829 Carling Ave | 166m | 50f | Approved

[kwoldtimer]

No complaints about the podium?

[bartlebooth]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

No complaints about the podium?

Yes, there were some. The above ground parking came up a lot. There was also a question about Claridge's history of bait and switch renderings but it wasn't put forward to the developer/architect which was disappointing. I didn't find that there were too many wind and shadow questions but that's just my perspective. Maybe I was too focused on how horrible the first 6-7 stories of this building are. No real complaints about height (outside of shadow stuff) from what I heard.

[UrbOttawa]

A few points that I recall:

• Lot's of comments about parking: too many spaces, shouldn't have above ground parking, increased traffic etc.. The claridge representative said no contractor in the city would go deeper for underground parking, said parking spaces were essentially there for marketing value to sell condos (TOD condos next to an o-train stop...)
  
• Not much discussion about the design in general. I asked a question along with another (who sounded like a fellow SSPer) about whether the developer would be held accountable for materials and build quality but they weren't addressed.
  
• The city planner noted that this will be subject to a special review panel for tall towers (with architects from Chicago and New York). This hasn't happened as of yet, so I imagine we will see refinement to the design.
  
• Height seemed to be generally accepted (including councillor McKenney)

A few slightly updated renderings from the presentation:

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by Harley613

Wind and shadows...my god, these people never give up. If anything the L shaped cluster of buildings forming here will block a lot of wind along Preston and inside the neighbourhood. As for shadows, well they do know they live along a mass transit in a major city, right?

Yeah, but when they moved here they thought it would be trees and tumbleweed and they would skip and jump to Parliament Hill along creekbeds.

Noise, traffic and shadows are key elements that no matter what experts show in drawings that are all based on calculations the public won't buy it.

[Harley613]

My biggest problem with this building's current design is that the parking garage is the MOST prominent element of the design. It's simply bizarre to me that they would attract the eye more to the ugly parking garage than any other part of the building. Shouldn't it be the opposite?

[skylerottawa]

Thanks for this update. I'm new to the forum but I've been following this development closely. I like the new renders much better than what I was seeing before. Also hoping they build east to even out the future Dows Lake skyline

[phil235]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

No complaints about the podium?

There should be. That is hideous for a prominent corner like this. And once it's Claridged, it certainly won't look any better.

[rumple-stilts]

[QUOTE=UrbOttawa;9507135]A few points that I recall:


[*] The city planner noted that this will be subject to a special review panel for tall towers (with architects from Chicago and New York). This hasn't happened as of yet, so I imagine we will see refinement to the design.

Did you happen to notice the expression on David Pontarini face when this was mentioned by the city planner? This was obviously news to him.

[rumple-stilts]

Originally Posted by Harley613

My biggest problem with this building's current design is that the parking garage is the MOST prominent element of the design. It's simply bizarre to me that they would attract the eye more to the ugly parking garage than any other part of the building. Shouldn't it be the opposite?

HPA has taken great pains to camouflage the parking to make it look like a standard 1980's apartment building for some reason.

[J.OT13]

I honestly don't have any issues with the parking garage as shown. It doesn't look like a parking garage and we still have retail at grade. It all depends on execution and of course, that's not Claridge's strong suit...

[Urbanarchit]

I definitely take issue with the podium. It's beside a transit station in an urban area, and the amount of parking they're providing coupled with the fact that they are proposing 6 floors of above-grade parking is problematic. Austin, TX does it extensively, and it doesn't look good or make for good streets. The City needs to push back on the podium and on removing parking entirely. The developer would either get 6 extra floors to rent out for an office or units or the building would be shorter.

[roger1818]

Sorry if this has been answered earlier, but will these be condos or rentals?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

Is it going to be archived on YouTube or similar?

Depends, was it Leiper's open house?

Originally Posted by roger1818

Sorry if this has been answered earlier, but will these be condos or rentals?

I've listened to a bunch of these open houses, and usually the developer doesn't know at this point. That said, Claridge usually does a mix of condos and rentals. Don't know how that works if it's a single building.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by skylerottawa

Thanks for this update. I'm new to the forum but I've been following this development closely. I like the new renders much better than what I was seeing before. Also hoping they build east to even out the future Dows Lake skyline

Welcome to the forum!

[originalmuffins]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Depends, was it Leiper's open house?



I've listened to a bunch of these open houses, and usually the developer doesn't know at this point. That said, Claridge usually does a mix of condos and rentals. Don't know how that works if it's a single building.

They mentioned it would be condo oriented.

I agree with everyone not liking the amount of parking. I brought up during the open house that more retail should be incorporated instead of the 7 floors of parking. Reduce a few floors, increase retail for amenities that people would find more useful (grocery store, bank, etc).

Also I know there wasn't much complaints about the height (Catherine mentioned she loves developments like this because she prefers densification but has concerns over the parking) but The Hospital association Head did mention she did not like the additional height and wants it to stick to the 55 floors, but I doubt that complaint comes to fruition.

[SL123]

Originally Posted by originalmuffins

They mentioned it would be condo oriented.

I agree with everyone not liking the amount of parking. I brought up during the open house that more retail should be incorporated instead of the 7 floors of parking. Reduce a few floors, increase retail for amenities that people would find more useful (grocery store, bank, etc).

Also I know there wasn't much complaints about the height (Catherine mentioned she loves developments like this because she prefers densification but has concerns over the parking) but The Hospital association Head did mention she did not like the additional height and wants it to stick to the 55 floors, but I doubt that complaint comes to fruition.

If its a Condo Tower then they definitely will not want to reduce the number of parking sadly.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by SL123

If its a Condo Tower then they definitely will not want to reduce the number of parking sadly.

That's my thinking. Where rental apartments typically have a supply of parking spaces that can be assigned to whichever tenant wants to rent one (subject to availability), condo units typically include ownership of a specific parking space. The fact that it has fewer parking spaces than units (much fewer when you subtract off the visitor and retail parking spaces), makes me think they are going for a different model. where parking spaces are not owned, but leased. If so, this makes a lot of sense, as only those who actually need parking have to pay for it and saves the hassle of the owner having to sublet their parking space if they don't need it.

I know a lot of people on here like to complain about buildings having too many parking spaces. One has to ask though, in Ottawa, how many "households" (or what ever term you want to describe the group of 1 or more people who live together) own their home, but don't own a car? There will be some I am sure, but I can't imagine there are all that many.

Building buildings without any parking spaces for residents won't encourage people to not own a car, it will most likely force them to live somewhere else (or find somewhere else to park their car).

[postingaboutottawa]

It is a lot of parking but I disagree that the podium is the most prominent feature of the building i think the height is. Its good that the podium has been made a bit more interesting and it will have probably another round of refinement.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by roger1818

.

I know a lot of people on here like to complain about buildings having too many parking spaces. One has to ask though, in Ottawa, how many "households" (or what ever term you want to describe the group of 1 or more people who live together) own their home, but don't own a car? There will be some I am sure, but I can't imagine there are all that many.

I was curious, so I looked it up. According to this, it's 42% of households without a car in the central city, 16% in the city as a whole. 48% of households with incomes under $30,000 don't own a car. Not insignificant numbers.

https://www.ottawainsights.ca/themes/environment-and-sustainability/transportation/

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by phil235

I was curious, so I looked it up. According to this, it's 42% of households without a car in the central city, 16% in the city as a whole. 48% of households with incomes under $30,000 don't own a car. Not insignificant numbers.

And, at least in theory, Ottawa expanding LRT and BRT should increase the viability of this number into the future.

Especially for those who live in new builds on LRT lines. Ahem.