George Barrett

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to enter into two long-term leases, each for a period of more than 21 years, for portions of a commercial property containing a shopping mall and free-standing buildings.

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

The applications for provisional consent were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a residential property into two parcels and minor variances for reduced lot width and area to permit the construction of a second detached dwelling.

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

The Committee also 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 applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for residential development.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future development.

The retained land contains a U-Haul facility.

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 application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit zero parking spaces in the attached garage and to allow a front yard parking space in the existing driveway, in order to convert the garage and second-storey living space into an additional dwelling unit.

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

The application was granted as amended.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 4.74 metres for a one-storey sunroom addition, whereas the zoning by-law required 8.38 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, 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.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two parcels to construct two detached dwellings with rear-yard coach houses, along with associated minor variances for lot width, lot area, coach house height, and setbacks.

Despite opposition from neighbours regarding scale, privacy, and environmental impacts, the Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and compatible with the neighbourhood.

The Committee granted the consent and authorized the minor variances, subject to conditions including infrastructure agreements and grading plans.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels, creating separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

The application was unopposed.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 6.02 metres (instead of the required 7.5 metres) to construct a sunroom at the rear of their existing dwelling.

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

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act and found 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 application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit the construction of a new attached garage and carport with a reduced front yard setback and an entrance closer to the front lot line than the principal dwelling entrance.

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 consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide a property into two parcels for future phased development and to grant an easement for servicing and access.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns subject to conditions.

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 for provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced setback for a detached garage and a reduced landscaped strip between a driveway and interior side lot line.

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 as amended.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future development, and to establish easements for servicing access.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, servicing plans, grading plans, and road widenings.

The applicants applied for minor variances to subdivide their property into two parcels, each to contain a new detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units.

The requested variances sought relief from the minimum lot area and lot width requirements.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal fit well within the area and that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels for the construction of two detached dwellings, each containing an additional dwelling unit.

The requested variances were to permit reduced lot areas of 399.6 and 492.7 square metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 555 square metres.

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

The applications were granted.

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

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

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

The application for provisional consent was granted subject to standard conditions regarding the filing of a registered Reference Plan and electronic registration documents.

The applicant, Costco Wholesale Canada LTD, sought minor variances to permit an addition to an existing office building with reduced transparent glazing and no active customer entrances facing public streets.

The application was amended during the hearing to remove a variance for landscaped area.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the amended proposal met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it fit well in the area, respected the neighbourhood character, and represented orderly development without creating adverse impacts.

The application was granted as amended.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced number of resident parking spaces and a garage entrance projection for a four-storey, 32-unit 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 sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to enter into a long-term lease of more than 21 years for a portion of their property to construct a three-storey retirement home.

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

The application was unopposed and granted subject to conditions.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to construct two detached dwellings, each containing an additional dwelling unit.

The application was unopposed.

The Committee found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had regard for matters of provincial interest and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications.