Charles Courchesne and Linda Larkin, 2023 CanLII 152674

DECISION

CONSENT/SEVERANCE

Date of Decision: July 14, 2023

Panel: 3 - Rural

File No(s).: D08-02-23/B-00154

Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act

Owner(s)/Applicant(s): Charles Courchesne and Linda Larkin

Property Address: 3486 French Hill Road

Ward: 19 - Orléans South-Navan

Legal Description: Part of Lot 4 Concession 2 former Geographic Township of Cumberland

Zoning: RU

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Hearing Date: July 4, 2023, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANTS’ PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION

1The Owners want to subdivide their property into two separate parcels of land to create one new lot for a detached dwelling. The existing dwelling will remain on the other parcel.

2The Owner requires the Committee’s consent to sever the land. The property is shown on a sketch filed with the applications and the separate parcels will be as follows:

3The land to be severed will have a frontage of 70 metres, a depth of 200 metres, and will contain a lot area of 1.4 hectares. This parcel will contain the existing detached dwelling and will be known municipally as 3490 French Hill Road.

4The land to be retained will have a frontage of 80 metres, an irregular depth of 608 metres and will contain a lot area of 21 hectares. This parcel will be known municipally as 3486 French Hill Road.

5The application indicates that the property is subject to an existing easement as in CU16170.

PUBLIC HEARING

6Dwight Johnson, Agent for the Owner, addressed an adjournment request filed by City Planner Jack Graham. The request was for additional time to allow the City to correct an error in the Official Plan relating to the severance criteria for lots designated Rural Countryside. Mr. Johnson requested that the Committee hear the application.

7Mr. Graham explained that the error in the Official Plan was a recurring issue and that an Official Plan Amendment was forthcoming, but he acknowledged that the Committee has previously agreed to hear applications affected by the error. The Committee agreed to hear the application as scheduled.

Oral Submissions Summary

8In a brief presentation, Mr. Johnson summarized his pre-application consultation and explained that a well was drilled and a hydrogeological assessment was submitted to the City.

9With respect to the conditions requested by the City in its Planning Report on file, Mr. Johnson noted that an updated Environmental Impact Statement was requested with a map showing a development envelope of no more than 0.2 hectares, and asked for an opportunity to work with staff to identify a larger envelope that would be acceptable to the City. He also questioned the need for a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment and evidence of Ontario Building Code compliance for limiting distances along the west property line.

10Mr. Graham advised that a development envelope of 0.2 hectares is a standard requirement where environmental features are involved but agreed that the City would consider a larger envelope through its review of the revised EIS. He also advised that the lot is adjacent to an Unnamed Waste Disposal Site to the north, necessitating an environmental assessment. and explained that evidence regarding limiting distances was requested by the City’s Building Code Services Branch.

11In response to a proposal that an environmental assessment be required only if the City determined that it was necessary, Mr. Graham agreed that the wording of the condition could be modified accordingly.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:

APPLICATION GRANTED

Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests

12Under the Planning Act, the Committee has the power to grant a consent if it is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. Also, the Committee must be satisfied that an application is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and has regard for matters of provincial interest under section 2 of the Act, as well as the following criteria set out in subsection 51(24):

Criteria

(24) In considering a draft plan of subdivision, regard shall be had, among other matters, to the health, safety, convenience, accessibility for persons with disabilities and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the municipality and to,

(a) the effect of development of the proposed subdivision on matters of provincial interest as referred to in section 2;

(b) whether the proposed subdivision is premature or in the public interest;

(d) the suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided;

(d.1) if any affordable housing units are being proposed, the suitability of the proposed units for affordable housing;

(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them;

(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;

(g) the restrictions or proposed restrictions, if any, on the land proposed to be subdivided or the buildings and structures proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;

(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;

(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;

(j) the adequacy of school sites;

(k) the area of land, if any, within the proposed subdivision that, exclusive of highways, is to be conveyed or dedicated for public purposes;

(l) the extent to which the plan’s design optimizes the available supply, means of supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and

(m) the interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41 (2) of this Act or subsection 114 (2) of

the City of Toronto Act, 2006. 1994, c. 23, s. 30; 2001, c. 32, s. 31 (2);

2006, c. 23, s. 22 (3, 4); 2016, c. 25, Sched. 4, s. 8 (2).

Evidence

13Evidence considered by the Committee included all oral submissions made at the hearing, as highlighted above, and the following written submissions held on file with the Secretary-Treasurer and available from the Committee Coordinator upon request:

Application and supporting documents, including a cover letter, plans, a hydrogeological assessment and terrain analysis, an environmental impact study, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received June 28, 2023, with an adjournment request
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email dated June 30, 2023, with no objections
Hydro Ottawa email dated June 27, 2023, with no comments

Effect of Submissions on Decision

14The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and granted the application.

15Based on the evidence, the Committee is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement that promotes efficient land use and development as well as intensification and redevelopment within built-up areas, based on local conditions. The Committee is also satisfied that the proposal has adequate regard to matters of provincial interest, including the orderly development of safe and healthy communities; the appropriate location of growth and development; and the protection of public health and safety. Additionally, the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. Moreover, the Committee is satisfied that the proposal has adequate regard for the criteria specified under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and is in the public interest.

16THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT therefore grants the provisional consent, subject to the following conditions, which must be fulfilled within a two-year period from the date of this Decision:

That the Owners enter into an Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s) and to the satisfaction of Development Review Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, which provides the following covenant/notice that runs with the land and binds future Owner(s) on subsequent transfers:

“The City of Ottawa does not guarantee the quality or quantity of the groundwater. If, at some future date, the quality or the quantity of the groundwater becomes deficient, the City of Ottawa bears no responsibility, financial or otherwise, to provide solutions to the deficiency, such solutions being the sole responsibility of the homeowner.”

The Committee requires a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.

That the Owners enter into an Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s) and to the satisfaction of Development Review Manager of the Rural Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, which provides the following covenant/notice that runs with the land and binds future Owner(s) on subsequent transfers:

“The City of Ottawa has identified that there are potential sensitive marine clays within the area that may require site specific detailed geotechnical engineering solutions to allow for development, the City of Ottawa bears no responsibility, financial or otherwise, to provide solutions to the deficiency, such solutions being the sole responsibility of the homeowner.”

The Committee requires a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.

That the Owners acknowledges and agrees to convey to the City, at no cost to the City, an unencumbered road widening across the complete frontage of the lands, measuring 13 meters from the existing centerline of pavement/the abutting right-of-way along French Hill Road, pursuant to Section 50.1(25)(c) of the Planning Act and Schedule C16 of the City’s new Official Plan. The exact widening must be determined by legal survey. The Owner shall provide a reference plan for registration, indicating the widening, to the City Surveyor for review and approval prior to its deposit in the Land Registry Office. Such reference plan must be tied to the Horizontal Control Network in accordance with the municipal requirements and guidelines for referencing legal surveys. The Owner(s) must provide to the City Surveyor a copy of the Committee of Adjustment Decision and a draft Reference Plan that sets out the required widening. The Committee requires written confirmation from City Legal Services that the transfer of the widening to the City has been registered. All costs shall be borne by the Owner.
That, if required, the Owners submit a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment prepared by a qualified person who meets the qualifications prescribed by the regulations, for approval by the Development Review Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, to be confirmed in writing from the Department to the Committee, outlining the assessment of the property and determining the likelihood that one or more contaminants have affected any land or water, in or under the property.
That the Owners provide a report, to the satisfaction of the City of Ottawa, demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer with respect to quality and quantity to support the proposed development, failing which the Owners construct a new well on the severed lot and provide a report, to the satisfaction of the City of Ottawa, to demonstrate the adequacy of the aquifer with respect to quality and quantity to support the proposed development. The report must include a septic impact assessment to evaluate the water quality impact of the on-site septic system on the receiving aquifer.

The Owners’ report must demonstrate the following to the City of Ottawa:

a. That the construction of any new well on the severed parcel is in accordance with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks

b. That the quality of the water meets the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Regulations, Standards, Guidelines and Objectives;

c. That the quantity of water meets all the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks requirements.

d. That the septic impact assessment meets the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks requirements.

A qualified Professional Engineer or Professional Geoscientist must prepare the report. It is the Owner’s responsibility to coordinate the person drilling a new well, if required, and the professional noted herein in order to properly satisfy this condition.

If the accepted report recommends specific mitigation measures or design requirements, the Owners shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owners, which is to be registered on the title of the property, which includes those recommendations. In instances where the subject site has sensitive soils, the drilling of a well or the conveyance of a 30- centimetre reserve may be required. Both the report and any required Development Agreement shall be prepared to the satisfaction of Development Review Manager of the Rural Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate.

That the Owners enter into a Development Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s) and to the satisfaction of the Development Review Manager of the relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, to prepare and submit a revised Environmental Impact Statement.
That the Owners provide evidence (payment receipt) to the Committee that payment has been made to the City of Ottawa of cash-in-lieu of the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes, plus applicable appraisal costs. The value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed shall be determined by the City of Ottawa in accordance with the provisions of By-Law No. 2009-95, as amended. Information regarding the appraisal process can be obtained by contacting the Planner.
That the Owners satisfy the Chief Building Official, or designate, by providing design drawings or other documentation prepared by a qualified designer, that as a result of the proposed severance the existing buildings (house and shed) on the ‘sketch for severance’ shall comply with the Ontario Building Code, O. Reg. 332/12 as amended, in regard to the limiting distance along the West property line. If necessary, a building permit shall be obtained from Building Code Services for any required alterations.
That the Owners file with the Committee a copy of the registered Reference Plan prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor registered in the Province of Ontario, and signed by the Registrar, confirming the frontage and area of the severed land. If the Registered Plan does not indicate the lot area, a letter from the Surveyor confirming the area is required. The Registered Reference Plan must conform substantially to the Draft Reference Plan filed with the Application for Consent.
That upon completion of the above conditions, and within the two-year period outlined above, the Owners file with the Committee, the “electronic registration in preparation documents” for the conveyance for which the consent is required.

“William Hunter” WILLIAM HUNTER VICE-CHAIR

“Terence Otto” TERENCE OTTO MEMBER

Absent BETH HENDERSON MEMBER

“Martin Vervoort” MARTIN VERVOORT MEMBER

Absent JOCELYN CHANDLER MEMBER

I certify this is a true copy of the Decision of the Committee of Adjustment of the City of Ottawa, dated July 14, 2023.

“Michel Bellemare” MICHEL BELLEMARE SECRETARY-TREASURER

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

To appeal this decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), a completed appeal form along with payment must be received by the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment by August 3, 2023, delivered by email at cofa@ottawa.ca and/or by mail or courier to the following address:

Secretary-Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment, 101 Centrepointe Drive, 4th floor, Ottawa, Ontario, K2G 5K7

The Appeal Form is available on the OLT website at https://olt.gov.on.ca/. The Ontario Land Tribunal has established a filing fee of $400.00 per type of application with an additional filing fee of $25.00 for each secondary application. Payment can be made by certified cheque or money order made payable to the Ontario Minister of Finance, or by credit card. Please indicate on the Appeal Form if you wish to pay by credit card. If you have any questions about the appeal process, please contact the Committee of Adjustment office by calling 613-580-2436 or by email at cofa@ottawa.ca.

Only the applicant, the Minister or a specified person or public body that has an interest in the matter may appeal the decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal. A “specified person” does not include an individual or a community association.

There are no provisions for the Committee of Adjustment or the Ontario Land Tribunal to extend the statutory deadline to file an appeal. If the deadline is not met, the OLT does not have the authority to hold a hearing to consider your appeal.

If a major change to condition(s) is requested, you will be entitled to receive Notice of the changes only if you have made a written request to be notified.

NOTICE TO APPLICANT(S)

All technical studies must be submitted to Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department a minimum of 40 working days prior to lapsing date of the consent. Should a Development Agreement be required, such request should be initiated 15 working days prior to lapsing date of the consent and should include all required documentation including the approved technical studies.

Ce document est également offert en français.

Committee of Adjustment City of Ottawa Ottawa.ca/CommitteeofAdjustment cofa@ottawa.ca 613-580-2436

Comité de dérogation Ville d’Ottawa Ottawa.ca/Comitedederogation cded@ottawa.ca 613-580-2436