Committee of Adjustment / Comité de dérogation
DECISION MINOR VARIANCE
Date of Decision: April 17, 2026
Panel: 2 - Suburban
File: D08-02-26/A-00016
Application: Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act
Applicants: M. and J. Burtt
Property Address: 2120 Niagara Drive
Ward: 18 - Alta Vista
Legal Description: Lot 125, Registered Plan 608
Zoning By-law: 2008-250, 2026-50
Zoning: R1O, N2D
Heard: April 7, 2026, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANTS’ PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION
1The Applicants want to construct a two-storey detached garage containing a coach house, as shown on plans filed with the Committee. The existing garage will be demolished.
REQUESTED VARIANCES
2The Applicants request that the Committee authorize the following minor variances from the Zoning By-law:
a) To permit an increased building height for a coach house of 6.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum building height for a coach house of 3.6 metres.
b) To permit a reduced setback from the interior side lot line of 1.28 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum setback of 4 metres.
c) To permit an increased footprint for a building containing a coach house of 51 square metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum total floor area of 50 square metres.
d) To permit an increased footprint for a building containing a coach house of 47% of the footprint of the principal dwelling, whereas the By-law permits a maximum footprint of 40% of the footprint of the principal dwelling.
3For the purposes of the transition and continuation provisions of Zoning By-law 2026-50, these applications were deemed complete on March 17, 2026.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
4Dave Jones, agent for the Applicants, provided an overview of the application and responded to questions from the Committee.
5Mr. Jones confirmed that the Applicants would like to keep the window in the stairwell and would be willing to frost it to alleviate privacy concerns.
6City Planner Elizabeth King expressed concerns that the window located in the stairwell and facing the interior side yard does not meet the intent of the Official Plan. She requested that any approval of the requested variances be tied to plans and to the frosting of the stairwell window to ensure the neighbours’ privacy is protected.
7Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATION GRANTED
Application Must Satisfy Statutory Four-Part Test
8The 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 variances are minor, are 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.
Evidence
9Evidence 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:
Application and supporting documents, including cover letter, plans, tree information report, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received April 2, 2026, with concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received March 31, 2026, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received April 2, 2026, with comments.
D. Janes, agent, email received April 1, 2026, with a petition signed by six residents, in support.
Effect of Submissions on Decision
10The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and granted the application.
11Based on the evidence, the Committee is satisfied that the requested variances meet all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.
12The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “concerns” regarding the application, highlighting that “[s]taff are not satisfied that reduced interior side yard for the coach satisfied the “four tests”, specifically the intent of the Official Plan policy as the proposed coach house has a window located on the second floor of the coach house facing the interior side yard”.
13The Committee also notes that no evidence was presented that the variances would result in any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.
14Additionally, the Committee notes that any potential impact on the privacy of the neighbours to the west could be mitigated with the frosting of the window in the stairwell.
15Considering 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.
16The 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.
17In 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.
18Moreover, 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.
19THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ORDERS that the application is granted and the variances to the Zoning By-law are authorized, subject to:
a) the location and size of the proposed construction complying with the plans filed with the Committee of Adjustment on February 25, 2026, and the revised site plan filed with the Committee of Adjustment on March 19, 2026, as they relate to the requested variances; and
b) the frosting of the window in the second-floor stairwell facing the property to the west.
Declared Interest FABIAN POULIN VICE-CHAIR
Declared interest JAY BALTZ MEMBER
"George Barrett" GEORGE BARRETT ACTING PANEL CHAIR
"Heather MacLean" HEATHER MACLEAN MEMBER
"Julianne Wright" JULIANNE WRIGHT MEMBER
I certify this is a true copy of the decision of the Ottawa Committee of Adjustment, dated April 17, 2026.
“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 7, 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
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