Committee approves controversial towers near experimental farm despite shading concerns

UPDATE: City councillors voted to approve the proposed highrise towers at 1081 Carling Ave. on Sept. 27, 2023 in a vote of 18 to 7.

A controversialdevelopment has been given the green light by planning committee despiteconcerns 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 membersapprove theplan byTaggart Realty Management to build two condominium towers, of 16- and 27-storeys, at 1081Carling 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 havemajor concerns with the shadowingimpact as it stands."

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

• Planned towers threaten experimental farm research, scientists say

"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, thepresident of the Civic Hospital Neighbourhood Association.

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

In the end, two motions by River wardCoun. Riley Brockington one to defer a decision by two monthsand one to drop the height of the taller tower to 16 storeys wererejected.

Shade from a planned high rise is a threat to this farm's research, director says

1 year ago

Duration 1:00

Pascal Michel, the director general of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's Ontario-Quebec region said internal assessments have shown that there is a "potential significant negative impact" on research done at Ottawa's Central Experimental Farm from two towers planned nearby.

Housing versus climate research

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

Theeventual debate was framed as a conflict betweenfighting climate change and fighting homelessness.

"We have been preaching as a council, we have a housing crisis," saidBeacon Hill-Cyrvilleward Coun. Tim Tierney. "Either we're committedor 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 theCivic Hospital Neighbourhood Association, who believes thatsimply 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 expensiveprobably unaffordableto most Ottawa residentshousing."

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

Confusion over conflicting studies

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 saidAgriculture 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 andimpacts, but I think it was also informative for them to understand the policy framework that we work within."

What's next?

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.

Insteadthey 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 goneto 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'svice-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 thefarm," she said. "That shouldn't stop."