Centurion Appelt (Ranger Portfolio) GP Inc., 2024 CanLII 147980

DECISION

CONSENT/SEVERANCE

Date of Decision: June 14, 2024

Panel: 2 - Suburban

File No.: D08-01-24/B-00078

Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act

Owner/Applicant: Centurion Appelt (Ranger Portfolio) GP Inc.

Property Address: 1 Centrepointe Drive

Ward: 8 – College

Legal Description: Part of Lot 35, Concession 2 (Rideau Front), Geographic Township of Nepean

Zoning: MC F(2.0) H(34)

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Heard: June 4, 2024, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION

1The Applicant wants to subdivide their property into two separate parcels of land to create one new lot for future development.

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

3The land to be severed, shown as Parts 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 on a Draft 4R-Plan filed with the application, will have a frontage of 39.19 metres on Baseline Road, a depth of 71.8 metres, and a lot area of 3,352.8 square metres. This parcel is vacant and will be known municipally as 85 Gemini Way.

4The land to be retained, shown as Parts 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11 on the said plan will have a frontage of 157.75 metres on Baseline Road, a depth of 71.8 metres, and a lot area of 8,168.2 square metres. This parcel contains a four-storey medical building and associated surface parking and is known municipally as 75 Gemini Way.

5The subject property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

6Thomas Freeman, Agent of the Applicant, provided a slide presentation, a copy of which is on file with the Secretary-Treasurer and available from the Committee Coordinator upon request.

7Mr. Freeman questioned the need for the condition outlined in the City’s Planning Report requiring the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland. Mr. Freeman requested that the condition be removed given that no development is proposed at this time, and any future development would be subject to the Site Plan Control application process, and the cash-in-lieu of parkland payment could be made at that time.

8When questioned by the Committee, City Planner Penelope Horn agreed that the condition could be removed.

9With the concurrence of all parties, the Committee removed the condition relating to the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland.

10Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATION GRANTED

Application(s) Must Satisfy Statutory Tests

11Under 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

12Evidence 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, tree information report, Lawyer’s letter, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received May 30, 2024, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received May 29, 2024, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received May 30, 2024, with comments.

Effect of Submissions on Decision

13The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and granted the application.

14The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the application subject to the requested conditions agreed to by the Applicant’s Agent.

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 Owner(s) provide a servicing plan or other evidence, to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch of the Planning, Building and Development Services Department, or his/her designate, to be confirmed in writing from the Department to the Committee, that each existing building and/or unit on the severed and retained parcels has its own independent water, sanitary and sewer connection, as appropriate, that are directly connected to City infrastructure and do not cross the proposed severance line. If they do not connect directly or are not independent, and there is sufficient justification for the service locations to remain, the Owner(s), if required, must obtain Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Conservation and Parks (Environmental Compliance Approval – ECA), must obtain the approval of the Committee to grant easement(s) as required for access and maintenance of the services, and must register a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement, between the Owners of the services, on the title of the property, all at his/her own costs.
That the Owner(s) shall provide evidence that a grading and drainage plan, prepared by a qualified Civil Engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, an Ontario Land Surveyor or a Certified Engineering Technologist, has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch of the Planning, Building and Development Services Department, or his/her designate, to be confirmed in writing from the Department to the Committee. The grading and drainage plan shall delineate existing and proposed grades for both the severed and retained properties, to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch of the Planning, Building and Development Services Department, or his/her designate.
Pursuant to Section 50.1(25)(c) of the Planning Act and Schedule C16 of the Official Plan, the Owner 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 21 metres from the existing centreline of pavement/the abutting right-of-way. 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.

The Owner is advised that the required road widening described above may be reduced or waived under certain situations, as described in Schedule C16 s.2.1.1 (c) of the Official Plan or where the right-of-way requirement exceeds the front yard setback or corner side yard setback, or where an existing building or structure encroaches into the required road widening, as of the day the Consent to Sever application was deemed complete, as applicable, and determined by the Director, Transportation Planning, Planning, Building and Development Services.

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 the Conveyanc for which the consent is required.

“Fabian Poulin” FABIAN POULIN VICE-CHAIR

“Jay Baltz” JAY BALTZ MEMBER

“George Barrett” GEORGE BARRETT MEMBER

“Heather MacLean” HEATHER MACLEAN MEMBER

“Julianne Wright” JULIANNE WRIGHT MEMBER

I certify this is a true copy of the Decision of the Committee of Adjustment of the City of Ottawa, dated June 14, 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 July 4, 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.

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