Relevé Ottawa [400 Albert St] | 78/98m | 23/29f | U/C

[J.OT13]

This one is so bland and disappointing. Even more so coming from Broccolini, who has generally built high quality project in Ottawa and Montréal (not so much Gatineau, but that's the Feds for you).

To build on other people's comments, they should have purchased the entire block and propose one big redevelopment (built in phases of course). In that project, they should have included just one site for garage entrances and loading bays. If 23 floors is the max they can get with the restrictions, fine. I don't expect another Campeau to ever step up. But that doesn't mean they have to design such a bland tower.

We need only to look at Winnipeg where buildings of similar height look spectacular. Here's their True North Square proposal in the arena district:


http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=217327

The only positive of the Broccolini proposal is that it is one of the only buildings west of Lyon with ground floor retail.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

This one is so bland and disappointing. Even more so coming from Broccolini, who has generally built high quality project in Ottawa and Montréal (not so much Gatineau, but that's the Feds for you).

To build on other people's comments, they should have purchased the entire block and propose one big redevelopment (built in phases of course). In that project, they should have included just one site for garage entrances and loading bays. If 23 floors is the max they can get with the restrictions, fine. I don't expect another Campeau to ever step up. But that doesn't mean they have to design such a bland tower.

We need only to look at Winnipeg where buildings of similar height look spectacular. Here's their True North Square proposal in the arena district:


http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=217327

The only positive of the Broccolini proposal is that it is one of the only buildings west of Lyon with ground floor retail.

Those Winnipeg buildings are really nice! Thanks for sharing them!

I totally agree with most of your comment. One sentence you wrote did jump out at me though. You wrote that "If 23 floors is the max they can get with the restrictions, fine." I'd point out that Broccolini didn't even try going higher. Their opening proposal set the bar low. Compare that with all the developments in Little Italy and along Parkdale where developers actually put some resources and effort into pushing for more sensible heights and we see a huge contrast in end results you get.

I just for the life of me can't figure out why Broccolini isn't asking for more height here. I mean is it possible that Broccolini still hasn't figured out yet how the game is played?

Surely most people realize that very few cities would be able to thrive if they copied Ottawa's zoning scheme with its byzantine network of CDPs and quasi-institutional community associations.

Thankfully for us, Ottawa doesn't even follow Ottawa's zoning scheme. Almost every reasonable application for a zoning height amendment gets at least some height increase, not always for 100% of the height requested but it happens often enough that it's silly not to go through the process.

I mean the process isn't that complicated and yet Broccolini doesn't seem to get it.

Step #1) Developer proposes building a modestly tall (by non-Ottawa standards) project on a prime site that is, for some inexplicable reason, zoned ludicrously low (like 6 floors or something) despite being across the street from a major transit station and being well-served by amenities.

Step #2) The NIMBYers in the community association cry fowl.

Step #3) The Ottawa Citizen and/or Ken Gray write a piece on the story pretending as if the NIMBYers had anything of value to contribute to the discussion or the process.

Step #4) The city planners in City Hall approve the zoning amendment or some portion thereof because they're not morons and they realize the proposal isn't actually going to kill nearly as many children as the community association claims it will.

Step #5) The city councilor whose ward encompasses the project makes a statement about how awful it is that this project doesn't respect the CDP/zoning bylaws/community association's wishes.

Step #6) The city councilor whose ward encompasses the project then votes against the proposal knowing full well that the rest of city council will vote in favour of the zoning amendment thus protecting each city councilor from their respective community associations because most city councilors aren't morons either.

Step #7) The developer gets to build some version of what they originally wanted and the sky doesn't fall and everybody in Ottawa goes about with the rest of their lives forgetting why people made such a fuss about the proposal in the first place.

[Urbanarchit]

*

[waterloowarrior]

One issue with this proposal is that the floorplate is about 2x the maximum the City is looking for and the building will be fairly close (13 metres) from future buildings to the north. These requirements are currently under appeal though.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

Step #1) Developer proposes building a modestly tall (by non-Ottawa standards) project on a prime site that is, for some inexplicable reason, zoned ludicrously low (like 6 floors or something) despite being across the street from a major transit station and being well-served by amenities.

Step #2) The NIMBYers in the community association cry fowl.

Step #3) The Ottawa Citizen and/or Ken Gray write a piece on the story pretending as if the NIMBYers had anything of value to contribute to the discussion or the process.

Step #4) The city planners in City Hall approve the zoning amendment or some portion thereof because they're not morons and they realize the proposal isn't actually going to kill nearly as many children as the community association claims it will.

Step #5) The city councilor whose ward encompasses the project makes a statement about how awful it is that this project doesn't respect the CDP/zoning bylaws/community association's wishes.

Step #6) The city councilor whose ward encompasses the project then votes against the proposal knowing full well that the rest of city council will vote in favour of the zoning amendment thus protecting each city councilor from their respective community associations because most city councilors aren't morons either.

Step #7) The developer gets to build some version of what they originally wanted and the sky doesn't fall and everybody in Ottawa goes about with the rest of their lives forgetting why people made such a fuss about the proposal in the first place.

Excellent summation of an all too familiar process.

In Step 6 you usually have a person speak at Planning Committee with a PH.D in physics or acoustics who claims that the sky will fall if this is built or the construction of this building will stop all spring and fall bird migration.

We've seen the Councillor position in step 6 time and time again. As well, there is also the option for Council to turn it down completely and then hire outside consultants to defend Council position versus the developers team and the City Planning Department testimony.

[11a2b3]

The development application says 23 and 21 storeys. Citizen article says it would be 3 phases. Maybe Broccolini is planning something bigger for the third phase?

[JHikka]

Although I don't bike myself I do drive Bay Street quite a bit and in the mornings there's heavy bike traffic travelling into Downtown. The concern about the garage/bay doors is valid. I can only guess that cyclists like using Bay because it's a quieter street travelling north compared to Kent/Bank/Elgin, but I could be completely wrong.

In the end I can't really say i'm against residential mixed-use developments in the central Downtown core, even if they're mostly bland and a bit too short for my liking. If this goes ahead then the area between Bowery, Gotham, and this development will have seen quite the uptick in residential units in the past year/coming years.

[J.OT13]

Looking at this PDF, I'm a little less pissed.

http://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Im...gn%20Brief.PDF

They actually went from 20 floors to 23. Future tower on Lyon will be 30 floors. The site will also include a decent sized urban park at some point. There will also be a break between the two towers. It will end up taking over the full block, omitting the two 3 storey heritage-ish apartments on Albert.

[Urbanarchit]

*

[Urbanarchit]

*

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by defishel

That's odd. I got the impression that the side on Albert would be another building and the corner of Lyon/Albert was still city-owned (or is it Claridge?). In terms of height, it's not bad. Though the parkette does seem a bit odd considering there's a giant park a block away from them.

The north-east corner is still owned by the City. Unless they use it as a bargaining chip for a Library, there's not much they (the City) can do with it. Might as well sell it to Broccolini for profit.

As for the park, I would prefer seeing it on the east side of the site, to break the Lyon Street canyon.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The north-east corner is still owned by the City. Unless they use it as a bargaining chip for a Library, there's not much they (the City) can do with it. Might as well sell it to Broccolini for profit.

Is that the one the city expropriated for LRT?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Is that the one the city expropriated for LRT?

Yes it is. Initial plan was to have a pedestrian tunnel from the station concourse under Queen and Lyon all the way to an entrance on that corner. They opted for the cheaper option of integrating the entrances to existing/future adjacent buildings.

[rocketphish]

Councillor wants proposed Slater redevelopment to include grocery store

Matthew Pearson, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: November 3, 2015 | Last Updated: November 3, 2015 6:36 PM EST

Somerset Coun. Catherine McKenney wants a developer to “do everything possible” to secure a grocery or hardware store on the ground floor of a Centretown property slated for redevelopment.

Broccolini Construction Inc. wants to build a 27-storey tower at 383 Slater St., replacing a two-storey building occupied by Alterna Savings and Credit Union.

The proposed development, which the planning committee will consider next week, would include 300 rental apartments, four storeys of underground parking and street-level space for commercial tenants.

McKenney doesn’t want to see another restaurant.

“Residents have expressed a strong desire for community-oriented commercial uses in their neighbourhood and this would go a long way to enhance the existing neighbourhood and provide important amenities for current and future residents,” she wrote in her comments on a staff report.

The developer hasn’t determined who the potential tenants will be and is aware of the request for a grocery store, the report says.

The closest supermarket now is at the corner of Bank and Somerset streets, about one kilometre away.

The downtown councillor also voiced her concern about the location of the entrance to the building’s parking garage off Bay Street, which would force vehicles to cross a bike lane on the east side of Bay.

The planning department supports the developer’s plan, which seeks permission for more height, larger commercial space and less landscaping. Planners say the proposal meets the test for highrise buildings and transit-oriented development.

As the proposed building represents the first phase of a multi-part development, McKenney wants a temporary park built with “substantial landscaping, shade and furniture” for residents to use until construction of the second phase begins.

mpearson@ottawacitizen.com
twitter.com/mpearson78

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...-grocery-store

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

The closest supermarket now is at the corner of Bank and Somerset streets, about one kilometre away.

Or Kowloon Supermarket at Somerset & Arthur.

A grocery store would probably be wise for the location but would be most beneficial for those living north of, say, Ligar or Nepean streets, as it still wouldn't be closer than either of the other two mentioned on Somerset for those south of those streets.

[AuxTown]

I was talking to one of the product reps at Hartman's (or whatever it is called now) the other day. He said that they are taking a HUGE hit since Sobey's opened. I wonder if our downtown core could sustain another such store? There are lots more people living downtown now but a lot of them use their cars to shop at places like Costco or the Superstores in Vanier and Westboro. I'm all for more retail, but not if a place like Hartman's has to close as a result.

[jimmyjones]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

I was talking to one of the product reps at Hartman's (or whatever it is called now) the other day. He said that they are taking a HUGE hit since Sobey's opened. I wonder if our downtown core could sustain another such store? There are lots more people living downtown now but a lot of them use their cars to shop at places like Costco or the Superstores in Vanier and Westboro. I'm all for more retail, but not if a place like Hartman's has to close as a result.

Whereas there is a dearth of any meaningful hardware stores in the area.
I like living downtown for the most part, but it's a real pain when you need to go to a computer store or hardware store.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

I was talking to one of the product reps at Hartman's (or whatever it is called now) the other day. He said that they are taking a HUGE hit since Sobey's opened. I wonder if our downtown core could sustain another such store? There are lots more people living downtown now but a lot of them use their cars to shop at places like Costco or the Superstores in Vanier and Westboro. I'm all for more retail, but not if a place like Hartman's has to close as a result.

Hartman's has always been on the pricey side, no? Maybe having Sobey's nearby will force them to finally compete for your business.

[MountainView]

I've been saying this for years (and mentioned it on this forum in a couple of different threads) that there needs to be a Canadian Tire in the central core. Sure, there are some Home Hardwares but they are small and are not a department store. I'm sure a CT would do well in the central core. Coventry is the closest - and also has the nearest Best Buy to downtown beside it as well.

[Vanier]

Originally Posted by jimmyjones

Whereas there is a dearth of any meaningful hardware stores in the area.
I like living downtown for the most part, but it's a real pain when you need to go to a computer store or hardware store.

Lowes will have a store at the former Target store on St. Laurent that is served by both the 7 and 14 bus routes. The renovations are already underway.

That will ease the dearth of hardware stores in the central-east core.