FILE # D02-02-20-0073
The Omnibus Zoning report will recommend amendments to modify the intent of certain provisions and to correct minor errors in the Zoning By-law. These amendments have been combined in an Omnibus Zoning report as a means of efficiently modifying the By-law. Additional items to correct errors in the Zoning By-law may be added on a priority basis. The following amendments to the Zoning By-law are proposed:
Amendments affecting the urban area:
Setbacks Abutting a Laneway for Residential Infill Development
An amendment is needed to clarify the setback that applies for properties abutting a laneway, which is not zoned. Current provision only indicates setbacks abutting another zone.
An amendment is required to clarify that the minimum 7.5m setback was to apply to the pre-severance Planned Unit Development lot line, rather than to each newly severed individual lot. The amended provision will clarify that the setback applies only to lots abutting 3099 Uplands Drive (R3B zone).
An amendment is needed to introduce a provision that would require a mix of residential and non-residential uses in the Traditional Mainstreet Zone located along Hawthorne Avenue. Specifically requiring non-residential uses at grade, where it abuts Hawthorne Avenue.
An amendment is needed to reduce aisle widths for residential parking lots to match with those required for parking garages.
An amendment is needed to remove electricians and plumbers from the list of municipally licensed businesses permitted since these professions do not require a City of Ottawa license.
3828 Innes Road and 6211 Renaud Road
It is proposed to rezone the subject lands from Development Reserve to Open Space and Environmental Protection to more accurately reflect the intended uses. The subject properties are abutting City-owned parcels of land. They form part of a large protected woodlands complex identified as Urban Natural Area 97 in the Urban Natural Areas Environmental Evaluation Study (2005). They are also partly designated Urban Natural Feature in the City’s Official Plan, and partly used as a storm water conveyance channel that drains a portion of the East Urban Community (EUC) that has developed incrementally over the past several years. The current zoning (DR) is a remnant of what was once was in effect over a large area of the EUC. This remnant parcel of land, which is not part of any subdivision lands that surround it, should have been appropriately rezoned when the subdivisions were approved and registered. The current uses of the parcel are intended to continue in perpetuity; therefore, it is appropriate to rezone the parcel to Environmental Protection (EP) and Parks and Open Space (O1R) to integrate it with the zoning currently in effect over the adjacent lands.
Section 70(1) - Protection of Airport Operations
This section incorrectly references the Official Plan provision as ‘Section 4.8.7 – Land Use Constraints Due to Aircraft Noise’. An amendment is required to correct the reference to ‘Section 4.8.6 – Land-Use Constraints Due to Airport and Aircraft Operations’
120 Central Park - R5K H(28)
An amendment is needed to add the permitted heights as approved by the OMB that were errantly omitted when consolidating previous zoning by-laws into by-law 2008-250.
Parts of 320 Deschatelets / 175 Main Street
An amendment is needed to add farmers’ market as a permitted use along the Grand Allee of the Greystone Village development.
1132 8th Line Road
This amendment is required because of a technical oversight that shifted the zoning line to exclude the subject property, which was previously zoned Agricultural (AG), permitting the existing detached dwelling as a use. The lot was zoned residentially in 2000 but under the new version in 2003 the zoning line errantly shifted to exclude this lot.
Sections 203(2)(g) and 205(2)(g) - Places of worship in Light Industrial Zones
By-law 2019 – 449 amended provisions affecting places of worship in urban employment areas of the Official Plan. This included restrictions against locating within areas that would be denied a permit from the airport authority due to their zoning documents.
An amendment is needed to remove the reference to Airport Vicinity Development Zone as it should only be a reference to the Airport Operating Influence Zone.
Urban Exception 2582
This amendment is to permit porches located within required front and corner side yards to provide a foundation.
Sections 106(3)(a) and 106(3)(b)
An amendment to replace the words "required" with the words "provided" is necessary in order to clarify that parking space size reductions may be applied to the number of parking spaces actually provided on a site rather only to those required, so that if additional parking spaces are provided above the requirement, they may take advantage of size reduction provisions.
Rockcliffe Park - Accessory Structures and buildings in rear yardsUrban Exceptions 1256, 1257, 1258, 1259,1260, 1261, 1262 and 1858
It is proposed to change the setback requirement for accessory buildings in rear yards in the Rockcliffe Park Heritage Conservation District from 0.6 metres to 1.5 metres.
The existing 0.6 metre minimum setback does not allow for the preservation of green space in between buildings, which is a heritage attribute of the Rockcliffe Park HCD, a Heritage Conservation District designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. A 1.5 metre setback is also in alignment with the former Village of Rockcliffe Park Zoning By-Law provisions.
250 City Centre – Holding Provision
An amendment is required to clarify the intent of the holding provision, which is meant to limit the eventual development of this site with new buildings, rather than uses within the existing buildings.
The amendment will clarify that the holding symbol applies to new buildings and building additions only.
Arterial Mainstreet Provisions - Table 185(3)(g)
An amendment is required to clarify that height step backs continue to apply to those properties subject to Section 185(3)(g). This section outlines the maximum height only.
By-Law 2015-45 implemented Official Plan policies by reducing permitted height for those zones within major hubs and corridors from 30 metres to 25 metres. The existing table provides step back requirements for all AM zoned properties. Though the maximum height of 25 metres was provided in a separate section, the intent, based on review of the planning report for by-law 2015-45, was to have these step back provisions apply to all properties in the AM zone. The reduced height in other words was to be in reference to the maximum height only.
It is therefore proposed to reorganize the table for clarity.
The subject site is currently zoned IG1, which permits a recreation and athletic facility as a use, however the maximum area for such a use is capped at 300 square metres under the current subzone. The area required to host the necessary range of community functions for this use is generally greater than 300 square metres, being noted in a motion approved by Council on July 8, 2020 as being up to 1700 square metres. An amendment is therefore required in order to permit a more appropriately sized facility on this site.
2 Via Modugno
As a result of an irregularly shaped lot a technical front lot line makes it look like development is occurring at a rear property line. The fronts of buildings were meant to front on via Mondugno.
AM15 Typographical error
An amendment is needed to fix a typological error for the AM15 zone located along St-Laurent Boulevard. The AM15 zone should have been written as AM10.
112 Nelson Street
An amendment is needed to add a holding symbol with release conditional on the entering into and registration of a Section 37 agreement all to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Planning & Infrastructure.
Amendments affecting the rural area:
7356 Mansfield Road
An amendment is needed to regularize a dwelling located on this property.
Hunt Club Road at Russell Rd realignment 4055 / 4120 Russell Rd
An amendment is need as a result of the realignment of the road. This amendment will match the appropriate zoning to each side of the road.
2518 Devine Road
An amendment is needed to implement the site-specific policy of an Official Plan amendment for 2518 Devine Road, allowing the severance of two lots.
Section 128 – Home-Based Business Provisions
Amendments are proposed in order to address rural zones that are currently unable to benefit from the provisions of Section 128. Several of the Mineral Extraction subzones and Mineral Aggregate Reserve subzones permit detached dwellings and home-based businesses and are suitably sized and located to allow for the additional types of businesses permitted under Section 128, however due to the current limitation to AG and RU zones only, are not permitted. It is therefore proposed to revise Section 128 to permit mineral extraction zones to apply the additional provisions of Section 128.
7025 Fallowfield Road
An amendment is required to update the floodplain mapping to reflect the most up to date mapping by the conservation authority following a permit to relocate the watercourse crossing this property.
Section 211(2)(d) – Agricultural Provisions
An amendment to Section 211(2)(d) is required to clarify the intent of the provision: to permit any combination of the additional dwelling unit types listed (detached dwelling, a mobile home, and bunk house), with a maximum of one additional detached dwelling only, in the Agricultural Zone. No material change is proposed.
Amendments affecting both the rural and urban areas:
Sec. 110(3) – Refuse Collection
An amendment is required to clarify that refuse collection areas are to be screened from view regardless of where they are located exterior to the building. The current provision indicates that refuse collection must only be screened from view if within a ‘parking lot’, as defined in the zoning by-law. This will clarify that screening is required whether within a parking lot or a landscaped area. The amendment will also provide greater flexibility by permitting soft landscaping as a screening option
An amendment is required to clarify the application of this definition on a sloped property where one end of a building may be completely above grade and the other completely below grade.
Section 65 – Permitted Projections into Required Yards
This section is not meant to be more restrictive with respect to setbacks than the underlying zoning. An amendment is required to clarify that in no case must the setback for a permitted projection be greater than the required building setback.
Gas bar defintion
An amendment is needed to ensure that small-scale electric vehicle charging stations that are accessory to a parking space are not considered a gas bar.
Approval Timelines and Authority
A Zoning By-law amendment report is expected to go to Planning Committee in the third quarter of 2020 and Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, and City Council in the fourth quarter of 2020.
How to comment on these proposals
The City of Ottawa would like to receive any comments concerning this proposal. Please forward comments to the undersigned planner via mail, telephone, facsimile or e-mail by September 13, 2020. Comments received will be considered in the evaluation of the proposal.
Stay Informed and Involved
Register for future notifications about this application and provide your comments either by faxing or mailing the notification sign-up form in this package or by e-mailing me and adding File No. D02-02-20-0073 in the subject line.
If you wish to be notified of the decision of Council on the proposed zoning by-law, you must make a written request to me. My contact information is below.
Should you have any questions, please contact me.
Regular mail: Mitchell LeSage
2020 Omnibus Zoning Amendment
110 Laurier Avenue West, 4th Floor
Mail Code 01-15
613-580-2424 ext. 13902
If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting (meeting date, time and location to be determined) or make written submissions to the City of Ottawa before the proposed by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the City of Ottawa to the Ontario Municipal Board.
If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting (meeting date, time and location to be determined) or make written submissions to the City of Ottawa before the proposed by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Local Planning Authority Tribunal unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so.