Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION
CONSENT/SEVERANCE AND MINOR VARIANCE
December 19, 2025
Panel:
1 - Urban
Files:
D08-01-25/B-00181 & D08-02-25/A-00193
Applications:
Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act
Applicant:
J. Silburt
Property Address:
525 Chapel Street
Ward:
12 - Rideau-Vanier
Legal Description
Part Lot 41 (East Chapel Street), Registered Plan 33878
Zoning
R4UB [480]
Zoning By-law:
2008-250
Heard:
December 10, 2025, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS
1The Applicant wants to convey a portion of their property to the abutting property owners to the east, known municipally as 527 Chapel Street. The parcel to be conveyed contains one half of the existing detached garage, which currently straddles the lot line between 525 and 527 Chapel Street.
CONSENT REQUIRED:
2The Applicant seeks the Committee of Adjustment’s consent for a lot line adjustment.
3The severed parcel is shown as Parts 4 and 5, on a draft 4R-plan filed with the applications, and will have a frontage of 1.29 metres and a lot area of 70.1 square metres. This parcel contains half of the existing detached garage and will be conveyed to the property to the east, known municipally as 527 Chapel Street.
4The retained land, shown as Parts 1, 2 and 3 on the said plan, and will have a frontage of 7.56 metres, an irregular lot depth and a lot area of 200 square metres. This parcel contains the existing detached dwelling, known municipally as 525 Chapel Street.
5It is proposed to create an easement over Parts 2 and 3 for vehicle and pedestrian access, in favour of P527 Chapel Street (Parts 4, 5, 6 and 7).
6The application also indicates the property is subject to existing easements as set out in instrument number N322880.
7The proposed lot line adjustment will result in 525 Chapel Street not complying with the requirements of the Zoning By-law and therefore a minor variance application has also been filed.
REQUESTED VARIANCE
8The Applicant seeks the Committee’s authorization for a minor variance from the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced lot area of 200 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 225 square metres.
9The property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.
PUBLIC HEARING
10On October 8 and November 5, 2025, the hearing of the applications was adjourned to allow the Applicant time to discuss the requested conditions with City Planning and Building Code Services.
Oral Submissions Summary
11J. Silburt, Applicant, provided a brief overview of the applications and responded to questions from the Committee.
12Responding to questions from the Committee, City Planner Penelope Horn confirmed that the condition requiring proof of independent services is a standard condition which ensures that each parcel would be serviced separately, with no portion of the underground services crossing the proposed lot line.
13Scott Alain, acting as agent for the Applicant, provided a brief overview of the previous minor variance application and explained that the requested variance was necessitated by the lot line adjustment. Mr. Alain noted that the site would be subject to the Tree Protection By-law.
14The Committee also heard oral submissions from the following individual:
- N. Girard, resident, highlighted her concerns about the previously approved application for minor variances at 527 Chapel Street and the protected tree adjacent to her property.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:
• CONSENT APPLICATION GRANTED
• MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION GRANTED
Consent Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests
15Under 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):
Minor Variance Application Must Satisfy Statutory Four-Part Test
16The 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.
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 a cover letter, plans, elevation photos, parcel abstract, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received December 4, 2025, with no concerns; received October 30, 2025, with no concerns; received October 2, 2025.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received December 1, 2025, with no objections; received October 31, 2025, with no objections; received October 3, 2025.
Hydro Ottawa email received December 2, 2025, with comments; received October 29, 2025, with comments; received October 1, 2025, with comments
N. Girard, resident, email received November 4, 2025, with comments; received October 7, with comments.
M. Whitaker, resident, email received October 7, 2025, with comments.
Effect of Submissions on Decision
18The Committee of Adjustment 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, subject to the requested conditions of provisional consent agreed to by the Applicant.
20Based 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.
21The 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.
22Additionally, the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.
23Moreover, 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.
24Based on the evidence, the Committee is satisfied that the requested variance meets all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.
25The Committee also notes that no compelling evidence was presented that the variance would result in any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.
26Considering the circumstances, the Committee finds that, because the proposal fits well in the area, the requested variance is, 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.
27The Committee also finds that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan because the proposal respects the character of the neighbourhood.
28In addition, the Committee finds that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law because the proposal represents orderly development that is compatible with the surrounding area.
29Moreover, the Committee finds that the requested variance is minor because it will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties or the neighbourhood in general.
30THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ORDERS that the consent application is granted and the provisional consent is to be given, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix A to this decision.
31THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ALSO ORDERS that the requested minor variance application is granted and the variance to the Zoning By-law is authorized.
"Ann M. Tremblay"
ANN M. TREMBLAY
CHAIR
"John Blatherwick"
JOHN BLATHERWICK
MEMBER
Declared interest
COLIN HASKIN
MEMBER
Declared interest
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 December 19, 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 January 8, 2026.
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
613-580-2436
Comité de dérogation
Ville d’Ottawa
Ottawa.ca/Comitedederogation
613-580-2436
APPENDIX “A”
The Owner(s) provide evidence that the accompanying minor variance application (D08-02-25/A-00193) has been approved, with all levels of appeal exhausted.
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 file with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment the following:
a) A copy of the Reference Plan and/or legal description of the severed land and the deed or Instrument conveying the severed land to the owner of the abutting property to the _______, known municipally as _____________, so that no new lot is being created, in accordance with paragraph (b) below;
b) A Certificate of Official attached to the deed/transfer required by paragraph (a) above containing the following endorsement:
“The lands to be severed are for the purpose of a lot addition only to the abutting lands owned by (insert name) described as PIN (insert property identification number) being Part(s) (insert numbers) on Plan (insert plan number), not for the creation of a new lot, and any subsequent transfer, charge or other transaction involving the lands to be severed shall be subject to compliance with Section 50(3) or Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, as applicable. Neither the lands to be severed nor the abutting lands are to be transferred, charged or otherwise re-conveyed in the future without the other parcel unless a further consent is obtained.
The Owner shall cause the lands to be severed to be consolidated on title with the abutting lands and for this condition to be entered on the parcel register for the consolidated parcel as a restriction”;
c) An Undertaking from a solicitor authorized to practice law in the Province of
Ontario, and in good standing with the Law Society of Upper Canada, as follows:
“In consideration of, and notwithstanding the issuance of the Certificate under Section 50(12) of the Planning Act in respect to the subject Application for Consent, I undertake on behalf of the Owner, within 60 days of the registration on title of the transfer document containing the endorsement set out in the Certificate of Official issued by the Committee of Adjustment, to file an Application to Consolidate Parcels including the severed land (Part of PIN (insert number) and the abutting land (PIN insert number). This PIN consolidation is intended to reinforce the Planning Act stipulation in the condition outlined above that both parcels have merged on Title and cannot be conveyed separately in the future. I further undertake to forward a copy of the registered Application to Consolidate Parcels and a copy of the Consolidated Parcel abstract page(s) to the Committee office within 21 days of the registration of the Application to Consolidate Parcels”.
d) Where the parcel consolidation stipulated in paragraph (b) and the solicitor’s Undertaking in paragraph (c) above cannot be reasonably completed because the parcels of land to be merged have different estate qualifiers, an Application to Annex Restrictive Covenant under the Land Titles Act must be registered on the Title of both the severed lands and on the abutting parcel that is to be merged. The Covenant, which is to be to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee, shall advise all future purchasers that the parcels must be dealt with together and not separately, and contain wording set out below or similar wording acceptable to the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee:
“These lands have been merged and may not be dealt with separately, without applying for a Consent of the Committee of Adjustment”.
In lieu of the Undertaking provided in paragraph (c), a replacement Undertaking by the solicitor must be filed undertaking on behalf of the Owner to register the Restrictive Covenant on both property Titles within 60 days of the registration of the transfer document containing the endorsement of the Certificate of Official issued by the Committee of Adjustment for this application and to file a copy of the registered Restrictive Covenant with the Committee within 21 days of the registration of the document.
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 lot line adjustment for which the consent is required to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment or their designate.