← All documents

Zoning By-law 2008-250 & Schedule 333

Web — Open source document →  ·  City of Ottawa
TL;DR

Current zoning already permits up to 18 storeys on much of the block, but 38 storeys is not permitted and requires a Zoning By-law Amendment.

Key Points

Full Analysis

Policy Context

Zoning implements the Official Plan at the site level, establishing maximum building heights, permitted uses, setbacks, and floor space provisions. Much of the northwest quadrant of the block is governed by Schedule 333, which reflects a 2015 Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) decision. Schedule 333 is accessible through the City’s zoning schedules or via the GeoOttawa zoning map viewer.

As-of-Right Height Permissions

Under Schedule 333, maximum permitted heights on the block range from 2 to 18 storeys depending on location. The Carleton Tavern / Morning Owl portion is separately capped at 13.5 metres (~4 storeys).

This means 18 storeys is already permitted on a large portion of the block. 38 storeys exceeds current zoning and requires amendment.

Three Height Benchmarks

There are three relevant height thresholds for this site:

The existence of 18-storey permissions complicates arguments that this is purely a jump from 8 to 38, but it also sharpens the debate: the question becomes whether doubling the permitted height can be shown to maintain compatibility, transition quality, and mainstreet character.

Compatibility & Transition Implications

Because 18 storeys is already permitted, a straightforward argument that no high-rise belongs here is difficult to sustain. The debate shifts to proportionality, visual dominance, shadow impacts, transition quality, and whether doubling the permitted height maintains compatibility with the surrounding context.

Amendment Requirements

To reach 38 storeys, the applicant must secure:

Both require Planning & Housing Committee approval.

Why It Matters Here

This zoning layer is essential context for any submission: 38 storeys is not as-of-right, 18 storeys already is, and the core planning question is whether doubling the permitted height is justified under the applicable policy framework.