Plan for residential towers across from Central Experimental Farm approved by city's planning committee a second time
Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food of Canada Stefanie Beck raised concerns about the "significant costly and enduring impacts that this development, if it goes ahead as planned, will have on the Central Experimental Farm."
Joanne Laucius, Ottawa Citizen
Published Sep 20, 2023 • Last updated 0 minutes ago • 5 minute read
The city’s planning committee has for a second time approved a plan to build two residential towers at 1081 Carling Avenue — even though committee members heard the decision will almost certainly go to the Ontario Land Tribunal — after it was sent back to the committee.
The redevelopment proposal from Taggart Realty Management with Fotenn Planning + Design includes two residential towers — one 16 storeys and the other 27 storeys tall — replacing an existing eight-storey building and creating 410 units.
At issue was the balance between the need to build more housing and adhere to the city’s official plan which is in conflict with the effect the new development could have on the historic Central Experimental Farm. The towers would cast shadows on a plot of research land on the farm, which is the central research station for the federal Department of Agriculture. It was clear many councillors felt they were in a bind between provincial and federal authority — but that they had to make a decision.
“We have gotten very clear indication from the provincial level about how they want us to plan in Ottawa, which is as a denser city that is focused on transit, that is focused on intensification, that is focused on people living near amenities that curtails sprawl to a certain degree that it can, versus the federal level of government, which is responsible for agriculture,” said Coun. Jeff Leiper, the chair of the committee.
“The Ontario Land Tribunal, to which this file will almost certainly go, I’m sure, is going to be considering this within their mandate.”
Wednesday’s meeting was the next step in a back-and-forth over the development and what it means for the Central Experimental Farm. The proposal has stirred up controversy, with 160 residents attending a virtual public meeting and 14 delegations appearing before the committee on Aug. 16 when it voted to approve the plan the first time. Nine delegations signed up to speak to the committee on Wednesday.
City staff had recommended that the committee approve a zoning bylaw amendment allowing the project to go ahead. The project would meet the goals of the city’s official plan as well as an analysis of the shadow cast by the towers, based on the city’s terms of reference. The recommendations concluded the shadows wouldn’t exceed the criteria for “open spaces” reserved for scientific, educational and cultural purposes.
But representatives from Agriculture Canada were not available to answer questions the first time the planning committee considered the zoning change last month. The committee’s decision to approve it was sent to city council, which sent it back which sent it back to the planning committee after it had been determined that a required notice of a public meeting had not been shared with to Agriculture and Agrifood Canada and the NCC, in accordance with the Planning Act.
Speaking to the committee on Wednesday, the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food of Canada, Stefanie Beck, raised concerns about the “significant costly and enduring impacts that this development, if it goes ahead as planned, will have on the Central Experimental Farm.”
Beck said there is a significant link between research on the farm and feeding the nation. The research projects on the farm can’t be moved elsewhere, she said. “If you do allow this development to go ahead as is, you should know that millions of dollars and decades of long-term research will be compromised.”
“We are hoping not to have to take any legal action, but we are losing access to research facilities that cost millions of dollars. If we’re being asked to mitigate, there’s a cost to that.”
The city has previously acknowledged the incremental impact development near the farm will have on it, she said. “Our concerns today should be understood to extend to future development plans around the farm,” said Beck.
Meanwhile, some councillors also expressed concerns about what approving the towers at 1081 Carling would mean for other projects in the pipeline near the farm.
There are other applications in the queue, and the city should have discussions with Agriculture Canada about the optimum height for new development, said Coun. Riley Brockington.
“Taggart deserves a decision, I respect that. But I respect even more the agricultural research and the value of what’s on at Agriculture Canada,” he said.
Every incremental new development around the perimeter of the farm will create different shadows on the farm at different times of the day, Beck told the committee.
“That will absolutely have an impact on what we can do, what time of year, how reliable our data is, what the impact will be on Canadians and the food security of Canadians. Absolutely. The more we do this, the more difficult it is going to be,” said Beck.
Brockington put forward a motion to limit the height of each of the two towers to 14 storeys. The motion failed.
The committee heard that Taggart has been at work on the plans for more than two years, and limiting the height of the towers to 14 storeys would reduce number of units.
“This is a significant reduction of almost 40 per cent in terms of the total density. And at this point in time, we’re not prepared to entertain such a drastic reduction in the tower height that is proposed by councillor (Brockington),” said Derek Howe, Taggart’s vice president of development.
Howe said Taggart had complied with all of the city’s requirements.
“All levels of government are currently requesting more housing supply to be built,” he said. “We have complied with all of the policy procedures, studies, four rounds of technical comments to go back and forth with planning staff. We’ve made a number of changes, modifications to the project.”
The spectre of legal action on the part of either Taggart or Agriculture Canada was raised several times.
Tim Marc, senior legal counsel for the city, noted that the federal government is not bound by the Planning Act when it comes to the Experimental Farm itself. But Agriculture Canada is not in an “enhanced position” to appeal what happens outside its own land, he said.
When it comes to the legal right to sunlight, that was abolished in Ontario in 1880, six years before the Central Experimental Farm was established by legislation. A case based on sunlight would be a difficult case to make before the Ontario Land Tribunal, he said. In Marc’s opinion, it would be difficult for Agriculture Canada to make a case that it should be compensated for 13 hectares of lost research land.
Beck said there will be a “tipping point” after which it no longer makes sense financial or administrative sense to do research on the land, but she’s not sure what that point would be. It’s not just the value of the land, it’s also the value it has to the city as a space everyone can enjoy, she said.
“I would note there is some irony in developers saying that they would like to build around the farm because they’ll have this fabulous view of the farms, this bucolic vistitation possible every day. Well, that’s not going to be the case if we have enough development casting shade over the farm.”
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...-a-second-time
Prev
Linear Mode
