S. Sluyter and L. Dumas-Sluyter, 2026 CanLII 51927

Date of Decision: May 29, 2026

Panel: 2 - Suburban

Files: D08-01-26/B-00035, D08-02-26/A-00017

Applications: Consent under section 53 of the Planning Act, Minor Variance under section 45 of the Planning Act

Applicants: S. Sluyter and L. Dumas-Sluyter

Property Address: 34 Marielle Court

Ward: 7 - Bay

Legal Description: Part of Block 6, Registered Plan 4M-411

Zoning (By-law 2008-250): R4N

Zoning (By-law 2026-50): N4B

Heard: May 19, 2026, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANTS’ PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATIONS

1The Applicants want to divide the property into two lots, each with an existing semi-detached home.

2The Applicants have filed an application to sever land. The property is shown on a draft reference plan submitted along with the applications, and the resulting lots would be as follows:

Table 1 Proposed Parcels

File No.

Frontage (m)

Depth (m)

Area (m²)

Part

Building

B-00035

7.62

30.48

232.26

3 and 4

Existing semi-detached 32 Marielle Court

Retained

5.69

30.48

173.43

1 and 2

Existing semi-detached 34 Marielle Court

3The proposal also requires one or more minor variances to the zoning requirements.

REQUESTED VARIANCES

4The Applicants are requesting that the Committee authorize the following minor variances from the zoning regulations.

A-00017: 34 Marielle, Parts 1 and 2 on the draft reference plan

Under Zoning By-law 2008-250:

a) To permit a reduced lot area of 173.43 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 225 square metres.

b) To permit a reduced lot width of 5.69 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 7.5 metres.

Under Zoning By-law 2026-50:

c) To permit a reduced lot width of 5.69 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 7.5 metres.

5There are no other pending applications regarding the property under the Planning Act.

6For the purposes of the transition and continuation provisions of Zoning By-law 2026-50, these applications were deemed complete on April 20, 2026.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

7Chris Sluyter, one of the Applicants, and City Planner Dylan Geldart were present.

8There were no objections to the approval of these unopposed applications, as part of the Committee’s expedited procedure.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:

• MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION GRANTED

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 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).

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.

Evidence

11Evidence 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 a cover letter, parcel abstract, plans, tree information, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received May 13, 2026, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email dated May 13, 2026, with no objections.
Hydro Ottawa email dated May 13, 2026, with comments.

Effect of Submissions on Decision

12The Committee of Adjustment considered all written and oral submissions relating to the applications in making its decision and granted the applications.

13The Committee notes that the City’s Planning Report raises “no concerns” regarding the applications, subject to the requested conditions agreed to by the Applicants.

14Based on the evidence, the Committee is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, that promotes building homes, sustaining strong communities; providing infrastructure and public service facilities in an efficient manner while accommodating projected needs; the wise use and management of resources; and, protecting public health and safety.

15The 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.

16Additionally, the Committee is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

17Moreover, 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.

18Based on the evidence, the Committee is also satisfied that the requested variances meet all four requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

19The Committee notes that no evidence was presented that the requested variances 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 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.

21The 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.

22In 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.

23Moreover, 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.

24THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT ORDERS that the consent application is 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 variances to the Zoning By-laws are authorized.

"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 Ottawa Committee of Adjustment, dated May 29, 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 18, 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 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 cofa@ottawa.ca 613-580-2436

Comité de dérogation Ville d’Ottawa Ottawa.ca/Comitedederogation cded@ottawa.ca 613-580-2436

APPENDIX “A”

If required, 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, common areas, and common landscaping.

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) provide evidence, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review All Wards Branch within Planning, Development and Building Services Department, or their designates, that both severed and retained parcels have their own independent water, sanitary and storm connection as appropriate, 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) provide evidence that the accompanying minor variance application (D08-02-26/A-00017) has been approved, with all levels of appeal exhausted.
That the Owner(s) submit to the Committee a copy of a deposited reference plan that conforms substantially to the draft reference plan or sketch submitted with the application(s), to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment or their designate. The frontage and area of the severed land must be indicated on the plan or in a surveyor’s certificate.
Once all the above conditions have been fulfilled, that the Owner(s) have an Ontario lawyer in good standing, submit to the Committee to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment or their designate:

a) A draft Certificate of Official indicating the type of transaction(s) for which provisional consent is given and including a full description of the land that is the subject of the consent.

b) A copy of the “electronic registration in preparation documents” for the transactions(s) for which provisional consent is given.