HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Downtown & City of Ottawa


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2015, 5:20 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,335
Rideau tower considered too soon: residents
City approves development despite CDP still underway

By Emma Jackson
Ottawa East News, Jul 10, 2015


Residents are calling foul after planning committee approved a 14-storey tower on Rideau Street before it has even considered a draft community design plan underway for the area.

“This whole process makes a mockery of what the city has said,” said Sally Southey, who lives in Sandy Hill.

She said the draft community design plan for Uptown Rideau, which will guide development in the neighbourhood, has benefitted from hours of volunteer work from involved citizens – and it will all be for naught if the Richcraft’s proposal is allowed to amend it before it’s even been made official city policy.

“The fact that the city has played along with the plan just reinforces what citizens across this city know, which is that developers seem to have a real hold on the planning department,” Southey said.

The official plan amendment involves several lots on Rideau, Cobourg and Besserer streets. If council agrees with planning committee, it would allow a mixed-use complex ranging in height from 3.5 to 14 storeys, although most of the site currently allows up to nine.

The site uses “density transfer” to concentrate most of the height in a tower at the corner of Rideau and Cobourg, while the rest of the building would be seven and 3.5 storeys to transition to the low-rise neighbourhoods to the south – that’s what the amendment is for.

The proposal includes a 200 square metre public park accessed from Cobourg, and the developer has agreed to widen nearby sidewalks and increase setbacks on the property to encourage a more pedestrian-friendly area. The whole site will have a holding zone placed on it until the site plan control process is finished, and the urban design review panel is satisfied with the project’s overall design.

But residents are incensed the city is even considering the proposal before it finalizes a community design plan for the area, which should be considered later this fall.

“Until the CDP is made public, even if it’s not approved, no one will have any way of knowing what is or isn’t consistent with the long term vision,” said Robert Tritt, who came to the meeting on behalf of the Lowertown Community Association.

BETWEEN POLICIES

The application is caught between the current Sandy Hill Secondary Plan and a newly drafted community design plan for Uptown Rideau. Under the current plan, the Rideau Street portion of the site is designated a mixed-use mainstreet allowing up to nine storeys, while the area closer to Besserer is considered low-profile, allowing up to four stories.

The draft CDP labels the area a traditional mainstreet, which would generally support mid-rise development with some exceptions for strategically-placed high-rises.

While the application is technically being considered under the current neighbourhood plan – it can’t really be affected by future policies that don’t have council’s approval – planners said they took into account the general direction of the draft discussions to make sure the project fits the model.

They’ve specifically capitalized on a new concept in the draft called density transfer, which allows an applicant to be flexible with the allocation of height and density inside a property to make the most of the site, staff said.

That’s how the project ended up with three different heights: 3.5 stories closer to Besserer Street, which is classified as a “low-profile neighbourhood”, seven storeys across most of the property and 14 storeys closer to the corner of Rideau and Cobourg.

“By transferring density on the subject site, we can get a better building with public benefits and minimal public impacts,” said planner Erin O’Connell.

DEFERRAL DEFEAT

Attempts to defer the committee’s vote until after the CDP is complete were squashed -- a motion from Kitchissippi Coun. Jeff Leiper was defeated 6 to 3, and appeals from several community associations and Rideau-Vanier Coun. Mathieu Fleury couldn’t sway the committee which voted 7 to 2 in favour of the amendment.

Council will consider it Aug. 26.

http://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/n...oon-residents/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2015, 2:33 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,244
Approved by Council
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2015, 4:50 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,335
Rideau, Besserer complex approved ahead of CDP

By Emma Jackson
Ottawa East News, Aug 28, 2015


Rideau-Vanier Coun. Mathieu Fleury is banking on the city’s site plan process to fix an unpopular high-rise development planned for Rideau, Cobourg and Besserer streets downtown.

Council approved an official plan and zoning amendment package on Aug. 26 to allow a mixed-use complex ranging in height from 3.5 to 14 storeys at that corner.

Right now the zoning for most of the site allows up to nine storeys, but there’s a need to transition to the low-rise heritage neighbourhoods south of the lot. For that the developer has been approved to use “density transfer” to concentrate most of the height in a 14-storey tower at the corner of Rideau and Cobourg, while the rest of the buildings would be seven and 3.5 storeys.

The problem, Fleury said, is the density transfer concept has not yet been approved by council; it’s included in a draft community design plan for the area that’s still in its final development stages.

“I wish the applicant had waited for the CDP to be completed so that all the discussion around density transfers would have been in place or approved. It would have been more suitable for this application,” Fleury said.

Action Sandy Hill, the area’s community association, and other local community groups are unhappy that council is pre-emptively approving development applications before the CDP has even been considered. They lobbied the councillor to defer the decision at council, but Fleury said he realized that wasn’t going to fly among his council colleagues.

Instead, he explained to council that he’ll be using the site plan control process – the next step in getting the complex built – to fix the myriad issues still outstanding.

Those include:
  • the size, location and format of the proposed public spaces,
  • the transition to Besserer’s low-rise houses,
  • the aesthetics of the road at Rideau and Cobourg leading into the dead-end at Besserer and “the overall aesthetics of the building in order to make it something the community can be proud of,” Fleury said.

He also wants to address concerns about the site’s soil conditions, which will be studied more closely by city engineers.

The whole site will have a holding zone placed on it until the site plan process is finished and the urban design review panel is satisfied with the project’s overall design. But Fleury warned council he’s not afraid to intervene if the developer doesn’t play along.

“If I do see that the conversations don’t progress and aren’t satisfactory, I would pull delegated authority on the site plan,” he said, a process that sees the ward’s councillor have greater authority over decisions. “What I care about is good design.”

The proposal includes a 200-square-metre public park accessed from Cobourg, and the developer has agreed to widen nearby sidewalks and increase setbacks on the property to encourage a more pedestrian-friendly area.

http://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/n...-ahead-of-cdp/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Sep 1, 2015, 1:43 PM
Arcologist Arcologist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nation's Capital
Posts: 687
The original design was much better than the revised version. More height on the tower and less bulk on the low-rise section... Oh well...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2015, 5:25 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,335
Sandy Hill community group targets Rideau Street highrise
City council approved 14-storey development for site in August

By Alex Robinson
Ottawa East News, Sep 28, 2015


Action Sandy Hill is hoping it will have the last word on a 14-storey mixed-use development being proposed for Rideau Street.

The community association has filed an appeal with the Ontario Municipal Board with the intention of walking back a city council decision to give Richcraft Group the necessary approvals to build the highrise.

City council gave its blessing to the development in late August by approving an official plan and zoning amendment.

The development has faced vehement opposition from the community over its height and design since it was first proposed more than a decade ago. The current plan would see a 14-storey tower sitting atop a three-storey podium at the corner of Rideau and Cobourg Streets. It would also feature a seven-storey building on Rideau Street and a three-and-a-half-storey apartment building on Besserer Street.

Residents take issue with the height of the building, as the current Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan recommends only building up to six storeys on that part of Rideau Street. A former OMB decision on the developer’s proposal approved a nine-storey tower.

A new CDP – a planning document that recommends heights and densities developers can build to – is currently being developed by city staff, but has not yet been finalized.

The developer has fallen back on a policy in a draft version of the new CDP called a density transfer, which would allow for developers to build higher than the maximum in some parts of a site in exchange for having parts of the development that are smaller than the cap.

“They said they’re relying on the spirit of the new CDP, which hasn’t been finalized yet,” said Sally Southey, an area resident and ASH board member.

Rideau-Vanier Coun. Mathieu Fleury, who voted against the application, said a holding provision has been placed on the application and he hopes to get the developer to concede to some community concerns through the site plan control approval process.

Fleury said he did not know whether he would support the OMB appeal as he had not seen its details yet.

“I’ll have to wait and see. I’m looking forward to see what that is. It’s too early to say,” he said in an interview.

The OMB appeal contends that the proposal violates the existing CDP, as well as the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Official Plan and the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan.

A spokeswoman for the city refused comment on the OMB appeal, saying the city does not comment on legal matters.

With files from Emma Jackson

http://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/n...reet-highrise/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2016, 5:43 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,335
Latest imagery:










Last edited by rocketphish; Aug 3, 2016 at 11:07 PM. Reason: Resaved images for permanence.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2016, 6:03 PM
Harley613's Avatar
Harley613 Harley613 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aylmer, QC
Posts: 6,662
That's a very attractive looking proposal, and would be a great start towards cleaning up that strip.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2016, 6:09 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,612
Did it get OMB approval, or was the appeal not pursued?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2016, 9:15 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,034
Is that suitably stubby for the Guardians of Decency?
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2016, 3:06 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
That's one thing with Richcraft; designs get better as they develop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2016, 3:51 AM
Harley613's Avatar
Harley613 Harley613 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aylmer, QC
Posts: 6,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
That's one thing with Richcraft; designs get better as they develop.
So the exact opposite of Claridge
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2016, 11:03 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Did it get OMB approval, or was the appeal not pursued?
No hearing scheduled yet according to the OMB website
https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDe...spx?n=PL150947
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2016, 4:31 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harley613 View Post
So the exact opposite of Claridge
Calridge has a different approach; come up with a mediocre mediocre, stick with that design, then build something that looks 10 times worse.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2016, 12:48 PM
Arcologist Arcologist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nation's Capital
Posts: 687
I like this proposal.

In this case, I think the density transfer in the new CDP that Richcraft is falling back on is a good idea. It provides some height variance throughout the development.

I'm not sure Action Sandy Hill has thought this one through... if they win, they'll end up with a uniform 9-storey hulking chunk of building sitting in their neighbourhood.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2016, 4:39 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
No hearing scheduled yet according to the OMB website
https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDe...spx?n=PL150947
Well Action Sandy Hill thought they did well

https://www.ash-acs.ca/560-rideau-omb-hearing/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 7:40 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
No hearing scheduled yet according to the OMB website
https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDe...spx?n=PL150947
Done and dusted. The expert witness retained by the opponents to this project didn't come out looking too good.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onomb/do...anlii2285.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 7:49 PM
Spoonsy's Avatar
Spoonsy Spoonsy is offline
You call that a knife?
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Centretown West
Posts: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proof Sheet View Post
Done and dusted. The expert witness retained by the opponents to this project didn't come out looking too good.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onomb/do...anlii2285.html
"The Board prefers the opinion evidence of Mr. Ippersiel, Ms. O’Connell and Ms. Coutts over that of Mr. Fromojvic. While there is no dispute as to Mr. Fromojvic’s qualifications as a theoretical/academic planner, his lack of experience with the practical side of land use planning became quite evident during his cross-examination by counsel for the City and Richcraft. Cross-examination revealed that he was not very familiar with the City’s parent official plan and had not carried out an analysis of the relevant policies as these applied to the issues before the Board on these appeals as he felt that there was no rationale put before council when it adopted OPA 166. Notwithstanding that he was qualified by the Board as capable of providing professional opinion evidence, Mr. Fromojvic was evasive and refused to answer proper hypothetical questions put to him while under cross-examination by counsel. His opinions were based largely on academic theory and he was unable to provide the Board with any evidence of any unacceptable undue adverse impacts to be caused by the proposed development. His repeated insistence that there was no planning rationale to support Council’s decision to adopt OPA 166 and enact Zoning By-law No. 2015-270 is just simply not sufficient for the Board to allow the appeals. He had an obligation as a planner to provide the Board with some analysis of the planning documents. His testimony was not useful to the Board in its deliberation of the issues before it."


Wow! Emphasis mine... OMB put this guy on blast ... wish there was a video
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 10:19 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,860
Reading on pages 1,3 and 6 of the December Sandy Hill news it was all roses and unicorns and the planner did a great job...but wow, what a surprise, most planning consultants in Ottawa don't want to work for community associations.

I wouldn't be surprised if that planner who they had hired had not done an OMB hearing before. Obviously, you have to start somewhere but he did appear unprepared based on the decision.

http://home.imagesandyhill.org/



Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonsy View Post
"The Board prefers the opinion evidence of Mr. Ippersiel, Ms. O’Connell and Ms. Coutts over that of Mr. Fromojvic. While there is no dispute as to Mr. Fromojvic’s qualifications as a theoretical/academic planner, his lack of experience with the practical side of land use planning became quite evident during his cross-examination by counsel for the City and Richcraft. Cross-examination revealed that he was not very familiar with the City’s parent official plan and had not carried out an analysis of the relevant policies as these applied to the issues before the Board on these appeals as he felt that there was no rationale put before council when it adopted OPA 166. Notwithstanding that he was qualified by the Board as capable of providing professional opinion evidence, Mr. Fromojvic was evasive and refused to answer proper hypothetical questions put to him while under cross-examination by counsel. His opinions were based largely on academic theory and he was unable to provide the Board with any evidence of any unacceptable undue adverse impacts to be caused by the proposed development. His repeated insistence that there was no planning rationale to support Council’s decision to adopt OPA 166 and enact Zoning By-law No. 2015-270 is just simply not sufficient for the Board to allow the appeals. He had an obligation as a planner to provide the Board with some analysis of the planning documents. His testimony was not useful to the Board in its deliberation of the issues before it."


Wow! Emphasis mine... OMB put this guy on blast ... wish there was a video
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2017, 2:24 PM
Arcologist Arcologist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nation's Capital
Posts: 687
More taxpayers' money wasted.

Thanks, Action Sandy Hill!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2017, 6:33 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proof Sheet View Post
Côte-de-Sable? Really? Yes, I know that's the literal translation of Sandy Hill, but has it ever historically been referred to as that?

When I'm in Montreal, I never refer to Snowy Hill when I'm in Côte-des-Neiges.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Downtown & City of Ottawa
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:19 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.