HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 2:02 PM
Harley613's Avatar
Harley613 Harley613 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aylmer, QC
Posts: 6,869
Did Randall Denley read my post? That's my idea for the future of the farm, including the scraping of the soil to expose the Canadian Shield in places.
__________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/the.harleydavis/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 2:17 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harley613 View Post
The existing building on this site also shadows the greenhouses for a couple of minutes after 8 in the summer months. An 8 story office building, a 27 story tower...even a 60 story tower will all have the same effect at that distance when the sun gets low.

Where did you hear that the concern was about the greenhouses? I thought it was about the farmland, but I could be mistaken.
__________________
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 2:32 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
Where did you hear that the concern was about the greenhouses? I thought it was about the farmland, but I could be mistaken.
From here, posted by rocketphish August 13th.

Quote:
Leiper acknowledged concerns about the development’s impact on the Experimental Farm, noting Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s concerns about shadowing that would compromise experiments and “rob large greenhouses of passive heat,” increasing their bills.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...ered-this-week

Different articles raise different concerns. Field research is one thing, but losing passive heat at the greenhouse for a couple hours a year seems insignificant. That crosses the NIMBY line, not wanting to pay an extra $100 a year for power (at least, that's how it sounds).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 4:36 PM
Harley613's Avatar
Harley613 Harley613 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aylmer, QC
Posts: 6,869
I just ran my own comprehensive shadow study using http://shadowcalculator.eu . An 89 Metre building here would come closest to throwing shade on the greenhouse next to the ornamental gardens just before sunset on days right around August 19th, but it doesn't quite make it. There is no time of day on any day of the year where these buildings would cast any shadow on any of the three greenhouse areas of the experimental farm.
__________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/the.harleydavis/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 4:42 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 2,445
Thanks, Harley613. That is good to know.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 5:17 PM
Williamoforange's Avatar
Williamoforange Williamoforange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
and how do you think Agriculture Canada would have known that there would be a housing crisis in 2023 over 100 years ago when the experimental farm was acquired in 1886?
What they should have known that is unless they own the land they don't get to dictate it's use against what the goals of the provinces & federal government policies are....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 5:25 PM
Williamoforange's Avatar
Williamoforange Williamoforange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ottawacurious View Post
I think someone showed up above that any height will cause shadows...even trees will cause shadows

I started thinking about this differently - where else could condos/apartments go up in that area?

The west side of that stretch of Carling has far more opportunities for condos than the east stretch/directly across from their office buildings. This section/west side would also have greater impact on the farm than the East Side toward the future hospital.

Carling addresses - 1129, 1127 (houses), 1111 (parking indigo), retirement home (already built), 1087 (under discussion), Civic (few spots in the front that could be converted to towers potentially?), and then two blocks of houses that I doubt would turn into condos and then you are really out of the zone where shadows should make any difference. Thoughts?

Stated earlier but there are two projects currently that could be stopped under the logic from the farm....

Which of they were would require ~19 or more 9 story devs to make up for the loss of units.... All of which will also produce shadows on the farm....nvm never be allowed to actually be built in the local neighborhoods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 5:43 PM
zzptichka zzptichka is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Outaouias
Posts: 2,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harley613 View Post
I just ran my own comprehensive shadow study using http://shadowcalculator.eu . An 89 Metre building here would come closest to throwing shade on the greenhouse next to the ornamental gardens just before sunset on days right around August 19th, but it doesn't quite make it. There is no time of day on any day of the year where these buildings would cast any shadow on any of the three greenhouse areas of the experimental farm.
Great tool.
If we assume they are talking about these greenhouses in red square, the shadow does touch them for literally a few minutes before sunset for a couple of weeks in March and September. That's about it.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 5:52 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harley613 View Post
I just ran my own comprehensive shadow study using http://shadowcalculator.eu . An 89 Metre building here would come closest to throwing shade on the greenhouse next to the ornamental gardens just before sunset on days right around August 19th, but it doesn't quite make it. There is no time of day on any day of the year where these buildings would cast any shadow on any of the three greenhouse areas of the experimental farm.
The shadow analysis provided by the proponent indicates that on August 21st, the shadow would extend to just south of the Building 21 greenhouses. On September 21st, the shadow would extend to just north of them. Therefore halfway between those dates at about 6:30pm, wouldn't the shadow fall completely on those greenhouses? What does your modelling show?





http://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Im...02-21-0093.PDF
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 6:14 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Watched Taggart's presentation. For what it's worth, it's a decently nice proposal. They've definitely made some good changes, including set-backs. I like the space between and around the towers. A few renderings I hadn't seen before.

Did they add a retail/cafe space to the podium? The plaza is showing something that looks like a patio.

Video is still live, so I can't give a time stamp at this point.

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 6:33 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Brockington motion to defer the item (two months) so the City's Planning Department actual SPEAK to Agriculture Canada about development along Carling and Baseline. Nothing about Fisher or Merivale though.

Gower agrees the City should speak with Agriculture Canada, but does not agree with the deferral.

Clarke Kelly good with deferral. "Doing it properly better than doing it quickly", "Do it right, not quick".

Tierney pulling the housing crisis card (would love to see him fight this hard for the climate crisis). Does seem like no one from the Farm showed up to speak at delegation, which could be telling...

Troster doesn't care about the angular planes or "character", frustrated that not one from the Farm came down to speak, but she wants more info on whether this actually effects research as the climate and food security are also important.

Leiper ends by saying that the Province is on the City's arse and that deferring doesn't change that.

Votes on deferral:
Brockington - Yes
Curry - No
Dudas - Absent
Johnson - Absent
Kavanaugh - No
Kelly - Yes
Kitts - No
Lo - No
Tierney- No
Troster - Yes
Gower - No
Leiper - No

Deferral Fails.

New motion from Brockington to revise 27 floor tower down to 16. It's a strange one.

Leiper points out that reducing to 16 would reduce shadows on the field from 7,474 minutes per year to 5,799 minutes per year, which is insignificant. The other field would be 26,187 minutes per year vs. 25,304 minutes per year. Brockington destroyed on this one.

Of those who were present, only Kelly and Brockington voted in favour of this motion.

Votes on the application:
Brockington - No
Curry - Absemt
Dudas - Absent
Johnson - Absent
Kavanaugh - Yes
Kelly - No
Kitts - Yes
Lo - Yes
Tierney- Yes
Troster - Yes
Gower - Yes
Leiper - Yes

Approved by Planning and Housing Committee.

Last edited by J.OT13; Aug 16, 2023 at 7:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 7:22 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Tierney spoke loud and proud about tackling the housing crisis and how his ward has one of the highest number of apps coming in for high rise apartments, and he's supporting them. Oh how quickly he forgot 1649 Montreal Rd, which has now been approved by the OLT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 9:48 PM
skyscraperaccount skyscraperaccount is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Posts: 223
JFC Brockington trying to cut the thing in half.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2023, 11:20 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,200
Ottawa planning committee OK's apartment towers across road from Central Experimental Farm
The redevelopment proposal for 1081 Carling Ave. now goes to full city council on Aug. 23.

Joanne Laucius, Ottawa Citizen
Published Aug 16, 2023 • Last updated 6 minutes ago • 4 minute read


The City of Ottawa’s planning and housing and development committee has approved a proposal for two towers on Carling Avenue across from the Central Experimental Farm.

The redevelopment proposal from Taggart Realty Management with Fotenn Planning + Design at 1081 Carling includes two residential towers — one 16 storeys and the other 27 storeys tall — replacing an existing eight-storey building and creating 410 units.

City staff had recommended that the committee approve the zoning bylaw amendment that would allow the project to proceed. The committee heard the project met the goals of the city’s official plan and an analysis of the shadow cast by the towers, based on the city’s terms of reference, concluded the shadows wouldn’t exceed the criteria for “open spaces” reserved for scientific, educational and cultural purposes.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada wrote the city expressing concern that the shadows cast by the 1081 Carling development would affect a plot of land used for research. Meanwhile, some councillors feared approving the project could set a precedent for upcoming high-rise developments around the experimental farm’s perimeter.

The proposal has been controversial in the neighbourhood, with 160 residents attending a virtual public meeting and 14 delegations appearing before the committee on Wednesday.

The discussion included questions about how future development would affect the farm, which is both a scientific and heritage institution providing green space for residents, although the plots are not accessible to the public.

“The experimental plots, which are directly across the street, are a significant reason for the designation of the farm as a national historic site,” said Leslie Maitland of Heritage Ottawa. “And, if these experimental plots are rendered useless, then you have to say, ‘Well, what was the point of the designation?'”

Corey Peabody appeared for the Fisher Heights Community Association. Even though the Carling development is not in Peabody’s neighbourhood, a proposal for three high-rise towers at the intersection of Fisher Avenue and Baseline Road will be up next.

“This decision on this development is really precedent-setting. 1081 (Carling) is going to set the standard for other developments around the perimeter of the experimental farm,” Peabody said. “I would really like to encourage the city to sit down with Agriculture Canada, create a buffer zone or something to protect the farmland.”

It’s council’s responsibility to address concerns over threats to the viability of the farm as a public asset, argued Knoxdale-Merivale Coun. Sean Devine, whose ward includes 780 Baseline.

“While we absolutely have an urgent need to build the kind of density that’s being offered here, that need does not exist in a vacuum. That does not supercede the fact that the farm is a vital asset, not only for the research that it produces, but for the unique role it plays in the city’s public life,” Devine said.

“What will Agriculture Canada do with the farm? Will they hold onto the farm if it faces death by 1,000 cuts?”

Some councillors pointed out that Agriculture Canada was not present to answer questions.

Beacon Hill-Cyrville Coun. Tim Tierney said Agriculture Canada could use other plots of land for research or use the affected plot for shadowing studies. The proposal is a good opportunity to build housing in a city experiencing a housing crisis. If the proposal was rejected, the city could be overruled by the province, Tierney said.

“We have to build houses, and that’s the truth of the matter. If we don’t do it, we’re going to get overruled.”

Without significant federal legislation to protect the farm, the city will continue to chip away at the farm, River Ward Coun. Riley Brockington said. On Carling Avenue between Preston Street and Churchill Avenue, 30 towers have been approved or are in the process of being approved, he said.

“This isn’t about 1081 Carling. This is just the catalyst that got us together to talk about what I believe is the more important issue,” said Brockington, who presented a motion to defer the decision until the next planning meeting on Oct. 18 to provide an opportunity for more input from Agriculture Caanda about building heights around the farm.

“Over time, we know the perimeter around the farm is going to be faced with development. We need to have a conversation and an understanding of what the right heights should be around the perimeter of the farm. Because 780 Baseline is next, and then Merivale, and we’re going to do this over and over again,” Brockington said.

“I loathe postponing applications when they are teed up and ready to go, but we don’t have these questions answered.”

Stittsville Coun. Glen Gower agreed the city needed to have more extensive meetings with Agriculture Canada and other stakeholders and acknowledged the decision could affect future applications, but he did not support deferring the decision.

Developing a major policy document around a new way to assess shadow and solar impact for the Central Experimental Farm would require reopening a significant part of the city’s official plan, which was approved by the province less than a year ago after three years of public consultation, Gower said.

“It would be a major change to the designations we made for the Baseline corridor, the Carling corridor, and perhaps others,” Gower said. “I don’t see that happening in a way that would affect our decision on this application between now and October.”

Brockington’s motion to defer the decision failed, as did a second motion to limit the height of the second Carling tower to 16 storeys.

A motion to approving the proposal will be before full city council on Aug. 23.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...erimental-farm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2023, 1:14 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,200
Committee approves controversial towers near experimental farm despite shading concerns
Environmental concerns at odds with council's pledge to promote new housing

Elyse Skura · CBC News
Posted: Aug 17, 2023 4:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: 5 hours ago


A controversial development has been given the green light by planning committee despite concerns from federal scientists who worry the high-rise towers will rob lands used to study agricultural impacts of needed sunlight — but community groups say they will continue to fight it.

City staff recommended members approve the plan by Taggart Realty Management to build two condominium towers, of 16- and 27-storeys, at 1081 Carling Ave. in an area that borders the Central Experimental Farm.

"The new net shadow created by the proposed development does not exceed the criteria established for open spaces," planner Collete Gorni told the committee. "As a result, staff do not have major concerns with the shadowing impact as it stands."

But several councillors, concerned residents and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada officials fear the project's effects could be disastrous and set a dangerous precedent for the area.

"If we chip away at this special property and render it useless, will the federal government simply have to fold their tents?" asked Karen Wright, the president of the Civic Hospital Neighbourhood Association.

"By neglect, we may lose this special piece of the city."

In the end, two motions by River ward Coun. Riley Brockington — one to defer a decision by two months and one to drop the height of the taller tower to 16 storeys — were rejected.

More than a dozen people called on councillors to reject the proposal, citing concerns about farm research but also about things like parking and traffic.

The eventual debate was framed as a conflict between fighting climate change and fighting homelessness.
"We have been preaching as a council, we have a housing crisis," said Beacon Hill-Cyrville ward Coun. Tim Tierney. "Either we're committed or we're not committed."

That argument carried no weight with neighbourhood associations.

"It was not an all-or-nothing proposal. It never was," said Tanis Halpape with the Civic Hospital Neighbourhood Association, who believes that simply making the 27-storey tower shorter would have addressed scientific concerns.

"Furthermore, we have to remember this is not affordable housing... We're creating very expensive — probably unaffordable to most Ottawa residents — housing."

Councillors in neighbouring wards also expressed concern about how approving this proposal would impact discussions on upcoming developments that border the farm.

Another question loomed over the committee meeting: why did the federal government, the developer and city staff come to different conclusions on whether the level of shade would affect crops?
Staff explained they evaluated the proposal as they would any other, considering the farm as green space and evaluating the effect of shadow in the same way they look into complaints of losing sunlight in a backyard.

But planning director Derrick Moodie said Agriculture Canada scientists were not cut out of talks.

"This winter we did have a discussion," Moodie told councillors. "I think it was informative for us to understand some of their concerns and impacts, but I think it was also informative for them to understand the policy framework that we work within."

Planning committee chair Jeff Leiper pressed Taggart Realty Management to agree their first study which said there is "no impact" from shadow on the farm was inaccurate.

But its representatives would not.
Instead they promised to update their report on cultural heritage impacts by Friday, so it can be reviewed by staff before next Wednesday's council meeting.

Despite some reservations, seven councillors voted to support staff recommendations; Brockington and West Carleton-March Coun. Clarke Kelly voted no.

"Had we refused this it would almost certainly have gone to the Ontario Land Tribunal," Leiper said. "We lose those battles. And the loss of those battles is not necessarily just a blow to pride. Our staff are heavily engaged in those tribunal cases and that's not time they can afford."

Taggart's vice-president of development Derek Howe told reporters he was "very happy" with the committee's decision, but declined to comment on whether the developer would work to address any lingering concerns.

It was painful news to Halpape, but not an ending.

"People are passionate about protecting the farm," she said. "That shouldn't stop."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...ttee-1.6937947
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2023, 3:45 PM
zzptichka zzptichka is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Outaouias
Posts: 2,296
Quote:
"People are passionate about protecting the farm," she said. "That shouldn't stop."
Passionate as in, none of the researchers even bothered to show up to speak in opposition of what could "destroy the lifetime of their work"?

That's what's making me mad. All you care about is reducing the number of undesirables who would live in your hood. You don't care about the Farm, you are only using it to manipulate the public opinion to help your agenda. Disgusting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2023, 1:28 AM
AuxTown's Avatar
AuxTown AuxTown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 4,552
Newsflash everyone: This was never about the farm!

Same shit happened when they tried to move the hospital to the most obvious location right across the street. Every busy-body NIMBY in the neighbourhood with too much time on their hands and too much money in their bank account canvassed the scientific community looking for reasons that particular patch of the farm could not be developed. They came up with endangered birds (I call bullshit) and crop experiments that couldn't possibly happen anywhere else (except for the 1000's of hectares of farmland immediately adjacent to Ottawa's urban boundaries). Then magically people started talking about the hospital in the less affluent and less likely to complain neighbourhood down the road. That said, I like the new location and I can't wait to work there, but the whole process stunk to high heaven!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2023, 4:54 AM
Harley613's Avatar
Harley613 Harley613 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aylmer, QC
Posts: 6,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuxTown View Post
Newsflash everyone: This was never about the farm!

Same shit happened when they tried to move the hospital to the most obvious location right across the street. Every busy-body NIMBY in the neighbourhood with too much time on their hands and too much money in their bank account canvassed the scientific community looking for reasons that particular patch of the farm could not be developed. They came up with endangered birds (I call bullshit) and crop experiments that couldn't possibly happen anywhere else (except for the 1000's of hectares of farmland immediately adjacent to Ottawa's urban boundaries). Then magically people started talking about the hospital in the less affluent and less likely to complain neighbourhood down the road. That said, I like the new location and I can't wait to work there, but the whole process stunk to high heaven!

I heard the head of the 'Civic Hospital Neighbourhood Association' yesterday morning on CBC One screaming about this, that, and the other thing and it was pretty much the most aimless pointless NIMBY thing I have ever heard. Same old bullshit.
__________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/the.harleydavis/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2023, 1:13 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuxTown View Post
Newsflash everyone: This was never about the farm!

Same shit happened when they tried to move the hospital to the most obvious location right across the street. Every busy-body NIMBY in the neighbourhood with too much time on their hands and too much money in their bank account canvassed the scientific community looking for reasons that particular patch of the farm could not be developed. They came up with endangered birds (I call bullshit) and crop experiments that couldn't possibly happen anywhere else (except for the 1000's of hectares of farmland immediately adjacent to Ottawa's urban boundaries). Then magically people started talking about the hospital in the less affluent and less likely to complain neighbourhood down the road. That said, I like the new location and I can't wait to work there, but the whole process stunk to high heaven!
Do you have any references to back up this statement or is this just your opinion? Both are valid, but it should be made clear (my interpretation is it is the latter, but I want to be sure).

The reality is the farm isn't the city's responsibility, it is the federal governments, so the planning committee made the correct move. If the scientists believe this is a problem, they can attempt to get the federal government to make similar height regulations to the ones the NCC set. I don't necessarily trust the process to make this happen, but that is the most appropriate avenue.
__________________
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2023, 1:31 PM
Dzingle Bells Dzingle Bells is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuxTown View Post
Newsflash everyone: This was never about the farm!


They were already extremely against the development before they knew about the potential shadows on the farm. They were grasping for typical NIMBY arguments (transition, angular plane, traffic, etc) that would have no weight at planning committee.

Once there was actually a legit planning policy question (shadows on the farm) they jumped behind that because it was the only thing that might actually get what they want...no development in their neighbourhood.

There is a reason they are not up in arms about the Lone Star development or other ones that will cast shadows on the farm. It's not about the farm.

Leiper even told them at their AGM that the shadow on the farm argument was the only thing that had any merit.
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 & Urban Ottawa
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:18 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.