Downtown Sidestreet Retail
 

There's an interesting article by Eric Darwin at Spacing Ottawa on this subject:

http://spacingottawa.ca/2011/09/08/h...from-the-city/

Both the article and the comments are worth reading, and the topic may be an interesting one for some discussion here as well. I like the way that Darwin does not flinch at taking on some sacred cows: namely, criticising Charlesfort. While I generally like Charlesfort projects, Darwin raises an interesting point about their ground-level interaction.

Where I think the article is dead wrong is about the Mondrian, which is extremely lively at grade (at least along Bank, and even if it is because of a Shoppers).

I think the reason Mondrian was mentioned was more so that it was an example of the vertical equivalent of locating parking in front of buildings.

But it's carried off quite well. I've had to talk people into believing that's a parking garage above the Shoppers Ubiquity Mart.

Speaking of Shoppers, why is it some locations seem to be immune from those god-awful "lifestyle posters" that plague others, most conspicuously the friggin' Rideau Centre?

I'm not going to blame Charlesfort or other developers, when the city and the local councillor actively oppose having ground floor retail on streets not deemed to be a mainstreet.
and the zoning bylaw for residential areas also limits retail: http://ottawa.ca/residents/bylaw/a_z...dex_en-05.html

I know for the new Rideau Street one it was made a condition of site plan that they not have them. So if ever you see a Shopper's going in, call the councillor to have them require they be not allowed.

Our zoning bylaw is crap, and that councillor is crap. That's why Ottawa ends up full of crap. Or fuller of crap.

While condo retail works well on "main streets" I'm not sure I would agree that retail on side streets adds much to downtown. You don't often get popular businesses that generate pedestrian traffic or serve local residents, but small niche businesses that invest little in the appearance of their stores, are hardly ever open and go bankrupt frequently, leaving an eyesore. There are a few exceptions. I think a restaurant or coffee shop facing Nepean would have done well at the Charlesfort building.

Restaurants are going to have a harder time finding locations as condos go up, as the only eating establishments allowed under condos are ones that have minimal cooking like sushi or sub shops.

What do you mean by this?

I can't help but think of Milestone's and Metropolitain in 700 Sussex, Clocktower in Westboro Station, the restaurant in the GCTC building, etc...

Is there a bylaw? Or do you mean that the condo boards won't allow them?

On the first two examples you cite, 700 Sussex and Westboro Station, the restaurants are in low-rise purpose-built structures adjoining the building. There's definitely a by-law that governs what can go under a mixed use building, and it's probably related to issues of ventilation and working with open flames.

Economically, a city needs those. It needs spaces for businesses (and other organizations) to try. And fail. Or succeed, as the case may be.

If we fail to build (or even allow) such spaces, we are stifling future economic growth and diversity.

Centretown side streets, esp. between Kent and Bank, are littered with numerous small office and retail spaces, many of which have (or have had) stable, long-term existences.

Utter madness. There are restaurants in hotels, which for any safety concern are exactly the same as residences.

Most hotels and commercial buildings don't have windows that open or balconies. They also have the ability to intervene with the building infrastructure to put in proper ventilation. I can see how retrofitting a generic commercial bay in a mixed-use condo would be a huge problem.

So I took a closer look at this today, and while the bar/dining areas of Metropolitain and Milestone's are in the podium areas sticking out from the main building, the kitchens for both restaurants are in the main block, directly under residential units.

What by-law are you referring to?

The kitchens are deep into the building. I'd like to know about this by-law, too.

I'm not sure in those specific cases, but this may be referring to condo by-laws that prevent restaurants and certain commercial uses. Condo by-laws are passed by the condo corporation, which is composed of the condo residents. If the residents don't want a restaurant, which they often don't, they can pass a by-law restricting use.

I believe that was what happened in the condo on Bronson and Powell. The residents voted on allowing commercial use at street level and rejected it. I believe a gym went in instead, which leaves a blank wall on the main street. That is a real shame in the middle of a developing commercial strip. The City needs to insist on ground floor commercial on designated main streets.

The best way to avoid this is to insist on two condominiums within the building be formed, one of the commercial space and one of the residential space, then either the developer can keep the commercial condo and manage it themselves or sell it to a commercial investor/management company, etc.

Basically if you look at the General Mixed Use Zoning it permits restaurants, but then scroll down to subzones GM2 to GM4, it removes this permission and replaces it with what is allowed. I think most condos apply for this zoning

Traditional MAinstreet zoning does what we want:
It's just that there aren't enough streets designated TM.