George Barrett

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into three separate parcels for the construction of a long semi-detached dwelling and a detached dwelling, and to grant an easement/right-of-way.

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 applicant, Ottawa Salus Corporation, applied for consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct a 54-unit low-rise apartment building and a four-unit townhouse block, along with associated easements for access, parking, and servicing.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns.

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 for consent were granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement.

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment and a grant of easement to convey a portion of a property containing surface parking to an adjacent property.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought a minor variance from the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 5.13 metres, instead of the required 6 metres, to construct an addition at the rear of an existing detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the 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 will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into four separate parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings, each containing a secondary dwelling unit, and to establish associated easements for vehicular access and parking.

The City's Forestry Services raised concerns regarding the removal of a large tree and requested revised plans.

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 applications were granted subject to several conditions, including requirements for tree protection, servicing, grading, and noise attenuation.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to create one new lot, while retaining the existing three-storey building.

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

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback and a reduced total interior side yard setback to construct an attached garage and a one-storey front addition.

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

Finding that the proposal fit well within the neighbourhood, maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and would not create unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment and to grant an easement/right of way over a portion of its property to an abutting property owner.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit reduced front and interior side yard setbacks to construct a two-car garage in place of an existing carport.

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 applicant, Intek Building Inc., applied for consent to sever a property to create two new parcels for the construction of two three-storey semi-detached dwellings with secondary dwelling units, while retaining a parcel for a detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement.

Finding that the proposal promotes efficient land use and intensification within a built-up area, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the provision of a noise attenuation study.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced lot widths to subdivide their property into two separate parcels for the construction of a new detached dwelling, while retaining the existing dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the 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 represents orderly development without creating unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee authorized the requested variances.

The applicant sought minor variances under section 45 of the Planning Act to subdivide a property into two separate parcels for the construction of two detached dwellings.

The requested variances included permitting a dwelling on a severed corner lot to front the same street as the created interior lot, and reducing the rear yard setback and area.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fit well within the neighbourhood and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The applications were granted subject to the submitted site plan and elevations.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future residential development, while retaining the existing dwelling.

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

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

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two detached dwellings, requiring the demolition of the existing dwelling.

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

The Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications, payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, and the provision of independent servicing for both parcels.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit a reduced lot area for proposed semi-detached dwellings with secondary dwelling units.

The Committee of Adjustment considered 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 as amended.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct a new detached dwelling while retaining the existing dwelling.

The City's Planning Department raised no concerns, noting the reconfigured lots were in keeping with the neighbourhood's character.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to several conditions including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a driveway to be located between the front wall of a dwelling and the street for the construction of a detached dwelling.

An initial variance regarding a watercourse setback was removed after the proposal was redesigned.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting it was compatible with the surrounding area and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact.

The application was granted as amended.

The applicant sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit 13 parking spaces instead of the required 14 for a proposed four-storey, low-rise apartment building.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test, noting that the reduction of one parking space would not have an undue adverse impact given the site's proximity to amenities and transit.

The application was granted, subject to the location and size of the parking being in accordance with the filed site plan.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback and a reduced rear yard setback to construct a second-storey addition onto an existing dwelling.

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

The proposal regularized an existing legal non-complying front yard setback and slightly reduced the existing legal non-conforming rear yard setback.

Finding no adverse impacts on neighbouring properties and that the proposal respected the neighbourhood's character, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant, Richcraft Properties Ltd., applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to create a drainage easement over its property in favour of an adjacent property.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns, noting the size of the stormwater drainage easement was appropriate.

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

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions.