Marie Campion and Joseph Milner, 2024 CanLII 149626

DECISION

CONSENT/SEVERANCE

Date of Decision: March 1, 2024

Panel: 1 - Urban

File No(s).: D08-01-24/B-00009

Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act

Owner(s)/Applicant(s): Marie Campion and Joseph Milner

Property Address: 62 and 64 Glynn Avenue

Ward: 13 - Rideau-Rockcliffe

Legal Description: Lot 52 and Part of Lot 51, Registered Plan 291

Zoning: R3M

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Hearing Date: February 21, 2024, 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 separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling, currently under construction.

2The Owners require the Committee’s consent to sever the land.

3The severed land, shown as Part 2 on the Draft 4R-plan filed with the application, will have a frontage of 8.23 metres, a depth of 31.31 metres and contain an area of 257.6 square metres. This lot is known municipally as 64 Glynn Avenue.

4The land to be retained, shown as Part 1 on the said plan, will have a frontage of 8.23 metres, a depth of 31.32 metres and a lot of area of 257.7 square metres. This lot is known municipally as 62 Glynn Avenue.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

5Jasmine Paoloni, Agent for the Applicants, highlighted no concerns with the conditions requested in the City’s Planning Report, but did express concerns regarding Bell’s requested easement condition. She indicated there were two parts to the easement, one for the existing overheard wires, and the second regarding a buried conduit. While the easement for the overhead wire was acceptable, Ms. Paoloni believed there was insufficient room to accommodate the underground conduit.

6In response to questions from the Committee, Ms. Paoloni advised that she would be favourable to leaving the condition open-ended, as during previous discussions with Bell Canada she noted that there might be other options such as relocation of the services.

7The Committee suggested altering the condition to include the words “may require” and to separate the condition into two parts (overhead and underground).

8With all parties in concurrence, the Committee amended the Bell Canada condition.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:

APPLICATION GRANTED

Application 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;

(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, area certificate, building permit, parcel registry, tree information report, a photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received February 16, 2024, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received February 14, 2024, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received February 14, 2024, with comments.
Ministry of Transportation email received February 14, 2024, with no comments.
Bell Canada email received February 16, 2024, with comments; received February 21, 2024, with comments.

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.

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(s) provide evidence to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, or designate, that the party wall meets the Ontario Building Code, O Reg. 332/12 as amended, which requires a 1-hour fire separation from the basement through to the underside of the roof. Verification from the Building Inspector is required. If necessary, a building permit shall be obtained from Building Code Services for any required alterations.
The Owner/Applicant(s) shall prepare, submit, and implement 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) and species or size class (small, medium, large) of one new 50 mm tree per lot, to be planted on the property frontage or right-of-way following construction, to enhance the urban tree canopy and streetscape.
That the Owner(s) provide evidence (servicing plan), to the satisfaction of the General Manager of the Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, to be confirmed in writing from the Department to the Committee, that both the severed and retained parcels can have their own independent water, sanitary and sewer connection, as appropriate, and that these services do not cross the proposed severance line and are connected directly to City infrastructure. If they do cross the proposed severance line, or they are not independent, the Owner(s) will be required to relocate or construct new services from the city sewers and/or watermain at his/her own costs.
That the Owner(s) enter into a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements at the expense of the Owner(s), setting forth the obligations between the Owner(s) and the proposed future owners.

The Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement shall set forth the joint use and maintenance of all common elements including, but not limited to, the common party walls, common structural elements such as roof, footings, soffits, foundations, common areas, common driveways and common landscaping.

The Owner shall ensure that the Agreement is binding upon all the unit owners and successors in title and shall be to the satisfaction of the City’s General Manager of the Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, and City Legal Services. The Committee requires written confirmation that the Agreement is satisfactory to the City’s General Manager of the Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department, or his/her designate, and is satisfactory to City Legal Services, as well as a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.

That the Owner(s) grant to Bell Canada, without cost, such easements as may be required to protect the existing aerial facilities, the consent to the registration of which is hereby granted.
That the Owner(s) grant to Bell Canada, without cost, such easements as may be required to protect the existing buried facilities, the consent to the registration of which is hereby granted.
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 severence for which the Consent is required.

“Ann M. Tremblay” ANN M. TREMBLAY CHAIR

“John Blatherwick” JOHN BLATHERWICK MEMBER

“Simon Coakeley” SIMON COAKELEY MEMBER

“Arto Keklikian” 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 March 1, 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 21, 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 cofa@ottawa.ca 613-580-2436

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