Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION CONSENT/SEVERANCE AND MINOR VARIANCE
April 11, 2025
Panel:
1 - Urban
D08-01-24/B-00278, D08-01-24/B-00279 D08-02-24/A-00323
Applications:
Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act
Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act
Applicant:
8887322 Canada Inc
Property Address:
201 Rideau Street
Ward:
12 - Rideau-Vanier
Legal Description:
Part of Lots T, U, and W (North Rideau Street) Registered Plan 42482
Zoning:
MD S82
Zoning By-law:
2008-250
Heard:
April 2, 2025, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS
1The property contains a 24-storey hotel and residential building with four levels of underground parking. The Applicant wants to subdivide the property into two parcels to establish separate ownerships of the existing hotel use and associated parking and the existing residential use and associated parking, with easements for access, connectivity, utilities and servicing.
CONSENT REQUIRED:
2The Applicant seeks the Committee of Adjustment’s consent to server and for a grant of easement/right of way. The property is shown as Parts 1 to 40 on a strata plan of survey filed with the applications and the separate parcels will be as follows:
Table 1 Proposed Parcels
File No.
Part Nos.
Parcel Layout
Area
Municipal Address
B-00278
1 to 4, 7, 8, 14, 19 to 23, 25 to 35, 37, 40
- The majority of parking levels 1 to 3 and a portion of level 4
- The majority of the ground floor including the hotel lobby, restaurant and lounge areas
- The majority of storeys 2 to 14
- Portions of storeys 15 to 24
- A portion of the mechanical penthouse and roof
24,371.7 sq. metres (below parking level 4 to roof)
201 Rideau Street (Hotel)
B-00279
5, 6, 9 to 13, 15 to 18, 24, 36, 38, 39
- Portions of parking levels 1 to 4
- A portion of the ground floor including the residential lobby and mail room
- Portions of storeys 2 to 14
- The majority of storeys 15 to 24
- A portion of the mechanical penthouse and roof
13,951.5 sq. metres (parking level 4 to roof)
201 Rideau Street (Residential)
Easements/rights of way are proposed over the hotel parcel in favour of the residential parcel as follows (B-00278):
Over Part 8 (stairwells, vestibule and corridor), Parts 22 and 23 (recycling and garbage room), and Part 32 (amenities on Floor 3) for pedestrian access.
Over Parts 20 and 21 (drive aisles) for vehicular access.
Over Part 2 (sump pits), Part 7 (service chase), Parts 25 to 30 (mechanical, utility and electrical rooms), and Part 40 (mechanical and electrical penthouse) for servicing.
Over Parts 14 and 19 (air well), Parts 31, 34 and 37 (service chase), and Part 33 (roof drain) for utilities.
Easements/rights of way are proposed over the residential parcel in favour of the hotel parcel as follows (B-00279):
Over Part 9 (rooftop mechanical), Part 10 (service elevator and lobby), Part 18 (walking area from stairwell), Part 38 (Floors 24 and 25 corridor), and Part 39 (rooftop mechanical) for pedestrian access.
Over Parts 12 and 13 (drive aisle access to sump pits) for servicing.
3The applications indicate the property is subject to existing easements as set out in instruments OC2263858, OC2376587, OC237658, and N683553.
4The existing building is not in conformity with the requirements of the Zoning By- law and therefore a minor variance application (D08-02-24/A-00323) has been filed and will be heard concurrently with these consent applications.
REQUESTED VARIANCE
5The Applicant seeks the Committee’s authorization for a minor variance from the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced drive aisle width of 4 metres for a parking garage, whereas the By-law requires a minimum drive aisle width of 6 metres.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
6Timothy Beed, agent for the Applicant explained that the commercial hotel component and residential rental components would operate independently in the same building. The common areas would be addressed by the joint use maintenance agreement. Mr. Beed confirmed that the drive aisle width was an existing condition due to the location of mechanical equipment and bollards. He indicated that the reduced drive aisle would include mirrors, signage and stop bars.
7City Planner Penelope Horn was also present.
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, plans, parcel abstract, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received March 26, 2025, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received March 26, 2025, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received March 21, 2025, with comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received March 25, 2025, with no comments
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:
CONSENT APPLICATIONS GRANTED
MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION 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 variance meets all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.
18The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the minor variance application.
19The Committee also notes that no evidence was presented that the variance would result in any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.
20Considering 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.
21The 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.
22In 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.
23Moreover, 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.
24THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT THEREFORE 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.
25THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ALSO ORDERS that the requested minor variance application is granted and the variance to the Zoning By-law is authorized, subject to the location and size of the proposed construction being in accordance with the plans filed, Committee of Adjustment date stamped March 11, 2025, as they relate to the requested variance.
"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 April 11, 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 May 1, 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
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-00323) has been approved, with all levels of appeal exhausted.
That the Owner(s) provide a servicing plan or other 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 building and/or unit on the severed and retained parcels has its own independent water, sanitary and sewer connection, as appropriate, that are directly connected to City infrastructure and do not cross the proposed severance line.
If the services are shared, and there is sufficient justification for the service locations to remain, the Owner(s) may be required to obtain an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks, the approval of the Committee to grant easement(s) for access and maintenance of the services, and/or to register on title, a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement, between the Owners of the services, which shall be at their own costs.
The Owner(s) may be required to enter into a Development Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner(s), to cover these required items as well as all engineering, administrative and financial matters. 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) 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 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, the common party walls, common structural elements such as roof, footings, soffits, foundations.
The Owner shall ensure that the Agreement is binding upon all unit owners and successors in title and shall be to the satisfaction of Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate, or City Legal Services. The Committee shall be provided written confirmation that the Agreement is satisfactory to the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, 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) 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 grant of easement/right-of-way for which the Consent is required.