[waterloowarrior]

Developer: Richcraft
Architect: Roderick Lahey
Planning Consultant: FoTenn

Not sure if it's 22/24 or 24/26..... there are references to both sets of numbers

Proposed residential condominium development on a 3 storey townhouse podium that includes a restaurant (cafe) use with 2 residential towers 26 and 24 storeys in height (including podium element)\

http://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/appDetails.jsf?lang=en&appId=__8UV7EU

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6057/6289588105_0d5b474ea0_b.jpg

[Cre47]

Do like the top part. It's about time, there are tall (rather semi-tall) tower proposals for that area. Of course, the two main assets, being close to Algonquin and an intensification right near a transit station. I'm sure there will be some NIMBYISM on that project and probably something will be written on the Bulldog.

[kevinbottawa]

That area reminds me of the growing city centre in Thornhill. With these towers it'll look like it even more.

[McC]

now that's a proper-looking townhouse podium and point towers (for pure-residential, not mix use, of course, then the podium should be different..,), anyway, why has it been so hard to design some of these in this town? (and it's not a developer-specific thing, because Richcraft's Galleria site would have been a great location for townhouse-point-towers instead of the two massive slabs they built).

[Admiral Nelson]

It would be great to see these so close to a transit hub. Precisely what's needed.

I wonder when the other elements of the 2007 Centrepointe plan will be implemented.

[S-Man]

It is what's needed, in a big way - and the influx of population will probably spur new funding for the Baseline Station completion (Bob Chiarelli, are you there?)...
However, I see these towers being brought down to a stubby 12 storeys at the urging of impacted neighbours. And those neighbours won't be college students renting basement apartments on Baseline.

[O-Town Hockey]

It is what's needed, in a big way - and the influx of population will probably spur new funding for the Baseline Station completion (Bob Chiarelli, are you there?)...
However, I see these towers being brought down to a stubby 12 storeys at the urging of impacted neighbours. And those neighbours won't be college students renting basement apartments on Baseline.

I don't think the shadows from these buildings could possible touch another residential property so what could people be complaining about? If they're worried about traffic then they should move. Situating this type of development along two major arterials as well as adjacent to a major transit hub is ideal. Not to mention it is walking distance to Algonquin and a big shopping centre. This will be a great addition to the area.

[Uhuniau]

I don't think the shadows from these buildings could possible touch another residential property so what could people be complaining about?

Astronomical reality has never, to my knowledge, prevented an Entitled Ottawan from bitching about shadows, real or imagined. On one of the media reports about the Preston project (CBC? Citizen?) someone was whinging that the Italia tower would keep Preston street in shadow all day.

[S-Man]

While it sounds like myself and some others are knee-jerking this coming NIMBY outcry, the truth is: if any part of the building is visible at any time of year from a private residence, then that's a quality of life issue. Looming towers, and all that.

If at any point of the day at any time of the year a shadow encroaches even one inch onto said property - that's permanent shade and no blue sky. Vitamin D, etc. Sad, but I've seen it countless times for buildings even three storeys tall. Luckily, with this council and the location - which has little residential encroachment and is near all those good things, something close to this will be built.

It will just be annoying as the community group fights it tooth and nail. And I'd love to be proven wrong by a wall of silence from the Centrepointe neighbourhood, I really would.

[Harley613]

i always pictured centrepointe becoming a secondary cbd/residential high density area akin to scarborough or north york. it's the perfect spot for it. hopefully this is the first of many nice high density projects in this area.

[RTWAP]

I'm really pleased.

The facing side of Centrepointe Drive has a nice urban feel to it, with closely packed town homes and some nice walk-up businesses down the street. Kind of brownstone-like. But the other side of the street faces the solid back wall of a high school, and ... nothing. This will help to give the street a bit more of a feeling of completion and consistency.

[Uhuniau]

I'm really pleased.

The facing side of Centrepointe Drive has a nice urban feel to it, with closely packed town homes and some nice walk-up businesses down the street. Kind of brownstone-like. But the other side of the street faces the solid back wall of a high school, and ... nothing. This will help to give the street a bit more of a feeling of completion and consistency.

Speaking of which, why did the school boards start building such ugly, street-killing, neighbourhood-deadening schools?

Compare, say, the schools on Broadview Avenue, to bunkers like Lester B. Pearson.

[kevinbottawa]

These other renderings from the application are nice.

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Oql82CzNMkNGepcMoT85TnK9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/OdMNFh9fTTaeeGCyopFSiHK9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/7G-gxUTJFXnW0As8E8NQLHK9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/LKpULI2BslH2Zl9845eDd3K9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

[citizen j]

Speaking of which, why did the school boards start building such ugly, street-killing, neighbourhood-deadening schools?

Compare, say, the schools on Broadview Avenue, to bunkers like Lester B. Pearson.

I blame Bauhaus and Le Corbusier for making it so easy to copy their designs badly/cheaply. Machines for learning?

[Nepean]

I'm really pleased.

The facing side of Centrepointe Drive has a nice urban feel to it, with closely packed town homes and some nice walk-up businesses down the street. Kind of brownstone-like. But the other side of the street faces the solid back wall of a high school, and ... nothing. This will help to give the street a bit more of a feeling of completion and consistency.

I agree. I live off Centrepointe and I think this project will really improve the neighbourhood. Though based on the meeting that I attended last week on this project, I may be in the minority.

[Admiral Nelson]

I agree. I live off Centrepointe and I think this project will really improve the neighbourhood. Though based on the meeting that I attended last week on this project, I may be in the minority.

I'm also in Centrepointe, and I agree with you.

[MountainView]

These other renderings from the application are nice.

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Oql82CzNMkNGepcMoT85TnK9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/OdMNFh9fTTaeeGCyopFSiHK9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/7G-gxUTJFXnW0As8E8NQLHK9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/LKpULI2BslH2Zl9845eDd3K9JBxE5W8NprrU4iUPVXA?feat=directlink

Just to make it easier for everyone to see... thanks for finding the links!

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-vrLTJRR0dR4/TrBmB0eF75I/AAAAAAAABT8/JHPXPu_uSII/s678/newcondo3.jpg
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-r_ipkCsfi3U/TrBmB9ZGmFI/AAAAAAAABUA/57XteCUOeXA/s677/newcondo2.jpg

[Ottawan]

:previous:

Really nice street-level interaction!

I think if one takes developments like this in context, looking at the forest (what projects ultimately are being proposed and approved now vs. 15 years ago) rather than focusing on the trees (NIMBY reactions to individual projects, suburplosive requests of developers in the suburbs) we are starting to see how amalgamation is actually working at what I always thought would be its greatest purpose: allowing for a planning vison for the city as a whole to flourish, and specifically a planning vision focused on intensification.

[kevinbottawa]

Just to make it easier for everyone to see... thanks for finding the links!

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-vrLTJRR0dR4/TrBmB0eF75I/AAAAAAAABT8/JHPXPu_uSII/s678/newcondo3.jpg
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-r_ipkCsfi3U/TrBmB9ZGmFI/AAAAAAAABUA/57XteCUOeXA/s677/newcondo2.jpg

Thanks!

[eternallyme]

Excellent proposal being near Baseline Station. While some NIMBYism might be expected, there is already higher-density commercial and institutional in the area. APPROVE it.

[Nepean]

I attended a board meeting of the Centrepointe Community Association this past Tuesday that discussed this project. I would estimate that roughly 30 people attended, including Coun. Chiarelli who was there in listening mode.

After this meeting I was left with two main impressions. First, many residents in Centrepointe have the same concerns as other neighbourhoods in the city who are facing development: i.e. worries about increased parking, impact on property values, concerns about the height of the proposed building, etc.

Second, notwithstanding these concerns, it appears that a good part of the community realizes that something is going to be built at this site regardless of what they think, so instead of fighting a losing battle, they will start imposing demands on the developer in order to ensure that the community gets some benefit out of this project. To this end, a discussion on s. 37 benefits took place during the meeting.

A key word in the meeting was "negotiation." Without a doubt, some participants at the board meeting didn't like the development at all, and expressed full-blown NIMBY sentiments. Others, however, seem to feel that a better approach was to work with the developer.

For instance, one participant said that the community had to "get over itself" and to accept that something was going to be built on this site. So instead of simply saying "no," a better approach was to list the community's concerns, pass them on the developer, and then see if the project could bring greater benefits to the community.

[waterloowarrior]

appealed to the OMB

[S-Man]

Jesus. Is there some divine rule that anything new in Ottawa must be appealed to the OMB? Maybe the province is in the red the way it is because it has to staff that thing day and night to handle the appeals coming in from Ottawa.:rolleyes:

No, seriously - I just did a tour of the updated threads on this site, and with the exception of two projects already underway, absolutely everything had been appealed to the OMB.

Three storeys in Westboro. OMB
14 storeys in Westboro. OMB.
23 storeys in Centretown. OMB
And so on and so forth.

Then again, Kennie Greygrey wrote a great column last year about the impending destruction of this valuable low-density suburban heritage extremifiplosionification blah blah blah......

[waterloowarrior]

Jesus. Is there some divine rule that anything new in Ottawa must be appealed to the OMB? Maybe the province is in the red the way it is because it has to staff that thing day and night to handle the appeals coming in from Ottawa.:rolleyes:

No, seriously - I just did a tour of the updated threads on this site, and with the exception of two projects already underway, absolutely everything had been appealed to the OMB.

Three storeys in Westboro. OMB
14 storeys in Westboro. OMB.
23 storeys in Centretown. OMB
And so on and so forth.

Then again, Kennie Greygrey wrote a great column last year about the impending destruction of this valuable low-density suburban heritage extremifiplosionification blah blah blah......

Anyone can appeal to the OMB... all you need is your $125 cheque :) well actually you need to participate at some point in the process as well.

This Centrepointe one was likely appealed by the applicant for a lack of decision by the City within the planning act timeframe... same with Soho Italia.

[waterloowarrior]

registration page... fancy top is gone
http://www.richcraft.com/condos_centrepointe.html

http://www.richcraft.com/Images/comingsoon/centrepointe.gif

[MountainView]

It's so bland. I prefer the old proposal with the two towers. I guess this one is shorter but has more units overall?

[kevinbottawa]

The previous proposal was a lot better. They really changed it for the worse.

[McC]

that often happens with Richcraft.

[Ottawan]

The previous proposal was a lot better. They really changed it for the worse.

Absolutely. A very concrete example of obsession over height can have a real negative impact. There is little doubt in my mind that this will cast more shadows and obstruct more views than the taller proposal. It also makes the podium townhouses appear more fake.

That said, I still am a fan of the townhouse design. Hopefully the execute that well, as it is a redeeming feature of the development.

[J.OT13]

It's fine for the area, bland but not ugly (in terms of architecture).

[waterloowarrior]

recommended for approval .. revised height of 49m / 15 fl * 3
http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=2406&doctype=agenda&itemid=122489

revised drawings are also up on devapps
http://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/appDetails.jsf?lang=en&appId=__8UV7EU

[MountainView]

I still prefer the idea of 24&26fl towers over 3 X 15fl towers. The architecture and look was much nicer in the previous concept. Plus 3 towers will block much more sunlight / cast shadows / views. Sigh...

[Nepean]

Last night, I went to the AGM of the Centrepointe Community Association (CCA), where this project was discussed. Councillor Chiarelli made a presentation and the CCA President also spoke. As expected, residents raised many traditional concerns: e.g. parking problems; increased traffic; height; a decrease in property values in homes in the immediate vicinity of this project. (The latter was a concern, given that Richcraft has esimated that all three buildings could take up to five years to build from start to finish).

What seemed to be unique, however, was that the CCA did not start from an inflexible position. Don't get me wrong, if most local residents had their way, they would opt for the full implementation of the Centrepointe Community Design Plan that was passed by council several years ago. For many, the Richcraft project goes against the spirit of the CDP.

However, the CCA also went out of its way to say that Richcraft had taken their concerns seriously, and that discussions were productive. While this was not a kumbaya session in praise of developers, local residents seemed to realize that development would occur, and that they had to be constructive in their feedback, rather than yelling "No!" at the top of their lungs.

My takeaway is that many local residents are opposed to this project, while realizing that it is not productive to fight a pointless battle. As such, the CCA actively engaged with the developer this fall and made several productive suggestions. For instance, they have requested that a pathway link the buildings to Baseline Station, in order to promote the use of public transit, which would address concerns about traffic. As well, the CCA has asked that any paths be open to the public.

According to Coun. Chiarelli, this project is a model for how a community and a developer should engage. This doesn't mean everyone got what the wanted (in fact, nobody got 100%) but at least it seems that everyone was left with the feeling that their voices were heard and taken into account. In short, an interesting meeting.

[McC]

glad to hear it, we've been trying to work towards a similar approach in Mechanicsville, but it is very very difficult! And on all sides: there are residents who want to fight and WIN, developers who may value "presenting" more than "listening" in their "community engagement," and not least of all, City planning staff who have seemed to be very un-interested in working with the people who live in the part of the city being "planned" by a never-ending series of one-off zoning requests. Politics!

[Dado]

Absolutely. A very concrete example of obsession over height can have a real negative impact. There is little doubt in my mind that this will cast more shadows and obstruct more views than the taller proposal. It also makes the podium townhouses appear more fake.

That said, I still am a fan of the townhouse design. Hopefully the execute that well, as it is a redeeming feature of the development.


I still prefer the idea of 24&26fl towers over 3 X 15fl towers. The architecture and look was much nicer in the previous concept. Plus 3 towers will block much more sunlight / cast shadows / views. Sigh...

Given the location, there's not too much to shadow most of the time, and what impacts of shadowing there are is likely to be reduced with three shorter buildings (i.e. long morning shadows). It's an SSP fiction that fewer taller buildings always have fewer shadow impacts than more shorter ones. If there is little in the immediate vicinity, then the shadow impacts are related to shadow length and not shadow girth.

Three buildings also means less useless "parky" stuff at ground level.

I suspect that the reduction in architectural features is due to the developer discovering more interest in the development than anticipated, but probably at the mid-price level where aesthetics are less of a selling feature. Developers only add architectural flourishes if they think they need them to make the building more profitable; if a developer can make more profit by not having architectural flourishes then that is what they will build. The idea that taller buildings result in extra architectural flourishes is another one of those SSP fictions that is not grounded in any kind of economic rationality. In other words, the developer may first have proposed extra architectural flourishes initially because this site is out at Centrepointe where they anticipated less latent demand, so the flourishes (and height) were added because that's what they thought they needed to attract buyers, especially high-end buyers. But if they subsequently found out that the extras were not helping at all as most of the interest was from mid-price point buyers and may just have been driving up costs, then out they went.

That may also partly explain the switch from two to three buildings: you're not selling views of the Ottawa River ensconced in Westboro, after all. You're likely selling to people interested in better transit service to downtown, proximity to major retail and maybe the opportunity for student rental accommodations. Taller buildings aren't costless and if high-end buyers are not interested, then reducing the height while adding an extra building could make a lot of sense. Moreover, three buildings rather than two allows for the construction to be phased over a longer period.