1081 Carling Ave | 57+89m | 16+27f | Approved

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Harley613

It's gross how they act like they would be the first neighborhood in Ottawa to have a 20 something story building next to homes. Very entitled and smarmy.

Entitled and smarmy, but whether it's also relevant remains to be seen. Although this is a neighbourhood that can bring a lot of entitled to its NIMBYism.

[originalmuffins]

These NIMBYs are delusional. Anything to protect their lawns from the sHadOwS anD wINd tuNnELs. That rendering is just so insane..........

It's probably a classism thing, why allow people who can afford only condos in this market into their single family home neighborhood. We'll be taking away their safety and freedom. Lol.

[zzptichka]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/pl...l-farm-research-scientists-say-1.6924383

Planned towers threaten experimental farm research, scientists say

God this makes me so angry.

"Scientists say"... Effing NIMBYs know that their usual bullshit doesn't work anymore so they are weaponizing "Our Precious Farm" talking point to keep "undesirables" away from the area. The towers will be on the NORTH side. There will be next to ZERO shadow, especially considering how vast the Farm is.

People will read the title and think the towers in the middle of the tiny farm (let's face it, most Ottawans have no idea how big is the Farm and where it's even located) are about to wipe it all out.

Reddit crowd, that is usually dunking on nimbys, already fell for this manipulation hook, line and sinker.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/pl...l-farm-research-scientists-say-1.6924383

Planned towers threaten experimental farm research, scientists say

God this makes me so angry.

"Scientists say"... Effing NIMBYs know that their usual bullshit doesn't work anymore so they are weaponizing "Our Precious Farm" talking point to keep "undesirables" away from the area. The towers will be on the NORTH side. There will be next to ZERO shadow, especially considering how vast the Farm is.

People will read the title and think the towers in the middle of the tiny farm (let's face it, most Ottawans have no idea how big is the Farm and where it's even located) are about to wipe it all out.

Reddit crowd, that is usually dunking on nimbys, already fell for this manipulation hook, line and sinker.

If the farm wins the locals aren't going to like the result that SHOULD be enforced upon them.

If towers can NOT be built along the edge of the farm then the entire neighborhood within 1km should be zoned for 9 stories. Or whatever the amount is that allows the city to make up for the loss in available units along arterial roads and near mass transit.

[OTSkyline]

Reason#42364 why we shouldn't have a 4sq km farm in the middle of an urban city/Capital.

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

Reason#42364 why we shouldn't have a 4sq km farm in the middle of an urban city/Capital.

Oh, you don't know? That land is the only 4 sq. km. out of Canada's 9,984,670 sq. km. where these experiments will work, and that half an acre that would be in shade for two hours in the late evening for two months of the summer is the only half an acre out of Canada's 2.467 billion acres where that particular experiment can be conducted.

[McKellarDweller]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

Reason#42364 why we shouldn't have a 4sq km farm in the middle of an urban city/Capital.

Aren't there long-term, multi-decade studies conducted on that land that can't be started from new?

[RideauRat]

I'm not a scientist but isn't the farm in its current location like the WORST grounds for experiments ?

I'd imagine it be to the equivalent of running some sort of quarantined lab test where you want to least skewed results from outside environmental factors, except the lab is a Tim Hortons on Rideau street this case.


why wont the scientist address all of it in this case? how are their results even worth a damn with so much distractions and city pollution, increase in pedestrians, waste & more. (genuine question)

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by McKellarDweller

Aren't there long-term, multi-decade studies conducted on that land that can't be started from new?

I wonder how valuable any multi-decade projects on the Northern periphery of the farm are compared to the value of densification of the area over the coming decades. When is the inflection point.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by McKellarDweller

Aren't there long-term, multi-decade studies conducted on that land that can't be started from new?

Yeah. The quote below gives a good idea of those considerations.

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

From the article: Bold is my highlight. I agree with what Jeff is saying and I also agree with the above comment. How much does this matter? In science, you try to control all the variables and it makes it tougher when a new variable is added to the mix. How significant it is? To us uninformed folks, it seems pretty minor. To the scientists at the farm, doesn't seem to be minor for them. So, we say 'adjust', and they say 'we have 150 years of history in this specific field, it's not that as simple as adjusting'. How important is that specific research when where they plant will have other variables? I don't really buy the farms logic of significance either despite personally having a dairy farm background. Trees will grow around farmers fields. Shadows are a thing. Add it to your study and say "impact of shadows on growth patterns of soybeans".

"I have also pasted a screen shot showing modeling by Agriculture Canada demonstrating the reduced minutes of sunlight (including red spectrum light that is particularly important to the process of photosynthesis and that is more abundant when the sun is at a more oblique angle later in the day: it is helpful to know that there are 260,000 minutes of sunlight in an Ottawa growing season, not accounting for cloudy days).

The concerns are legitimate. As I understand the issue, plantings are not uniform throughout the fields in question: different varieties are planted within discrete small plots. If the sun moves across a field in a way that results in different levels of spectrum across varieties, it will be challenging to isolate the variables in determining which varieties are best achieving the desired scientific outcomes.

Bluntly, I believe that bigger concern being expressed is the future of the Farm. If the different levels of light can’t be accounted for through a regression analysis, the fields here are not at least so unique as to eliminate the potential to do the same research elsewhere. But as has been expressed to me, if the Farm’s research potential is nibbled away at how long will it be before its utility as a living lab is gone? When that day comes would the Farm simply be sold off for development? These are not wild-eyed questions. They are though, I believe, premature: even if the Taggart proposal is allowed to proceed it’s by no means inevitable that it will result in loss of the Farm"

I don't think any of us are scientists who work in the agriculture industry. We don't know what's at stake. Maybe it is time to have a serious conversation on the future of the Central Experimental Farm. We could look at finishing the multi year studies, but start gradually moving the experiments elsewhere, like the Greenbelt or further out.

Long term, it might be worth considering redeveloping much of the farm, once all research moves out, or create a urban farming zone that provides food for locals.

For now, I don't think we can outright reject the arguments from actual scientist who work on this research. It's not necessarily NIMBYism, but there life's work.

[Harley613]

My dream for the farm has and always will be for it to keep the museum and some agriculture and animals, but only as part of a world class urban central park. I want ponds with pedal boats, sports fields and ice skating, bandshell/ampitheatre, perhaps a zoo. Scraping off some soil to expose some Canadian Shield. I want it all tied cohesively together with the Arboretum, Fletcher Wildlife Garden and Dow's Lake. We already have half the ingredients for something truly incredible and world class there. I think important agricultural research should be done....anywhere else but the core of a near-future 2 million metro. That should be land for the people. I do NOT want to see the land developed, but would love to see incredible density along the fringe of my dream park, all looking down at an urban oasis in the core of the capital.

Best Examples :
Forest Park in St. Louis
Prospect Park in Brooklyn

[McKellarDweller]

Originally Posted by Harley613

I wonder how valuable any multi-decade projects on the Northern periphery of the farm are compared to the value of densification of the area over the coming decades. When is the inflection point.

Hey.. I hope you didn't take my question as being against development on the north side of Carling
I agree with your other question .. asking about the nutritional value of sun on the farm for a small number of evening hours in a small portion of the year in the summer.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Harley613

My dream for the farm has and always will be for it to keep the museum and some agriculture and animals, but only as part of a world class urban central park. I want ponds with pedal boats, sports fields and ice skating, bandshell/ampitheatre, perhaps a zoo. Scraping off some soil to expose some Canadian Shield. I want it all tied cohesively together with the Arboretum, Fletcher Wildlife Garden and Dow's Lake. We already have half the ingredients for something truly incredible and world class there. I think important agricultural research should be done....anywhere else but the core of a near-future 2 million metro. That should be land for the people. I do NOT want to see the land developed, but would love to see incredible density along the fringe of my dream park, all looking down at an urban oasis in the core of the capital.

Best Examples :
Forest Park in St. Louis
Prospect Park in Brooklyn

Might even add Assiniboine in Winnipeg.

I'd caution anyone who wants a full on redevelopment. Anything east of Mornignside should be protected at the highest level. The only portion that might be dispensable once all research has left is the land between Fisher and Merivale.

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by McKellarDweller

Hey.. I hope you didn't take my question as being against development on the north side of Carling
I agree with your other question .. asking about the nutritional value of sun on the farm for a small number of evening hours in a small portion of the year in the summer.

Not at all! I'm always open for questions, debate, information, discussion. I learn so much here and am constantly evolving my own opinions. I never take someone else's thoughts on a matter as being any more concrete than my own.

Agreed about your second point. I think the Farm needs to chime in on the exact impact this two hours for two months evening shadow would cause. Otherwise, the NIMBYs will use the situation as incontestable proof that the lot should get a 12 story hulking sidescraper instead of this rather nice and reasonably scaled and designed project.

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

If the farm wins the locals aren't going to like the result that SHOULD be enforced upon them.

If towers can NOT be built along the edge of the farm then the entire neighborhood within 1km should be zoned for 9 stories. Or whatever the amount is that allows the city to make up for the loss in available units along arterial roads and near mass transit.

I'm inclined to think this is not the Farm's initiative. They were either lobbied by the local CA with influential members in it, or maybe some of these scientists actually live in the neighbourhood.

I'd be curious to see ATIP documents related to this.

[Ottawacurious]

There's an opportunity here too. Why not work with the developer and look at green building on skyscrapers and ability to grow foods and plants there. I get the original mission is farms but why not open the mission to include farming in a city - be it balcony or rooftop gardens. Yes, not their normal research but certainly relevant. Tie it in with the green builds architecture at Carleton. Develop/cultivate (see what I did there) that relationship and grow new areas of development.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by McKellarDweller

Aren't there long-term, multi-decade studies conducted on that land that can't be started from new?

That point has been made by the Farm in the past (the hospital location debate, iirc).

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

I'm inclined to think this is not the Farm's initiative. They were either lobbied by the local CA with influential members in it, or maybe some of these scientists actually live in the neighbourhood.

I'd be curious to see ATIP documents related to this.

I did think the article should have addressed this (they probably don't but it would be good to know),

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Harley613

My dream for the farm has and always will be for it to keep the museum and some agriculture and animals, but only as part of a world class urban central park. I want ponds with pedal boats, sports fields and ice skating, bandshell/ampitheatre, perhaps a zoo. Scraping off some soil to expose some Canadian Shield. I want it all tied cohesively together with the Arboretum, Fletcher Wildlife Garden and Dow's Lake. We already have half the ingredients for something truly incredible and world class there. I think important agricultural research should be done....anywhere else but the core of a near-future 2 million metro. That should be land for the people. I do NOT want to see the land developed, but would love to see incredible density along the fringe of my dream park, all looking down at an urban oasis in the core of the capital.

Best Examples :
Forest Park in St. Louis
Prospect Park in Brooklyn

A tempting vision, although the Farm is also "world class" of a sort, no?

[Harley613]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

A tempting vision, although the Farm is also "world class" of a sort, no?

I don't think the acres of fields are 'world class' anything to a casual observer. Maybe an agricultural researcher or a farm afficionado. To most of us it's just a peculiarity I think. The Arboretum/Observatory/Museum/Fletcher are amazing but could be so much more as part of my vision.