265 Catherine St [Former Greyhound terminal] | 110/117/127m | 32/34/36f | Site Prep

[Ottawacurious]

February 3, 2026
NOTICE OF DECISION – Site Plan Control Application
Thank you for your comments relating to the Site Plan Control Application for 265 Catherine Steet.
We would like you to know that the Planning, Development and Building Services Department has reviewed this application and approved it.
We have attached a copy of the report explaining the decision for this application. Prior to the commencement of work on the property, the property owner is required to fulfil any requirements by the City, as were determined through the review of this
application (e.g. building permit).

The changes required can be found on devapps.

The proposed development at 265 Catherine Street includes a mixed-use development
consisting of three high-rise towers (Towers 1, 2, and 3) with two 6-storey podiums
(Buildings A and B) and three storey townhouses (Building C) along Arlington Avenue.
• Tower 1: 32 storeys, on Building A, fronts Catherine Street.
• Tower 2: 36 storeys, on Building B, also fronts Catherine Street.
• Tower 3: 34 storeys, on Building B, faces Lyon Street.

The development includes 1,164 units in total. There are two phases of construction proposed: Phase 1 includes Tower 1 with about 423 units, and 251 underground parking spaces; Phase 2 includes Towers 2 and 3 with around 734 units, along with seven townhouse units in Building C, and will add 436 underground parking spaces. Unit types include a mix of bachelor, one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, with an intention for 100 of these to be affordable units.

The site will feature a total of 667 parking spaces in a two-level underground garage and 1,193 bicycle parking spaces, more than double the minimum bicycle parking requirement. A minimum of 20 per cent privately owned public space will be provided in the form of a woonerf-style lanes, patios, and gardens, in addition to an approximately 1,000 square metre privately-owned public space at the northeastern corner, originally planned as a public park. The building design also contemplates a public washroom facility next to the public plaza. The public park, which will be conveyed to the City, has been relocated to 506 Kent Street to allow the expansion of the below grade parking
garage.

[SL123]

looking at DevApp it looks like Site plan was approved recently.

[J.OT13]

Is that an indication we could see construction soon?

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

February 3, 2026
NOTICE OF DECISION – Site Plan Control Application
Thank you for your comments relating to the Site Plan Control Application for 265 Catherine Steet.
We would like you to know that the Planning, Development and Building Services Department has reviewed this application and approved it.
We have attached a copy of the report explaining the decision for this application. Prior to the commencement of work on the property, the property owner is required to fulfil any requirements by the City, as were determined through the review of this
application (e.g. building permit).

The changes required can be found on devapps.

The proposed development at 265 Catherine Street includes a mixed-use development
consisting of three high-rise towers (Towers 1, 2, and 3) with two 6-storey podiums
(Buildings A and B) and three storey townhouses (Building C) along Arlington Avenue.
• Tower 1: 32 storeys, on Building A, fronts Catherine Street.
• Tower 2: 36 storeys, on Building B, also fronts Catherine Street.
• Tower 3: 34 storeys, on Building B, faces Lyon Street.

The development includes 1,164 units in total. There are two phases of construction proposed: Phase 1 includes Tower 1 with about 423 units, and 251 underground parking spaces; Phase 2 includes Towers 2 and 3 with around 734 units, along with seven townhouse units in Building C, and will add 436 underground parking spaces. Unit types include a mix of bachelor, one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, with an intention for 100 of these to be affordable units.

The site will feature a total of 667 parking spaces in a two-level underground garage and 1,193 bicycle parking spaces, more than double the minimum bicycle parking requirement. A minimum of 20 per cent privately owned public space will be provided in the form of a woonerf-style lanes, patios, and gardens, in addition to an approximately 1,000 square metre privately-owned public space at the northeastern corner, originally planned as a public park. The building design also contemplates a public washroom facility next to the public plaza. The public park, which will be conveyed to the City, has been relocated to 506 Kent Street to allow the expansion of the below grade parking
garage.

Seriously how f-ing dumb is the council/planning/legal department in Ottawa, we literally just went through this quasi privately owned public space with the golf course in Kanata, nvm the disaster its been in Toronto.

It's just a bad idea.

[SkeggsEggs]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Seriously how f-ing dumb is the council/planning/legal department in Ottawa, we literally just went through this quasi privately owned public space with the golf course in Kanata, nvm the disaster its been in Toronto.

It's just a bad idea.

we have privately owned parks in the city that function just fine?

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by SkeggsEggs

we have privately owned parks in the city that function just fine?

There only as good as the contract that was written and the length of time the original signatories own the property.

Once a new actor is involved then encroachment becomes an issue along other things, nvm that as the golf course issue shows no contract is in perpetuity.

The city is better off owning parkland.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

There only as good as the contract that was written and the length of time the original signatories own the property.

Once a new actor is involved then encroachment becomes an issue along other things, nvm that as the golf course issue shows no contract is in perpetuity.

The city is better off owning parkland.

An unprofitable private golf course isn't the same as a bit of open space around dense residential towers.

Here's the site plan. Other than maybe the little green space at the north-east corner, explain to me how this might be redeveloped?

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

An unprofitable private golf course isn't the same as a bit of open space around dense residential towers.

Here's the site plan. Other than maybe the little green space at the north-east corner, explain to me how this might be redeveloped?

Encroachment of use by any retail in the dev, building owners hosting events in the space that cost money to enter & etc.

also if it's so disconnected then the city should own it.... This really isn't a complicated thing.

As for the future, say in 21 years the building condo wants to wall the space off of they could of they do chose to, if the contract isn't properly written.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Encroachment of use by any retail in the dev, building owners hosting events in the space that cost money to enter & etc.

also if it's so disconnected then the city should own it.... This really isn't a complicated thing.

As for the future, say in 21 years the building condo wants to wall the space off of they could of they do chose to, if the contract isn't properly written.

I fully expect retail (restaurants) to use some of the space for patios. I don't think that's prohibited. It's what will make the space livelier.

Even paid events, maybe, like space for music festivals or something. We have those in public parks too.

Can't see that space being walled off to create one big podium. You'd be blocking residential windows, retail spaces, vents and all sorts of stuff.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I fully expect retail (restaurants) to use some of the space for patios. I don't think that's prohibited. It's what will make the space livelier.

Even paid events, maybe, like space for music festivals or something. We have those in public parks too.

Can't see that space being walled off to create one big podium. You'd be blocking residential windows, retail spaces, vents and all sorts of stuff.

And I'm sure the restaurant with that patio will fully expect that your a paying customer........ Paying customer only.....

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

And I'm sure the restaurant with that patio will fully expect that your a paying customer........ Paying customer only.....

Yes. What's your point?

[ponyboycurtis]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

And I'm sure the restaurant with that patio will fully expect that your a paying customer........ Paying customer only.....

Generally how patios work.

I have no illusions about this being a lush retail strip. Catherine st will be noisy and aggravating and Arlington is low key SFH.

Look at the retail fabric that's there and has been there for decades. It is what it is as far as a strip of road goes.

Side note. Did anyone ever goto the OEM express there? Did you also know his twin brother worked the second store in Kanata? I went there to buy a 7800GT video card wayyyy back in the day. Catherine was out of stock. Says we have one in Kanata. Drive out there. Literal Bugs Bunny head explode moment when his identical twin brother serves me at the counter.