Beth Henderson

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to establish an easement/right-of-way for servicing a property.

The Committee of Adjustment previously granted provisional consent for a lot line adjustment, which required this additional consent application to establish the servicing easement.

The Committee found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, and granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a portion of their property to the abutting property owners.

The application was brought to resolve an issue where the applicants' pool was partially located on the abutting property, as part of a mutual land exchange.

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

The application for provisional consent was granted, subject to conditions including a grading and drainage plan and parcel consolidation.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 29.1 square metre portion of their property to the abutting property owners to the south.

The adjustment was required because a pool belonging to the abutting property was partially located on the applicants' property.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding 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 consent was subject to conditions, including the submission of a grading and drainage plan and a site plan showing the exact location of the sewage system relative to the pool.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit an increased lot coverage of 9.3% (maximum permitted is 8%) to construct a two-storey detached dwelling and a one-storey pool house.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no objections from the public or city planning staff.

The variance was authorized.

The applicants sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit an increased building height of 5.9 metres for a coach house, whereas the Zoning By-law restricts the height to that of the principal dwelling (4.3 metres).

The application was unopposed.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fit well in the area, respected the character of the neighbourhood, and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 95.3 square metre landlocked portion of their property to an abutting owner.

The application was unopposed and supported by the City Planner subject to conditions.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Provisional consent was granted subject to conditions regarding grading, drainage, private sewage systems, and parcel consolidation.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into four separate parcels for future residential development, retaining two existing dwellings.

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 applications were granted subject to conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications.

The applicants applied for minor variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey detached dwelling with reduced setbacks from a watercourse.

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

Finding that the watercourse functioned similarly to a swale and that the proposal fit well within the neighbourhood without 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 applicants sought minor variances to permit reduced lot widths to subdivide their property into four separate parcels for future residential development.

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 Planning Report or neighbours.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling, retaining the remaining land for farming operations.

The Committee of Adjustment reviewed the application against the criteria in section 51(24) of the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement.

Finding that the proposal was consistent with provincial policies and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit an increased gross floor area for a new second-storey addition and a reduced setback from the normal high-water mark of the Jock River.

The property is subject to a floodplain overlay.

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 proposed addition was within the existing footprint and would not significantly change the drainage pattern.

The application was unopposed and granted.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced interior side yard setback of 1.22 metres, instead of the required 4.5 metres, to construct an attached garage.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fit well in the area, respected the neighbourhood's character, and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced setback of 110 metres from a mineral aggregate reserve zone for a proposed detached dwelling, whereas the zoning by-law required 150 metres.

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

The variance was authorized.

The applicant sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit an increased lot coverage of 43.15% (229.38 square metres) for the construction of a detached dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 40%.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fit well in the area, respected the neighbourhood's character, and would not create any unacceptable adverse impacts.

The application was granted subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed plans.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to subdivide a property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future residential development, retaining the existing dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had regard for matters of provincial interest, and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, environmental mitigation agreements, and geotechnical reporting.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a vacant property into two separate parcels, one for commercial/industrial use and the other for a future subdivision, and to establish an easement/right of way.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and found 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, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the provision of a hydrogeological report.

The applicants applied for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future residential development.

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

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

Provisional consent was granted subject to conditions including cash-in-lieu of parkland and registration of a reference plan.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling.

The severed parcel would contain the existing dwelling and accessory buildings, while the retained parcel would consist of vacant farmland.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The consent was granted subject to conditions, including obtaining a zoning by-law amendment to address a lot width and interior side yard setback deficiency.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide a vacant property into two parcels, one for commercial/industrial use and the other for a future subdivision.

The requested variances included permitting a lot with 0.0 metres of street frontage, a reduced lot width of 26.0 metres, and designating the southeastern lot line as the front lot line.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no concerns from the City Planning Report and no evidence of adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The applications were granted.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a minor variance to permit an increased lot coverage of 21.62% to construct a one-storey addition and attached garage.

The City's initial concerns regarding the well and septic system were addressed.

The Committee found that the requested variance 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 the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.