Good evening, Kitchissippi! Last week, city staff introduced a second draft of the new zoning by-law (NZBL). This draft will be received at a joint Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee and Planning and Housing Committee being held on Monday, March 31st.
As you might expect, this draft is jam packed with new information, with a lot to parse through. Thankfully, staff have provided a useful breakdown of the many issues tackled in this draft. You can find draft 2 of the New Zoning By-law, and all supporting documentation, here.
This is the second of three planned drafts. Over the course of spring and early summer there will be further City consultations on the draft, leading to a third and final draft on which Council is expected to vote around the end of the year.
Most of the following is very technical. Both Stephany Chevalier-Crockett and Alice Fyfe in my office can help you navigate what the new zoning by-law is likely to mean for your property and the properties around it, including whether this second draft has changed that outlook significantly. Email us at jeff.leiper@ottawa.ca if you have questions! We’re in close touch with our community associations who are following this closely, and who will likely communicate with residents the changes (or lack thereof) in which they are most interested.
Five key issues were highlighted in draft 2 of the new zoning by-law. These are:
Issue 1: Minimum Parking Rates for Villages
Issue 2: Maximum Building Height in N1 and N2 – Neighbourhood Zones
Issue 3: Conversion of the R4 zone to N4 zone in the draft Zoning By-law
Issue 4: Building Height Transition Framework
Issue 5: Communal Parking Lot Permissions in Neighbourhood (N1-N6) Zones
Issues 2 through 5 apply to Kitchissippi, and I’ve laid out the issues and staff’s evaluation of them below. With these five key issues, staff have also presented various options on how Council can proceed in their deliberation of them. You can find staff’s full analysis of the five key issues, and how they arrived at their recommendations, here.
Maximum Building Height in N1 and N2 – Neighbourhood Zones
One of the significant changes in Draft 2 of the new zoning by-law is an adjustment to maximum building heights in N1/N2 zones. These zones replace what are currently the R1/R2 zones. In the last draft, N1 and N2 heights were limited to 8.5m across all transects (as defined in the Official Plan) in the city. In Draft 2, staff are recommending that the maximum building height be increased to 11m for all N1/N2 zones in the Suburban transect only. This means no changes for our Inner Urban transect, but they may be of interest to residents.
Conversion of the R4 zone to N4 zone in the draft Zoning By-law
An issue raised by residents during the consultation of draft 1 of the NZBL was the conversion of R4 zones to N4 zones. Currently, certain R4 zones are more akin to an N3 zones in terms of their height and density permissions. Staff considered the concerns raised by those within the Inner Urban R4 subzones, and they took note that these areas had received greater height and density permissions in 2020 through the R4 Zoning Review and the amendments that followed. As a result, staff are recommending that R4 heights be restricted to 11m for those previous R4 subzones in most cases, as well as converting some R4 zones to N3 zones to better align with their current height and density permissions.
The details of these changes, and which zones are affected, are outlined in the tables provided by staff below. A height suffix of H(11) indicates a maximum height of 11m for a zone. In the case here, N4 H(11) would be interpreted as an N4 zone, with the maximum height for a building being 11m. This is an important change for neighbourhoods like Hintonburg and Mechanicsville where the first draft proposed adding even more height, and thus density, than what had been done just a few years before in a review of their R4 zoning. That’s been dialled back.
Draft 1 conversion of zones (Inner Urban)
Draft 2 conversion of zones (Inner Urban)
Building Height Transition Framework
In this draft, staff have further built out an approach to regulate heights in mixed-use zones abutting low-rise residential areas. While the first draft proposed a series of maximum heights depending on the distance of a building from a low-rise property, this new draft sees some amendments to this framework. In this framework, a 30-metre transition area helps guide the as-of right height on a property, depending on lot depth. Within that 30m, heights would be subject to the application of an angular plane – effectively, constraining heights to mid-rise, and approaching high-rise heights on only the deepest lots. In short, height (as-of-right) would scale according to lot depth in mixed-use zones abutting a low-rise neighbourhood.
While high-rise buildings would be contemplated on deep lots as-of right, mid-rises (or only podiums to high-rises) would fit within the transition area of smaller lots. For example, for lots up to 40m in depth, mid-rise development would be possible as-of-right. Deep lots, such as those greater than 50m in depth, would see high-rise buildings considered feasible as-of-right (up to 27 storeys).
Communal parking lot permissions in all Neighbourhood zones
In the first draft of the NZBL, communal parking lots were only permitted in planned unit developments (developments with more than one residential building on one lot). While staff support continuing with this level of permission, feedback received during consultations has led to further consideration in allowing communal parking lots in Neighbourhood zones. Effectively, these would be vehicular parking spaces accessible to those beyond the residents of a given lot. Staff have put forward four options in their consideration of communal parking; ultimately, they continue to recommend the same approach as draft 1, with the caveat of removing a provision that reads “No parking spaces are permitted in any other location on the lot containing the Planned Unit Development.” The removal of that condition is intended to allow for flexibility with respect to the location of on-site parking for a Planned Unit Development site.
Other items of interest for Kitchissippi
Clarifications on density for N1, N2 and N3; calculations for density on N4 and beyond
One matter that we frequently heard feedback on after the introduction of draft 1 was the calculation of densities on lots, given the per hectare formula introduced in the New Zoning By-law. In the newest draft, you’ll see some significant changes to maximum densities for buildings in Neighbourhood zones. N1, N2, and N3 zones have all been modified to include a maximum number of units per building – four, six, and 10 units respectively. In addition to this, the maximum densities for the Neighbourhood zones will now be regulated on a “per 100 square metres of lot area” formula rather than a “per hectare” formula. As an example, that would mean the previous calculation of 250 units per hectare for the N3 zone would now be calculated as 2.5 units per 100 square metres of lot area.
Rear yard setback treatment in Neighbourhood zones
Some communities in the ward expressed concerns about the treatment of rear yard setbacks in the subzones that tend to apply to most neighbourhoods in our ward. Between our current Zoning By-law and the current draft of the New Zoning By-law, there was a reduction in the required rear yard setback. Currently, many of our neighbourhoods see a rear yard setback that ranges from 25 to 30% of lot depth, and the proposed draft by-law sees lot depths of 25% proposed across all Neighbourhood subzones. A further addition states that the rear yard setback “need not exceed 7.5m, regardless of abutting zone.” On the whole, the main changes to these setbacks was a reduction in lot depth for more suburban subzones (only subzones C, D, E, and F saw their lot depth changed from 28% previously to 25% now).
For a more granular discussion of the changes made to each section of the newest draft, I’d encourage you to read the “Overview of changes in Draft 2 of the Zoning By-law.” It provides an overview of all changes in Draft 2, beyond the five key issues flagged in a separate document.