Heat loss can be mitigated through insulation and other means. Toronto and Montreal are not exactly in a tropical oasis, with weather very similar to Ottawa's. Yet there are many curtain walled buildings there.

The problem with design is if you ask 50 peoples opinions you'll get 50 different answers. The only thing I think we could all agree on is the resentment of the redundant charcoal-brick square towers plaguing this city.

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by GeoNerd

I humbly disagree. The notion that a +20 storey building is more human scale than a 40 storey building is inaccurate. The first 1-3 storey's matters most, after 10-15 storey's there is little to no difference from the curb view. I say reach for the stars.

If we're talking about building something in Vanier (the developers have indicated this is for a different property elsewhere along the transitway), than there is definitely an issue when we consider there isn't good public transit and no rapid transit in the area. Just because something is a highrise doesn't mean it's a good urban building. You can build vertical suburbs, especially if everyone living there requires a car to get around because there aren't any amenities and good alternatives to the car. This is why highrises make a lot of sense around transit stations and downtown, but not necessarily in other areas.

I would love to see an impressive all-glass curtain wall condo constructed in Ottawa in the right context. Heat loss can be mitigated through insulation and other means. Toronto and Montreal are not exactly in a tropical oasis, with weather very similar to Ottawa's. Yet there are many curtain walled buildings there.

Just because Toronto and Montreal do curtain wall extensively despite their climates, doesn't mean it's actually good (also Toronto is in a different climate zone from Ottawa and Montreal). The only insulation you can actually get with curtain wall is at the floor level with spandrel panels. The windows would need to be triple-paned at least and use something like argon to be filled between them, but even then it isn't good and isn't recommended lately for design. There's going to be a lot of heat loss in winter and heat gain in summer from extensive glazing use, meaning the inhabits are going to be thermally uncomfortable and spending a lot more money and requiring more energy just to condition their units. While glass can be a good material aesthetically, the environmental performance should be prioritized.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Urbanarchit

If we're talking about building something in Vanier (the developers have indicated this is for a different property elsewhere along the transitway), than there is definitely an issue when we consider there isn't good public transit and no rapid transit in the area. Just because something is a highrise doesn't mean it's a good urban building. You can build vertical suburbs, especially if everyone living there requires a car to get around because there aren't any amenities and good alternatives to the car. This is why highrises make a lot of sense around transit stations and downtown, but not necessarily in other areas.



Just because Toronto and Montreal do curtain wall extensively despite their climates, doesn't mean it's actually good (also Toronto is in a different climate zone from Ottawa and Montreal). The only insulation you can actually get with curtain wall is at the floor level with spandrel panels. The windows would need to be triple-paned at least and use something like argon to be filled between them, but even then it isn't good and isn't recommended lately for design. There's going to be a lot of heat loss in winter and heat gain in summer from extensive glazing use, meaning the inhabits are going to be thermally uncomfortable and spending a lot more money and requiring more energy just to condition their units. While glass can be a good material aesthetically, the environmental performance should be prioritized.

There are no TOD's in Vanier. The posting mentioned west end. However, on the topic of Vanier...Vanier has many amenities including massive employment areas. The case could be made for the creation of great 15 minute neighbourhoods in Vanier.

Toronto's climate is very similar to Ottawa/Montreal. Due to the lake they have a slightly warmer winter and a delayed spring. Summer is identical. Triple pane windows are increasingly common and provide great insulation. A cheap poorly insulated window frame can be less efficient than a curtain wall. Just because old concrete bunker towers with tiny windows may (or may not) be more energy efficient during certain conditions, that doesn't mean we should not be constructing alternatives. I'm not going to recommend home owners install tiny sliding windows over big bay windows in their homes to try and be more energy efficient. Technology in modern windows allows us to be bold.

[UrbOttawa]

A lot of great comments on here already - I'll echo the request for an interesting roof design (plus a lighting feature!). One thing I would love to see more of is more experimentation with materials, colours and building textures. As others have mentioned, it's almost become a foregone conclusion that any new tower proposal in the city will be some combo of bland charcoal/light grey/red brick + glass and spandrel. I'm not against brick by any means - I would just like to see more thoughtful selection and nuanced implementation instead of flat brick walls (architecture in London tends to do an exceptional job of this).



https://www.dezeen.com/2018/10/16/da...quoise-bricks/


https://www.dezeen.com/2020/02/17/av...ocial-housing/

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lo...8!4d-0.1275862


https://www.dezeen.com/2019/03/18/ar...sydney-bricks/


There are also some nice projects with terracotta, including Linebox's St. Charles Market in Ottawa:


https://twitter.com/LineboxStudio/st...189761/photo/1



https://www.dezeen.com/2021/05/26/ht...-architecture/

BDP Quadrangle from Toronto has been doing some interesting work lately:


https://urbantoronto.ca/database/pro...5-yonge-street

Looking forward to learning more about the project as it progresses!

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by GeoNerd

There are no TOD's in Vanier. The posting mentioned west end. However, on the topic of Vanier...Vanier has many amenities including massive employment areas. The case could be made for the creation of great 15 minute neighbourhoods in Vanier.

15-minute neighbourhoods can be achieved without highrises and building of 30+ storeys. Midrise and missing middle can meet a lot of needs for Vanier, including the buildings being cheaper and faster to build with fewer restrictions and requirements from the City and the Ontario Building Code, and they won't contribute as much creating vertical sprawl.

Toronto's climate is very similar to Ottawa/Montreal. Due to the lake they have a slightly warmer winter and a delayed spring. Summer is identical. Triple pane windows are increasingly common and provide great insulation. A cheap poorly insulated window frame can be less efficient than a curtain wall. Just because old concrete bunker towers with tiny windows may (or may not) be more energy efficient during certain conditions, that doesn't mean we should not be constructing alternatives. I'm not going to recommend home owners install tiny sliding windows over big bay windows in their homes to try and be more energy efficient. Technology in modern windows allows us to be bold.

Nice strawman, there. No one said anything about small windows and concrete bunkers being more energy efficient. The choices for doing buildings aren't between small windowed-bunkers or entirely glass towers.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Urbanarchit

15-minute neighbourhoods can be achieved without highrises and building of 30+ storeys. Midrise and missing middle can meet a lot of needs for Vanier, including the buildings being cheaper and faster to build with fewer restrictions and requirements from the City and the Ontario Building Code, and they won't contribute as much creating vertical sprawl.

Nice strawman, there. No one said anything about small windows and concrete bunkers being more energy efficient. The choices for doing buildings aren't between small windowed-bunkers or entirely glass towers.

Straw man? You've brought up an argument about Vanier in a conversation about a western TOD. Talk about straw man.

In no way are tall buildings in TOD vertical sprawl. Nor are they in the right context outside of heavily transit connected areas. Missing middle in a TOD would likely be under development. If you value cheap and fast to build buildings with fewer restrictions and requirements over well designed & articulated buildings I don't know what to tell you. Maybe check back here regularly for new postings.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by Urbanarchit

15-minute neighbourhoods can be achieved without highrises and building of 30+ storeys. Midrise and missing middle can meet a lot of needs for Vanier, including the buildings being cheaper and faster to build with fewer restrictions and requirements from the City and the Ontario Building Code, and they won't contribute as much creating vertical sprawl.

Why do you keep bringing up Vanier? The developer stated that this parcel is located along the O-Train's west extension. Also, Ottawa is the last city in the world that should be worrying about "vertical sprawl".

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by DTcrawler

Why do you keep bringing up Vanier? The developer stated that this parcel is located along the O-Train's west extension. Also, Ottawa is the last city in the world that should be worrying about "vertical sprawl".

Originally, I confused the Vanier proposal the developer mentioned with the one they were asking for feedback; they corrected me. GeoNerd then disagreed with me regarding 20 floors being more more human scale than 40. I then said this in response several posts ago:

If we're talking about building something in Vanier (the developers have indicated this is for a different property elsewhere along the transitway), than there is definitely an issue when we consider there isn't good public transit and no rapid transit in the area.

Note how I indicated that the developer corrected that this was not in Vanier. But despite that, my point was that there is a difference in scales with regards to building in different areas that are not served by rapid transit. 40 floors is still quite high, but is more acceptable downtown or near rapid transit than in neighbourhoods like Vanier, which was still a point I made previously and GeoNerd disagreed with. I used the word IF in that quote if you noticed, because IF (hypothetically) we are talking about a neighbourhood like Vanier then buildings of those sizes are inappropriate.

I'll reiterate to make it clear. In only 2 posts, my comment about some heights being appropriate in some areas and inappropriate in others, with Vanier as an example of where it would not be appropriate - in contrast with what GeoNerd was saying that there is not any difference between 10+ floors, so "reach for the stars" anywhere.

That is where this came from.

Also, I don't think you quite get what I mean by vertical sprawl, as Ottawa is definitely guilty of this. It is urban sprawl except instead of building lowrise houses in car dependent areas, it's building highrises (ie. a large number of people on a smaller property) in car dependent areas. It is no different from horizontal sprawl except more people per parcel, all who need a car to get around for every day things. It is not smart planning to just build highrises anywhere and think it'll be good because it's "density", especially without building rapid transit in those areas.

[phil235]

A lot of my thoughts are pretty similar to those that have already been brought up, but I do want to echo the comment on materials. My preference is definitely a podium-tower design with real setbacks around the 4th or 5th floors. I think you can really make an impact on the street by using materials that contribute to the streetwall in an interesting way and create a distinction between the podium and the tower.

I'd also like to see a pedestrian realm that is actually comfortable for pedestrians, particularly if this is on a major street. That would mean wide sidewalks with trees and enough room that people walking or sitting are separate enough from the passing traffic for it to be enjoyable. I'd also reiterate the need for active frontage. Even if design is good, if there are no entrances and exits on the street, the building can take on a fortress-like aspect that prevents it from actually integrating into its surroundings.

So in a nutshell, I'd like to see visual interest both at street level and from a distance. I think you will reap benefits by making your tower distinctive and recognizable.

[LRTeverywhere]

Originally Posted by phil235

I'd also like to see a pedestrian realm that is actually comfortable for pedestrians, particularly if this is on a major street. That would mean wide sidewalks with trees and enough room that people walking or sitting are separate enough from the passing traffic for it to be enjoyable. I'd also reiterate the need for active frontage. Even if design is good, if there are no entrances and exits on the street, the building can take on a fortress-like aspect that prevents it from actually integrating into its surroundings.

Depending on the street this building is on it would also be great if the buildings frontage has cycle tracks intergrated during construction so that in the future when a road upgrade project reaches it, the frontage won't have to be torn up and rebuilt.