The Sky [845 Carling Ave] | 73/155/191m | 18/45/55f | Approved
 

dow honda preliminary proposal - 2x 48 fl...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BGUQ8FeCUAAhgCE.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8099/8...02facda1_b.jpg

https://twitter.com/davidreevely/sta...77973237452801

Graziani and Corazza Architects

http://www.gc-architects.com/

I was joking when I posted this! :haha:

I had heard a rumour not too long ago that Richcraft would be pushing for two towers at 55 fl for this site. Not far off.

I haven't kept too close track of what's going on, but it seems like there might be a bit of a tower cluster forming in that area.

Is this real or am I dreaming? Not one, but two 48 story buildings! I'm skeptical that these will get approved, but I sincerely hope it happens. This will be a really great place to live within the next few years.

Anymore details on this project? Are both towers located on the same plot or across the street from each other? How is Richcraft for buildings? My mother and I were talking about the projects, and while we agree we don't like Claridge, she said she doesn't like Richcraft (I at least like La Galleria 1/2's exterior).

In any case, I'm happy with the height. :)

Some time last year I said to myself I'd never see a proposal over 40 floors in Ottawa in my life time. Now we have three. This is a big milestone.

I'm speechless, could this really happen? Even minus a few stories, this would be monumental for Ottawa.

Groans of horror? Are these towers going to be inhabited by boulder-throwing cyclopses and flaming demons or something?

Really hope this happens!

Seems almost too good to be true for this city ugh

Campeau did try to propose a 42 storey tower downtown in late 80s, but that went nowhere. However this is far away from the Parliamentary precinct and its height restrictions.

updated Carling/Preston proposed/approved/construction projects (I'll colour code them next time)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8532/8...c6e63011_b.jpg

edit: added Norman St and Rochestor.. thanks Brent!

Exciting! Although it seems like the taller buildings make it seem less dense?

Don't forget the condos on Norman and Rochester (assuming they get the go ahead) to add to that density.

I'm hopeful that the CIBC building will be replaced with a taller condo, along with everything from Preston to Rochester along Adelaide.

This is very exciting. I sincerely hope that this doesn't end up with 4 tall towers (by Ottawa standards) all the same height. It looks great with the varied heights pictured.

Edit: Waterloo, I posted your rendering in the Canada section; I hope you don't mind.

no problem O-Town... I updated the original render with the Norman and Rochester proposals as well.

Not the biggest fan of G+C but looking forward to some more detailed drawings/renders of this one!

I am not opposed to tall buildings in this area but several things spring to mind.

1. Some of these buildings are on very small footings. I look at the footprint for the Claridge Icon and wonder how it will ever support 40+ stories. I believe this area used to be swamp, so I wonder how easy it will be to keep these buildings straight.

2. The infrastructure is not there. Roads are definitely not there so all these people better take transit. But this leads to other problems. Try catching a bus from Carling and Preston to go East. The 101 and 102 make all sorts of irritating twists and turns before they get on the transitway. The Carling intersection with Bronson is already a nightmare at rush hours.

3. Expansion of the O-train is still years away, and accomodating this kind of population probably requires a direct connection to downtown (no transfer at Bayview).

4. Blasting required to (eventually) twin the O-train track will wreak havoc on the foundations of these tall condominiums (which are already supported by very small footings).

5. A tall building at the Dow Honda site and/or the Civic Parking lot (champagne and Carling) will likely make it very difficult to make a future connection between the Bayview/Carling O-train and a Westbound Carling LRT (which would likely need to be a no-transfer connection).

Q#1: probably piles and caps, or a combination of piles, caps, rock anchors, and grade beams, depending on the geo-technical details.
Where there's a will, there's a way.

Q#2: Not to mention the "get out and push" routine at Bronson and Carling in a snow storm. I would like to see the city address a solution to this asap as well.

Q#3: This might be a 'chicken and egg' scenario. and unfortunately the 'build access and they will come' mentality doesn't usually pan out. (example: Mirabel airport) Usually the density comes first, with the right plan in place, and the access will follow after several years of headaches for the early adopters. Can you imagine the uproar if the city built a train to service, for example, Carp or Russell today in anticipation of future development?

Q#4: I would be more concerned about the older buildings to be honest. The new earthquake and deflection requirements will more than cover the new buildings from the blasting (structurally). The noise and annoyance is another issue altogether though.

Q#5: I have no expertise here - but certainly seems like a valid point.

the expansion of the O-Train will be done this year. Construction will take place this summer. The new trains will be received this May. They are aiming for 2014 to get them running after testing, training, etc. In any case, these buildings are years away from being finished (once approved + construction).

I think when JM1 is referring to expansion of the o-train, he means doubletracking throughout the o-train line (which would involve substantial blasting and tunnel work by Carling and Preston), not just the addition of another passing track and augmentation of the number of trains running.

Is that plan for next decade, what's the plan? I guess the question then is, can the O-Train handle the new population with 8 minutes service?

The question is more like, when the O-Train eventually needs to be double-tracked, do they have a plan for shutting down the line for a couple of years while they do the work? Seems to me that they are allowing development at a scale based on transit potential that isn't even all there yet. The O-Train went from pilot project to permanent with the minimal of investment — the city is flying on the seat of their pants on this one.

I see what looks like a giant blank wall on the left tower. That better not be a blank wall!

Looked more like balconies closer up.

They should increase from 48 to >50 to get over that hump!

Seriously, that area might be the new CBD...

Glad to hear it.

The aesthetics don't do much for me, though. Looks like some kid ran out of one colour of Lego and then started using the rest that was left over. For such tall towers the form and visual impact is really mediocre and incomplete. I hope it evolves to something better.

The O-Train cut is in bedrock, so bedrock is not that deep.

A bigger problem is the amount of parking that is required, leading to deep foundations for all the extra underground parking levels. This thing is going to act like a giant pit that will constantly have to be pumped out.

I would suggest that the passenger loads of students transferring at Bayview right now far exceed anything that these buildings could produce. Moreover, this will be going in the "non-peak" direction as far as the O-Train is concerned (the O-Train's peak and non-peak directions are related to Carleton University, so its peak directions of travel are towards it in the morning and away from it in the afternoon).

Can probably be done with rock hammers... and since the foundations of the buildings will be so deep anyway, it likely won't matter one bit.

Amazingly, the City might actually be doing something about that - though at the last minute, of course, despite being warned about it by numerous activist types whom the City never listens to when they raise an issue only to do what they recommended years later at greater cost, inconvenience, grief, etc. The City did try to secure a corner triangle, though whether that has been successful I can't recall.

I'd of thought the main traffic in that direction was Carleton students going to Carling. I know of a fair number of people who do that, but I do suppose my circle of friends is too small a sample size to work with. Still I do wonder how many of these condos are going to be rented out to students.

Not enough setback from the podium or good street interaction for my urban tastes... The design itself is meh IMO, but I don't really mind what's up there as long as the base is soundly designed.

Lots of interesting conjecture as to what may happen. I tend to deal with facts.

Having said that, I work in the area and exit the Carling Stn to walk to work every day. The site had a soil sample drill rig at the rear north end of the property. Drill holes are being done in the parking areas. I saw one capped drill hole today next to the rig and assume they will be continueing to do more over the next few days or week.

Quite a fascinating proposal. Public transit aside, I think realigning the driveway up close to Carling, then back again where the lake rounds out towards the south-east would make a PERFECT opportunity to create a boardwalk/cafes/bistro type of environment along the lake. Someplace for all those new residents to take in a coffee along Dows Lake. Perhaps a pedestrian overpass from the north side of Carling/Preston and newly aligned Driveway to provide access to the lakeside?

How about the tulips? Will anyone think of the tulips?!? :D

Haha, that's awesome - someone from Richcraft must have seen your post

Not to mention there's still no (solid) plan for a grocery store in this area.

Completely agree the O-train needs to be upgraded sooner rather than later. Carleton students are packed in there like sardines in the morning.

:) Whether the Col By runs alongside Carling or alongside the lake, there will still be the same amount of Tulip space. Far more picturesque closer to the water I would think....
oops, just realized, I'm confusing Col By with QE Driveway. I meant move the QED up to along Carling then back down. That will also allow the removal of that short road at the end of Preston...even MORE room for Tulips!

That little strech at the end of Preston is actually a pretty important connector between Preston/Carling and Prince of Wales. You can take it out, but then how do you get to Prince of Wales?

It's simple. Make the intersection AT Carling. POW would end at that intersection and QED begins. It would mean a rather sharp turn on POW just after crossing the train tracks to head up towards Carling/Preston, but it would not be any worse then the significant turn further south on POW closer to Baseline.

A smaller, service-vehicle only road would extend from current POW to Dows Lake Pavilion.

Right... I'm not sure what your point is though.

My comment was in response to another comment that development around Carling Station would result in more passengers heading north in the morning to Bayview (i.e. to downtown and other workplaces) and south in the evening, and that this was somehow a major concern. But since the main direction of travel on the O-Train in the morning is from Bayview (and Carling) to Carleton (and Greenboro to Carleton), any additional Bayview-oriented passenger loads from development around Carling is not going to strain the O-Train - just make better use of it. Simply put, the northbound trains that arrive at Carling in the morning are not all that full, having discharged much of their passengers at Carleton. Anyone we can get to use those trains at Carling (or indeed Gladstone, if built) is a net benefit to the system.

That actually could add strain to the O-Train, though it depends on where else they'd be and get to class otherwise too.

So this would be what? A five-pointed intersection (clockwise looking north: Preston, Carling EB, QED, PoW, Carling WB)?

The sacrilegious amongst us might suggest just continuing QED around Dows Lake through/past HMCS Carleton, over the O-Train tunnel through the arboretum and finally up to that parking lot/roundabout at Prince of Wales. Just keep QED and PoW separate, at least to cars.

I don't know if the Arnon site on the other side of the tracks was actually approved for 26 storeys, but if I were them I'd propose something a lot higher now.

based on the tweets from the meeting it sounded like Arnon was trying to buy additional land in the area so perhaps we'll see another proposal soon. here's the thread for anyone looking for background http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show....php?p=5925660

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8099/8...02facda1_b.jpg

lots more images here
http://postmediaottawacitizen.files....ichcraft48.pdf

source: David Reevely's Greater Ottawa blog
http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2013/...8-storey-idea/

The design is giving me visual indigestion :yuck:

The third midget sibling looks like it was bullied and robbed of stuff and the other two are fighting over the spoils. Or maybe it's a couple going through a divorce, one gets to keep the child because the other had an affair with Claridge's Icon. Come on, if you are going to build the tallest buildings in the city you are writing a story on the skyline.

Not a fan either, it's trying to do too much...

the elevations have a 1:800 scale... anyone have a ruler handy?

I really like this. A central square with O-Train access through one of the towers.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-x.../Richcraft.png

Even though it's more on the safe side, I don't think it looks that bad. Certainly better than the boring redesign of SOHO Italia. I think the design is fine for a <50 storey building.

It would be great to have a real showstopper downtown that's around 60 to 70 storeys, something that would define Ottawa along with the Parliament buildings.

I proposed a while back to hook the Airport Parkway and south Bronson into Booth and Rochester (which become a one-way couplet) with a new interchange at the Queensway, while closing the Bronson ramps and narrowing it to 2 lanes throughout, sending Bronson directly into Carleton University. Relocating the traffic into an extreme-density area seems more feasible now...

Are there any buildings in the CBD from the early towers that are in condition worth demolition? Maybe restore the height limit there and try to reclaim the downtown...I think we are catching up to a 40-year-old error, I kinda wish now buildings in the CBD were height-limited again...

My calculation is about 540ft/164.5m to its highest point / roof, does that seem about right?

^seems reasonable! if that's the case it would squeeze into the top 50 proposals in Canada list! http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=179543

Looking at this pic makes you feel sorry for Tunney's Pasture. I'd love to see a skyline like the one developing at Preston/Carling over at Tunney's. It has so much potential.