SOHO Lisgar | ??m |16 fl | Completed

[waterloowarrior]

SOHO Parkway ad in the Citizen (scanned by rakerman)



Includes URL for site for SOHO Lisgar & Champagne.

http://www.sohovipclub.com/

For SOHO Lisgar they have an "aerial map".




Streetview

[AuxTown]

Looks like it will blend in perfectly with Centretown's sea of boxes. I actually like the density of the area and feel that anything taller would seem out of place. Should give Urban Capital some competition in the entry level condo market along Bank. Picture the project here:



Should be just to the left of and closer to the camera than the yellow building with the Domicile advertisements on it.

[waterloowarrior]

there's an application for SOHO Lisgar at the Committee of Adjustment meeting on February 17 http://www.kitchissippiward.com/comm...r-feb-17-2010/

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

there's an application for SOHO Lisgar at the Committee of Adjustment meeting on February 17 http://www.kitchissippiward.com/comm...r-feb-17-2010/

I wish all Councillor's or the Committee itself would publish a summary of hearings...it would be useful to see what has been applied for in the general area and how successful they were in getting variances etc approved.

[rakerman]

site is up but it's just a signup form http://soholisgar.com/

ad in the Saturday Citizen says $229,900 to $1.2 million

sales centre with model suite opening April 10, at 300 Lisgar

no new render that I know of

[jcollins]

That's really exciting that they'll have both new projects going at the same time. Shows their commitment to the projects and the city.

They shouldn't compete against each other either I don't think. Or would the Champagne project not be ready for sales to even possible compete against one another?

[blackjagger]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

I wish all Councillor's or the Committee itself would publish a summary of hearings...it would be useful to see what has been applied for in the general area and how successful they were in getting variances etc approved.

Based on the Buzz Report from the CCCA the CoA was asked for an increase in FSI and reduction of front and side yards setback. The CCCA requested a provision to benefit the local community in exchange for the request.

http://www.centretowncitizens.ca/buz...-february-2010

I wish that more community associations would due that instead of flat out being against, not that the CCCA isn't against a lot of proposals. But to trade the developer a few extra floors for say a donation to a local park or street art would add a lot to Ottawa.

Cheers,
Josh\

[waterloowarrior]

Urbsite has a great article about the north part of Centretown
http://urbsite.blogspot.com/2010/03/...velopment.html

edit: fixed URL

Also includes some SOHO Lisgar renders

[Ottawan]

I really like the renderings! This will be an attractive building in a great location. That said, I would be cautious about buying there, or at least aware that there is the potential for views on every side to be boxed in by new development.

[blackjagger]

I like the rendering as well, but it could have been so much more. Though it is something very different to the standard beige box we seemed to be cursed with. This with Hudson Park, Tribeca, and even Central may start a trend to more interesting design. Though I am a little surprised with the height. My assumption would have been that they would have tried for at least 15 floors if not more. Not saying they would have gotten it, but I figured an attempted would have been made.

An increase in height would have allowed for a design that includes some setback, similar to Charlesforts Lisgar proposal. Why are we forcing developers to build to the extremes of the lot instead of allow height in exchange for less bulk.

Cheers,
Josh

[K-133]

Originally Posted by blackjagger

An increase in height would have allowed for a design that includes some setback, similar to Charlesforts Lisgar proposal. Why are we forcing developers to build to the extremes of the lot instead of allow height in exchange for less bulk.

Cheers,
Josh

Josh,

To clarify, are you suggesting that imposing height restrictions is forcing builders to build to the extremes of the lots in order to ensure that their projects are profitable and worth their investment? If so, I agree.

My concerns about this project, as an investor, is location. I've walked those blocks of Bank street many times, and they are not always very appealing. Hopefully the area cleans up further, but with the drug clinic a couple of blocks away, I don't foresee that happening anytime soon.

Mind you, the Domicile building is in the same 'zone' on Cooper, and seems to be doing well. I'll have to look into how well that building rents to confirm my concerns. Any others on here with such facts?

Other than location, this project looks pretty exciting!

[waterloowarrior]

the building right behind this one (@ 375 Cooper) is also getting redeveloped (at a much smaller scale).

http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/cit...S-PGM-0055.htm

The property under review, 375 Cooper Street is a two-storey garage-type building constructed in 1956 and located at the rear of the property at 300 Lisgar Street (Canus Plastics). A location map is attached as Document 1.

The existing building was constructed as a warehouse and was owned by Canadian Pittsburgh Industries prior to its purchase by Canus Plastics. The property at 300 Lisgar Street has been subdivided by Canus Plastics and the southern half of the building with the civic address, 375 Cooper Street was sold to the current owner. In the recent past the building has been leased to commercial entities with an apartment on the second floor. Photos of the existing conditions are presented in Document 2. The existing building is an underutilized, semi-industrial site on a mainly residential block of Cooper Street between O’Connor and Bank Streets.

This building was the subject of a previous application under the Ontario Heritage Act in the fall of 2009. The property owner withdrew the application in December 2009 after receiving feedback from Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee (OBHAC) regarding the design. This new application incorporates the comments from both OBHAC and staff regarding the design.

The proposal is to alter the existing building to allow for its complete conversion to residential use with three condominium units. The proposed alterations include adding a third storey penthouse to the building to allow for additional residential units, re-cladding the entire front façade, and providing new landscaping. The only elements to be retained are the glass blocks, which will be relocated on the front façade of the building and the garage door, which will be made smaller and will allow for indoor parking for two vehicles.

[blackjagger]

Originally Posted by K-133

Josh,

To clarify, are you suggesting that imposing height restrictions is forcing builders to build to the extremes of the lots in order to ensure that their projects are profitable and worth their investment? If so, I agree.

That is exactly what I am suggesting. And our downtown core is a prime example of the environment that this leads to, block upon block of buildings build out to the very edge of their lots (at ground level I don't think this is a bad thing) from the street to the top floor. Every time I think of this I see the Bell building in all its glory, a 50 story building made to fit in half the height.

I'll try and take the rendering and see what I can come up with in PS that better describes what this proposal could have looked like.

Though again beggars can’t be choosers, this is much better than a beige box. I just image so much better for Ottawa.

Cheers,
Josh

[jcollins]

I agree with Josh, I'm a little surprised they didn't at least try for a bit higher than 12 floors.

Maybe they didn't want to be shut down by Diane, or have to potentially deal with the OMB

[blackjagger]

Not perfect by any means...but the idea is there. Taller, thinner, with setbacks is better then a 12 story block.

[K-133]

Unfortunately, your preaching to the choir...

Ottawa could be such a great city.

[jcollins]

Ya that would look great!! What is that ~24 floors?

Still wierd they didn't try to go bigger.

[rodionx]

Originally Posted by K-133

Josh,

My concerns about this project, as an investor, is location. I've walked those blocks of Bank street many times, and they are not always very appealing. Hopefully the area cleans up further, but with the drug clinic a couple of blocks away, I don't foresee that happening anytime soon.

Mind you, the Domicile building is in the same 'zone' on Cooper, and seems to be doing well. I'll have to look into how well that building rents to confirm my concerns. Any others on here with such facts?

Other than location, this project looks pretty exciting!

You mean the methadone clinic at Bank and Somerset? That was controversial when it went in, but it turned out to be much ado about nothing. I've been walking past it for years now, and never noticed anything untoward. There used to be an Internet cafe around the corner on Bank that was way more dodgy, but it's now an art gallery for "Canada's only illuminist."

It's true that some days it looks like Bank Street has been beaten with an ugly stick from one end to the other, but the overall trend is slowly upward. These condo projects themselves are a major driver. You can't bring in hundreds of people who can afford to rent or own a $400,000 apartment without altering the ambiance. Not that it's going to be the Glebe or Westboro, but the kind of people that go for downtown living wouldn't want it to be.

[citizen j]

Originally Posted by jcollins

Ya that would look great!! What is that ~24 floors?

Still wierd they didn't try to go bigger.

Maybe trying to play this one by the books to build up some good will with council on Soho Champagne?

[jcollins]

Originally Posted by citizen j

Maybe trying to play this one by the books to build up some good will with council on Soho Champagne?

Ya that could make sense. But why not at least match the Parkway project at 15 fl