Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION CONSENT/SEVERANCE AND MINOR VARIANCE
Panel: 2 - Suburban
Files: D08-01-25/B-00207 & D08-01-25/B-00208 D08-02-25/A-00212 & D08-02-25/A-00213
Applications: Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act
Applicant: 2772465 Ontario Inc.
Property Address: 58 St. Claire Avenue
Ward: 8 - College
Legal Description: Lots 1557, 1558, 1559 and 1560, Registered Plan 375
Zoning: R1FF [632]
Zoning By-law: 2008-250
Heard: November 4, 2025, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS
1The Applicant, owner of four full lots on a plan of subdivision, wants to construct two detached dwellings, each with two additional dwelling units.
CONSENT REQUIRED:
2The Applicant seeks the Committee’s consent to grant rights of easements/rights- of-way and for a joint use and maintenance agreement.
3The property is shown as Parts 1 to 4 on a draft 4R-plan filed with the applications. It is proposed to establish the easements/rights-of-way as follows:
- Over Part 2 on the draft 4R-plan, in favour of Parts 3 & 4 for vehicular and pedestrian access;
- Over Part 3 on the draft 4R-plan, in favour of Parts 1 & 2 for vehicular and pedestrian access.
4The proposal does not comply with the Zoning By-law and therefore minor variance applications have also been filed.
REQUESTED VARIANCES
5The Applicant requests that the Committee authorize the following minor variances from the Zoning By-law:
A-00212: 58 St. Claire Avenue, Parts 3 and 4 on draft 4R- Plan, proposed detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units:
a) To permit a reduced lot area of 417.8 443.6 square metres, whereas the By- law requires a minimum lot area of 600 square metres;
b) To permit a reduced lot width of 15.22 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 19.5 metres.
A-00213: 60 St. Claire Avenue, Parts 1 and 2 on draft 4R- Plan, proposed detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units:
c) To permit a reduced lot area of 417.8 443.6 square metres, whereas the By- law requires a minimum lot area of 600 square metres;
d) To permit a reduced lot width of 15.22 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 19.5 metres.
6The property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
6Jennifer Murray, Agent for the Applicant, confirmed that the applications needed to be amended as follows, based on exception 632 in the Zoning By-law, which allows the minimum lot area to utilize a portion of the rear land not exceeding 1.6 metres in depth:
A-00212: 58 St. Claire Avenue, Parts 3 and 4 on draft 4R- Plan, proposed detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units:
a) To permit a reduced lot area of 417.8 443.6 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 600 square metres;
A-00213: 60 St. Claire Avenue, Parts 1 and 2 on draft 4R- Plan, proposed detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units:
c) To permit a reduced lot area of 417.8 443.6 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 600 square metres.
7Ms. Murray provided a slide presentation, a copy of which is on file with the Secretary-Treasurer and available from the Committee Coordinator upon request.
8Responding to a question from the Panel, she confirmed that each detached dwelling would include two additional dwelling units, with shared access to the basement utilities. She also advised that two parking spaces were proposed for each dwelling, which would allow for the green space to be maintained in the rear yard. As the design was not yet finalized, the Applicant would consider permeable pavement and stormwater management options.
9City Planner, Dylan Geldart confirmed that the City Planning department had no concerns with the applications, highlighting that the shared driveway would eliminate the number of driveways on St. Claire Avenue and a stormwater management report requested as a condition of provisional consent would address flooding issues.
10The Committee also heard oral submissions from the following individuals:
N. Wilson, on behalf of the City View/Ryan Farm Community Association, noted concerns with drainage and flooding issues due to rear yard parking and the lack of stormwater infrastructure in the neighbourhood .
T. McKegney and C. Jolicoeur, residents, highlighted that the proposed development is out of character with the luxury single family homes in the neighbourhood and expressed concerns with flooding, traffic and the impact on property values.
R. Kalamouni, resident, echoed the same concerns that the proposed development is out of character with the luxury homes in the neighbourhood, and that the proposal would set a precedent and have a negative impact on property values.
11Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:
CONSENT APPLICATIONS GRANTED
MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS GRANTED, AS AMENDED
Consent Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests
12Under 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 Planning Statement, 2024, 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).
Minor Variance Application Must Satisfy Statutory Four-Part Test
13The Committee has the power to authorize a minor variance from the provisions of the Zoning By-law if, in its opinion, the application meets all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act. It requires consideration of whether the variance is minor, is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure, and whether the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law are maintained.
Evidence
14Evidence 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, plans, revised plans, revised tree information report, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received October 30, 2025, requesting adjournment; received November 3, 2025, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email dated October 31, 2025, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email dated October 29, 2025, with comments.
N. Wilson and J. Prot, City View/ Ryan Farm Community Association email dated November 3, 2025, opposed.
G. Iacobucci emails dated November 3, 2025, opposed.
J. and J. Morvay email dated November 3, 2025, opposed.
M. Cambareri email dated November 3, 2025, opposed.
R. Kalamouni email dated November 3, 2025, opposed.
T. McKegney and C. Jolicoeur email dated November 3, 2025, opposed.
D. Cama emails received November 3 and November 4, 2025, with comments.
Effect of Submissions on Decision
15The Committee of Adjustment considered all written and oral submissions relating to the applications in making its decision and granted the applications.
16The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the applications, subject to the requested conditions agreed to by the Applicant’s agent.
17Based on the evidence, the Committee is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, that promotes building homes, sustaining strong communities; providing infrastructure and public service facilities in an efficient manner while accommodating projected needs; the wise use and management of resources; and, protecting public health and safety.
18The 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.
19Additionally, the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.
20Moreover, 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.
21Based on the evidence, the Committee is also satisfied that the requested variances meet all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.
22The Committee notes that no compelling evidence was presented that the requested variances would result in any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties. As for concerns raised about the number of additional dwelling units included in the proposed development, the Committee notes that, as required by the Planning Act, the City’s Zoning By-law permits a detached dwelling to contain two additional dwelling units.
23Considering the circumstances, the Committee finds that, because the proposal fits well in the area, the requested variances are, from a planning and public interest point of view, desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure on the property, and relative to the neighbouring lands.
24The Committee also finds that the requested variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan because the proposal supports intensification in the Outer Urban Transect and respects the character of the neighbourhood.
25In addition, the Committee finds that the requested variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law because the proposal represents orderly development that is compatible with the surrounding area.
26Moreover, the Committee finds that the requested variances, both individually and cumulatively, are minor because they will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties or the neighbourhood in general.
27THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT having been asked to consider an application that has been amended from the original application, and the Committee having determined that no further notice under the Planning Act is required;
28THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ORDERS that the consent Applications are granted and the provisional consent is to be given, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix A to this decision.
29THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ALSO ORDERS that the requested minor variance Applications are granted, as amended, and the variances to the Zoning By-law are authorized.
"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 November 14, 2025
“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 and the filing fee must be submitted via one of the below options and must be received no later than 3:00 p.m. on December 4, 2025.
OLT E-FILE SERVICE – An appeal can be filed online through the E-File Portal . First-time users will need to register for a My Ontario Account. Select [Ottawa (City): Committee of Adjustment] as the Approval Authority. To complete the appeal, fill in all the required fields and provide the filing fee by credit card.
BY EMAIL - Appeal packages can be submitted by email to cofa@ottawa.ca. The appeal form is available on the OLT website at Forms | Ontario Land Tribunal. Please indicate on the appeal form that payment will be made by credit card.
IN PERSON – Appeal packages can be delivered to the Secretary-Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment, 101 Centrepointe Drive, 4th floor, Ottawa, Ontario, K2G 5K7. The appeal form is available on the OLT website at Forms | Ontario Land Tribunal. In person 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.
Please note only one of the above options needs to be completed. If your preferred method of appeal is not available at the time of filing, the appeal must be filed with one of the other two options.
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.
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 you have any questions about the appeal process, please visit File an Appeal | Ontario Land Tribunal
NOTICE TO APPLICANT
Should a Development Agreement be required, such request should be initiated 30 working days prior to lapsing date of the consent and should include all required documentation including that related to transfers, easements, and postponements, and all approved technical studies. If you do not fulfill the conditions of provisional consent within the two-year period, the Planning Act provides that your application “shall be deemed to be refused”.
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
APPENDIX “A”
That the Owner(s) provide evidence that the accompanying minor variance applications (D08-02-25/A-00212 & D08-02-25/A-00213) have been approved, with all levels of appeal exhausted.
That the Owner(s) provide proof, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, or their designate, that the existing detached dwelling and accessory building located at 58 St. Claire Avenue (PIN 046880137) have been demolished or relocated under the authority of a building permit.
That the Owner(s) provide evidence, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards, Planning, Development and Building Services Department, that each existing parcel has its own independent storm, sanitary and water services connected to City infrastructure and that these services do not cross the proposed severance line. If they do cross or are not independent, the Owner(s) will be required, at their own cost, to relocate the existing services or construct new services from the City sewers/watermain. Notice shall be provided in writing to the Committee from the Department confirming this condition has been fulfilled.
That the Owner(s) provide a Stormwater Management Report, prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer, licensed in the Province of Ontario, demonstrating a design for post-development stormwater peak flows that are controlled to pre- development peak flows for all stormwater events up to and including the 100-year storm event. The report shall be to the satisfaction of and approved by the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate.
If the Stormwater Management Report includes infiltration techniques, the Owner(s) must provide a supporting Geotechnical Brief prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, for approval by the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate.
The Owner(s) shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City to construct the required stormwater system, which may include required securities. A copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title, shall be forwarded to the Committee of Adjustment. If applicable, the Owner(s) shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Ontario Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Should the stormwater management system cross property lines or access to the system be over multiple properties, that the owner will seek approval of the Committee to grant easement(s) for access and maintenance of the stormwater system or register a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement on title of the properties, all at the owner(s) costs.
That the Owner(s) provide proof 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, delineating the existing and proposed grades for both the severed and retained lands has been provided to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate.
That the Owner(s) enter into a Resurfacing Agreement with the City, to the satisfaction of the Program Manager, Right of Way Branch within the Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate, and provide financial security in accordance with the Road Activity By-law, as amended, to install an asphalt overlay over the roadway surface of St Claire Ave, fronting the subject lands, to the limits shown on the approved Site Servicing Plan. Where the approved Site Servicing Plan demonstrates the resurfacing is not required, based on the City’s Road Cut Resurfacing Policy, the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate, shall deem this condition satisfied.
Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Owner/Applicant(s) shall provide a Servicing Plan showing the locations of existing services and existing protected trees. Approval by Forestry Services is required to determine the capping location, prior to any excavation within the Critical Root Zone of a protected tree.
That the Owner/Applicant(s) provide a revised Tree Information Report, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate. This report shall be prepared by an Arborist, identifying all trees protected under the City's Tree Protection by-law, and meeting the standards of the City's Tree Information Report Guidelines, including an assessment of impacts related to the current site plan, and specific mitigation measures where work is proposed within the Critical Root Zone of a protected tree.
That the Owner/Applicant(s) provide a Grading, Servicing, and Stormwater Management Plan with the proposed elements/structures (driveways, parking, retaining walls, projections, services, grading, etc.) designed and located based on the least impact to protected trees and tree cover, as well as a revised Tree Information Report reflecting these changes to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate.
That the Owner/Applicant(s) enter into a Development Agreement or a Letter of Undertaking (LOU) with the City of Ottawa, at the expense of the Owner/Applicant(s), and to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate. A development agreement is to be registered on title of the property (where applicable). The agreement/LOU will include the tree protection and mitigation requirements detailed in the Tree Protection By-law and the approved Tree Information Report (or any approved revisions), and associated securities for tree protection. The securities, which will be based on the value of the City tree(s) to be protected (Tree(s) 1 & 2) shall be retained for two (2) years following issuance of a final occupancy permit, and thereafter returned to the owner only upon the City having received a report from an arborist confirming that the identified tree(s) is/are healthy, retainable, and remain(s) structurally stable. The Owner(s) The Owner(s) acknowledges and agrees that if, in the opinion of the City Forester and/or the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch, the report indicates that any tree is declining and/or must be removed, the security for that tree, in its entirety, will be forfeited.
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 to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment or their designate.
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 certificate of official for which the Consent is required to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment or their designate.