Gary Duncan

The applicants sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to build a one-storey addition with a roof top terrace at the rear of their existing legal non-conforming house.

The Committee of Adjustment found the requested permission desirable for the appropriate use of the land and noted it would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties.

The application was granted as an unopposed fast-track consent item.

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for future development, while retaining the existing two-storey office building.

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 application was granted subject to conditions, including requirements for independent municipal services and a site servicing brief.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced westerly interior side yard setback and to allow two parking spaces in the rear yard, in order to convert an existing semi-detached dwelling into a six-unit low-rise apartment building.

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

Finding that the variances 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 Committee granted the application.

The applicants applied for consent to sever their property into two separate lots, each containing one half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

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 section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to construct a one-storey detached dwelling with an attached garage.

The requested variances included increased lot coverage, reduced setbacks from a watercourse for the dwelling and septic system, and reduced lot area and width.

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, raised no concerns from the City's Planning Report, and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels under section 53 of the Planning Act, retaining the existing dwelling on one parcel and creating a vacant farmland parcel.

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

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, and had adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including obtaining a Zoning By-law Amendment to restrict residential development on the retained lands.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a residential property into two separate lots for future development.

The existing house would be retained while a detached garage would be demolished.

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

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including requirements for independent municipal services, stormwater management, and tree protection.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 2.5 metres for the construction of an 18-unit apartment building.

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 and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment to transfer part of its property to an adjacent owner, along with the establishment of various easements for vehicular access and municipal services.

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

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal represented orderly development, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to standard conditions.

The applicant applied for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for future development and to establish shared access easements.

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

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

The application was granted subject to standard conditions, including requirements for independent servicing, noise control, and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property into two parcels to construct a new semi-detached dwelling while retaining the existing detached dwelling.

The application was unopposed.

The Committee granted the application, 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 standard conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced interior side yard setback and increased building height for a detached garage, as well as a reduced interior side yard setback for a second-storey addition.

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

Finding no unacceptable adverse impacts and noting the proposal respected the neighbourhood character, 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 consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into two parcels for future residential development.

The Committee of Adjustment reviewed the application against the criteria in subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024.

Finding no objections and noting the City Planning Report raised no concerns, the Committee granted the application subject to standard conditions regarding municipal addressing, hydrogeological reporting, and grading.

The applicants sought consent from the Committee of Adjustment under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two parcels, retaining the existing dwelling on one parcel and leaving the other as vacant agricultural land.

The application was unopposed and the City Planner raised no concerns.

The Committee found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

The Committee concluded that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into four parcels to create three new lots for future residential development.

A neighboring resident raised concerns regarding the hydrogeological sensitivity of the area and the impact of recent droughts on groundwater supply.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the applications, subject to conditions including a requirement for a hydrogeological and terrain analysis report to demonstrate the adequacy of the aquifer.

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

The applicant applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced side yard setback of 2.94 metres for a second-floor addition over an existing one-storey portion of a building.

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 front-facing garage for a proposed two-storey detached house, contrary to the zoning by-law which restricts front-facing garages where they are not the dominant streetscape pattern.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four tests under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal incorporated design elements to reduce visual impact and fit well within the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Ottawa 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.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding loss of privacy and the impact on neighbourhood character.

The Committee found that the proposed severances and variances met the criteria under the Planning Act, noting that the proposal respects the character of the neighbourhood and represents orderly development.

The consent and minor variance applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicants applied to the Ottawa Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels, allowing each half of an existing semi-detached house to constitute a separate property.

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

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

The application for consent was granted subject to standard conditions.

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment to transfer 5.58 hectares of agricultural land to an adjacent property, retaining 0.72 hectares containing an existing dwelling.

The applicant also requested a minor variance to permit the reduced retained lot area, where the zoning by-law required a minimum of 6.0 hectares.

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

The Committee also found that the minor variance met the four-part test under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it was desirable, minor, and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

Both applications were granted subject to conditions.