Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION
CONSENT/SEVERANCE
Date of Decision
April 26, 2024
Panel:
2 - Suburban
D08-02-24/B-00028 & D08-01-24/B-00029
Application:
Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act
Owner/Applicant:
1000445214 Ontario Inc.
Property Address:
958 Woodroffe Avenue
Ward:
7 – Bay
Legal Description:
Part of Lot 48, Registered Plan 293826, Geographic Township of Nepean
Zoning:
R2G
Zoning By-law:
2008-250
Hearing Date:
April 16, 2024, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS:
1The Owner wants to subdivide their property into two separate parcels of land for the construction of two, long semi-detached dwellings. Each new dwelling unit will contain two additional dwelling units. The existing dwelling will be demolished.
CONSENT IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING
2The Owner requires the Committee’s consent for Conveyances and Grants of Easements/Rights-of-Way.
3The property is shown as Parts 1 to 6 on a Draft 4R-Plan filed with the applications and the separate parcels will be as follows:
Table 1 Proposed Parcels
File No.
Frontage
Depth
Area
Part No.
Municipal Address
B-00028
7.57 7.54
metres
46.75 metres
349 sq. metres
1, 2 and 3
958 Woodroffe Avenue
B-00029
.37 7.4
metres
46.75 metres
349 sq. metres
4, 5 and 6
956 Woodroffe Avenue
4It is also proposed to create an easement/right of way over Part 3 in favour of Parts 4, 5 and 6 (956 Woodroffe Avenue) for pedestrian and vehicular access.
5It is also proposed to create an easement/right of way over Part 6 in favour of Parts 1,2 and 3 (958 Woodroffe Avenue) for pedestrian and vehicular access.
6The Applications indicate that the property is subject to an existing easement as in CR294218.
7Approval of these applications will have the effect of creating two separate parcels of land that will not be in conformity with the requirements of the Zoning By-law and therefore, minor variance applications (File Nos. D08-02-24/A-00036 & A- 00037) have been filed and will be heard concurrently with these applications.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
8The Committee noted that the frontage for application D08-02-24/B-00028 should be amended from 7.57 metres to 7.54 metres, and the frontage for application D08-02-24/B-00029 should be amended from 7.37 to 7.4 metres to reflect the revised Draft 4R-Plan provided by the Applicant.
9With all parties in concurrence, the applications were amended accordingly.
10Chang Sun, Agent for the Applicant, provided an overview of the applications. In response to the Committee, Mr. Sun confirmed that outdoor amenity space was being provided.
11The Committee also heard oral submissions from the following individuals:
M. Frampton, resident, noted concerns with grading and drainage in relation to the removal of three mature trees on the property. Mr. Frampton also noted concerns regarding snow removal.
H. Shouldice, resident, requested a fence be erected at the rear of the property to alleviate any light from vehicle headlights, any impact on the rear neighbour from garbage and snow removal.
M. Cho, resident, noted concerns with garbage maintenance, environmental factors, and lack of trees on the property.
12City Planner Penelope Horn confirmed no concerns with the applications. In response to resident concerns, Ms. Horn noted that nine trees will be planted to compensate for the removal of the mature trees on site, and that a condition is being requested to manage and direct stormwater management on site.
13Mr. Sun noted that storage is located at the rear of the property, but interior storage could be a possibility. He also confirmed that any snow accumulation will be addressed in the stormwater management plan.
14Planning Forester Nancy Young confirmed the size and location of the proposed replacement trees.
15Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATIONS GRANTED
Applications Must Satisfy Statutory Tests
16Under 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
17Evidence 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:
Applications and supporting documents, including cover letter, parcel registry, revised plans, tree information report, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received April 12, 2024, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received April 11, 2024, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received April 10, 2024, with comments.
Ottawa-Carleton District School Board email dated April 5, 2024, with comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received April 16, 2024, with comments.
Hydro One email received April 16, 2024, with no comments.
M. Cho, resident, email received April 15, 2024, with concerns.
Effect of Submissions on Decision
18The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the applications in making its decision and granted the applications.
19The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the applications.
20Based 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.
21THE 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.
The Owner/Applicant(s) shall prepare and submit a tree planting plan, prepared to the satisfaction of the Manager of the relevant Branch within the Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or their designate(s), showing the location(s), species or ultimate size of the specified number of compensation trees (50 mm caliper) required under the Tree Protection By-law, assuming that all proposed tree removals are permitted.
That the Owner(s) provide evidence to the satisfaction of both the Chief Building Official and Development Review Manager, Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or designates, that both severed and retained parcels have their own independent water, sanitary and storm connection as appropriate,
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 Relevant Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development 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 Relevant Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate.
That the Owner(s) provide proof 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 be confirmed in writing from the Department to the Committee, that the existing dwelling/building has been removed.
That the Owner(s) enter into a Development Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s) and to the satisfaction of Relevant Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, to require that an asphalt overlay will be installed, at the Owner(s) expense, on Woodroffe Street, fronting the subject lands, over the entire public driving surface area within the limits of the overlay, if the approved Site Servicing Plan shows three or more cuts within the pavement surface. The overlay must be carried out to the satisfaction of Relevant Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate. The Committee requires a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title. If the Relevant Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate determines that a Development Agreement requiring an asphalt overlay is no longer necessary, this condition shall be deemed as fulfilled.
The Owner(s) shall prepare a noise attenuation study in compliance with the City of Ottawa Environmental Noise Control Guidelines to the satisfaction of Relevant Manager of the Relevant Branch within Planning, Real Estate and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate. The Owner(s) shall enter into an agreement with the City that requires the Owner to implement any noise control (and vibration if applicable) attenuation measures recommended in the approved study. The Committee requires a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.
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 an easement/right-of-way 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
Absent
JULIANNE WRIGHT MEMBER
I certify this is a true copy of the Decision of the Committee of Adjustment of the City of Ottawa, dated April 26, 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 May 16, 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 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
613-580-2436
Comité de dérogation
Ville d’Ottawa
Ottawa.ca/Comitedederogation
613-580-2436