Ottawa's Central Experimental Farm

[Tesladom]

I'll say this again and again - infill is not the answer, families can't afford an 1800sf townhouse like this at $1.7Million

Where are families supposed to live?

[OTownandDown]

Originally Posted by phil235

I agree with this. It would be interesting to see if there is a way to increase the public use of the farm without affecting the research that goes on there. For instance, there is lots of land to the north east side of the farm (i.e. around the tennis club) that doesn't seem to be part of the agricultural function. (There are also some cool buildings that most people never get to see.) I could just be uniformed, but if that land is largely unused, it would be a plus for the city, and for the protection of the farm in the long run, if the public benefit could be maximized.

If I'm completely off base, and that property is needed, then they should at least work on Fletcher's Garden across POW to make that a more accessible spot. Maybe fast track the botanical garden or something like that.

Sorry, totally off topic.
As 'research' dwindles down to nothing, we'll need a better use for the empty buildings on the farm, or they'll be demolished one by one. Perhaps an old-tyme heritage museum on the grounds surrounding the big red barn? Recently (lol, well, pre-pandemic) went to Skansen in Sweden. It was a beautiful town and filled with tourists. Done really really well:
https://www.skansen.se/

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Again the city and the NCC should get together and allow some development in non-sensitive areas of the Greenbelt....Feds should also look at Central Experimental Farm development as well, we have 20-30 years of development lands available within existing servicing areas

Originally Posted by Tesladom

I live in Orleans, 2 kids etc..., I can't afford to live inside the Greenbelt, and our household income is probably in the top 10%... so if I can't afford a $1.5M infill 3 bedroom townhouse in Westboro, then what about the the the other 90%... seriously a townhouse in Orleans in now $600k+, wtf? Even that is preposterous

No offence, but this is some of the most offensive, nonsensical, approaches I've heard. The Experimental Farm is not "unused land", it is the nations largest agricultural research facility and a city treasure. To suggest we pave over it with cheap housing is absurd. I can see turning it into a park and moving the research aspect to the greenbelt or beyond, but developing it is lunacy. And what makes you think if they developed it that the housing would magically be affordable?

If you are in the upper 10% income bracket and can't afford to live within the greenbelt than you need to hire an accountant immediately. You mention that you "can't afford a $1.5M infill 3 bedroom townhouse in Westboro". Welcome to the club. That is one of the top 3 most expensive neighbourhoods in the city. There are many other great neighbourhoods within the greenbelt that a family of 4 can comfortable live with even modest incomes. The problem is many people have drank the "suburban dream" Kool-Aid and think they need a massive home, full of junk they don't need, with a big yard they hate to maintain, 2 cars, on a quiet cul-de-sac, to be happy. Reality is a smaller home in a great, walkable, inner-greenbelt neighbourhood, would likely give you a much higher quality of life for the same price.

[Burbs_boy]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I don't know why so many people here want to destroy greenspace when the city is overflowing with strip malls, parking lots and brown fields waiting to be redeveloped.

Urban green spaces have been shown to considerably increase life quality.

Ah yes...beautiful greenspace. And btw, totally in agreement on strip malls etc. But you cannot just give people condos or $1million+ infill townhomes, it won't be enough and if you don't provide people with the housing they want, or at the very least will accept, then the move out to Cerleton Place/ Kemptville etc will continue.

[Tesladom]

Originally Posted by GeoNerd

There are many other great neighbourhoods within the greenbelt that a family of 4 can comfortable live with even modest incomes.

OK, Ottawa's Median Family income is $86,000
Lets assume "modest" is median income (who cares about the other 50%!)

After tax, health care plans, pension etc... Lets say you have $60k, or $5k Net per month
Please prepare us budget

Assume person has minimal savings, create a plan for them to save up enough to buy a house, maintain family with 2 kids, daycare etc...

You will see that it is nearly impossible... even if you are buying a $600k townhouse in the burbs

10% down plus transfer tax and moving fees would need upfront $75k... how do you save up $75K... it will take you 5 years, then you will need more money because house cost way more... endless cycle.
Regardless, assume you get the $75k, $600k, 1.6% mortgage is $2300 per month, + 400 for taxes and another $300 for basic utilities, $100 insurance
$3100 per month. You are left with $1900 for groceries, vehicles(s), maintenance & repairs, furniture, clothes, entertainment, kids sports... YIKES! Assume just one car, that's around $600-$700 "all-in" per month for an affordable car. Daycare for before of after school will set you back another $600-$800
Let's hope you got 100% government Job security as well

This is for the Median? for cheapest townhouse?
I would hate to be lower income than median

[Burbs_boy]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The National Agricultural Station in Beltsville, Maryland is in the same situation, surrounded by suburban development. It makes no sense moving these research facilities that often depend on long-term research. Or do we just quit doing research? And for what? More second rate residential development, just like what we got in neighbouring Central Park, that was surplus Experimental Farm property originally.

We can't get Lebreton Flats developed properly, so how can we trust developers with this key property. We can't even get a proper botanical gardens built, which locations close to Carleton University has been begging for decades. We can't make proper use of this land to improve this city, so how does privatizing it make Ottawa better? It doesn't.

That institution is on the outskirts of the DC suburbs in a town of 16,000 people, not centrally located in an urban centre. We are a big country with lots of prime arable land, I'm sure they can plant their sunflowers elsewhere just fine.

Ideally any housing would not reflect the adjacent neighbourhoods, it is far from ideal, but that's the beauty of a blank slate such as this, you don't have to repeat the mistakes of the past. But, if it came down to it, that would still be preferable to the current situation. We focus too much on high-minded idealistic development, that's partially why LeBreton has been a disaster.

Clearly the relative value of the land is a matter of personal priorities, I (a 20 something dreaming of owning a home) see far more value in a properly developed community than research that could easily be done in elsewhere. But discarding all of that, the simple fact that we were not able to build a hospital (which I think we can all agree is a top priority) on this land is something we should be ashamed of.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

I'll say this again and again - infill is not the answer, families can't afford an 1800sf townhouse like this at $1.7Million

Where are families supposed to live?

Because brand new housing in the suburbs also screams, affordability!!

For only $999,999, you can have this:


https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...cester-leitrim

It's undeniable that housing is ridiculously expensive. But this is a problem in every major Canadian city. It is highly unlikely that a magical increase in supply would fix this issue.

[J.OT13]

It's taking forever to develop LeBreton. Zibi and Greystone are slow and steady. How does anyone figure that redeveloping the CEP would solve the housing and affordability crisis?

[Kitchissippi]

Even if the land were free, I doubt you'd find a developer in the Ontario side willing to build a townhouse for less than 350-400K. There wouldn't be that much money in it for them.

[caetura]

The price of a house and the value of a house are related but don't conflate the two. I just don't think the debate between increasing urban density vs approving new far flung suburbs should ever be made on making housing more affordable. It hasn't proven true with the GTA over the past 10-20 years and it's not proving true now in Ottawa.

You tackle price with interest rates increases, capital gains on home sales, crack downs on empty investment properties etc..

You tackle value with zoning, access to the necessities for life & work and passing the complete cost of building a community along to the developers & residents (beyond one time development charges for roads & utilities)

[LRTeverywhere]

Originally Posted by Burbs_boy

Ah yes...beautiful greenspace.

Looks like pretty nice greenspace to me if you don't use a picture from the winter.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by LRTeverywhere

Looks like pretty nice greenspace to me if you don't use a picture from the winter.

Not that I agree with anything else tesladom is saying but the area being "green" does not make it greenspace. Your not free to wander on any part of it, not free to do any sorta activity on it. I'm essence you can look but not touch.

So let's be clear here what people are defending is an open air research lab for farming that one can pass through on very specific paths. Nothing more.

Personally I'd rather it be turned into actual useable greenspace with the farm moved outside of the city so that the city does not interfere with its experiments.

As for suggestion on urban farming, that's not a concept that uses open air land but built structures where good is grown inside.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Not that I agree with anything else tesladom is saying but the area being "green" does not make it greenspace. Your not free to wander on any part of it, not free to do any sorta activity on it. I'm essence you can look but not touch.

So let's be clear here what people are defending is an open air research lab for farming that one can pass through on very specific paths. Nothing more.

Personally I'd rather it be turned into actual useable greenspace with the farm moved outside of the city so that the city does not interfere with its experiments.

Yes, it's not a park or traditional green space, and most of it is restricted access. But it does have beach volleyball courts, tennis courts, the ornamental garden, picnic areas, and a ton of cycling and walking trails. Also its contributions to urban heat island reducing and carbon capture are unmeasurable. So it is a very valuable green space to the city.

I do agree it would be better suited as a traditional park with research moved out of the city.

[eltodesukane]

As you say, it is a green space, but does not compare to Mount Royal Park, Jean-Drapeau Park (St. Helen & Notre Dame Islands), La Fontaine Park, Maisonneuve Park, Jeanne-Mance Park, etc, all in Montreal.
Nothing of the sort in Ottawa.

[vtecyo]

This is getting off topic a bit - but the farm isn't as closed off as it seems - once you go in the outer gates it's more than 90% open.

Frequently you have to walk around the end of a fence - since they seem to love surrounding only 3 out of 4 sides to their fields... The semi enclosing fences do little more than keep people from crossing the fields diagonally, but don't close them off.

Anyway I've highlighted in orange the areas that I know are totally surrounded by fences - with no entry warning signs etc... Google street view verifies this as far as I can see.



I've personally walked or ridden my bike through just about everywhere that's not marked in orange.

In the 90's they sold off a portion of unused land at the west end between Merivale and Clyde, and we got the uninspiring Central Park neighbourhood... that's a worst case scenario to me for the rest of the farm. Not that there was anything special about the scrubby field that preceded those houses - but if it had to be developed it could have been SO much better.



The farm is a bit of an oasis of peace and quiet - the views are nice mostly due to the openness - and the elevation changes in the south central and west sides. It's a place like no other in the city - it would be a shame to built on it just because it's not being using as intensively as some people would prefer.

There's no guarantee that a developed farm would filled with anything more than million dollar row houses, condo towers, with however many affordable units are required by the city.

[lrt's friend]

We complain that Ottawa does not have a Central Park, a Mount Royal, a Stanley Park. That we may be true, but Ottawa does have the CEF and that makes Ottawa unique in its own way. Not really a park but certainly a wonderful green space and it has park components and a wonderful trail system. Once we get rid of it, we lose our biggest greenspace in the urban area that cannot be replaced. The public realm of the CEF can be improved but once we pave it over, it is gone. I highly doubt that such a large piece of property could be developed with anything more than the mediocre. Zibi is probably the largest property with urban potential and only time will tell if it meets expectations. That is a much smaller piece of property.

[passwordisnt123]

So long as the CEF stays as-is, it will always face the threat of being carved up and sold for shitty, car-centric, low-grade, suburban development. That sword of Damocles will forever hang over its head under its current incarnation because so few Ottawans feel the same kind of kinship with it compared to Vancouverites and their Stanley Park or Montrealers and their Mont Royal. All it takes is one enterprising minister of Agriculture in a government that has no marginal seats in the Ottawa area to worry about and it's goodbye CEF.

The only long-term, durable way to truly save the CEF is to transform it into a park; make it into our Stanley Park or our Mont Royal. Nobody would dare touch it once the fences come down and it becomes a place made for people rather than a place made for corn, wheat and 4 cows.

[Kitchissippi]

The Experimental Farm does valuable research, especially today with genetically modified plants. The government has a duty to test/certify these new hybrids and the Farm’s relative isolation is great for minimizing contamination to and from adjacent farmland. It’s a research facility that advances technology that feeds people, and not just “greenspace”. The fact that Ottawans can enjoy it is a bonus.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The Experimental Farm does valuable research, especially today with genetically modified plants. The government has a duty to test/certify these new hybrids and the Farm’s relative isolation is great for minimizing contamination to and from adjacent farmland. It’s a research facility that advances technology that feeds people, and not just “greenspace”. The fact that Ottawans can enjoy it is a bonus.

[OTSkyline]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The Experimental Farm does valuable research, especially today with genetically modified plants. The government has a duty to test/certify these new hybrids and the Farm’s relative isolation is great for minimizing contamination to and from adjacent farmland. It’s a research facility that advances technology that feeds people, and not just “greenspace”. The fact that Ottawans can enjoy it is a bonus.

Does it need to do this in central urban area of the capital? I agree there is some value in farm experiments, I just don't understand why this can't be done on the outskirts (Casselman for example).

I totally understand the nay-sayers of the farm. It is a big open space in the city and vastly underutilized. I don't think any of them are saying build big box stores and SFH all over it.

In my opinion, I'd like to see a hybrid version. Take half of the space, and turn it into an actual city gem, park space, sports fields, kids playground, flower & vegetable garden, etc.. Then other half could absorb demand and housing for the next several years by building a dense, mixed-use neighbourhood. It's not going to be filled up in 2-3 years, it will grow organically and absorb demand for potentially the 10 or 15 years. During those 10-15 years, we should not be approving urban boundary expansions or costly new suburbs like Tewin. We already have services, transit, infrastructure build in this part of town to support the growth too.