New Ottawa Civic Hospital [930 Carling Ave + 520 Preston St] | U/C

[Buggys]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Uh... there is a huge difference between the two-hundred year old structure that is Fort Henry and the huge corn field that is the Experimental Farm. Fort Henry is irreplaceable and unique. The Farm is just one of countless giant farms throughout Southern Ontario.

Only in Ottawa is a generic corn field considered a key piece of heritage.

You cannot move the Central Experimental Farm because of the years worth of scientific data that exists for that particular geographic location & microclimate & soil conditions.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Uh... there is a huge difference between the two-hundred year old structure that is Fort Henry and the huge corn field that is the Experimental Farm. Fort Henry is irreplaceable and unique. The Farm is just one of countless giant farms throughout Southern Ontario.

Only in Ottawa is a generic corn field considered a key piece of heritage.

Well then why are both National Historic Sites?

[lrt's friend]

I've probably mentioned this before, but I've got inside insight on this file; I work for AAFC, specifically in the division that handles departmental requirements for the CEF. My co-workers and I have brainstormed this scenario many times and we all think it's a great idea. It would be much better for the department as it would allow us to significantly improve the quality of our research while decreasing costs considerably.

It is very reassuring that bureaucrats who are not residents of Ottawa are making these kinds of decisions on behalf of the City of Ottawa.

Nice that we will scatter the CEF's current facilities to multiple locations with less public accessibility and pave over the existing location.

Bah humbug.

Why should I believe you about relocation to the Greenbelt when it may be even cheaper to relocate research to other parts of the country with a similar climate in existing facilities? The cheapest option of course is to terminate the Ottawa research entirely. The perfect opportunity is to declare the CEF surplus when a round of budget cuts takes place.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Buggys

You cannot move the Central Experimental Farm because of the years worth of scientific data that exists for that particular geographic location & microclimate & soil conditions.

That's not particularly worth much, in the grand scheme of things.

Scientists get very attached to their research, and rightfully so, given how much of their life and soul they pour into it. This, however, often leads to scientists over sensationalizing about the importance of their work. Much of the teary-eyed media stories about the loss of historical data from Field One is essentially that.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Nice that we will scatter the CEF's current facilities to multiple locations with less public accessibility and pave over the existing location.

Not pave over.. build a new urban neighbourhood. Think of all the suburban expansion that could be avoided if the farm was opened to development. There's enough land in there to completely absorb all of Ottawa's population growth for 5 years. That's 5 years worth of growth in an urban location already serviced by urban infrastructure instead of 5 years worth of high-cost suburban expansion. The economic value to this city and its taxpayers would be immense.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Why should I believe you about relocation to the Greenbelt when it may be even cheaper to relocate research to other parts of the country with a similar climate in existing facilities? The cheapest option of course is to terminate the Ottawa research entirely. The perfect opportunity is to declare the CEF surplus when a round of budget cuts takes place.

As I explained in my previous post, there needs to be an Eastern Ontario research site, so the research functions performed on the CEF couldn't be moved to another region. And the Greenbelt is the only other space in the Eastern Ontario region where the government owns sizeable parcels of arable land.

In any case... most of the significant research that takes place on the CEF now takes place in indoor genetics laboratories in the northeast corner of the farm, which would almost certainly be retained by AAFC under any CEF closure scenario due to the very high cost of relocating them. Also, the Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids, and Nematodes is housed in the KW Neatby building and moving it somewhere else would be a huge pain.

Going back to the hospital, it is for this reason that Option 10 is completely out of the question.

[lrt's friend]

Not pave over.. build a new urban neighbourhood. Think of all the suburban expansion that could be avoided if the farm was opened to development. There's enough land in there to completely absorb all of Ottawa's population growth for 5 years. That's 5 years worth of growth in an urban location already serviced by urban infrastructure instead of 5 years worth of high-cost suburban expansion. The economic value to this city and its taxpayers would be immense.

It is still paving it over no what you say.

As another poster indicated, this would be in direct competition with higher priority developments at Chaudière, Lebreton Flats, Bayview and Rockcliffe and with no easy access to rapid transit.

As we have seen with the Central Park development west of Merivale on surplus CEF land, we ended up with nothing better than typical suburban development.

Money is not everything. This is not necessarily positive city building.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It is still paving it over no what you say.

As another poster indicated, this would be in direct competition with higher priority developments at Chaudière, Lebreton Flats, Bayview and Rockcliffe and with no easy access to rapid transit.

Agreed, it would take years to build out. But developers often buy up land decades before they plan to use it. AAFC could sell off all the land now, and make an agreement with buyers that AAFC could continue to use the newly sold land rent-free until the buyer is ready to start development. That would allow CEF functions to be gradually relocated.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As we have seen with the Central Park development west of Merivale on surplus CEF land, we ended up with nothing better than typical suburban development.

That was in the past when we didn't really care about urbanity. Nowadays, redevelopment plans often include a more urban flavour--look at Lansdowne and Lebreton, for example. One of the rules governing the CEF sale should be proper urban design standards. Because of how huge the plot is, most of the land is probably going to be ground related housing anyway, but there's no reason that can't be done well. After all much of The Glebe is ground related housing.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Money is not everything. This is not necessarily positive city building.

I would argue that replacing little-used CEF land that has little value to the city with a series of new urban neighbourhoods would be great city building.

[eemy]

I think you're extremely naive about the impact of adding 1000 acres of greenfield land to the inventory in central Ottawa. It would be catastrophic in my opinion. Developers wouldn't sit on it while developing Lansdowne or Rockliffe or whatever. They would immediately develop the CEF and sit on the other sites. And despite all the development controls in the world, there are very few examples of greenfield sites being developed into anything more urban than downtown Markham, which is hardly an urban oasis.

[OTSkyline]

I just have trouble understanding what is of such value in these extended empty fields in the middle of the city.

The only things I gather from previous comments on this thread is "well, it's been there forever and I like it".

To me, that's not justification...

[acottawa]

My idea:

Leave the arboretum and ornamental gardens where they are, but maybe also introduce other plants and landscaping to have a broader "national botanical garden."

Set aside a portion of the site for an "urban agricultural research facility" that would include the experiments that have an advantage being at the current location (urban heat island, pollution, longitudinal studies, etc). Relocate other research fields elsewhere (possibly the large facility on the greenbelt already run by ag can).

Of what's left:
Use maybe 1/3 for a demonstration farm and to continue to meet the historic site designation of "A rare example of a farm within a city" and so tourists can see a farm in the middle in the city and to complement the agriculture museum. But rather than mostly focus on cereal crops (like the current CEF) take a broader approach to what a farm is (orchards, vegetable gardens, meadows, some more landscaping).

Use another 1/3 for a large park. Ottawa has lots of NCC grass, but no large urban parks close to the city centre. This park could have a range of landscapes (forest, meadow, lawn, sports fields, gardens, etc).

Use another 1/3 for other public uses. This could include a hospital, but would also include land to be set aside for future ideas.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

My idea:

Leave the arboretum and ornamental gardens where they are, but maybe also introduce other plants and landscaping to have a broader "national botanical garden."

Set aside a portion of the site for an "urban agricultural research facility" that would include the experiments that have an advantage being at the current location (urban heat island, pollution, longitudinal studies, etc). Relocate other research fields elsewhere (possibly the large facility on the greenbelt already run by ag can).

Of what's left:
Use maybe 1/3 for a demonstration farm and to continue to meet the historic site designation of "A rare example of a farm within a city" and so tourists can see a farm in the middle in the city and to complement the agriculture museum. But rather than mostly focus on cereal crops (like the current CEF) take a broader approach to what a farm is (orchards, vegetable gardens, meadows, some more landscaping).

Use another 1/3 for a large park. Ottawa has lots of NCC grass, but no large urban parks close to the city centre. This park could have a range of landscapes (forest, meadow, lawn, sports fields, gardens, etc).

Use another 1/3 for other public uses. This could include a hospital, but would also include land to be set aside for future ideas.

The latest giant weed field. Maybe it should literally be 'weed'. A large portion of population would welcome that.

[Marshsparrow]

Move the damn farm to the greenbelt and bulldoze the 🞵🞵🞵🞵 out of the Central Experiment Farm and urban develop it with a new hospital, technology centre, urban park / forest, new library, affordable housing, safe injection site, etc., etc., etc.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

I think you're extremely naive about the impact of adding 1000 acres of greenfield land to the inventory in central Ottawa. It would be catastrophic in my opinion. Developers wouldn't sit on it while developing Lansdowne or Rockliffe or whatever. They would immediately develop the CEF and sit on the other sites. And despite all the development controls in the world, there are very few examples of greenfield sites being developed into anything more urban than downtown Markham, which is hardly an urban oasis.

Downtown Markham is actually shaping up to be pretty great:

(Metrolinx/York Region)

[eemy]

Renders always look great. Even the most far-removed cul-de-sac has crowded sidewalks in an architect's world.

[1overcosc]

The layout is certainly quite appealing, and that's the one thing that's accurate with these things.

[J.OT13]

Reminds me of Lansdowne. Looks good, but when built,

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Reminds me of Lansdowne. Looks good, but when built,

I wish it was Sparks Street.

[1overcosc]

Lansdowne is pretty great. Most importantly, it has the proper bones to allow natural growth and change over time. The latter feature is also a huge strength of the Sens plan for Lebreton.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

1. Tunney’s Pasture – Scott Street
2. Lincoln Fields – Pinecrest Creek
3. West Hunt Club Road (north) – Highway 416
4. West Hunt Club Road (south) – Highway 416
5. Woodroffe Avenue – West Hunt Club Road
6. Merivale Road /Woodroffe Avenue corridor
7. Central Experimental Farm – Baseline Road – Merivale Road
8. Existing Ottawa Hospital – Civic Campus
9. Central Experimental Farm – Carling Avenue (west)
10. Central Experimental Farm – Carling Avenue (central)
11. Central Experimental Farm – Carling Avenue (east)
12. Booth Street complex

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news...-from-experiment-farm-to-tunneys-pasture

My two cents;

This is the last downtown hospital. Downtown is the densest part of the City and the place most likely to have some sort of disaster (think natural disasters, fires, explosions (deliberate or accidental), riots...) We cannot afford to move it to the boonies, so sites 2 to 7 shouldn't even be on the list. Not to mention 3, 4 are next to the QCH, 5, 6 are not easily accessible by the highway.

Tunney's isn't bad, but still not super accessible by car. Sure it's on the Confederation Line, but the fact is, people mostly drive to hospitals, they don't take transit.

The current site is not realistic. We need to build a new hospital, then move the operations. No way of doing that on the current sit.

I kind of understand the concerns about the Farm, but that doesn't change my opinion; Hospital comes before Farm, every time.

Best site though IMO, Booth. Only a few blocks form the O-Train, right on the highway and the most central location. Not a fan in losing the historic buildings and/or mid-century office buildings, but again, worth the sacrifice for the Hospital.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Lansdowne is pretty great. Most importantly, it has the proper bones to allow natural growth and change over time. The latter feature is also a huge strength of the Sens plan for Lebreton.

The proposal was awesome, but they ended up with something a little more generic.

It's not a complete let down; I like that it's kind of an extension of the city instead of its own thing (campus style) and that it allows vehicle traffic. And ya, that is one of the greatest features of Rendez-Vous Lebreton.

Not a fan of the interlock everywhere. I like to see a delimitation between pedestrian, bike and car traffic.

Case in point, the Markham rendering. The Sims on there don't seem to realize their walking in the middle of the street. Watch out for that bus.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Renders always look great. Even the most far-removed cul-de-sac has crowded sidewalks in an architect's world.

All projects in Ottawa should be required to have at least 30% of the renders showing winter conditions.