Ugly Ottawa

[brentgaulois]

Originally Posted by McC

I don't disagree with you about the aesthetics, shadows, etc. we have definitely learned how to do social housing better with the Beaver Barracks! But it's a big jump from there to saying that we should evict people from scarce social housing to fix up the looks. (now that would be gentrification!)

I don't think Ottawa's market has reached a point (yet) where you could make a compelling business case for selling off an existing highrise to be levelled and re-built to bring in enough revenue to pay for building more/better social housing elsewhere.

But let's say we can wave a magic want to make the economics work; even then, with the CDP for the area, it would be tough to replace this building with anything higher than 6 floors on a trad main street, and I think that would probably be the coup de grace to any business case.

I agree with you that at this moment it would not be wise to simply demolish this building just yet for those reasons, considering Ottawa's market is definitely too small to demolish a building that at least could stand for several years more. However, I think with the redevelopment of Bayview Yards, along with Hintonburg/Mechanicsville, there definitely is room and need to create better social housing there. If there is a suitable replacement, then I don't think the neighbourhood should shy away from letting this building go.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by McC

I don't disagree with you about the aesthetics, shadows, etc. we have definitely learned how to do social housing better with the Beaver Barracks! But it's a big jump from there to saying that we should evict people from scarce social housing to fix up the looks. (now that would be gentrification!)

I don't think Ottawa's market has reached a point (yet) where you could make a compelling business case for selling off an existing highrise to be levelled and re-built to bring in enough revenue to pay for building more/better social housing elsewhere.

But let's say we can wave a magic want to make the economics work; even then, with the CDP for the area, it would be tough to replace this building with anything higher than 6 floors on a trad main street, and I think that would probably be the coup de grace to any business case.

Not social housing, but we are starting to level fairly large buildings. 90 Elgin, John Carling and now we are considering leveling the Jackson Building. The Wellington building has been gutted and rebuilt from the inside. Oh wait... that has nothing to do with good economics, just the federal government’s stupidity.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Not social housing, but we are starting to level fairly large buildings. 90 Elgin, John Carling and now we are considering leveling the Jackson Building. The Wellington building has been gutted and rebuilt from the inside. Oh wait... that has nothing to do with good economics, just the federal government’s stupidity.

I can haz asbestos?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by gjhall

I can haz asbestos?

If we tear down all the buildings with asbestos, half the city would be gone. Asbestos might be hazardous to remove, but doesn’t require a total tear down. I know that the J. Carling building and Lorne supposedly has/had structural problems (not a common problem in modern office buildings), but the Wellington building, there is no way it needed to be gutted of its entire structural frame and rebuilt.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

If we tear down all the buildings with asbestos, half the city would be gone. Asbestos might be hazardous to remove, but doesn’t require a total tear down. I know that the J. Carling building and Lorne supposedly has/had structural problems (not a common problem in modern office buildings), but the Wellington building, there is no way it needed to be gutted of its entire structural frame and rebuilt.

Could be so, but just saying "there is no way" isn't actually supported by any facts. Perhaps it had more to do with asbestos + needed a gut reno anyway. When I worked in Parliament I used to go there for the odd thing, and the building, while possessing many noteworthy fine details, was largely really awful inside.

The Lorne building was extremely troubled with HVAC and other issues which were making employees in the building sick for decades.

I know nothing about Sir John Carling other than the ID badge office I went to there once 7 years ago.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by gjhall

Could be so, but just saying "there is no way" isn't actually supported by any facts. Perhaps it had more to do with asbestos + needed a gut reno anyway. When I worked in Parliament I used to go there for the odd thing, and the building, while possessing many noteworthy fine details, was largely really awful inside.

The Lorne building was extremely troubled with HVAC and other issues which were making employees in the building sick for decades.

I know nothing about Sir John Carling other than the ID badge office I went to there once 7 years ago.

Removing asbestos is common; we don't need to completely gut a building to do it.

The Lorne probably needed to go anyway, with the parking lot behind it and the lack of aesthetics; an addition at the rear would likely have been counterproductive.

I can't say much about the Carling building, but from a far, it looks fine (I know that doesn’t prove anything, but anyway) and I can't see a building, especially such a large, yet simple office building from 67' being structurally unsound. But again, I could be wrong.

As for the Wellington, I can’t recall if both sides were gutted, but if so, it would be kind of sketchy; what are the chances that both sides of a building, completed 3 decades apart, would need a whole new structure. Furthermore, it was built by a private company during some of the greatest times in our history (the roaring 20’s where everyone had struck it rich and the early 60s, a prosperous time when Canada saw the start of a massive building boom).

So no, I don’t have cold hard facts, but I believe that mine is a plausible deduction.

[Kitchissippi]

How has this ugly building escaped this thread? It's the Shared Services Canada building on Queen, the street level is hideous. It looks particularly bad next to The Gardens condo

[McC]

It's ugliness is insidious too; it seeps into the souls of the people who work there! (they are some of the jerkiest drivers I see pulling into that parking lot, and I see some doozies in the morning walk in to the office!)

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

How has this ugly building escaped this thread? It's the Shared Services Canada building on Queen, the street level is hideous. It looks particularly bad next to The Gardens condo

About 60% of that city block belongs on ugly Ottawa. While we're at it, about 65% of the Escarpment District belongs on ugly Ottawa!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

About 60% of that city block belongs on ugly Ottawa. While we're at it, about 65% of the Escapement District belongs on ugly Ottawa!

"Escapement" district! Freudian slip?

[McC]

Bam!

[Beedok]

I was thinking Ottawa was really ugly. Then I went for a walk in Gatineau!

[Harley613]

I popped by Mikey's 'house' tonight to take a shot of the ultimate 'Ugly Ottawa' example.

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by Harley613

I popped by Mikey's 'house' tonight to take a shot of the ultimate 'Ugly Ottawa' example.

It's all red... Who's Mikey?

[Harley613]

Michael Cowpland

[S-Man]

Do the Cowplands/a Cowpland still live there?

They were a big deal back when, what with him and all his dough and her with her diamond nipples and a painted dog.

Trying to find your way in Rockliffe Park is a nightmare, I might add. A well-treed nightmare with German vehicles aplenty.

[Cre47]

Here are a few from Gatineau

Former Dairy Queen, has been like this for at least the past 10 years if not more. His next door neighboors pretty much the same except with occasional temporary tenants

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.45619...BpQT-a-M8g!2e0

Former McDonalds which I think after this shot looked in much worse shape

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.44751...QbCMAtrwFQ!2e0
This lot in a very busy street has become a field of weeds for the past four years ever since a fire gutted the building there

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.42809...IMKt5gth2Q!2e0

Same street, being vacant like this for seven years

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.43083...0ICRiYusMw!2e0

[Harley613]

Oh...my...God...are they painting it?!? There was definitely some activity going on this morning!

[TMA-1]

At least it's easy to spot.



easy to spot in any weather 4338 by southfacing, on Flickr

Originally Posted by Harley613

I popped by Mikey's 'house' tonight to take a shot of the ultimate 'Ugly Ottawa' example.

[kwoldtimer]

They certainly seem to have maintained a low profile in recent years. All her over the top tackiness was about the only interesting thing on Ottawa's social circuit, back in the day!