George Barrett

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a portion of their property to an abutting property.

The City Planning Department had no concerns, and an initially requested condition regarding an encroachment was withdrawn by agreement.

The Committee of Adjustment found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and section 51(24) of the Planning Act, and granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced interior side yard setback and a reduced rear yard area for a proposed two-storey, semi-detached dwelling with additional dwelling units.

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 applications were granted.

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

The Committee of Adjustment granted the consent application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Planning Act criteria.

The Committee authorized the variances for lot width, area, and setbacks, finding them minor and desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

However, the Committee tied on the variances for increased driveway width, resulting in their refusal.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 5.8 metres, instead of the required 7.5 metres, to construct a sunroom addition at the rear of their dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no objections from the City or neighbours.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback and rear yard area for a sunroom constructed at the rear of their dwelling.

The application was unopposed and supported by City Planning.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act and found the variances to be minor, desirable, and in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted, subject to the variances being tied to the life of the sunroom.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels for the construction of two semi-detached dwellings and to establish easements for a shared driveway and servicing.

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 applications were granted subject to conditions, including independent servicing, stormwater management, and cash-in-lieu of parkland.

The applicant applied for a minor variance to permit an increased canopy projection of 8.78 metres into the rear yard for a proposed two-storey industrial warehouse facility.

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

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 applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback and rear yard area for a sunroom constructed at the rear of the existing dwelling.

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

Finding no objections from the City or neighbours, and determining that the proposal respects the character of the neighbourhood and represents orderly development, 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, subject to the variances being tied to the life of the sunroom.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to establish separate ownership for two existing office buildings and to establish easements for access, parking, and stormwater management.

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

The Committee declined to impose a City-requested condition requiring a Development Agreement for a noise warning on title, finding it unnecessary as no new noise-sensitive uses were being introduced.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

The application was unopposed.

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 consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 13.8 square metre portion of their property to an abutting property.

The application was unopposed and supported by City Planning.

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 application was granted subject to standard conditions regarding parcel consolidation and servicing.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into three parcels, creating two new lots for future residential development.

The applications were unopposed and heard as part of the Committee's fast-track consent agenda.

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

The applications for provisional consent were granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced total interior side yard setback of 3.02 metres to construct an addition expanding an existing single attached garage into a two-car attached garage.

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 fits well in the area, respects the character of the neighbourhood, and represents orderly development compatible with the surrounding area.

The application was granted.

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

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

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

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels and establish easements for access and parking.

The existing 30-unit apartment building would remain on one parcel, while a new 10-unit apartment building would be constructed on the other.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and granted provisional consent subject to conditions, including requirements for stormwater management, tree protection, and noise control.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced front yard and corner side yard setbacks for a proposed block of six townhouse dwellings.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application 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 compatible with the surrounding area, the Committee concluded that the variances are minor, desirable, and maintain the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced interior side yard setbacks, a reduced resident parking space rate, and an increased rear yard parking area to construct a 4-storey, 10-unit low-rise apartment building.

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

The proposal was deemed 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 without opposition.

The applicant sought consent for a long-term lease over 21 years and minor variances to construct a 4-storey, 39-unit apartment building.

The requested variances included reductions to front yard setbacks, parking space rates, glazing, and private way width.

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

Both the consent and the amended minor variance applications were granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit the construction of a three-storey, eight-unit stacked dwelling.

The requested variances included reductions to the minimum lot width, lot area, front yard setback, and rear yard setback.

Despite the City's Planning Report raising no concerns, the Committee refused the application.

The majority found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the proposed development was desirable for the appropriate development of the land or that it maintained the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, noting concerns about orderly development and compatibility with the surrounding area.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 3.87 metres, instead of the required 6 metres, to construct a sunroom at the rear of their detached dwelling.

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

The application was granted.