August 30, 2024

Stephen Fazil, 2024 CanLII 147113

Case Summary

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels for future residential development. The City's Planning Report raised no concerns, subject to conditions. The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act. The application for consent was granted, subject to conditions including cash-in-lieu of parkland and groundwater quality/quantity reporting.

DECISION

CONSENT/SEVERANCE

Date of Decision: August 30, 2024

Panel: 3 - Rural

File No.: D08-01-24/B-00132

Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act

Applicant: Stephen Fazil

Property Address: 6208 Nick Adams Road

Ward: 20 – Osgoode

Legal Description: Lot 18, Plan 4M-1669

Zoning: RR1 [837r]

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Heard: August 20, 2024, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION

1The Applicant wants to subdivide the property into two parcels to create two new lots, for future residential development.

2The Applicant requires the Committee’s consent to sever the land.

3The severed land, shown as Lot 2 on a sketch filed with the application, will have a frontage of 90.08 metres, a depth of 99 metres, and a lot area of 0.8151 hectares. This parcel will be known municipally as 1850 Manotick Station.

4The retained land, shown as Lot 1 on the said sketch, has a frontage of 54.62 metres on Nick Adams Road, 105.99 metres on Manotick Station Road, and a lot area of 0.8349 hectares. This parcel is known municipally as 6208 Nick Adams Road.

5The application indicates that the property is subject to easements as in OC2280669, OC2281143, and OC2283059.

6The subject property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

7Paul Robinson, the Agent for the Applicant, asked that the conditions requested in the City’s Planning Report requiring a 13-metre road widening and a 3-metre x 9- metre corner site triangle not be imposed as these conditions were already satisfied. He also asked that the requested condition regarding a noise warning registered on title not be imposed as this was captured in the subdivision approval process when the parcel was created.

8City Planner Luke Teeft confirmed that the 13-metre road widening and 3-metre x 9-metre corner site triangle conditions were already satisfied and should not be imposed. He further agreed to remove the portion of the condition related to the noise warning being registered on title, as sufficient evidence was provided that this was already satisfied.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATION GRANTED

Application(s) Must Satisfy Statutory Tests

9Under 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;

c) whether the plan conforms to the official plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if any;

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

10Evidence 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 cover letter, plans, environmental impact study, parcel abstract, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received August 15, 2024, with no concerns.
South Nation Conservation Authority email received August 15, 2024, with no comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received August 13, 2024, with no comments.
E. Behjati, resident, email received August 19, 2024, in support.

Effect of Submissions on Decision

11The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and granted the application.

12The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the application, subject to the requested conditions, as amended as requested by the Applicant’s Agent and agreed to by the City.

13Based 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.

14THE 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 Owner(s) provide evidence that payment has been made to the City of Ottawa for cash-in-lieu of the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes, plus applicable appraisal costs. The value of land otherwise required to be conveyed shall be determined by the City of Ottawa in accordance with the provisions of By-Law No. 2022-280, as amended. Information regarding the appraisal process can be obtained by contacting the Planner.
That the Owner enter into an Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s) and to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their 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 Agreement shall be to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate. 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 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:

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

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

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

o 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 and/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 the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate.

The Report shall be prepared as per Procedure D-5-4 “Technical Guideline for Individual On-Site Sewage Systems: Water Quality Impact Risk Assessment” and Procedure D-5-5 “Technical Guideline for Private Wells: Water Supply Assessment”.

That the Owner(s) enter into an Agreement with the City, to the satisfaction of the manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate, to be placed on title that references the development envelopes and obligates mitigation measures identified in “6208 Nick Adams Road Environmental Impact Study - Severances” provided by Muncaster Environmental Planning and dated June 5, 2024.
That the Owner(s) 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 Owner(s) file with the Committee, the “electronic registration in preparation documents” for a Conveyance for which the Consent is required.

Terence Otto TERENCE OTTO VICE-CHAIR

Gary Duncan GARY DUNCAN MEMBER

Beth Henderson 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 August 30, 2024.

“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 September 19, 2024, 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 the Planning, Development and Building Services 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.

This document is also available in English.

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

August 30, 2024

Stephen Fazil, 2024 CanLII 147113

Case Summary

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels for future residential development. The City's Planning Report raised no concerns, subject to conditions. The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act. The application for consent was granted, subject to conditions including cash-in-lieu of parkland and groundwater quality/quantity reporting.

DECISION

CONSENT/SEVERANCE

Date of Decision: August 30, 2024

Panel: 3 - Rural

File No.: D08-01-24/B-00132

Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act

Applicant: Stephen Fazil

Property Address: 6208 Nick Adams Road

Ward: 20 – Osgoode

Legal Description: Lot 18, Plan 4M-1669

Zoning: RR1 [837r]

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Heard: August 20, 2024, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION

1The Applicant wants to subdivide the property into two parcels to create two new lots, for future residential development.

2The Applicant requires the Committee’s consent to sever the land.

3The severed land, shown as Lot 2 on a sketch filed with the application, will have a frontage of 90.08 metres, a depth of 99 metres, and a lot area of 0.8151 hectares. This parcel will be known municipally as 1850 Manotick Station.

4The retained land, shown as Lot 1 on the said sketch, has a frontage of 54.62 metres on Nick Adams Road, 105.99 metres on Manotick Station Road, and a lot area of 0.8349 hectares. This parcel is known municipally as 6208 Nick Adams Road.

5The application indicates that the property is subject to easements as in OC2280669, OC2281143, and OC2283059.

6The subject property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

7Paul Robinson, the Agent for the Applicant, asked that the conditions requested in the City’s Planning Report requiring a 13-metre road widening and a 3-metre x 9- metre corner site triangle not be imposed as these conditions were already satisfied. He also asked that the requested condition regarding a noise warning registered on title not be imposed as this was captured in the subdivision approval process when the parcel was created.

8City Planner Luke Teeft confirmed that the 13-metre road widening and 3-metre x 9-metre corner site triangle conditions were already satisfied and should not be imposed. He further agreed to remove the portion of the condition related to the noise warning being registered on title, as sufficient evidence was provided that this was already satisfied.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATION GRANTED

Application(s) Must Satisfy Statutory Tests

9Under 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;

c) whether the plan conforms to the official plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if any;

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

10Evidence 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 cover letter, plans, environmental impact study, parcel abstract, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received August 15, 2024, with no concerns.
South Nation Conservation Authority email received August 15, 2024, with no comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received August 13, 2024, with no comments.
E. Behjati, resident, email received August 19, 2024, in support.

Effect of Submissions on Decision

11The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and granted the application.

12The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the application, subject to the requested conditions, as amended as requested by the Applicant’s Agent and agreed to by the City.

13Based 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.

14THE 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 Owner(s) provide evidence that payment has been made to the City of Ottawa for cash-in-lieu of the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes, plus applicable appraisal costs. The value of land otherwise required to be conveyed shall be determined by the City of Ottawa in accordance with the provisions of By-Law No. 2022-280, as amended. Information regarding the appraisal process can be obtained by contacting the Planner.
That the Owner enter into an Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s) and to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their 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 Agreement shall be to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate. 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 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.