Committee of Adjustment
Comité de dérogation
DECISION CONSENT/SEVERANCE
Panel: 2 - Suburban
File: D08-01-26/B-00080
Application: Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act
Applicant: T. Mikhael
Property Address: 2273 Lawn Avenue
Ward: 7 - Bay
Legal Description: Part of Lot 15, Registered Plan 461
Zoning (By-law 2008-250): R2F
Zoning (By-law 2026-50): N3B
Heard: May 5, 2026, in person and by videoconference
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION
1The Applicant wants to sever the property into two separate lots and build on them in the future. The existing house will be demolished.
CONSENT REQUIRED
2The Applicant is requesting the Committee’s consent to sever land. The property is shown on a draft reference plan submitted along with the application, and the resulting separate lots would be as follows:
Table 1 Proposed Parcels
| File No. | Frontage (m) | Depth (m) | Area (m2) | Part | Building |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B-00080 | 15.64 | 39.4 | 616.20 | 2 | Vacant |
| Retained | 18.34 | 39.4 | 722.10 | 1 | Vacant |
3There are no other pending applications regarding the property under the Planning Act.
4For the purposes of the transition and continuation provisions of Zoning By-law 2026-50, these applications were deemed complete on April 13, 2026.
PUBLIC HEARING
Oral Submissions Summary
5Olivia Gauthier, the Applicant’s agent, gave a presentation accompanied by slides; a copy of the slides is available upon request from the coordinator.
6Ms. Gauthier explained that Tree No. 1 was a Norway Maple, listed as an invasive species and, in her opinion, unsuitable for planting in an urban setting. She added that Tree No. 3, a red oak, was healthy but had been heavily pruned due to its proximity to overhead power lines. Ms. Gauthier stated that, while she respects the City’s policy of preserving mature, healthy trees, she believed it would be more appropriate to plant new trees at this site, as they could be positioned so as not to interfere with homes or services, while contributing to the City’s urban canopy.
7City Planner Dylan Geldart pointed out that the proposed layout of the lots would result in the avoidable loss of trees No. 1 and No. 3. He explained that these two trees were considered high priority because they were both mature, healthy and deemed beneficial to the community. He further noted that under the Official Plan, the Committee may refuse an application when the loss of trees is deemed avoidable through environmentally sensitive design. Mr. Geldart added that if the property were subdivided so that the lots fronted on Woodland Avenue rather than Lawn Avenue, it would be possible to preserve both trees.
8City forester Nancy Young stated that the fact that the Norway maple is considered an invasive species did not justify cutting down a healthy tree. She added that Tree No. 3, although it had grown for a long time near power lines and had been regularly pruned, had adapted well and remained healthy.
9The Committee also heard oral submissions from the following individual:
- S. Peterson, local resident, asked about the type of housing that would be built and spoke in favour of preserving the mature trees.
10Following the public hearing, the Committee reserved its decision.
DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE: APPLICATION REFUSED
Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests
11Under 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 Planning Statement, 2024, 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).
Evidence
12The evidence reviewed by the Committee included any oral statements made during the hearing, as noted above, as well as the following written documents, which may be obtained upon request from the coordinator:
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 30, 2026, with concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received April 29, 2026, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email received April 28, 2026, with comments.
Effect of Submissions on Decision
13The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and refused the application.
14The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “concerns” regarding the application, highlighting that “[s]taff are of the opinion the application in its current form is inconsistent with the City’s objectives, particularly since alternative lot configurations and driveway locations exist that could preserve these high priority trees while still providing the same level of residential density and intensification”. The report also highlights that “retention of large, healthy trees be given priority over replacement plantings and compensation”.
15The Committee also notes policy 6 under subsection 4.8.2 of the Official Plan, which states that the “City and the Committee of Adjustment may refuse a development application where it deems the loss of a tree(s) avoidable.”
16Based on the evidence, the Committee is not satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, that notably directs planning authorities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for a changing climate through approaches that include promoting low impact development, protecting the environment, and improving air quality.
17The Committee is also not satisfied that the proposal has adequate regard to matters of provincial interest, including the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to a changing climate, as well as the appropriate location of growth and development.
18Additionally, while the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality, the Committee is not satisfied that the proposal has adequate regard for the criteria specified under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, specifically, whether the plan conforms to the Official Plan or is in the public interest. The Committee takes note of the Official Plan policies, which encourage the preservation of urban tree cover and stipulate that decisions regarding planning and development, including those made by the Committee of Adjustment, must prioritize the retention and protection of large, healthy trees rather than their replacement with new plantings. The Committee finds that the removal of Tree No. 1 and Tree No. 3 is avoidable and that the planning arguments put forward are not sufficient to justify their removal.
19THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ORDERS that the application is refused.
"Fabian Poulin" FABIAN POULIN VICE-CHAIR
"Jay Baltz" JAY BALTZ MEMBER
"George Barrett" GEORGE BARRETT MEMBER
Absent 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 May 15, 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 June 4, 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
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