Ann M. Tremblay

The applicant sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit the construction of a 10-unit low-rise apartment building, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 8 units.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the evidence, including a City Planning Report with no concerns, and found that the requested variance met the statutory four-part test.

The Committee concluded that the proposal fits well in the area, respects the character of the neighbourhood, and represents orderly development.

The application was granted subject to a condition requiring a grading and drainage plan that includes rooftop storage stormwater management.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a vacant 46.7 square metre parcel to an abutting property.

The application was unopposed and supported by the City's Planning Report.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to standard conditions including parcel consolidation.

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 currently under construction.

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the application met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two parcels to construct a two-and-a-half-storey semi-detached dwelling, along with several minor variances including reduced rear yard setbacks, lot area, and permission for front-facing attached garages.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent application met the criteria under the Planning Act and that the variances satisfied the four-part test, being minor, desirable, and maintaining the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The applications were granted subject to conditions, with two members dissenting on the variances permitting front-facing garages.

The applicants sought minor variances to construct a detached dwelling with an additional dwelling unit and an accessory structure.

The requested variances included an increased deck projection, increased building height, and reduced setback for an accessory structure.

After considering oral and written submissions, including support and opposition from neighbours, the Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Committee concluded that the proposal fits well in the area, respects the neighbourhood character, and will not create unacceptable adverse impacts.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to create two new lots for two three-storey, low-rise apartment buildings.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and was in the public interest.

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced corner side yard setback of 1.5 metres for the construction of a three-storey, eight-unit, low-rise apartment building.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

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

The applicant sought minor variances to construct a carport on the east side of the existing dwelling.

The requested variances included reductions to the interior side yard setback, front yard setback, landscape strip, and driveway width, as well as increases to walkway width and entrance setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no objections from the City Planner or neighbours.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced lot width of 9.97 metres, where 10 metres is required, to construct two three-storey apartment buildings.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fits well in the area and respects the character of the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced lot area, lot width, and rear yard setback for the construction of a nine-unit, low-rise apartment building.

The application was unopposed, and the City's Planning Report raised no concerns.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested 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 minor variances to permit reduced interior side and rear yard setbacks, and to locate a communal amenity area within an interior yard, for the construction of two four-storey 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 no objections from the City or the public.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment and to establish an easement over the retained land in favour of the abutting property.

The application was unopposed and supported by the City's Planning Report.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including the execution of a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement.

The applicant sought consent to convey a portion of their property to an abutting owner, subdivide the remaining property into two parcels for financing purposes, and establish easements and rights of way.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to establish easements and rights of way for pedestrian and vehicular access and stormwater infrastructure in favour of a neighbouring property.

The application was unopposed and supported by city planning staff.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 4.98 metres for a front addition to their dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 6 metres.

The application was unopposed.

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

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into three parcels for the construction of three townhouses, along with associated minor variances for lot area, lot width, rear yard setbacks, and driveway width.

The primary issue was the proposed removal of a healthy tree located outside the as-of-right building envelope.

Two committee members found the proposal consistent with intensification policies and the statutory tests, while two members found the loss of the tree avoidable and contrary to Official Plan policies prioritizing tree retention.

Due to the tie vote, the applications for consent and minor variances were deemed refused pursuant to the Committee's Rules of Procedure.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit the construction of a four-storey, six-unit low-rise apartment building.

The requested variances included reduced lot frontage, reduced interior side yard setbacks, and reduced lot area.

Several residents and the local community association objected to the proposal.

The majority of the Committee found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the City's Planning Report raised no concerns and no compelling evidence of unacceptable adverse impacts was presented.

The application was granted, with one member dissenting.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit a reduced lot width and lot area to construct a semi-detached dwelling.

The existing dwelling on the property would be demolished.

The Committee considered 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 represents orderly development without unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels and minor variances to permit the construction of a semi-detached dwelling with reduced front yard and corner side yard setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the consent application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Committee also authorized the minor variances, concluding they met the four-part test under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, as they reflected existing legal non-complying setbacks and would not cause unacceptable adverse impacts.

The applicant sought consent to subdivide a property containing three existing townhouses into three separate parcels and to establish various easements for vehicular and pedestrian access.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland and the registration of joint use and maintenance agreements.