HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2010, 12:27 AM
Davis137's Avatar
Davis137 Davis137 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,290
Build something that's at least 20 Storeys here, and have some other smaller buildings that setback the taller tower with the transitways and streetscapes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Apr 26, 2010, 6:07 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
Dalhousie Community Association: 801 Alvert
http://dalhousiecommunityassociation.blogspot.com/

801 Albert Street is the triangle of land bounded by the City Centre Complex, Albert Street, and the Otrain corridor. It is presently a "hole", that is, it appears to be significantly lower than the surrounding properties. Phoenix owns it, and has come foreward with numerous redevelopment proposals, all of which have been lacking in merit. Granted, it is a very difficult site to develop, with many easements and utility lines crossing it. The City is now examining the utilties in the area as part of the Bayview-Carling CDP; it may be possible to realign some of them (but at great cost).

In their prior proposal, Phoenix wanted two condo towers and a four floor office building, all on one podium structure level with Albert Street. Building the garage would prevent the city from replacing the sewers some day, so they turned down the idea of a single podium structure. Now Phoenix is proposal three separate podiums, leaving the sewer rights of way open to the air. The City is recommending it be rejected, as it divides up the parcel into awkward pieces.

Here is our letter:


Planning Committee

Re: 27 April 2010: zoning – 801 Albert Street

Dear Sir/Madam

The Dalhousie Community Association supports the eventual development of this site. The development could be high density suitable for its proximity to a major transit hub. The current Phoenix proposal falls far short of the site’s potential and should be rejected. The buildings should be adjacent the sidewalk, parking should be underground, it should be pedestrian and transit focused (not parking garage and surface lots), its prominent location merits the very highest architectural and planning endeavor.

The Association calls on the city to make every effort to promptly resolve the issues of the utilities crossing the site and the city’s need for future access for repair and replacements. Rather than having the proponent come back repeatedly with proposals for the site, we encourage the city to work collaboratively with the developer to find a suitable development track.

Eric Darwin
23 April, 2010
President, Dalhousie Community Assoc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2010, 1:32 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
Bayview highrise proposal rebuffed by city
Ottawa developer dejected about project's prospects
http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa.../13739356.html
By JON WILLING, CITY HALL BUREAU
Last Updated: April 28, 2010 9:27am

A city committee rejected this development near Lebreton Flats, citing concerns over city services running beneath the property. DCR Phoenix image

William Buchanan has been battling City Hall over his “labour of love” for about seven years.

“It’s been a problem. There’s always something that has come up, whether it deals with the planning aspect, or more specifically, with the construction approval,” Buchanan said Tuesday after a planning and environment committee meeting.

Buchanan, planning manager for DCR Phoenix Development Corp., was trying to warm councillors up to the company’s three-tower proposal for a prime piece of land beside the O-Train Bayview station, south of Lebreton Flats.

DCR Phoenix is pitching a 17-storey office tower, 24-storey condo tower and a four-storey mixed-use building on the triangular chunk of land.

The property was originally owned by the city, which sold it to the National Capital Commission. DCR Phoenix acquired the property from the NCC in 2004 and in 2005 the company submitted an unsolicited proposal to develop a new main branch for the Ottawa public library and some residential units. The city declined the offer.

Since then DCR Phoenix has been trying to come up with a development the city could stomach.

The site is challenging to develop since key municipal infrastructure, such as sewers and watermains, run under parts of the property.

The three-tower proposal is being rejected by city planning staff because a study on the water and sewer infrastructure isn’t complete and neither is a community design plan. On top of that, staff are chilly to the design.

Owners of the neighbouring City Centre complex are also cold to the three-tower plan.

City councillors on the planning and environment committee believed the development would disrupt city infrastructure.

Capital Coun. Clive Doucet openly questioned why the developer bought the land when it appears undevelopable.

The committee agreed there couldn’t be any development until the proper studies are complete and it refused the necessary zoning change. City council will be asked to confirm the committee’s decision Wednesday (today).

Buchanan argued the towers wouldn’t disrupt any infrastructure.

“For them to come forward and say that you can’t develop the property is ridiculous,” he said outside the committee room.

As for community concerns, Buchanan notes there’s not much of a neighbourhood there and City Centre is hardly eye-catching as it is.

Buchanan was asked if he has any idea what the city would like to see on his land.

“To be honest, no,” he said. “We’ll try to sit down with them.”

jon.willing@sunmedia.ca


Developer should be stopped: city committee
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/De...980/story.html
Buried infrastructure at risk from three towers proposed at City Centre, councillors say

BY KATE JAIMET, THE OTTAWA CITIZENAPRIL 27, 2010


OTTAWA — The city should fight a zoning application that could see three towers built on a piece of empty land criss-crossed by underground water and sewage mains, city council’s planning and environment committee resolved Tuesday.

The majority of councillors on the committee felt there was a risk that critical city infrastructure, including major sewers and water mains, could be jeopardized if the development goes ahead at 801 Albert St., next to the City Centre development on the west side of downtown.

“As far as I’m concerned this is about protecting the city and that trumps any development,” said Capital Councillor Clive Doucet. “The developer made his own choice (to buy the property) and I’ll be damned if I’m going to be part of a crew that puts the city’s infrastructure at risk … for no good reason.”

But William Buchanan, manager of planning for the development company DCR Phoenix, said the risk to infrastructure will be minimal because the three towers — ranging in height from four to 24 storeys — would not be built directly over top of the pipes.

“We are not touching in any way, shape or form any of the current infrastructure that crosses the property,” he said.

Buchanan later said that the condition of the sewage pipes was not known, and that DCR Phoenix would likely conduct its own risk assessment before building.

DCR Phoenix will go before the Ontario Municipal Board (which can overrule city planning decisions) to ask for changes to the zoning of the property, a wedge-shaped piece of land bounded by the O-Train tracks, the Transitway and the City Centre commercial building.

The changes would allow for greater density than is currently allowed on the site and would remove a condition stating that the land cannot be developed before a “master servicing study” looking at water and sewer impacts is completed.

Councillors were also concerned that the proposed development — consisting of a residential highrise, an office tower, and a low-rise, mixed-use building — doesn’t fit with the vision of developing the area as a dynamic, pedestrian-friendly urban community.

But Buchanan said his development shouldn’t be held up by nebulous visions of the future.

“They talk about a neighbourhood, but it’s not really a neighbourhood,” Buchanan argued. “You’ve got City Centre, which has been rated the ugliest building in the city for years, and there’s nothing else.”

City council is to discuss the issue today.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2010, 3:54 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Just responding to a couple of earlier posts...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deez View Post
bahaha.

This thing is an absolute abomination of urbanism...some of which is the City's fault and some the developer's.

First of all...why on earth are the property lines set so frigging far back from Scott (Albert?)? This development is steps from the CBD yet the setbacks are similar to new single family home subdivisions in Avalon. And what abuts the property line? A surface lot? At the intersection of what could be an N-S-E-W transit transfer location? Give me a break.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy_haak View Post
Usually they would just zone it Hazard or something similar to prevent development on that part of the land (at least where I work). Obviously the road ROW is particularly wide along Scott Street/Wellington in that area. I'd be curious to find out why.

It seems a little bit premature to begin developing Bayview. There should really be a more comprehensive plan for the area before development should proceed.

If you look on Google it's pretty clear that when the overpass of the railway was built they departed from the Scott/Wellington/Albert road RoW to get a more perpendicular bridge. The services however remain in the original road alignment, so there is this odd arc of a circle chunk of land encompassing the original road alignment south of the current one that's a challenge to deal with.

The City, naturally, hasn't completed the CDP for the area (which should have been done *before* the NS-LRT EA but after the 2003 OP&TMP - it's now underway again) so they don't know what to do with it, nor did they buy the property itself from the NCC when the latter sold it (which they should have for the NS-LRT).

The fact that the developer has no idea what the city would like to see there just adds to the problems (whether that's because the City doesn't know, or they didn't ask, or both, is hard to say - but probably both). The proposal also seems to be done in complete isolation from anything on the City Centre site, whereas I would think that one would wish to develop (or at least plan) the entire area between the O-Train, Somerset, Champagne and Scott/Wellington/Albert in one shot, which would allow for addressing issues of servicing, LRT routing/integration and making the two overpasses (Scott & Somerset) more pedestrian friendly environments.


It's pretty much typical planning in Ottawa, I guess. Why plan years ahead when you can plan in a disorganized unfocused frenzy at the last minute? It's so much more exciting this way.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2010, 4:24 PM
citizen j's Avatar
citizen j citizen j is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,029
^exciting indeed! I've already got tickets for the OMB hearings. I say the developer takes it in game 4.
__________________
The world is so full of a number of things
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2010, 4:47 PM
blackjagger's Avatar
blackjagger blackjagger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 287
My personal favourite.

"Capital Coun. Clive Doucet openly questioned why the developer bought the land when it appears undevelopable."

So he would rather see a field next to a major transit hub instead of a mix use high density project. I think this project has faults, but not so much that it can't be made to work. Even with just adding a pedestrian bridge to Wellington and some form of building right up to Scott.

Cheers,
Josh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2010, 6:20 PM
citizen j's Avatar
citizen j citizen j is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,029
^Don't think of it as a field. Think of it as,... er, a park.
__________________
The world is so full of a number of things
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2010, 8:43 PM
Davis137's Avatar
Davis137 Davis137 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,290
Eventually the city will come to some sort of ammended agreement with the developer. I mean, they will be able to soak that land for a lot more tax money and stuff when there's businesses or people residing there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2010, 2:09 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,946
Apparently around 2003 the City estimated that it would cost about $16M to move the sewer pipes. I am thinking that when the new LRT is built, it might be a great time to lay a HUGE new section of sewer across LeBreton Flats to the Booth regulator. The pipes under this piece of property could then be moved and redirected to the new trunk. This will cost a lot of money.

Also, I was at the Bayview-Carling CDP Study the other day and it seems to me that there might be a problem with the sewer capacity in that area. Already there are a number of sewers which are pretty much at capacity so where would new development tie into? There might not be enough spare sewer capacity for the intensification desired due to all the up-stream flows leaving no room. (Apparently there is no problem providng the area with water - just sewer services.)

My suggestions would be to: A) Build a huge new section of trunk sewer under the new LRT line from Bayview to Booth; B) Have the City buy that corner of land and re-align the sewers; and C) Use the area for a large underground sewer storage tank to prevent overflows to the river.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2010, 7:27 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
ZONING - 801 ALBERT STREET
ZONAGE - 801, RUE ALBERT

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

(This matter is not subject to Bill 51)

That Council refuse an amendment to the Zoning By law 2008 250 and former City of Ottawa By-law 93-98 to change the zoning of 801 Albert Street to permit a mixed-use development for the reasons outlined in the report and because, given the significant infrastructure easements required and already located on the site, Committee is of the view that this site is not developable without the following:
a. completion of a Master Servicing Study as part of the Community Design Plan (CDP) process to confirm the water, sewer and storm sewer service infrastructure requirements, including the potential and options for relocating main trunk lines to better accommodate development and design objectives determined through the CDP process;
b. completion of a comprehensive Transportation and Traffic Impact Assessment as part of the CDP process that will address the surrounding area transportation and traffic issues and the property’s vehicle access and egress requirements;

c. completion of the Bayview-Carling CDP to determine a larger direction for how this site would fit within the development program for the CDP; and
d. approval of an application for Site Plan Control following completion of the CDP which reflects and implements the directions determined through the CDP for the site, and is consistent with the policies of the Official Plan for Mixed-Use Centres.


REFERRED by the following motion:

MOTION

Moved by Councillor G. Hunter
Seconded by Councillor R. Bloess

WHEREAS the Planning Act provides to the City a period of 120 days to review a zoning application; and

WHEREAS, although a rezoning application for 801 Albert was submitted several years ago, the current proposal was only submitted in March, 2010, less than two months ago; and

WHEREAS it is appropriate to allow the Community, Committee and Council additional time to give further consideration to issues such as density and parking; and

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the matter of the zoning for 801 Albert Street be referred back to Planning and Environment Committee for further consideration of density, servicing and parking; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Clerk and Solicitor be directed to seek a hearing in November or December, 2010 in to permit Council to develop a position on these issues.

REFERRAL CARRIED
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2010, 9:35 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,521
Interesting additions there. They look to be a preemptive strike against an OMB appeal by laying down the rationale for denying the request at this point in time. The developer has just been served notice not to think about appealing this and the OMB similarly has been served notice not to touch this one if it is appealed.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2010, 3:20 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
Empty excuses for an empty lot
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/busines...496/story.html
City’s butt-covering over land deal fiasco does no one any good

BY RANDALL DENLEY, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN JUNE 16, 2010 11:02 PM BE THE FIRST TO POST A COMMENT

The property known as 801 Albert Street is a scruffy little triangle of land on the western edge of downtown, near the Bayview transit station. The city made a big mistake when it sold the land a decade ago, and staff have been trying to cover their butts ever since.

Now, the company that owns the land is proposing a substantial office and residential development on the site and city planning staff are desperately trying to find some reason to say no. The problem is that all kinds of sewer and water lines run across the site and development could affect them. Unfortunately, city planning staff of the day assured the water and sewer people that the land would never be developed and sold it to the National Capital Commission for a pittance. The NCC then flipped it to DCR Phoenix. The city subsequently tried to buy the property back from the developer for $2.5 million, more than eight times what the city sold it for.

The developers have made a pretty persuasive case that the land can be redeveloped with no threat to sewers and they intend to prove their point at the Ontario Municipal Board. The pressure is now on city planning staff to prove that they have been right all along and that development on the site isn’t feasible.

In their attempt to do so, planning staff are really stretching for an argument. They say that the DCR Phoenix proposal for three towers on the site isn’t aesthetically pleasing and is more like the kind of development one would find in the suburbs. It’s a thin argument made thinner by the fact that the property is adjacent to the inaptly named City Centre, surely one of the ugliest buildings in town.

The city would also like the developers to wait for the completion of a community design plan for a vast area of the western downtown. That process began in 2004 and the city figures it will all be sorted out by 2012.

These arguments are definitely from the B list, but the city’s problem is that the developer has found a way to build without affecting the sewers, which planning staff now acknowledge. Pipe staff aren’t sure yet.

Planners are leaning heavily on the aesthetic argument, with urban design manager Richard Kilstrom saying the urban design is “pretty awful,” even though the developers haven’t even submitted sketches of the buildings.

The development company has been trying to find an acceptable use for the Albert Street site since 2004. First, it suggested a residential tower and townhouses. Then it got involved with the city in a public-private partnership deal that would have seen a new central library combined with a condo development. Funnily enough, the sewers didn’t seem to be an issue then. When that deal fell through, DCR Phoenix came back with a plan for two tall apartment buildings. Now it’s a mixed-use centre for offices and apartments.

The planning committee accepted city staff’s argument that the sewers were in dire peril when this issue came before it earlier this year. City council subsequently referred the matter back to planning for further consideration.

The city has always found a way to keep development from happening, but it is running out of options leading up to an OMB hearing scheduled for November. Staff really shouldn’t be spending public money at the OMB if their main arguments are “it doesn’t look nice,” and “can’t they just wait for another study?”

Planning committee chairman Peter Hume says the Albert Street matter typifies the thinking of what he calls “the something-for-nothing city.” Rather than protect a piece of land sewer staff said was required, the city decided to sell it off, then block development. If the city had retained the land or even bought it back from the NCC for the $800,000 DCR Phoenix paid, there would have been no issue, Hume says.

The lack of communication between city departments that is behind this problem happens far too often, Hume says. He acknowledges that an internal difference of opinion about the threat to the sewers is behind the years of delay at 801 Albert.

Buying the land back now isn’t really an option. With a viable development plan for the site, DCR Phoenix planning manager Bill Buchanan says the property is now worth at least $15 million. What the city needs to do, Hume says, is find a way to develop the site while protecting its interests.

That ought to be assisted by the fact that the mix of office and residential use is just the kind of thing the city’s official plan calls for. The city talks a great game about encouraging development and infill downtown, but on this particular site, it hasn’t followed through. It’s time to say yes to this plan.

There is no justification for wasting the taxpayers’ money at the OMB. This is such a tough-to-develop and unattractive site, the city should be glad that someone is willing to take it on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2010, 3:31 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
whoops, double post....

Denley is really simplifying the "aesthetics" issue (IMO)... the staff report has a detailed explanation of how the design doesn't fit with the OP.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2010, 1:16 PM
TransitZilla TransitZilla is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
Planners are leaning heavily on the aesthetic argument, with urban design manager Richard Kilstrom saying the urban design is “pretty awful,” even though the developers haven’t even submitted sketches of the buildings.
Isn't there a rendering here?

Regardless, there is a big difference between aesthetics and site plan layout, and I'm sure Denley knows that. He's just pretending that they're the same because it's convenient to his argument.

I posted earlier in this thread that the City should have worked with the developers to identify a way to phase the construction to allow this site to evolve into what they want over time, and I still stand by that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2010, 5:26 PM
Davis137's Avatar
Davis137 Davis137 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,290
It's all smoke n' mirrors to me
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2010, 11:43 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2010, 1:46 AM
cityguy's Avatar
cityguy cityguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Windsor
Posts: 752
This project seems doomed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Nov 8, 2011, 3:33 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
801 Albert Street, proposed development
http://dalhousiecommunityassociation...velopment.html
DALHOUSIE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION

755 Somerset Street West, Ottawa, Ontario, K1R 6R1

16 October 2011


Councillor Diane Holmes, City of Ottawa

Cc: Jeff Polowin, Hill & Knowlton
Councilor Katherine Hobbs

Dear Councillor,

Re: Re-Zoning of 801 Wellington St.

On Sept. 20 ’11, representatives of the Dalhousie and Hintonburg Community Associations were given a presentation of perspectives and other drawings of office towers for the 801 Wellington site opposite Bayview Station. The developer did not leave any documents with us. There was no assurance that any resultant buildings would look like what was presented. We were merely being informed that this was the basis of a re-zoning request which would eliminate the existing 1.5 FSI, allow 196, 184 and 95m heights ASL, and drastically reduce commercial parking requirements. Some shadow studies were later submitted electronically.

Site Planning:
A preliminary review indicates that the principal pedestrian and vehicle circulation and connectivity issues of the site have been met including views through the streets foreseen in the draft CDP, except that the gap between the two tall towers should be accessible around the clock.

Section 37:
The proponent committed to partial funding of a Wellington St. footbridge over the O-train, connected by a sidewalk and shared driveway/path along the south side of the site. We did not think anything else of significant was being provided that wouldn’t be required under the usual requirements of the OP. Replacing sewers is not a community benefit.

Mixed-use Centre:
As per the OP, Mixed-use Centres should be characterized by a broad variety of uses. In our view a significant residential component is essential in such a large development to insure the area is not dead after 5pm. Accordingly, at least 1/3 of the FSI should be residential. Thus the FSI should not be eliminated. Rather a max. FSI for commercial and a minimum FSI for residential should be applied. The great expanse of non-residential use between north Hintonburg and Walnut Court needs to be linked with some residential. A mixed use project will better contribute to knitting the communities together.

We support a “Mainstreet” style connectivity between northwest Dalhousie and north Hintonburg. This will require considerable care to ensure that Albert does not continue to be a speedway in this area.

Shadowing:
Studies were only forwarded for 10, 12 and 2 o’clock. Other shadow studies were requested but not yet provided. We would like a shadow study that instead of focussing on the new buildings, focuses on when and for how long the adjacent residences will be shadowed. The total FSI proposed should be less than 8.0 to reduce excessive shadowing.

Parking:
The requested reduction in commercial parking might just be sufficient in such proximity to a LRT station, but we have seen no parking study that backs this up. The possible impact on the nearby residential communities could be severe.

And there is no provision for residential parking, even though some non-office uses, such as residences or a hotel, were mentioned by the proponent. More parking needs to be incorporated into the development to accommodate a residential component. There will be no means to do so later.

All exterior parking should be short term only or the support uses will not function. Indeed, we favour most of the interior parking also being short term rather than monthly. Once it is monthly-only parking, the neighbourhood will be plagued by day parkers.

Compensating bicycle parking is required since vehicle parking is so reduced. We would like to see the bike parking facilitiy on the west side elaborated.

Design Review:
The proponents claim exemption from Design Review. Design review should be a condition of any re-zoning of such a prominent site.

Conclusion:
This proposal is not yet ready to proceed to a re-zoning in its present form.

Yours truly,



Eric Darwin, President

DALHOUSIE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Nov 8, 2011, 4:01 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,243
based on EMAPS it looks like the property is at around 56m asl so 196m asl would mean a 140m tall building? depends where it's located on the site. According to Josh's link in the general rumours thread it's two 33 fl office buildings.


Quote:
Originally Posted by blackjagger View Post
As per the Dalhousie Community Association meeting minutes, Phoenix has revised their 801 Albert development to two 33 storey office towers. Could we have a new tallest proposal??


http://dalhousiecommunityassociation...-oct-2011.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Nov 8, 2011, 2:02 PM
S-Man S-Man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,639
It's annoying this is still in Diane Holmes' area - she might mount a 'Save City Centre from shadows' campaign.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:08 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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