BST3 (Standard Life Centre III)| 69.6 m | 17 fl | Proposed

[MountainView]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I wish that developers would stop pushing buildings right up to the property line - it won't make our canyons any better or our streets any more human or bright. I wish someone would just have a eureka moment and discover podiums...

If there wasn't height restrictions then I'm sure we'd see nice podiums and set backs, but since there are, developers want to maximize square footage based on what they are allowed to build so this is why we see big square (ugly) buildings built property line to property line.

[citydwlr]

Originally Posted by defishel

At first, I was excited to see this rendering (many months ago), but now I'm not quite sure I like this. Other than filling in a gap on Bank Street, it really has nothing special going for it. It looks a lot like the new EDC building at O'Connor. Not to say that it's a bad building, it's still quite nice and even if it did get built I'd be excited about it.

This doesn't have great presence on Bank Street. As it says on the first page of this thread, the entrance would be off of Slater and have retail on Bank, which is great.

I agree, it's not a bad-looking building, but the street-level portions are not very pedestrian-oriented. I also would have preferred they continue the brick facade along Bank Street (i.e., basically having the whole 3-floor podium level be the older-style architecture) instead of mixing in the modern glass frontage. Actually, I'd like to see more developments along Bank Street maintain the look of the older-style buildings, at least on the first 2-3 floors.

The entrance around the corner on Slater is a bit mundane, and would do better to serve the public in a more appropriate way. That said, I do like the 2-story floor-to-ceiling glass frontage on the corner...

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I wish that developers would stop pushing buildings right up to the property line - it won't make our canyons any better or our streets any more human or bright. I wish someone would just have a eureka moment and discover podiums...

An interesting point to counter the argument that tall buildings up to the property lines creates a darkened canyon is that the glass on the buildings actually reflect light down to the street level. I have no problem with this building having a podium or no, it seems like another architectural/ urbanism fad.

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by citydwlr

I agree, it's not a bad-looking building, but the street-level portions are not very pedestrian-oriented. I also would have preferred they continue the brick facade along Bank Street (i.e., basically having the whole 3-floor podium level be the older-style architecture) instead of mixing in the modern glass frontage. Actually, I'd like to see more developments along Bank Street maintain the look of the older-style buildings, at least on the first 2-3 floors.

The entrance around the corner on Slater is a bit mundane, and would do better to serve the public in a more appropriate way. That said, I do like the 2-story floor-to-ceiling glass frontage on the corner...

I don't agree with the brick idea. That sounds like another attempt at historicism, and will cheapen the buildings overall by trying to match it's neighbours. I think it would be better to take a newer, more modern approach to filling in that gap so that there is a contrast between the older building and the new one, without looking like weird, brick patchwork. I think the glass contrasting with the brick is interesting.

I'd rather see the top portion set back a bit so that the older buildings actually look like they're separate. Maybe create an outdoor (public?) space like what Performance Court is doing.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by defishel

An interesting point to counter the argument that tall buildings up to the property lines creates a darkened canyon is that the glass on the buildings actually reflect light down to the street level. I have no problem with this building having a podium or no, it seems like another architectural/ urbanism fad.

If it's a fad, then I hope it lasts - it's so much nicer to walk down streets with setbacks (Bank, Sparks, Richmond in some spots) than canyon streets (basically all downtown E-W streets). It's been pretty well-documented how buildings with an inhuman scale can suck the life from a spot instead of contributing to it.

For all the glass boxes in Ottawa, I don't think that anyone could say with a straight face that they've made the streets they're on into sunny, pleasant places to be. We can do better.

[kevinbottawa]

Originally Posted by drawarc

Found this on Altus InSite, don't know if old or new rendering:




http://www.altusinsite.com/index_en....Find+Buildings

I prefer the renderings that preserve both of the old buildings along Bank. I also don't know how I feel about the building along Slater being concrete instead of glass in the above rendering.

[OTSkyline]

I personally like the glass look, especially how it will pop out walking along Bank going from older-brick buildings to modern glass tower. It's a very cool contrast.

What I don't like is the following:
1) The very bland square building (no architectural pzazz whatsoever)
2) The lot-line to lot-line size of the building, which kind of makes it overwhelming by sheer size and presence.
3) The height which looks the exact same throughout the render AND same height as the adjacent buildings, creating a 17/18 story ceiling on the entire block.

Again... so disappointed at Ottawa and its lack of innovation and thinking in these development processes.

[J.OT13]

I preferred the original rendering. They seem to have cheeped it out with (materials and the elimination of one historic façade). Either rendition are just too damn massive. I know that's due to the height restrictions where developers try to maximize square footage, but still. I'd like to see them at least try to push for a bit more height, maybe 22 floors (though 30 would be ideal). It still wouldn't pierce the skyline but would at least allow for better set backs and a slight increase on the CBD's max office potential .

[OTSkyline]

I'm still not 100% what sightline/view this is trying to protect...

The Peace Tower on Parliament Hill? I mean go to this spot on Bank St now and you can't see it, so what's a 20, 30 or 40 story building going to change?
I understand with buildings closer to Elgin or Wellington etc... since these would impact it a lot more the views, especially when driving down on Nicholas or Colonel By Drive, but this one? No idea...

[m0nkyman]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

I'm still not 100% what sightline/view this is trying to protect...

The Peace Tower on Parliament Hill? I mean go to this spot on Bank St now and you can't see it, so what's a 20, 30 or 40 story building going to change?
I understand with buildings closer to Elgin or Wellington etc... since these would impact it a lot more the views, especially when driving down on Nicholas or Colonel By Drive, but this one? No idea...

The view plane is from the Gatineau side. Imagine looking from somewhere around the museum of civilization. The idea is that no building will be taller than the peace tower from that spot. Read
http://www.ncc-ccn.gc.ca/sites/defau...ction-2007.pdf for the whole story.

[OTSkyline]

So according to the maps from that link it seems as though the restriction ends around Gloucester or Nepean St, correct?

If so, does that mean that technically a developer could propose a 35-40 story tower around Somerset/Bank for example? (But then again I guess theres not THAT much height passed Lisgar St downtown so they would argue that it would trump the neighbouring buildings too much..?)

[waterloowarrior]

301 Laurier Ave West/162 Bank St (NW Corner of Bank and Laurier) purchased by Morguard for $8.1 million. Maybe more changes coming to this proposal.
http://www.juteaujohnsoncomba.com/ne...Newsletter.pdf

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

301 Laurier Ave West/162 Bank St (NW Corner of Bank and Laurier) purchased by Morguard for $8.1 million. Maybe more changes coming to this proposal.
http://www.juteaujohnsoncomba.com/ne...Newsletter.pdf

I hope this means this will be the next new office building for Ottawa. They should keep all of the buildings that currently exist on Bank to leave for retail, though.