Fabian Poulin

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment to convey a landlocked portion of its property to an abutting property owner.

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

The unopposed application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two parcels to construct two two-storey detached dwellings, along with several minor variances for lot area, width, and setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the consent applications, finding them consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Committee also authorized most of the requested minor variances, finding they met the four-part test under section 45(1).

However, the Committee refused one variance for a reduced rear yard setback, finding it did not maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law and could cause adverse impacts on abutting properties.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 14-square-metre landlocked portion of its property to an abutting property owner.

The application was unopposed and supported by city planning staff.

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 Planning Statement and met the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels for future development and to establish associated easements and rights of way.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024.

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with provincial interests and good planning, the Committee granted the applications subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property to create a new lot for a six-storey apartment building while retaining existing townhouse dwellings on the other lot.

The application included requests for easements for access, parking, and servicing.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the applications, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions including the registration of a restrictive covenant.

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into three separate parcels and establish easements, as well as a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 31 metres for a proposed nine-storey mixed-use building.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent applications satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and that the minor variance met the four-part test under section 45(1).

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two parcels and for minor variances to permit reduced lot widths for the construction of two detached dwellings.

The applications were unopposed and supported by the City's Planning Report.

The Committee found that the consent application satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and that the minor variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1).

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit a deck projection of 3.66 metres into the rear yard, exceeding the maximum permitted 2 metres.

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

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under 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 a certificate of validation under section 57 of the Planning Act to correct a title error resulting from past transfers that contravened section 50 of the Act.

The Committee of Adjustment reviewed the application against the criteria in subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Noting no concerns from the City Planner or other agencies, the Committee found the application had adequate regard for the statutory criteria and was in the public interest.

The application for a certificate of validation was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit rear yard parking for a newly constructed three-storey semi-detached dwelling, contrary to the zoning by-law which restricts rear yard parking to legally provided garages.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the proposal did not meet the four-part test under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Specifically, the variances were not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the zoning by-law, and were not minor due to unacceptable adverse impacts on neighbours and the streetscape.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct semi-detached dwellings with additional units, and to establish vehicular and pedestrian easements.

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

The applications for consent and easements were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels for the construction of a high-rise, mixed-use development on each parcel, along with an easement for shared driveway access.

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

The applications for consent and the easement were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 5.97 metres, instead of the required 6.8 metres, to construct a one-storey addition containing an additional dwelling unit at the rear of an existing detached dwelling.

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

The variance was deemed minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent to establish a servicing easement over a portion of its property along a proposed shared driveway, in favour of four newly created lots for long semi-detached dwellings.

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

The unopposed application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a parking space in the front yard and between the front wall of the residential building and the street, to facilitate converting their carport into living space.

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

The application was granted.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels for future development and to establish easements for access and stormwater infrastructure maintenance.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions regarding servicing plans and joint use and maintenance agreements.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels and establish access easements for the construction of two semi-detached dwellings, along with minor variances for reduced setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, had regard for matters of provincial interest, and met the criteria under the Planning Act.

The consent and minor variance applications were granted subject to conditions, including tree protection and municipal servicing requirements.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit an increased cumulative total gross floor area and reduced parking space rates for specified light industrial uses.

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 the public.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent to establish easements and rights-of-way for a shared driveway, and minor variances for reduced lot area and width to construct two detached dwellings, each with two additional dwelling units.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent application satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and that the requested variances met the four-part test under section 45(1).

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including requirements for stormwater management and tree protection.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two new detached dwellings, along with minor variances for reduced lot width and garage setback.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under the Planning Act.

The applications were unopposed and granted subject to standard conditions.