Heather MacLean

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into two parcels to construct a new school, with the retained lands to be merged with an abutting parcel.

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 for consent was granted subject to conditions, including the demolition of the existing dwelling and the merging of the retained lands.

The applicant, 2473493 Ontario Inc., applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for a proposed three-storey low-rise apartment building, while retaining three existing apartment buildings on the other parcel.

The application included the creation of easements for vehicular and pedestrian access.

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

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, servicing plans, grading and drainage plans, and road widening conveyances.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide a property into two parcels for the construction of a semi-detached dwelling, requiring reductions in minimum lot area, front yard setback, and rear yard setback.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances 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 without creating unacceptable adverse impacts.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit an increased building height and reduced ground floor glazing for a proposed three-storey 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, maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and was considered minor with no unacceptable adverse impacts on the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct a semi-detached 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 application was granted subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the execution of a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought a minor variance to reduce the required parking space rate for a proposed mixed-use development from 1.2 to 1.04 spaces per 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 that the reduction in parking spaces supports Official Plan policies encouraging a shift away from automobile-centred development.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 4 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 7.5 metres, to construct a sunroom at the rear of the existing dwelling.

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

Finding no objections and noting the proposal fits well within the area without adverse impacts, the Committee concluded the variance was minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever her property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future residential development, while retaining the existing dwelling.

The application was unopposed.

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

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, tree protection, and servicing requirements.

The applicant sought consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act to sever an existing 8-unit townhouse building into 8 separate parcels with shared access and parking, and to establish reciprocal easements and rights-of-way.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, granting the applications subject to conditions including a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide an existing 8-unit townhouse building into 8 separate parcels with shared access and parking.

The requested variances involved reduced lot areas and lot widths for each proposed townhouse dwelling.

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

The applications were granted.

The applicant applied for a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 11.89 metres for a proposed three-storey, ten-unit apartment building, where the maximum permitted height is 11.0 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application 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 reduced parking rate of 0.96 spaces per unit for a proposed mid-rise apartment dwelling within a mixed-use development, whereas the zoning by-law required 1.2 spaces per unit.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under section 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 both the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced interior side yard setback of 0.92 metres (instead of the required 1.2 metres) to construct a 6-unit townhouse dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the reduction only affected the southwest corner of the building and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey semi-detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units per principal unit, requiring reductions in minimum lot width, lot area, and corner side yard setback.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding privacy, density, drainage, and parking.

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

The applications were granted subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed site plan and elevations.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever an industrial property into two separate parcels and to establish easements for vehicular and pedestrian access.

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 section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including the conveyance of a road widening, the registration of maintenance agreements, and the provision of independent servicing.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two detached dwellings with additional dwelling units, and to grant reciprocal easements for a shared driveway and parking.

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 application was granted subject to conditions, including the provision of a grading and drainage plan, tree protection measures, and the conveyance of a corner sight triangle to the City.

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into two parcels to create a new lot for a three-storey, 31-unit apartment building, and to establish easements for vehicular access and parking.

The retained land would continue to contain two existing apartment buildings.

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 for consent was granted subject to conditions regarding the registration of easements and a reference plan.

The applicants sought permission under subsection 45(2) of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming dwelling in a DR zone to construct a sunroom.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposed addition met the two-part test for desirability and impact, noting the small size of the addition and the lack of objections from the City or neighbours.

The application was granted subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed plans.

The applicant, 10926221 Canada Inc., applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling currently under construction.

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 Committee granted provisional consent subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan and confirmation of independent municipal services.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a home-based personal training business occupying 29% of the dwelling's gross floor area, exceeding the 25% permitted by the Zoning By-law.

Neighbours opposed the application, citing adverse impacts including noise, traffic, and parking issues.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the expanded business would likely contribute to additional adverse impacts and did not fit well in the area.

The Committee concluded that the requested variance failed three of the four statutory requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it was not minor, not desirable for the appropriate use of the land, and did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.