Tribeca | 84.5m | 27 fl x 2 | Completed

[eemy]

Originally Posted by trueviking

winnipeg is a long shot for sure, what sets it apart is the fact that construction costs are half of what they are in the other cities and that it is proposed to be a stand alone building, not the base of condo or office development like in each other proposal....the government might not love a national museum being part of "portrait gallery manor"...but who knows.

I don't necessarily mind it moving from Ottawa, but it is precisely this bidding process that I find embarrassing. If that is Winnipeg's idea, I'll vote for it in a second; a national museum doesn't belong as some sort of side amenity for a commercial highrise development.

[lrt's friend]

couldnt agree more....an institution like a national museum should be located where it is most appropriate, not sold to the highest bidder....i think we all know where harper will go with this though.

i just wanted to mention that winnipeg also submitted a proposal...not sure why it was left out of the article....the city is turning over a prime piece of land near where the human rights museum is being built...

winnipeg is a long shot for sure, what sets it apart is the fact that construction costs are half of what they are in the other cities and that it is proposed to be a stand alone building, not the base of condo or office development like in each other proposal....the government might not love a national museum being part of "portrait gallery manor"...but who knows.

winnipeg's site within the city seems to be more prominent than the others, but its still in winnipeg, so that is obviously a strike against.

i just dont want it to go to an alberta city.

Will the feds be paying for this prime real estate at fair market value? If not, again Winnipeg is trying to subsidize a federal project.

I have never been fond of the Metcalfe Street location in Ottawa. It certainly begs for some sort of development, but it is kind of out of the way from the other major tourist attractions. The best location was the original location, right on Wellington Street facing Parliament. If the gallery is not going there, are we going to have to look at a boarded up site for 10 or 20 or 30 years?

All I can say, this whole process has been designed to 'appear' to be fair, while we all know that it has been designed for Calgary to have the winning bid. This all reflects the movement of political and economic power from Ontario to Alberta. I just don't know why we have let Harris Conservatives get into federal cabinet to actually facilitate this after the majority of Ontario voters had thrown them out of office at the provincial level.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Will the feds be paying for this prime real estate at fair market value? If not, again Winnipeg is trying to subsidize a federal project.

I have never been fond of the Metcalfe Street location in Ottawa. It certainly begs for some sort of development, but it is kind of out of the way from the other major tourist attractions. The best location was the original location, right on Wellington Street facing Parliament. If the gallery is not going there, are we going to have to look at a boarded up site for 10 or 20 or 30 years?

All I can say, this whole process has been designed to 'appear' to be fair, while we all know that it has been designed for Calgary to have the winning bid. This all reflects the movement of political and economic power from Ontario to Alberta. I just don't know why we have let Harris Conservatives get into federal cabinet to actually facilitate this after the majority of Ontario voters had thrown them out of office at the provincial level.

I like the Metcalfe site, and I hope Claridge manages a signature building here one way or another, but it is IMO a great location for a national institution. It is the second best place for the Portrait Gallery after the original Wellington site. Why do I say that?

It is downtown so it's easy to walk to. The fact that it is NOT within the traditional federal precinct is what I like most about it. It will make tourists flow south and into the real city. Having it as part of a mixed use building is a perfect blend of town and crown in an age where Ottawa should be establishing itself as a model big city.

And I don't think we should concede defeat to other competitors. Ottawa has a stronger candidacy than the Globe and Mail thinks. The media by definition is there to stir things up.

[trueviking]

it should be in ottawa, but it should not be attached to a condo....they should build the original proposal in my opinion.

certain national museums can be outside of ottawa, but this isnt one of them...

[AuxTown]

A description of the Portrait Gallery of Canada's collection:
(from http://www.portraits.gc.ca/)

The Portrait Gallery of Canada is a program of Library and Archives Canada which has gathered the largest group of national portraits in the country: more than 20,000 paintings, drawings and prints, 4 million photographs, several thousand caricatures, and ten thousand medals and philatelic items. The collection contains works by well-known professional artists as well as images made by ordinary people, and includes portraits by both Canadian and international artists.

Some of the collection's most significant portraits record the earliest European contact with Aboriginal peoples. One unique treasure is a small painting of a Beothuk woman, Desmasduit, the only portrait made from life of a now-extinct people. Other highlights are 19th-century Canadian portraits and 20th-century photographs such as Yousuf Karsh. Caricature, that marvellous counterpart to honorific portraiture, also forms an important part of the collection.

The collection has grown through the generous donations of private individuals and judicious purchases made in Canada and abroad. Long a resource for researchers, the collection shows its public face through exhibitions.

If this collection doesn't belong in Ottawa I don't know what does?? It's too bad that Yousuf Karsh isn't alive today because I'm sure he would have a lot to say about locating this great gallery in Calgary. He was a proud Ottawan for many years and spent much of his career taking photographs of famous Canadians (and internationals) right here in the capital. He displayed much of his work at his gallery on Sparks Street. This gallery belongs at 100 Wellington and I'd be interested to hear reasons to do otherwise (that don't involve $$).


(The site at 100 Wellington, Karsh in front of Parliament, Karsh portrait of Winston Churchill)

[p_xavier]

À propos editorial from denley:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...5-4572c8565491


Best quote:

City staff have determined, for no compelling reason, that the towers should be 20 and 24 storeys. What's the point? Look up from the sidewalk, and 20 storeys will seem about the same as 27.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

À propos editorial from denley:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...5-4572c8565491


Best quote:

Admitedly, Denley is correct. Which is really worse? Two "tall" condo towers and a Portrait Gallery, or a parking lot?

[AuxTown]

Worst case scenario is portrait gallery in Cowtown, no condo towers, an empty parking lot with no prospects, and Dianne Holmes happy about this for some reason.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

Worst case scenario is portrait gallery in Cowtown, no condo towers, an empty parking lot with no prospects, and Dianne Holmes happy about this for some reason.

Man!! well said!

[AuxTown]

A couple of interesting quotes from The Ottawa Citizen in January in favour of the gallery moving to the old US Embassy. (link to article)

Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien requested the extension in a letter to government officials in order to allow a rumoured five Ottawa bids to be pulled together with city support.

Yesterday, his spokesman, Pat Uguccioni, said the mayor is pleased the deadline has been extended, but that the mayor maintains locating the gallery outside Ottawa is going cost tax payers $50 million extra over the course of 50 years.

In the letter, Mr. O'Brien said this on top of the $11 million already spent to get the former embassy ready to host the gallery.

"(The numbers) would seem to not only negate any potential savings through a public-private partnership in another city but also to significantly increase the cost for the taxpayers of Canada," the mayor said.

"This is a collection that shows the history of this country and Canadians who played roles in that history, and they are proposing to have a private developers deeply involved in what happens to this collection," he said.

"It's the privatization of our heritage, and I think people who feel embarrassed about this are right to feel that way."

[waterloowarrior]

Talks on portrait gallery proposal stall
Council to vote on downtown proposal Wednesday
Jake RupertOttawa Citizen
Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Talks between top city officials and developer Claridge Homes over a proposal to to build a home for the Portrait Gallery of Canada broke down Tuesday.

The parties couldn't negotiate their way out of a Catch-22: city planning staff will only approve two residential towers for the downtown site if Claridge gets federal blessing for the gallery, and Claridge president Bill Malhotra says he can only get financing to continue if he has the city's unconditional approval.

The company initially wanted the city to approve two 27-storey residential towers along with the gallery, but Claridge president Bill Malhotra said he would accept 20- and 24-storey towers on the site on Metcalfe Street, which is what city staff recommend.

City council is to vote on Claridge's proposal today.

"We have to get what we have to get or otherwise, 'Good bye,' that's it," Mr. Malhotra said. "I'm not asking for anything special, just what is needed for this to work."

After a day with Mayor Larry O'Brien, several councillors and planning staff, Mr. Malhotra said he doesn't think some city officials understand the risk his company is taking on the project, and that banks won't finance something like this with "unreasonable conditions" increasing risk.

After the talks with Mr. Malhotra, the mayor said he would support the company's position. He said if the company didn't win the right to host the gallery, the project should continue with the gallery space devoted to some other public project.

"The (Portrait Gallery of Canada) should be located in our nation's capital," Mr. O'Brien said in a memo to councillors on the issue. "The City of Ottawa needs to put its best foot forward and enter into a solid partnership with a developer that will help us succeed."

Earlier this month, by a vote of six to two, the city planning committee voted to keep current density rules for the site, allowing only half the amount of residential space the company wants. The committee also voted to make approval of the development contingent on the company winning the right to host the gallery.

Somerset Councillor Diane Holmes led the charge, but she has since relented a bit. Tuesday, she said in the interest of keeping the gallery bid alive, she will propose towers of 15 and 17 storeys.

The gallery was originally planned to go into the former United States embassy building on Wellington Street across from Parliament Hill, but the Harper government cancelled that project last year, citing escalating costs, then announced a competition between Canadian cities and developers to host the gallery. It is not known how many other cities will bid.

Liberal Senator Jerry Grafstein is pushing ahead with an amendment to the
National Archives Act that would force the government to locate the building in the capital region. His bill goes to a second reading next week.

"For me, it's a mission of patriotism, and I cringe that this isn't being taken seriously."

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...dc9412&k=35530

[eemy]

Perhaps the Concert Hall could go there instead if when Calgary or Edmonton are awarded the Portrait Gallery.

[AuxTown]

Senator's bill would force portrait gallery to be in Ottawa
Last Updated: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 | 4:20 AM ET Comments1Recommend3CBC News
An Ottawa senator has proposed a law that would make it illegal to locate the Portrait Gallery of Canada in Calgary, Winnipeg, Montreal — or any other city outside the National Capital Region.

Senator Jerry Grafstein's bill, which will have its second reading in the Senate next week, would amend the Library and Archives of Canada Act, requiring the gallery to be located in Ottawa, rather than any of the other nine cities competing for the museum.

"Governments have to respond to bills. They can stall it, they can reject it, but they have to respond to it. They cannot ignore it," Grafstein said Tuesday.

He argued that the gallery displaying works from the country's portrait collection needs to be close to the special building operated by the national archives where the entire collection is stored — located in Gatineau, Que., directly across the river from Ottawa.

In addition, it should be where it can attract visitors already there to see other national collections.

Grafstein was the first to suggest the gallery be housed in the historic former U.S. Embassy on Wellington Street, across from Parliament Hill, where it was originally slated to open in 2005.

Even though that site is no longer in the running and the federal government is holding a competition among nine cities to host the museum, Grafstein said he still has hope that the portrait gallery will end up in Ottawa.

"It's been an arduous voyage here. It has. But my heart beats eternal. I'm an optimist about this. Sooner or later, we will have a portrait gallery in Ottawa. We will."

Grafstein's bill needs the approval of both the Senate and the House of Commons in order to become law.

Meanwhile, Ottawa City Council was scheduled to vote Wednesday on a zoning change that will determine whether an Ottawa developer will bid for the portrait gallery.

Claridge Homes wants to provide space for the gallery in a proposed pair of 27-storey towers on Metcalfe Street. Many councillors have said the buildings are too high for the area.

The portrait gallery was announced by the Liberal government in 2001, and was to open in 2005 in the former American embassy building at an estimated cost of $22 million.

However, the project's cost grew to $45 million and its opening was delayed until at least 2007.

After Stephen Harper's Conservative government launched a review of the project in 2006, rumours began circulating that the gallery might move to Calgary.

In November 2007, the government announced that it wanted Halifax, Quebec City, Montreal, Ottawa-Gatineau, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver to bid for the gallery.

The cities have until May 16 to submit their proposals.

(from http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2008/04...wa-080423.html)

[Kitchissippi]

I agree with that move. The government should not be allowed to move national institutions for absolutely no reason, and especially "auction" them off to bidders.

Sure, there should be other national museums outside of Ottawa, but let Calgary come up with its own concept (like a Canadian Museum of Energy) and apply for federal funding and recognition, much like Winnipeg has with the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

[waterloowarrior]

edit: see next page

so we get two 20+ storey towers downtown no matter what... nice! perhaps, as Jeremy said, the concert hall could go there if the gallery doesn't go through

[AuxTown]

This is great! Diane Holmes can go somewhere and cry about this now. I think it's actually kind of good that the towers are a little shorter than Place Bell so that it will offer a bit of height diversity to the skyline when looking from the East. The biggest problem Ottawa has is not necessarily the height restriction (although it is a big issue) it's the fact that our entire CBD is practically the same height. For example, it is looking much better these days from the West now that we have The Gardens and Lebreton I to really contrast how tall PDV, Crowne Plaza, and Minto Place really are. Now let's get some decent renderings of the project to come!

[m0nkyman]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

Now let's get some decent renderings of the project to come!

And by decent, we mean both larger so that we can actually see it, but also that the project itself is decent.

[ajldub]

This senate-proposed bill is our best chance.

[AuxTown]

I'm rooting for that senate bill just as much as the next guy, but I'm just happy that this project is likely going ahead. We may lose the Portrait Gallery but there are all kinds of other (and likely more usefull) things that could go in it's place. How about a new Ottawa Public Library main branch? A concert hall for the Chamber Music Society anyone? Couldn't we use a new community centre for Centretown (Bronson Centre sucks)? That parking lot couldn't disappear faster IMO.

[Mille Sabords]

to city council for doing the right thing. Our city is emerging from the dark ages, at last.

We are not going to lose the Portrait Gallery. It will go here, in the Claridge complex. The Concert Hall will go to the Morguard site.