Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION CONSENT/SEVERANCE AND MINOR VARIANCES
Panel: 2 - Suburban
Applications: Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act Minor Variances under section 45 of the Planning Act
Applicant: 1301 THAMES INC.
Property Address: 1301 Thames Street
Ward: 16 - River
Legal Description: Part of Block 7, Registered Plan 221
Zoning: R2G
Zoning By-law: 2008-250
Heard: March 18, 2025, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS
1The Applicant wants to subdivide its property into two separate parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings with additional dwelling units, for a total of six dwelling units in each building, as shown on plans filed with the application. The existing dwelling and shed will be demolished.
CONSENT REQUIRED
2The Applicant seeks the Committee’s consent to sever land and grant of easements/rights-of-way. The property is shown as Part 1 to 4 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-00010
13.36 m
30.49 m
407.3 sq. m
1 and 2
1303 Thames Street
B-00011
13.36 m
30.49 m
407.2 sq. m
3 and 4
1301Thames Street
3It is proposed to establish the following easements/rights-of-way:
Over Part 2 in favor of Parts 3 and 4 for access.
Over Part 3 in favor of Parts 1 and 2 for access.
4Approval of these applications will have the effect of creating separate parcels of land for the construction of two long semi-detached dwellings. The proposed construction will not be in conformity with the requirements of the Zoning By-law and therefore, minor variance applications have been filed and will be heard concurrently with these applications.
REQUESTED VARIANCES
5The Applicant seeks the Committee of Adjustment’s authorization for minor variances from the Zoning By-law as follows:
A-00014: 1303 Thames, Parts 1 & 2 on draft 4R-Plan, proposed long semi- detached dwelling:
a) To permit an increased building height of 11.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum building height of 8.0 metres.
A-00015: 1301 Thames, Parts 3 7 4 on draft 4R-Plan, proposed long semi- detached dwelling
b) To permit an increased building height of 11.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum building height of 8.0 metres.
6The property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
7Chris Jalkotzy, agent for the Applicant, provided a slide presentation, a copy of which is on file with the Secretary-Treasurer and available from the Committee Coordinator upon request. Mr. Jalkotzy highlighted that the property is located on the boundary of the R4 zone, in which a maximum building height of 11 metres is permitted.
8Responding to the Panel’s questions, Mr. Jalkotzy indicated that, in addition to the conditions requested by the City in its Planning Report, he would have no objection to the imposition of a standard condition requiring the demolition of the existing dwelling and shed.
9City Planner Nivethini Jekku Einkaran confirmed that she had no concerns with the applications.
10The Committee also heard oral submissions from the following individual:
- R. Brinker, Chair, Carlington Community Association, highlighted concerns with the extent of the proposed height increases, which he submitted were not minor and would be more appropriately considered through a Zoning By-law Amendment application. He also noted concerns that an existing cedar tree was not identified on the Applicant’s tree information report and could be impacted by the proposed development.
11City Infill Forester Julian Alvarez-Barham, responding to a question from the Panel, explained that the cedar tree was not identified in the tree information report because it does not qualify as a distinctive tree under the Tree Protection By-law.
12Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.
Evidence
13Evidence 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, tree information report, parcel abstract, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received March 13, 2025, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received March 17, 2025, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received March 6, 2025, with comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received March 12, 2025, with comments.
R. Brinker, Chair, Carlington Community Association email received March 12, 2025, opposed.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:
CONSENT APPLICATIONS GRANTED
MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS GRANTED
Consent Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests
14Under 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
15The 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
16The Committee of Adjustment considered all written and oral submissions relating to the applications in making its decision and granted the applications.
17The 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.
18Based 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.
19The 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.
20Additionally, the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.
21Moreover, 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.
22The Committee of Adjustment considered all written and oral submissions relating to the applications in making its decision and granted the applications.
23Based on the evidence, the Committee is also satisfied that the requested variances meet all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.
24The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the applications.
25The Committee also notes that no compelling evidence was presented that the variances 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 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.
27The 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.
28In 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.
29Moreover, the Committee finds that the requested variances are minor because they will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties or the neighbourhood in general.
30THE 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.
31THE 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 March 13, 2025, as they relate to the requested variances.
"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 March 28, 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 April 17, 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
The Owner(s) provide evidence that the accompanying minor variance applications (D08-02-25/A-00014 & D08-02-25/A-00015) have been approved, with all levels of appeal exhausted.
That the Owner/Applicant(s) provide a Grading and Servicing Plan with the proposed elements/structures (driveways, retaining walls, projections, 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 within the Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate(s).
That the Owner(s) provide evidence to the satisfaction of both the Chief Building Official and Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services 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 to 7.1.5.4(1) of the Ontario Building Code, O. Reg. 332/12 as amended. If necessary, a plumbing permit shall be obtained from Building Code Services for any required alterations.
The Owner(s) shall: Prepare a noise attenuation study in compliance with the City of Ottawa Environmental Noise Control Guidelines to the satisfaction of the Development Review All Wards Manager, Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or his/her designate. The Owner(s) shall also enter into an agreement with the City that requires the Owner to implement any noise control attenuation measures recommended in the approved study. The Agreement will also deal with any covenants/notices recommended in the approved study, that shall be registered on the title and bind future owners on subsequent transfers, warning purchasers and/or tenants of expected noise levels due to the existing source of environmental noise. The Agreement shall be to the satisfaction of the Development Review All Wards Manager, Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or his/her designate. The Committee requires a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title.
or
Design the dwelling units with central air conditioning and enter into an Agreement with the City, at the expense of the Owner, which is to be registered on title to deal with the covenants/ notices that will bind future owners on subsequent transfers, warning purchasers and/or tenants of expected noise levels due to the existing source of environmental noise. The Committee requires a copy of the Agreement and written confirmation from City Legal Services that it has been registered on title. The following two conditions will be included in the above-noted Agreement.
Notices-on-Title respecting noise:
i) “The Purchaser/Lessee for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns acknowledge being advised that this dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the City of Ottawa’s and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change’s noise criteria.”
ii) “The Purchaser/Lessee for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns acknowledges being advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in this development and within building units, noise levels from increasing roadway traffic may be of concern, occasionally interfering with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the outdoor sound level exceeds the City of Ottawa’s and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change’s noise criteria.”
That the Owner(s) shall provide evidence 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, has been submitted to the satisfaction of Manager of the Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate to be confirmed in writing from the Department to the Committee. The grading and drainage plan shall delineate existing and proposed grades for both the severed and retained properties, to the satisfaction of Manager of the 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 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 Thames, fronting the subject lands, to the limits shown on the approved Site Servicing Plan. Where the approved Site Servicing Plan demonstrates that resurfacing is not required based on the City’s Road Cut Resurfacing Policy, the Development Review Manager of the All-Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designate, shall deem this condition satisfied.
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) provide evidence to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, or designate, that the existing dwelling and shed have been demolished or relocated under the authority of a building permit.
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 and grant of easements/rights-of-way for which the Consent is required.