Claridge Loop [70 Gloucester St]| 83m | 27fl | U/C

[kwoldtimer]

Highrise down to the Queensway, here we come!

[citizen j]

Originally Posted by Fraser

They gave Holmes an opportunity to speak and then no one else said a thing. It was carried on consent with Holmes dissenting. Quite a contrast from the 06-10 term.

It warms my heart to hear it. 27 is the new 12. I can't wait for the day some developer has the balls to propose 40 in Centretown. I can already hear the hue and cry and apocalyptic hysteria. It's great theatre.

[bikegypsy]

Originally Posted by Fraser

They gave Holmes an opportunity to speak and then no one else said a thing. It was carried on consent with Holmes dissenting. Quite a contrast from the 06-10 term.

I think this newer generation of councilors is more urbane and more inclined the view Ottawa as a real city rather than a small town which should remain in a certain way. Younger councilors most likely grew up in this city as it was a city and therefore are more sensitive to issues such as pollution, suburban development and core vibrancy. The old mentality is partly responsible for world champion urban sprawl and traffic nightmares. I often viewed councilors of the past as spoiled kids who block their ears and say "LA LA LA LA". A 30 year old man who refuses to leave his mom's home would be a good analogy.

A fresher attitude will allow this city to stop brushing stuff under the carpet and deal with issues in a more responsible way. I'm glad to see they're finally "putting on their pants", to coin a quebecois expression.

[S-Man]

How true! The last council was an absolute disaster - four wasted years.

[rakerman]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Highrise down to the Queensway, here we come!

That does seem like the likely approach from developers.

[S-Man]

I don't think that will happen, but I do think that the area just north of the Queensway - Catherine Street, mainly - will support taller buildings than the Somerset/Gladstone areas simply because there's no view to spoil, and not many close neighbours.

That's not to say there wouldn't be opposition....

[Harley613]

I am so glad I'm 30 and will live past the Holmes era. Anyone know how old she is?? She looks ancient on her city bio pic. Maybe she's afraid of automatic elevators because when she grew up there was a human controlling them, hence her aversion to tall buildings. I suppose it's also possible her eyesight is poor, so she is afraid she won't be able to see buildings over 12 stories tall.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by Harley613

I am so glad I'm 30 and will live past the Holmes era. Anyone know how old she is?? She looks ancient on her city bio pic. Maybe she's afraid of automatic elevators because when she grew up there was a human controlling them, hence her aversion to tall buildings. I suppose it's also possible her eyesight is poor, so she is afraid she won't be able to see buildings over 12 stories tall.

Just like at comments that residents make on the ottawa citizen etc my point blame the council but it comes down to a fair amount of locals don't want tall buildings for what ever reason.

[bikegypsy]

Originally Posted by reidjr

Just like at comments that residents make on the ottawa citizen etc my point blame the council but it comes down to a fair amount of locals don't want tall buildings for what ever reason.

Very true... Although we could agree that a growing number of people do want more density for legitimate and very specific reasons. Even without the public's input, the city has reach reciprocity failure... More population, more traffic and higher prices at the pump don't work well with an overly controlled development process in downtown. I've never been a fan of really tall buildings, but there has to be some give and take at some point.

[bikegypsy]

Originally Posted by rakerman

That does seem like the likely approach from developers.

This is inevitable and is the best option in terms of core growth. I suspect the next 2 decades will bring drastic changes to this part of downtown Ottawa. With Central and the Catherine st proposal, we can already see the pods appearing.

[Harley613]

it's CENTRETOWN.

it's inevitable.

i'm not a 'heighter' who believes we should build every building over 30 stories. i just think it's funny how holmes and her merry band of nimby's are fighting what is ABSOLUTELY inevitable and delaying progress. put tall buildings where they belong, and where they will eventually be anyhow. stop building twin and triple tower developments that take up entire city blocks and build UP in centretown.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by Harley613

it's CENTRETOWN.

it's inevitable.

i'm not a 'heighter' who believes we should build every building over 30 stories. i just think it's funny how holmes and her merry band of nimby's are fighting what is ABSOLUTELY inevitable and delaying progress. put tall buildings where they belong, and where they will eventually be anyhow. stop building twin and triple tower developments that take up entire city blocks and build UP in centretown.

It does make sense to build twin towers downtown in areas that are gaps it makes very little sense to build 6-8 buildings at 3-4 floors each.

[AuxTown]

Originally Posted by reidjr

It does make sense to build twin towers downtown in areas that are gaps it makes very little sense to build 6-8 buildings at 3-4 floors each.

Yes, but if CP 3 and 4 look like 1 and 2 it's going to be an awfully bland area. It's nice to get that density but a variety of heights and architectural styles is key to good city building.

[Harley613]

my sentiments exactly regarding cp 1,2,3,4. it's going to be very bland. it would look SO great as a 40,30,20,15 story development instead of a couple of city blocks that look shaved off at the top.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

Yes, but if CP 3 and 4 look like 1 and 2 it's going to be an awfully bland area. It's nice to get that density but a variety of heights and architectural styles is key to good city building.

Even better: a variety of uses at street level, that acknowledge and work with the street, with DOORS and WINDOWS and things.... not just vents or "beautiful" setbacks and "open space".

This town needs to learn how to build urban streetscapes again, not fake suburban crap re-imported downtown.

[rakerman]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Even better: a variety of uses at street level, that acknowledge and work with the street, with DOORS and WINDOWS and things.... not just vents or "beautiful" setbacks and "open space".

This town needs to learn how to build urban streetscapes again, not fake suburban crap re-imported downtown.

Yes!!

I have nothing against height. Fill all the parking lots up with towers as high as you want. BUT unless everyone involved is committed to a better street life, we're just going to end up in a dense urban desert. If towers brought life Laurier west of Kent would be a thriving district instead of a pedestrian dead zone.

I'm very worried that both Centretown development AND "transit-oriented development" will end up being towers dropped from the sky, with no life at street level, which may be fine for getting people walking and taking transit but will not fundamentally improve Ottawa's urban life. (More people living downtown is a necessary but not sufficient pre-condition for improved city dynamism.)

Great cities have great experiences at street level, whatever variety of heights may (New York) or may not (Paris) loom above them.

[Lloyd]

[QUOTE=MountainView;5290464]This quote by Holmes bothers me "The old zoning was 12 (storeys), and we would probably want to increase that. But more than doubling that in height is problematic.”

Article:

Builder offers city $1M payment for Gloucester Street tower — and a deadline

By Joanne Chianello, The Ottawa Citizen May 24, 2011

OTTAWA — The developers of a 27-storey tower proposed for Gloucester Street in Centretown have agreed to contribute more than $1 million for a “community benefit” as long as the site plan for the project is approved by July 29.

Council’s planning committee Tuesday approved the rezoning for 70 Gloucester St., paving the way for Claridge Homes to build a 229-unit residential tower at more than twice the currently permitted heights of 12 storeys.

The issue is to go to full council for approval on Wednesday, so that the detailed site-plan process can be finished by the end of July. That’s the deadline for developers to submit site plans to the city without paying any development charges for building in the downtown area.

Two years ago, council decided to waive the development charges that builders pay to the city for any project in downtown Ottawa. The idea was to encourage condo and other residential construction in the core of the city. It worked — possibly too well.

“That was a mistake on our part,” said Alta Vista Councillor Peter Hume of the development-fee exemption.

The construction came to the downtown, but the absence of development charges meant the city ended up with “no money to provide any amenities,” said Hume, who is also chair of the planning committee. “We have no (community) projects in the downtown core, and even if we have projects, we have no development charges to pay for them.”

That development charge exemption expires at the end of July, which is why Claridge — and other developers — are racing to get their “executed site plan agreements” officially filed with the city by July 29.

Here’s an additional hitch: Somerset Councillor Diane Holmes has negotiated a “community benefit” with Claridge, whereby the developer would contribute just over $1 million to something that would help all residents as a whole, such as a daycare or a basketball court at Jack Purcell Park. What exactly the community benefit is will be decided during the site-plan process. But if the site plan isn’t filed by July 29, and Claridge ends up having to pay the city’s development charges, some worry that the developer will withdraw its offer of providing that $1-million benefit.

The development at 70 Gloucester — which is connected to another 27-storey project to the south of the site at 89-91 Nepean St. — has a complicated and politically charged past. Claridge originally won support from council years ago for two residential buildings on a site between Gloucester and Nepean streets, just west of Metcalfe Street. The developer extracted an agreement from council for 20- and 24-storey heights, when the builder partnered with the city to bid for the national portrait gallery. The gallery project was eventually cancelled. But even before the Conservative government nixed the project altogether, Claridge had already appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board to build the towers at 27 storeys each. Claridge won.

Now, some worry that 27 storeys will become the new norm in Centretown.

“First there was the one building on Nepean Street, and one building can fit (into the area) if it’s the only building of that height,” said Charles Akben-Marchand, president of the Centretown Citizens Community Assoc. “But then there was another building of that height on a very narrow lot. We’re starting to set a trend of the entire block turning into 27 storeys the entire way across.”

Holmes is also concerned, calling the new heights “a problem if it spreads. The old zoning was 12 (storeys), and we would probably want to increase that. But more than doubling that in height is problematic.”

The buildings on Gloucester are supposed to be a transition zone, giving way to to lower structures in the southern part of Centretown, but these new buildings will be among the tallest in the downtown core.
QUOTE]



Am I not looking hard enough? Does the 70 Gloucester proposal have its own thread yet?

[gjhall]

70 Gloucester and 89/91 Nepean will be the same project ... if you look at the reports, they will share communal amenity space, parking, etc. So it would make sense to rename this threat to include 70 Gloucester for now until we have a name for the project.

Any guesses for the name?? It's Northwest of Tribeca, so using NYC geography it should be Holland Tunnell, Hudson River or Hoboken!

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by gjhall

70 Gloucester and 89/91 Nepean will be the same project ... if you look at the reports, they will share communal amenity space, parking, etc. So it would make sense to rename this threat to include 70 Gloucester for now until we have a name for the project.

Any guesses for the name?? It's Northwest of Tribeca, so using NYC geography it should be Holland Tunnell, Hudson River or Hoboken!

The Palisades?

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The Palisades?

Not too shabby.