Committee of Adjustment / Comité de dérogation
DECISION
CONSENT/SEVERANCE
Date of Decision: February 16, 2024
Panel: 1 - Urban
File No(s).: D08-01-23/B-00299
Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act
Owner(s)/Applicant(s): 165177 Canada Inc.
Property Address: 275 King Edward Avenue
Ward: 12 – Rideau-Vanier
Legal Description: Lot 7 & Part of Lot B, North side of Clarence Street, Registered Plan 43586
Zoning: TM [2789] S458
Zoning By-law: 2008-250
Hearing Date: February 7, 2024, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION
1The Owner wants to construct an eight-storey hotel and establish an easement in favour of the abutting owner.
CONSENT IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING
2The Owner requires the Consent of the Committee for a Grant of Easement.
3It is proposed to establish an easement for maintenance and access over Parts 1 to 4 on the draft 4R-plan filed with the application, in favour of 257 Clarence Street.
4The application indicates that the Property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
5Dennis Jacobs, Agent for the Applicant, responded to questions from the Committee and confirmed that all issues regarding parking and traffic have been approved during the site plan process.
6The Committee also heard oral submissions from the following individuals:
F. Moreau, resident, who was in support of the application noting that the addition of a hotel would be beneficial for the neighbourhood.
J. Polowin, legal counsel for the Owner of 257 Clarence Street, the property benefitting from the easement, confirmed that his client was in favour of the application.
7City Planner, Margot Linker, was also present.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:
APPLICATION GRANTED
Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests
8Under 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
9Evidence 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, parcel registers, minutes of settlement, plans, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
J. Moreau, resident, email received January 29, 2024, with comments.
Hydro Ottawa email received January 30, 2024, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received January 31, 2024, with no objections.
City Planning Report received February 1, 2024, with no concerns.
Ministry of Transportation email received February 2, 2024, with no comments.
Effect of Submissions on Decision
10The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and granted the application.
11The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the applications, noting that “Staff understand that 257 Clarence, which abuts the subject site, is occupied by buildings that have very small setbacks, and that an easement to address this is a condition of Site Plan Control Approval.”
12Based 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.
13THE 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) 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 for which the Consent is required.
“Ann M. Tremblay” ANN M. TREMBLAY CHAIR
“John Blatherwick” JOHN BLATHERWICK MEMBER
Absent SIMON COAKELEY MEMBER
Absent ARTO KEKLIKIAN MEMBER
“Sharon Lécuyer” SHARON LÉCUYER MEMBER
I certify this is a true copy of the Decision of the Committee of Adjustment of the City of Ottawa, dated February 16, 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 March 7, 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
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