Château Laurier expansion | Approved

[TheBrain]

Just announced:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...ding-1.3762263

It's been about 50 years since the Château Laurier underwent any major changes. But that could change over the next few years if the city approves the hotel owner's expansion plans.

Larco Investments, which bought the hotel two years ago, wants to move the parking garage underground and add up to 200 more rooms with a Peter Clewes-designed expansion.

In a release, the company states: "The intent is to build new long-term stay suites, create a new exterior courtyard off the ballroom for seasonal use and replace the aging five storey parking structure with an underground parking facility, all under the management of Fairmont Hotels & Resorts, the luxury brand that operates the hotel."

"The addition will offer a modern interpretation of the heritage character of the Château with a vocabulary of Indiana Limestone, glass and copper. The separated wings, massing and set back upper floors are compatible with the Château's existing roofscape silhouette, providing a dignified and deferential response to this iconic building," according to the release.

Project 'exciting,' councillor says

Rideau-Vanier ward Coun. Mathieu Fleury is also quoted in the release: "I want to highlight the openness of the Fairmont Château Laurier team of consulting and engaging with the community, the city and partners like the NCC to make this project a success. It is an exciting project that introduces captivating architectural design to this important site for our capital city, while highlighting its important heritage value and location near the Parliament Buildings, Major's Hill Park, as well as the ByWard Market."

According to Larco, this "pre-consultation phase with community stakeholders" will be followed by NCC and City of Ottawa approvals on the proposed design. Later, a site plan control application will be made to the city. The company is also promising "further opportunities for community consultation" on the proposed plan prior to final approval by the City of Ottawa.

First thoughts.... eh... ummm... ewwww?

More pics in the article.

[Capital Shaun]

Looks like a condo project. It's not ugly on its own.

But, WTF are they thinking? It doesn't mesh with the existing building. The view from Major Hill Park or the Rideau Locks just sucks. Looks more like the boxy glass structure is blocking the view.

Simply, it doesn't look at all like it's part of a castle.

[TheBrain]

Originally Posted by Capital Shaun

Looks like a condo project. It's not ugly on its own.
...
Simply, it doesn't look at all like it's part of a castle.

Agreed, you can see where they try and tie in with the colours and shape ... Somewhat... But yeah does not fit the style at all.

[SkeggsEggs]

Can't imagine the NCC approving that ...

[TransitZilla]

I like it.

It's certainly a juxtaposition and I'm sure that's fully intentional. Trying to build it like a replica of the existing building would be a mistake IMHO.

We have to remember that what's currently behind the Chateau is a parkake. The current view of this part of the Chateau from Mackenzie looks like this:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.42651...2!8i6656?hl=en
There's obviously room for improvement!

Also like that thew addition appears to have a wall of windows on the south side facing Major's Hill Park, which has the potential to help animate that park. The current interaction between the park and the Chateau is minimal: https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.42658...2!8i6656?hl=en

Arguably some tweaks, like sloping the roof, may help it integrate better with the existing building. But the parking garage shouldn't be sacrosanct, and as I said above, a Disney-style replica would be worse.

[Uhuniau]

Rendered incapable of expressing my feelings in any natural human language, allow myself to lapse into the universal language of smilies and emoji:

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I like it.

It's certainly a juxtaposition and I'm sure that's fully intentional. Trying to build it like a replica of the existing building would be a mistake IMHO.
{le snip}

Arguably some tweaks, like sloping the roof, may help it integrate better with the existing building. But the parking garage shouldn't be sacrosanct, and as I said above, a Disney-style replica would be worse.

I find the whole "you can't mimmic the old style" thing is like the Italians saying you can't put cheese on seafood. Well some people like their Coquilles St-Jacques au gratin.

The fact is, the Chateau Laurier was added on to several times over the years and they were done by different architects and the results were harmonious and almost seamless in style. Same story of Quebec City's Chateau Frontenac whose prominent tower was a later addition.

Here's what the Chateau Laurier looked when it first opened, you can hardly say the rest of the later addition was a "mistake". I think architects these days just lack the balls and aesthetic literacy to properly continue on with the language of its style.

[kevinbottawa]

Wow. Looks ridiculous, especially from the locks. That view of the Chateau Laurier from the locks is beautiful and well photographed. This expansion would destroy that. They would never do this at similar hotels like the Royal York. Only in Ottawa. The fact that the Councillor thinks this is exciting is mind boggling.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by kevinbottawa

Wow. Looks ridiculous, especially from the locks. That view of the Chateau Laurier from the locks is beautiful and well photographed. This expansion would destroy that. They would never do this at similar hotels like the Royal York. Only in Ottawa. The fact that the Councillor thinks this is exciting is mind boggling.

You're unfamiliar with Fleury's earlier work, then...

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I find the whole "you can't mimmic the old style" thing is like the Italians saying you can't put cheese on seafood. Well some people like their Coquilles St-Jacques au gratin.

The fact is, the Chateau Laurier was added on to several times over the years and they were done by different architects and the results were harmonious and almost seamless in style. Same story of Quebec City's Chateau Frontenac whose prominent tower was a later addition.

Here's what the Chateau Laurier looked when it first opened, you can hardly say the rest of the later addition was a "mistake". I think architects these days just lack the balls and aesthetic literacy to properly continue on with the language of its style.

It's not impossible, but it's very difficult, as:
1) the original quarry the materials came from usually doesn't exist anymore
2) the original materials have gained a unique appearance from weathering, which the new section will not match until decades have passed
3) the older methods of construction were much less efficient, meaning that in today's times, building it exactly the same way is often far beyond the budget of developers

In Kingston we've got a lot of local experience with additions to heritage, and generally, when the new structure tries to match the materials of the older structure, the end result is hideous.. but when you choose an unimposing glass or steel that doesn't stand out, it accents the beauty of the heritage building and just makes the whole thing beautiful.

An example: In this part of Queen's campus, they took a row of three heavily decayed old stone buildings. They added new material to fill in the bits of the facades that had to be torn down due to decay, new material to connect the 3 buildings together into a single building, and they added an extra floor to the whole thing. They used very neutral looking glass and steel for the additions, making for a very harmonious blend of heritage and modern:


(Pulled from Google Street View)

Right around the corner from this site, an all-glass addition (visible on the left) was added onto an old heritage school, again to great effect:

(Queen's University website)

[McC]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It's not impossible, but it's very difficult, as:

2) the original materials have gained a unique appearance from weathering, which the new section will not match until decades have passed

Or won't ever match because we don't burn copious amounts of coal anymore.

I hated it at first (spit take when I saw the 2-D elevation from Major's Hill on my portable: "IS THIS SOME KIND OF A JOKE?"). But I hate it less after looking at the 3-D views from the war memorial and the locks, where the lines match up really nicely, and the toned down copper mansard roof (I may be mistaken, but I don't think it's quite square as some have described) works well with the existing roof.

The views from Mackenzie definitely need some work.

Overall I think this could be succesful with careful and concerted tweaks rather than "back to the drawing board" as the Mayor tweeted. The former Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography proves to me that it is possible to add a contemporary addition to the Chateau that complements and enhances; not just theoretically, but even in real Ottawa.

But I also wouldn't object if they binned this and went back to the drawing board.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It's not impossible, but it's very difficult, as:
1) the original quarry the materials came from usually doesn't exist anymore
2) the original materials have gained a unique appearance from weathering, which the new section will not match until decades have passed
3) the older methods of construction were much less efficient, meaning that in today's times, building it exactly the same way is often far beyond the budget of developers

Nein. the real reason is that Modernist manifesto has purged the language of ornamentation from architecture, and vilified it as degenerate. Read about Adolf Loos' Ornament and Crime and you see that contemporary architects are still buying that shitte. It's kind of like using another Adolf's 'Mein Kampf" to guide social policies today. Loos basically reasoned that only degenerates and criminals had tattoos, therefore decoration was a crime that desecrates the purity and honesty of surfaces. Ironic that tattooing has gotten into vogue lately.

Establishment architects frown on revivalist architecture because it has been engrained in them that it is dishonest and does not reflect contemporary values and culture. I guess the soul-less boxes do?

[bobcage]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I find the whole "you can't mimmic the old style" thing is like the Italians saying you can't put cheese on seafood. Well some people like their Coquilles St-Jacques au gratin.

The fact is, the Chateau Laurier was added on to several times over the years and they were done by different architects and the results were harmonious and almost seamless in style. Same story of Quebec City's Chateau Frontenac whose prominent tower was a later addition.

Here's what the Chateau Laurier looked when it first opened, you can hardly say the rest of the later addition was a "mistake". I think architects these days just lack the balls and aesthetic literacy to properly continue on with the language of its style.

wow ... nice photo

[bobcage]

the Chateau Laurier should have a better more inviting entrance at the back than what they currently have at the front!

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I like it.

It's certainly a juxtaposition and I'm sure that's fully intentional. Trying to build it like a replica of the existing building would be a mistake IMHO.

We have to remember that what's currently behind the Chateau is a parkake. The current view of this part of the Chateau from Mackenzie looks like this:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.42651...2!8i6656?hl=en
There's obviously room for improvement!

Also like that thew addition appears to have a wall of windows on the south side facing Major's Hill Park, which has the potential to help animate that park. The current interaction between the park and the Chateau is minimal: https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.42658...2!8i6656?hl=en

Arguably some tweaks, like sloping the roof, may help it integrate better with the existing building. But the parking garage shouldn't be sacrosanct, and as I said above, a Disney-style replica would be worse.

I disagree with that - it seems to me that a replica of the existing structure is the only acceptable option for that site. The proposal completely destroys the iconic view of the Chateau, looking up the canal locks. I can't understand what would motivate the proponents to suggest anything else.

[acottawa]

They were mocking this for 10 minutes on Breakfast television on City this morning.

I wonder if this is a publicity stunt.

[bobcage]

Originally Posted by TheBrain

Just announced:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...ding-1.3762263









First thoughts.... eh... ummm... ewwww?

More pics in the article.

It's not completely bad but they skrewed up on the roof. it can't have a square looking roof like that. If you keep the characteristics of the old roof on top of this new design it might work.

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by bobcage

It's not completely bad but they skrewed up on the roof. it can't have a square looking roof like that. If you keep the characteristics of the old roof on top of this new design it might work.

Matching the existing roof line is a must.

[Horus]

[TheBrain]

Originally Posted by Horus

Hahaha, yeah pretty much...
Check the poll results at the end of the CBC article. Lol