Ottawa's Central Experimental Farm

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

If anything, Ottawa's parks helps the boring and bland city moniker.

I really don't buy your perception.

There is a difference between parks and urban public space. Perhaps, it is the latter that Ottawa needs to improve on.

We cannot get too carried away in comparing Ottawa to Montreal (three times the size of Ottawa) and Toronto (five times the size of Ottawa).

We need to improve what we have rather than try to be the same as the bigger cities. Being the same is not achievable nor desirable.

Instead, we should try to develop our own distinct character. Part of this distinctiveness is our urban green space especially along our waterways.

Sure, Ottawa backs to the waterways instead facing it, but there is history behind that and part also relates to geography. Ottawa does not meet the Ottawa River from downtown and east because of the steep hills facing the river.

Nevertheless, efforts are being made but I don't like ideas that simply commercialise our great assets. As I have said before, Zibi, Lebreton, and Bayview are our great opportunity. If we do this well, our city will much better for it. We should not be spreading our efforts too thin or everything may become underwhelming and a disappointment.

If there is anything that I am going to be critical about the use of our green space is the people who have prevented the windmill project of the 1990s and the National Botanical Gardens of the same era. The people who were behind the opposition to both projects should be ashamed of themselves. They were the opposite of city builders. Both originally slated for the CEF would have been a wonderful addition. But what can I say. The negatives things that a minority can achieve is amazing. Look at what they tried to do with Lansdowne Park. Thankfully they failed.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I really don't buy your perception.

There is a difference between parks and urban public space. Perhaps, it is the latter that Ottawa needs to improve on.

It is.

We cannot get too carried away in comparing Ottawa to Montreal (three times the size of Ottawa) and Toronto (five times the size of Ottawa).

Why not? The difference in how people use (or don't) public spaces in Ottawa is not a function of the city's size; it is partly the form of those public spaces, and partly cultural.

We need to improve what we have rather than try to be the same as the bigger cities. Being the same is not achievable nor desirable.

Agreed.

Instead, we should try to develop our own distinct character. Part of this distinctiveness is our urban green space especially along our waterways.

Yes, the deadening and stultifying, sacrosanct nature of the green space along the waterways, so much of it pointless, bogged down in nanny-state bureaucratic garbage ideas from the 1930s or 1950s about what is or is not "proper" use of such spaces, helps give Ottawa its distinctive and stereotypically dull character.

Sure, Ottawa backs to the waterways instead facing it, but there is history behind that and part also relates to geography. Ottawa does not meet the Ottawa River from downtown and east because of the steep hills facing the river.

And yet, in areas where the access is level, those parts of the shoreline are still treated as no-go, no-fun, no-commerce, nanny-state zones.

If there is anything that I am going to be critical about the use of our green space is the people who have prevented the windmill project of the 1990s and the National Botanical Gardens of the same era. The people who were behind the opposition to both projects should be ashamed of themselves. They were the opposite of city builders. Both originally slated for the CEF would have been a wonderful addition.

NIMBYists are almost incapable of shame.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Your definition of central is far too restrictive. Pre-1945 Ottawa was far too small to have a 'Central Park' sized animated park.

And let's get to the bottom of this. Define an animated park?

He rather covered it with "well used", no?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

MacDonald Gardens was the city's cemetery from the 1840s to the 1870s. There are still likely bodies buried there although most were transferred to Beechwood and Notre Dame. This places major restrictions on what we do with it.

McBurney Park in Kingston is also a 19th century cemetery, yet despite having hundreds of bodies and worn out gravestones underneath its soil, it still supports a huge variety of uses including regular neighbourhood festivals.

And besides... with tens of thousands of years of human history probably every property in the city has had a body beneath it at some point.

Being a 150 year old cemetery is no excuse to do nothing with the property.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

He rather covered it with "well used", no?

I guess I am looking for suggestions on how to achieve this.

[Temperance]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Ottawa's parks are something that outsiders admire about the city. Paving over everything should not be our goal.

Agree completely. There is a "development" fetishism on these forums whereby more and bigger buildings are always better. This does not make for a livable city or good urban planning. One of my favourite things about Ottawa is its parks and yes, the Central Experimental Farm is part of that. We can think about ways to enable more public use of the farm lands but "developing" the CEF would be a huge and irrevocable mistake.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I guess I am looking for suggestions on how to achieve this.

Parks that support more than one or two activities would help this. You don't even have to look at big cities like New York. Waterloo Park, which is a short walk from the city centre has four ball diamonds, several soccer fields, a spash pad, playground, a band stand, a snack bar, a farm animal collection, a replica of the grist mill that used to be on the site, a skate park, a cricket pitch, tennis courts and a wooded area.

Yes, Uhuniau is right that all of these things can be found somewhere in Ottawa, but just like combining a number of stores into a shopping mall can make it a destination, combining a number of activities into a park can make it into a destination.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

None of those locations would be terribly well-used spaces; they suffer from the same inherent problems that too many other Ottawa parks do: edge vacuum, not stitched into the urban fabric, green space for green space's sake.

This doesn't hold back urban parks in other cities. Golden Gate park is in the middle of a low-density residential area. Stanley park is on a peninsula well-separated from the city centre, Villa Borgese is separated from the city centre by a large cliff and the aurelian wall, Mount Royal Park is on top of a mountain separated by institutional uses. People will go somewhere if it is worth going.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

This doesn't hold back urban parks in other cities. Golden Gate park is in the middle of a low-density residential area. Stanley park is on a peninsula well-separated from the city centre, Villa Borgese is separated from the city centre by a large cliff and the aurelian wall, Mount Royal Park is on top of a mountain separated by institutional uses. People will go somewhere if it is worth going.

I am not familiar with Villa Borgese but the others I have been to. In each case, they are very large in size. Where in Ottawa do we have a public park of that size? The closest I can think of is Mooney's Bay/Hog's Back/Vincent Massey, which already have multiple uses including beach, sports fields, picnic area, snack bars, new children's play area. I am sure improvements can be made, but size is important in order to achieve multiple uses.

Most of the other parks in the city are either quite small or are strip parks along waterways. Of course, we can put any park to better use, but again, we need to focus on where we have most to gain. Not every park is going to be a lively place. Some parks need to places for quiet activities. So, your neighbourhood park is not going to be another Mount Royal Park.

The CEF is not really a park although it has components that are. We need to understand that it is a research facility. I have, however, pointed out that there are compatible public uses that have been suggested in the past and the portions of the public have resisted them. We need to stop resisting these compatible uses otherwise there is going to increasing pressure to develop the property (into another suburban wasteland), which I believe will be an enormous loss to the city.

[AndyMEng]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I am not familiar with ..... We need to stop resisting these compatible uses otherwise there is going to increasing pressure to develop the property (into another suburban wasteland), which I believe will be an enormous loss to the city.

This conversation is crazy and ridiculous. Have any of you even been to the CEF other than seeing it by bus from Baseline? Its extremely well-used space, even discounting the sciency-farming.

The activities below are from my own experience, lumped with the Arbouretum, but arguably it is one contiguous space.

1. There is a baseball diamond, used regularly, with full parking lots.
2. There is a small wildlife garden, regularly used and visited by volunteers and the curious.
3. There are 10's of km's of biking/running/walking trails, well used by hundreds of people every day commuting from one side of the city to the other, north-south, east-west, and everywhere in between.
4. Sections of the CEF have some pretty good, single track mountain-bike trails.
5. There is a world-class farming museum, rose garden, hosta display, AND the arbouretum (which I would lump into the CEF). The parking lot is full on weekends with thousands of users per year.
6. The entire CEF is used regularly for foot-races, bike tours, tobogganing, weddings, etc. Every time I'm there, there's an activity going on, small or large. I've run in several foot races that head through and around the farm, and I've even been on magical late-night bicycle tours looping through the CEF, with hundreds of decorated bicycles.
7. Leisurely walking or biking along the main roads of the CEF (which are public) is a lovely activity at any time of year, especially in warm months. I especially like the cows near the centre/south-west end of the park. They may be especially giant because of genetics or something, but they're scenic!
8. On a mild summer's day, you can see hundreds of people relaxing, picnicking under a tree, taking a stroll, walking the dog, playing guitar, kite flying, etc. It is by no means a dead space.
9. On top of all this, we have government laboratories, sciency-things, and an astrology lab complete with telescope (available occasionally to the public on special nights).

Don't forget that the farm also hosts several festivals per year. See 'Ice Cream', 'Tulips', 'Roses', 'Lilacs', 'Triathlon', 'Capital Velo Fest', and my favourite and the most farm-centric: "Rare and Unusual Plant Sale"

Yes, the south-west corner is pretty unused, save for farming, but the north-east corner (closest to the downtown) is heavily used.

But I suppose if you were a curmudgeon who doesn't get out much, travelling by bus past the farm each day, you could easily mistake a farm field for being unused.

The problem is not Ottawa's parks. The problem is Ottawa's citizens having a negative attitude and poor self-esteem. And now I might be going on a tangent, but the root of the problem is the government, uninspired public servants with no passion for their work, the unchallenged and well-salaried who feel guilt and wear golden handcuffs, their person-hood removed so that they don't leave the house much, dislike change and excitement, and wear light coloured running shoes with their slacks and enjoy ribs at lunch before hitting the 95 to Orleans, or, heaven help you, the 118 to Baseline.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Yes, Uhuniau is right that all of these things can be found somewhere in Ottawa, but just like combining a number of stores into a shopping mall can make it a destination, combining a number of activities into a park can make it into a destination.

That "combining" is something that can happen naturally, (A) if the built form, including the urban context, encourage it, and (B) if the legal overlay allows for it.

Can you imagine anything like Tam-Tam happening in Ottawa during the summer? Either Majors Hill or Confederation Park would be perfect settings, but I doubt it would last half an hour before getting shut down.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

This doesn't hold back urban parks in other cities. Golden Gate park is in the middle of a low-density residential area. Stanley park is on a peninsula well-separated from the city centre, Villa Borgese is separated from the city centre by a large cliff and the aurelian wall, Mount Royal Park is on top of a mountain separated by institutional uses. People will go somewhere if it is worth going.

All of those parks have views which are draws on their own.

Stanley Park is not "well-separated" from the city centre; it is tightly bound to it. That's a good part of why it's a great park. (Also, it's Vancouver, which helps a lot.) A Stanley Park in modern Ottawa would also never be allowed to have - GASP! - a major bridge and its approaches in it.

Golden Gate is complete surrounded by tightly-woven gridiron urban fabric. The only parks of a comparable size in Ottawa are surrounded by suburban crap.

Same goes for Mount Royal, which is not "separated" by institutional uses; it is actually stitched to the rest of the city by them. If Ottawa had a Mount Royal, it would never have had a McGill on one side and UdeM on the other side (well, with a cemetery intervening as well), with a sprinkling of urban hospital campuses (and notice how small and tight their footprints compared to what the new Civic is planned to be.) That kind of land use would be anathema to the Ottawa Federation of NIMBY, who would also be horrified at the prospect of a rail tunnel going underneath it, hundreds of feet below the summit.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

The activities below are from my own experience, lumped with the Arbouretum, but arguably it is one contiguous space.

A whole bunch of the activities you have mentioned are explicitly forbidden or require advance permission (which most people don't get). Visitors or infrequent visitors have no way of knowing which rules they can safely flaunt and which ones are enforced.

Other "fun" activities in Ottawa include hiding in buildings overnight and putting them on youtube, going to after hours clubs, drinking in parks and visiting the drug dealers in the market.

Cities shouldn't just be fun for trespassers.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

All of those parks have views which are draws on their own.

Stanley Park is not "well-separated" from the city centre; it is tightly bound to it. That's a good part of why it's a great park. (Also, it's Vancouver, which helps a lot.) A Stanley Park in modern Ottawa would also never be allowed to have - GASP! - a major bridge and its approaches in it.

Golden Gate is complete surrounded by tightly-woven gridiron urban fabric. The only parks of a comparable size in Ottawa are surrounded by suburban crap.

Same goes for Mount Royal, which is not "separated" by institutional uses; it is actually stitched to the rest of the city by them. If Ottawa had a Mount Royal, it would never have had a McGill on one side and UdeM on the other side (well, with a cemetery intervening as well), with a sprinkling of urban hospital campuses (and notice how small and tight their footprints compared to what the new Civic is planned to be.) That kind of land use would be anathema to the Ottawa Federation of NIMBY, who would also be horrified at the prospect of a rail tunnel going underneath it, hundreds of feet below the summit.

Exactly, what is your point? These parks are all unique to the specific cities. What are we to do in Ottawa when we don't have a similar park? It seems to me that you are opposed to green parks but all of these parks are actually very green. They all have attractions because of their size and attract the population because of their location and/or unique geographical features. The fact that a major roadway runs through the middle of Stanley Park is not an attraction, it is simply the reality.

You complain that the CEF is not really downtown, so where is this 1,000 acre park with many attractions supposed to be located?

[AndyMEng]

Originally Posted by acottawa

A whole bunch of the activities you have mentioned are explicitly forbidden or require advance permission (which most people don't get). Visitors or infrequent visitors have no way of knowing which rules they can safely flaunt and which ones are enforced.

Other "fun" activities in Ottawa include hiding in buildings overnight and putting them on youtube, going to after hours clubs, drinking in parks and visiting the drug dealers in the market.

Cities shouldn't just be fun for trespassers.

Forbidden? Which activities? I have personally done all of those things and have never had the fun gestapo come to stop me. In fact, much of these things are sanctioned, fun, and encouraged!

I don't know what kind of alternate dimension of Ottawa you live in, but it sounds terrible. If the only 'fun' you have of Ottawa is drug dealers and being drunk in a park, you need less stereotypes and more living. Or perhaps stop watching the depressing news and get out to meet actual people. Or perhaps move on to another city, but I suspect you can't, because you're in the group with the golden handcuffs, and now you're a bitter, bitter person.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Exactly, what is your point?

More or less yours, I think: make the most of what we got.

These parks are all unique to the specific cities.

As is any park, yes.

What are we to do in Ottawa when we don't have a similar park?

Stop aspiring to what we don't have, just as we don't aspire to have mountains like Vancouver or a St. Peter's Square like Rome.

It seems to me that you are opposed to green parks

No, I am opposed to green (public, open) space fetishism. I am opposed to the reflex in Ottawa that whenever land comes open in the urban core, that the first instinct is to propose Yet Another Pointless Green (Public, Open) Space to occupy the site. I am opposed to the anti-everything sentiment that keeps basic commerce as far away as possible from the public sphere. I am opposed to the nanny-statism that ensures that Ottawa's parks are as inoffensive and unused, other than what is authorized by diktat, as possible. I am opposed to the utterly mindless attitude that somehow a green (public, open) space is diminished when it is tightly surrounded by buildings or other things that aren't GPOs. I am opposed to the "linear park" fetish that is the only politically acceptable way to treat shorelines or disused rights of way.

Green (public, open) space done right is important for cities. Ottawa, whether city or NCC, does too much of it wrong.

The fact that a major roadway runs through the middle of Stanley Park is not an attraction, it is simply the reality.

Actually it is kind of an attraction: the bus (or other vehicle) ride from downtown to the north shore, through the park and across the Golden Gate, is one of the best things to for minimal cost if you are new and want to orient yourself to the city. In Ottawa, we are reserving our water crossings for cars, and, at best and grudgingly, for MUPs. No transit allowed; it's not on the list of Acceptable Things to do with your water.

You complain that the CEF is not really downtown

I am not complaining about that, no.

so where is this 1,000 acre park with many attractions supposed to be located?

Nowhere, because I'm not calling for one to be breathed into existence.

[lrt's friend]

So, what is all the bellyaching about?

Yes, you have the usual contingent who wants to convert every available piece of land into a new park as was the case with the former Daly Building site, but who actually is succeeding in getting their way? I think you are bringing up something that isn't a major problem. And, we see plans that are re-imagining public places that is leading us in the direction that you want us to go. It just won't happen overnight.

I think what we are seeing is that new site development such as Lansdowne, Zibi and Lebreton are including the urban public spaces that you are looking for, some of it green, some of it not so much. We certainly don't want all urban public spaces to be 100% concrete. That is equally unattractive as dead zone green spaces.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So, what is all the bellyaching about?

Yes, you have the usual contingent who wants to convert every available piece of land into a new park as was the case with the former Daly Building site, but who actually is succeeding in getting their way?

The people who freaked the freak out about the western LRT routing is the best recent example. It is always the reflex in Ottawa. Always.

I think what we are seeing is that new site development such as Lansdowne, Zibi and Lebreton are including the urban public spaces that you are looking for, some of it green, some of it not so much. We certainly don't want all urban public spaces to be 100% concrete. That is equally unattractive as dead zone green spaces.

There are very few ungreen public spaces in Ottawa. We could actually use a few of those suckers. The best one is probably Sparks Street, which functions (at least in summer) much more like a plaza or square than a pedestrian street (a concept which should be binned in any event.) There are those little plazas tucked away in the market, but they are mostly underused as well. Places like those are where I'd rather see outdoor cafes and restaurants, as opposed to impinging on sidewalks along Elgin, but I digress.

The only urban public spaces I'm looking for in Ottawa is to loosen up and let more things happen in the existing ones, especially in the core. The suburban parks are going to continue to be mostly about ultimate and dog-walking. Whenever I see a proposal for new development centred on Yet Another Open Space, especially one which, by design, will create edge vacuums, I assume that the proponents aren't terribly creative and kinda stupid to boot. Lebreton is the prime example; there is simply too much damn "space" in the plan, and not enough actual human use. Same thing in the east end with the tacky name, which I refuse to use, for the CFB Rockcliffe development; too much "space", not enough use.

Lansdowne, and if it gets off the ground as planned, the Chaudiere-area projects, come closer to getting my idea of balance right.

[lrt's friend]

You need give things a chance. Lebreton is going to one of the most exciting projects this city has ever seen. Let's hope for good execution. We need to vigilant but we also have to remember that places that are devoid of greenery are soulless. Maybe, that is my personal bias, but places with colourful planters in summer and trees with decent room to grow are important to make for good and more comfortable public space.

City planners are gradually learning how to build communities better. We are continually learning.

Before criticizing people protecting their parks such as the Byron linear park, remember people are looking for comfortable places in their neighbourhood to walk, run or bike. Not everybody is happy walking where there is constantly zooming traffic.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by AndyMEng

Forbidden? Which activities? I have personally done all of those things and have never had the fun gestapo come to stop me. In fact, much of these things are sanctioned, fun, and encouraged!

I don't know what kind of alternate dimension of Ottawa you live in, but it sounds terrible. If the only 'fun' you have of Ottawa is drug dealers and being drunk in a park, you need less stereotypes and more living. Or perhaps stop watching the depressing news and get out to meet actual people. Or perhaps move on to another city, but I suspect you can't, because you're in the group with the golden handcuffs, and now you're a bitter, bitter person.

Weddings on the Farm...Contact the Central Experimental Farm to receive a "Permission/Authorization to Use" form...There is a limit of 40 people attending a ceremony

Pictures...A completed "Permission/Authorization to Use" form is necessary for wedding pictures in the Arboretum or for the Ornamental Gardens... A wedding photo shoot or a group photo in the Ornamental Gardens may include up to 15 people.

The increasing levels of use by the public of the roadways through the Central Experimental Farm for dog walking, strolling, cycling, and jogging is compromising field-based research. Where such conflicts are occurring, consideration should be given to adding sections of fencing (refer to design guidelines for Fences). The signage strategy should clarify the boundaries for all public uses while providing the public with information that helps explain AAFC's position.

9AM–4PM
Dominion Arboretum, Friday hours

Claiming Ottawa has lots of parks because things that aren't parks (but are green in colour) can sometimes be hacked for park-like functions does not mean Ottawa has a lot of parks.