The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of Ottawa Cornwall, 2025 CanLII 85856

Committee of Adjustment

Comité de dérogation

Date of Decision: July 18, 2025

Panel: 3 - Rural

File Nos.: D08-01-25/B-00106 & D08-01-25/B-00107 D08-02-25/A-00124 & D08-01-25/A-00125

Applications: Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act

Applicant: The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of Ottawa Cornwall

Property Address: 5958 Piperville Road

Ward: 20 - Osgoode

Legal Description: Part of Lot 1, Concession 8 (Ottawa Front), Geographic Township of Gloucester

Zoning RI5

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Heard: July 8, 2025, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS

1The Applicant wants to subdivide their property into three separate parcels of land to create one lot future development and convey one parcel to the abutting property owner to the east, known municipally as 5950 Piperville Road.

2The Applicant seeks the Committee’s consent to sever land and for a lot line adjustment and grant of easement/right-of-way. The 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-00106	52.97 metres	236 metres (irregular)	23,958 sq. metres	1, 3, 4 and 5	5958 Piperville Road (existing church)
B-00107	20.01 metres	65.67 metres	1,313 sq. metres	6	To be conveyed to 5950 Piperville Road

3The land to be retained, shown a Part 2 on said plan, will have a frontage of 65.99 metres, an irregular depth of 130 metres and a lot area of 12,727 square metres. This parcel will contain the cemetery lands and be known as 5940 Piperville Road.

4It is proposed to establish easements/rights of way as follows:

Over Parts 3, 4 and 5 in favour of Part 2 to provide pedestrian and vehicular access.

5Approval of these applications will have the effect of creating 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. D08-02-25/A-00124 to D08-02-25/A-00126) have been filed and will be heard concurrently with these applications.

REQUESTED VARIANCES

6The Applicant seeks the Committee of Adjustment’s authorization for minor variances from the Zoning By-law as follows:

A-00124: 5958 Piperville Road, Parts 1, 3, 4 and 5 on draft 4R- Plan, existing church:

a) To permit a reduced lot width of 52.97 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 75 metres.

A-00125: 5940 Piperville Road, Part 2 on draft 4R- Plan, existing cemetery:

b) To permit a reduced lot width of 65.99 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 75 metres.

7The property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

8Tyler Yakichuk, agent for the Applicant, confirmed that no development is proposed at this time. He also advised that the Applicant had undertaken an Environmental Impact Assessment which did not identify an unevaluated wetland.

9Mr. Yakichuk confirmed that he was in agreement with all the City’s requested conditions of provisional consent.

10City Planner Luke Teeft stated he had no concerns with the applications.

11Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.

Evidence

12Evidence 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, plans, environmental impact study, parcel abstract, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received July 3, 2025, with no concerns.
South Nation Conservation Authority email received July 27, 2025, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received June 26, 2025, with comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received July 2, 2025, with no comments.
N. Dorzilme, resident, email received July 7, 2025, with comments.
N. Jean-François Celestin, resident, email received July 7, 2025, with comments

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:

• MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS GRANTED

13Under 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).

Minor Variance Application Must Satisfy Statutory Four-Part Test

14The 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.

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 Policy Statement that promotes efficient land use and development as well as intensification and redevelopment within built-up areas, based on local conditions.

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 also notes that no compelling evidence was presented that the variances would result in any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

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 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 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.

28THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ALSO ORDERS that the minor variance applications are granted and the variances to the Zoning By-law are authorized.

"Terence Otto" TERENCE OTTO VICE-CHAIR

"Gary Duncan" GARY DUNCAN MEMBER

"Beth Henderson" BETH HENDERSON MEMBER

"Martin Vervoort" MARTIN VERVOORT MEMBER

Absent JOCELYN CHANDLER MEMBER

I certify this is a true copy of the Decision of the Committee of Adjustment of the City of Ottawa, dated July 18, 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 August 7, 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(S)

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

The Owner(s) provide evidence that the accompanying minor variance applications (D08-02-25/A-00124 & D08-01-25/A-00125) have been approved, with all levels of appeal exhausted.
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 proof, to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate, that each existing parcel has its own water services connected to City infrastructure, independent private sewage system, and storm/foundation drainage and that they do not cross the proposed severance line. If the systems do cross, are not independent, or do not meet the minimum spacing requirements of the Ontario Building Code and City of Ottawa Hydrogeological and Terrain Analysis Guidelines, the Owner(s) will be required, at their own cost, to relocate the existing systems or construct new systems.
That the Owner(s) enter into an Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s), which is to be registered on title to deal with the following covenant/notice that shall run with the land and bind future owners on subsequent transfers:

“The property is located next to lands that have an existing source of environmental noise (collector road) and may therefore be subject to noise and other activities associated with that use.”

The Committee shall be provided a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.

That the Owner(s) enter into a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement, at the expense of the Owner(s), setting forth the obligations between the Owner(s) and the proposed future owners with respect to the joint use and maintenance of all common elements including, but not limited to common areas, common driveways and common landscaping.

The Owner shall ensure that the Agreement is binding upon all unit owners and successors in title and shall be to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate, or City Legal Services. The Committee shall be provided written confirmation that the Agreement is satisfactory to the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate, or is satisfactory to City Legal Services, as well as a copy of the Agreement and confirmation that it has been registered on title.

That the Owner(s) provide a Septic Impact Assessment Report, prepared by a Professional Engineer or Professional Geoscientist, licensed in the Province of Ontario, to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate.

The Report shall include but may not be limited to, the location of the septic system and mantle (if present), an assessment of the condition of the septic system components, recommendations on system performance and remedial works if necessary, and the identification of sufficient area for a replacement septic bed and mantle, as per the Ontario Building Code 2012, as amended.

The Report is required to evaluate the impact of the on-site septic system on the receiving aquifer. The Report must meet the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks guidelines; Procedure D-5-4 “Technical Guideline for Individual On-Site Sewage Systems: Water Quality Impact Risk Assessment”.

If the accepted report recommends specific mitigation measures or design requirements, the Owners shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owners, which is to be registered on the title of the property, which includes those recommendations. Both the report and any required Development Agreement shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate.

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, and that these services do not cross the proposed severance line and are connected directly to City infrastructure. Further, the Owner(s) shall comply with 7.1.5.4(1) of the Ontario Building Code, O. Reg. 163/24 as amended. If necessary, a plumbing permit shall be obtained from Building Code Services for any required alterations.
That the Owner(s) satisfy the requirements of Hydro Ottawa with respect to the relocation of the existing overhead services or grant an easement as required, the consent to 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 Conveyance, a lot line adjustment and grant of easement/right-of-way for which the Consent is required.