Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION CONSENT/SEVERANCE AND MINOR VARIANCE
June 13, 2025
Panel:
3 - Rural
D08-01-25/B-00093 & D08-01-25/B-00094 D08-02-25/A-00113 & D08-02-25/A-00114
Applications:
Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act
Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act
Applicants:
A. Fait and S. Petticrew
Property Address:
1937 Stagecoach Road
Ward:
20 - Osgoode
Legal Description
Part of Lot 12, Concession 4, Geographic Township of Osgoode
Zoning
RU
Zoning By-law:
2008-250
Heard:
June 3, 2025, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANTS’ PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS
1The Applicants want to subdivide the property into three separate parcels of land for residential purposes, as shown on plans filed with the application.
CONSENT REQUIRED:
2The Applicants seek the Committee’s consent to sever land. The property is shown as Parts 1 to 3 on a sketch 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-00093
50 metres
160 metres
0.8 hectares
1
1951 Stagecoach Road (Vacant)
B-00094
50 metres
160 metres
0.8 hectares
2
1945 Stagecoach Road (Vacant)
Retained
33 metres
Irregular
32.8 hectares
3
1937 Stagecoach Road (Existing Dwelling)
3Approval 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-00113, & D08-02- 25/A-00113) have been filed and will be heard concurrently with these applications.
REQUESTED VARIANCES
4The Applicants seek the Committee’s authorization for the following minor variances from the Zoning By-law:
A-00113: 1951 Stagecoach Road, Part 1, Vacant Lot:
a) To permit a reduced separation distance of 135 metres from an existing livestock facility to a proposed lot line, whereas the By-law states that a new development must comply with the minimum distance formula, in this case, requiring a minimum distance separation of 175 metres to the existing livestock facility.
A-00114: 1937 Stagecoach Road, Part 3, Existing dwelling:
b) To permit a reduced lot width of 33.04 metres for agricultural use, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 60 metres for agricultural use.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
5Paul Robinson, agent for the Applicant, provided a brief overview of the applications. Mr. Robinson asked that the City’s requested condition of provisional consent requiring a noise control study, be amended to require either the registration of a noise warning clause or a notice on title based on the results of a review by the City’s Planning Services of the Mineral Impact Assessment.
6City Planner Luke Teeft stated he had no concerns with request and proposed wording for the condition.
7Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.
Evidence
8Evidence 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, area certificate, minimum distance separation, mineral resource impact assessment, parcel register abstract, plans, tree information, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report revised report received May 29, 2025, with no concerns; received May 29, 2025, with no concerns.
South Nation Conservation Authority email dated May 27, 2025, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email dated May 26, 2025, with no comments.
N. Hermas, resident, email dated June 3, 2025, in support.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:
CONSENT APPLICATIONS GRANTED
MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS GRANTED
Consent 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;
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
10The 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
11The Committee of Adjustment considered all written and oral submissions relating to the applications in making its decision and granted the applications.
12The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the consent applications, subject to the requested conditions agreed to by the Applicant’s agent.
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.
14The 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.
15Additionally, the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.
16Moreover, 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.
17Based on the evidence, the Committee is also satisfied that the requested variances meet all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.
18The Committee also notes that no evidence was presented that the requested variances would create any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.
19Considering 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.
20The 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.
21In 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.
22Moreover, 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.
23THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT THEREFORE ORDERS that the consent
applications are granted and provisional consent is to be given, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix A to this decision.
24THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ALSO ORDERS that the requested minor variance applications are granted and the variances to the Zoning By-law are authorized, subject to the location and size of the proposed construction being in accordance with the plans filed, Committee of Adjustment date stamped May 1, 2025, as they relate to the requested variances.
"Terence Otto" TERENCE OTTO VICE-CHAIR
"Gary Duncan" GARY DUNCAN MEMBER
Absent
BETH HENDERSON MEMBER
"Martin Vervoort"
MARTIN VERVOORT MEMBER
"Jocelyn Chandler"
JOCELYN CHANDLER MEMBER
I certify this is a true copy of the Decision of the Committee of Adjustment of the City of Ottawa, dated June 13, 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 July 3, 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 APPLICANTS
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 applications (D08-02-25/A-00113 & D08-02-25/A-00114) 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 Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate, that each existing parcel has its own well, 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) provide a report, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate, demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer, with respect to quality and quantity, to support the proposed development.
Where adequacy cannot be demonstrated, the Owner(s) shall construct a new well on the severed lands and provide a report, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate, to demonstrate the adequacy of the aquifer, with respect to quality and quantity, to support the proposed development. The report must include a septic impact assessment to evaluate the water quality impact of the on-site septic system on the receiving aquifer.
The report must demonstrate the following:
a. That the construction of any new well on the severed parcel is in accordance with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks,
b. That the quality of the water meets the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Regulations, Standards, Guidelines and Objectives,
c. That the quality of the water meets the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Regulations, Standards, Guidelines and Objectives,
d. That the quality of the water meets the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Regulations, Standards, Guidelines and Objectives,
A qualified Professional Engineer or Professional Geoscientist must prepare the report. It is the Owner’s responsibility to coordinate the person drilling a new well, if required, and the professional noted herein in order to properly satisfy this condition.
If the accepted report recommends specific mitigation measures or design requirements, the Owner(s) shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s), to include those recommendations and such agreement shall be registered on title. In instances where the subject site has sensitive soils, the drilling of a well and/or the conveyance of a 30-centimetre reserve may be required. 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.
The Report shall be prepared as per Procedure D-5-4 “Technical Guideline for Individual On-Site Sewage Systems: Water Quality Impact Risk Assessment” and Procedure D-5-5 “Technical Guideline for Private Wells: Water Supply Assessment”.
- 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 City of Ottawa does not guarantee the quality or quantity of the groundwater. If, at some future date, the quality or the quantity of the groundwater becomes deficient, the City of Ottawa bears no responsibility, financial or otherwise, to provide solutions to the deficiency, such solutions being the sole responsibility of the homeowner.”
“The City of Ottawa has identified that there are potential organic soils within the area that may require site specific detailed geotechnical engineering solutions to allow for development, the City of Ottawa bears no responsibility, financial or otherwise, to provide solutions to the deficiency, such solutions being the sole responsibility of the homeowner.”
“The property is located next to lands that have an existing source of environmental noise (Stagecoach 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.
The Owner(s) shall prepare a Noise Control Study (or agree to register a Noise Warning Clause or a Notice on Title upon finalisation and concurrence of the Mineral Resource Impact Assessment (MRIA) by the City of Ottawa), in compliance with the City of Ottawa Environmental Noise Control Guidelines, to the satisfaction of the Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch, or their designate. The Owner(s) shall enter into an agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s), that requires the Owner(s) to implement any noise control attenuation measures recommended in the approved study. The Agreement shall also deal with any covenants/notices, recommended in the approved study, that shall run with the land and bind future owners on subsequent transfers, warning purchasers and/or tenants of expected noise levels due to the existing source of environmental noise (arterial road, highway, airport, etc.). The Committee shall be provided a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.
Pursuant to clause 51 (25) (c) of the Planning Act and Schedule C16 of the City’s Official Plan, the Owner conveys to the City, at no cost to the City, an unencumbered road widening across the complete Stagecoach Road frontage of the lands, measuring 15 meters from the existing centerline of pavement/the abutting right-of-way. The exact widening must be determined by legal survey. The Owner shall provide a reference plan for registration, indicating the widening, to the City Surveyor for review and approval prior to its deposit in the Land Registry Office. Such reference plan must be tied to the Horizontal Control Network in accordance with the municipal requirements and guidelines for referencing legal surveys. The Owner(s) must provide to the City Surveyor a copy of the Committee of Adjustment Decision and a draft Reference Plan that sets out the required widening. The Committee shall be provided written confirmation from City Legal Services that the transfer of the widening to the City has been registered. All costs shall be borne by the Owner.
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 severance for which the Consent is required.