Colin Haskin

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced interior side yard setback and to allow a garage to be the same distance from the front lot line as the principal entrance for a residential addition.

The application was unopposed and proceeded on the fast-track consent agenda.

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 permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to expand an existing legal non-conforming gas bar use by adding a take-out restaurant inside the convenience store.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the applicant failed to provide a traffic impact assessment.

The majority concluded that without such an assessment, it could not be satisfied that the proposal was desirable for the appropriate development of the land or that it would not create an unacceptable adverse impact on the surrounding area.

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 an existing semi-detached dwelling.

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 independent servicing, a joint use and maintenance agreement, and removal of illegal hardscaping.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a parking space in the front yard of their semi-detached dwelling, which is generally prohibited by the Zoning By-law.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the statutory 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 would not create any unacceptable adverse impact, the Committee granted the application and authorized the variances.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct four townhouse dwellings and minor variances for reduced rear yard soft landscaping and reduced lot area.

Neighbours objected due to concerns about an existing right-of-way.

The Committee of Adjustment (majority) found the applications met the statutory tests under the Planning Act, noting the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and represented orderly development.

The consent and minor variance applications were granted subject to conditions, with the Chair dissenting.