Ann M. Tremblay

The applicant sought minor variances to permit front-facing garages for a proposed two-storey semi-detached dwelling, contrary to the Zoning By-law's streetscape character rules.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The majority concluded that the proposal fit the immediate context, minimized impacts on mature trees, and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

One member dissented.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback of 0 metres and to allow the principal entrance to face the corner lot line, in order to legalize an already-enclosed porch.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the existing construction fit well in the area and respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The Committee concluded that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act and granted the application subject to conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey semi-detached dwelling with secondary dwelling units, including variances for front yard parking, walkways, basement entrances, and reduced rear yard setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the proposed front yard parking did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, was not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and was not minor.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to construct two 8-unit low-rise apartment buildings, along with associated easements for access.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and met the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications for consent were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling, each with a secondary unit.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including compliance with the Ontario Building Code for party walls, implementation of a tree planting plan, and entering into a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, including the establishment of independent services, a joint-use and maintenance agreement, and a tree planting plan.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two parcels to construct two 8-unit low-rise apartment buildings.

The requested variances included reductions in lot width, lot area, interior side yard setbacks, and front yard soft landscaping requirements.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fits well in the area, respects the character of the neighbourhood, and provides missing-middle housing without creating unacceptable adverse impacts on abutting properties.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling with an additional dwelling unit.

The requested variances included reductions in lot area, lot width, and interior side yard setback, as well as permission for an individual driveway.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as they were minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 4.816 metres for a coach house, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 3.6 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the structure already exists as a detached garage and the envelope will not change.

The application was granted, subject to the variance being restricted to the life of the existing structure.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a new three-storey, eight-unit low-rise apartment building, requiring reductions in interior side yard setbacks, rear yard setback, rear yard area, and rear yard soft landscaped area.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the proposal fits well in the area, respects the character of the neighborhood, and will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties, the Committee concluded the variances were minor and desirable.

The application was granted subject to the submitted site plan and elevations.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a front-facing attached garage, a driveway, a reduced garage setback, and an increased front yard setback for a proposed three-storey detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the increased front yard setback met the four-part test under the Planning Act as it respected the neighbourhood's character.

However, the majority of the Committee found that the variances for the garage and driveway did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan or Zoning By-law.

The application was granted in part, authorizing only the front yard setback variance.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling currently under construction.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act.

Finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and having adequate regard for the criteria in subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, independent servicing, and noise attenuation warnings.

The applicant, Mattamy Rockcliffe Inc., applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced setback of 0 metres from the exterior wall for 86 rooftop terraces in a planned unit development of stacked dwellings.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the variance was minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced tower separation distance of 13.6 metres between two areas of a proposed 35-floor mixed-use high-rise building, whereas the zoning by-law required 15 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Finding no concerns from city planning or adverse impacts on neighbouring properties, the Committee concluded the variance was minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for the construction of three long semi-detached dwellings, and to establish associated easements and rights-of-way.

The Committee considered the application under sections 53 and 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced lot width and reduced soft landscaping area to subdivide a property and construct two three-storey low-rise apartment buildings.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fit well in the neighbourhood and would not create any unacceptable adverse impacts.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create two new lots for the construction of two three-storey low-rise apartment buildings.

The Committee considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act and the criteria in subsection 51(24).

The Committee found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary.

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of a concurrent minor variance application, payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, tree planting, and the execution of a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced lot area, rear yard setback, and rear yard area to construct a three-storey low-rise apartment building with eight units.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the proposal fits well in the area, respects the character of the neighbourhood, and will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to extend an existing deck, requesting a 0-metre projection from the rear lot line and a reduced rear yard setback of 1.06 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The proposal fit well within the area, respected the neighbourhood's character, and would not create any unacceptable adverse impacts on abutting properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard area of 18.92% to construct a one-storey sunroom addition.

The Committee considered the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the variance was minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the Committee granted the application.