Heather MacLean

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for the construction of a detached dwelling, while retaining the existing dwelling.

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 several conditions, including tree protection, stormwater management, and servicing requirements.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced lot widths and areas to subdivide a property into two separate parcels for the construction of two detached dwellings, each with additional dwelling units.

The City's Planning Department had no concerns, and the Committee found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Committee concluded 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 applications were granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for the construction of a detached dwelling while retaining the existing dwelling.

The requested variances were for reduced lot width and area for both the existing and proposed lots.

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 compelling evidence of adverse impacts.

The applications were granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for residential development while retaining the existing dwelling.

The requested variances included reduced lot width, reduced lot area, reduced rear yard setback, and increased lot coverage.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the 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 to grant easements for vehicular and pedestrian access to accommodate a shared driveway for a previously approved severance.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a joint use and maintenance agreement and the submission of a stormwater management brief.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels for the construction of two single detached dwellings, requiring relief for reduced lot area and rear yard setback.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposed parcels would be wider than typical lots in the neighbourhood and that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted, as the variances were deemed 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 applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment and to establish easements for vehicular and pedestrian access and servicing over a private right of way.

The City of Ottawa requested a condition requiring a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement, which the applicant asked to be amended or deleted due to an existing agreement.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, subject to conditions including the registration of a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a driveway to be located between the front wall of a building and the street, which is not permitted by the Zoning By-law.

The variance was requested to accommodate a shared driveway and retain an existing City tree.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that it would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties and respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard area and a reduced rear yard setback to construct a one-storey addition at the rear of their existing detached dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposal fits well in the neighbourhood, maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and is minor in nature with no unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property to create one new residential lot while retaining the existing dwelling.

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.

Despite the applicants' request to remove a condition requiring a noise attenuation study, the Committee retained the condition as it is required under the City's Official Plan.

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

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to construct two single detached dwellings, requiring the demolition of the existing dwelling.

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 several conditions, including the approval of associated minor variance applications and the submission of various technical plans.

The owners applied for consent to sever their property into three separate parcels for future residential development.

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

The applications were granted subject to several conditions, including the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, independent servicing, and tree protection measures.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 1.88 metres for a new two-storey garage addition with a loft, replacing an existing garage.

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

The variance was deemed minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

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

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

Finding that the proposal fit well in the neighbourhood, maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and was minor in nature with no adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit an increased building height and aggregate floor area for a new detached garage.

The City's Planning Report recommended refusal, noting the accessory building would become the predominant feature on the lot and the discrepancy between the principal and proposed accessory structure was not minor.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding the requested variances were not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and were not minor, as they would create an unacceptable adverse impact on the neighbourhood.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback and a reduced number of parking spaces for the construction of a new 6-storey, 115-room hotel and restaurant.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under the four-part test of 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 sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for residential development, while retaining the existing dwelling.

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 obtaining minor variance approval and providing necessary servicing and grading plans.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced lot area, lot width, and interior side yard setback to subdivide their property and construct a new two-storey detached 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 application was granted.

The applicant applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to enter into a long-term lease in excess of 21 years for a portion of its property to expand an existing commercial 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 Committee determined that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest.

The application for consent was granted, subject to conditions including the approval of an accompanying minor variance application.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit zero loading spaces and a reduced parking aisle width for a proposed four-storey, 88-unit hotel.

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.