Heather MacLean

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to create separate ownerships for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling, along with associated easements.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including provisions for cash-in-lieu of parkland, servicing, and joint-use agreements.

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 consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two new single detached dwellings with secondary dwelling units.

The existing dwelling and garage were to be demolished.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under the Planning Act and found it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement promoting infill and intensification.

Despite some neighbourhood opposition, the Committee concluded the proposal met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and granted provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicant sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming use by replacing an existing rear deck with a new covered deck located 27.7 metres from the normal high-water mark, contrary to the 30-metre zoning setback.

The City requested a scoped Environmental Impact Statement as a condition of approval.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it met the two-part test for desirability and impact.

The majority of the Committee declined to impose the Environmental Impact Statement condition, finding it unreasonable and unnecessary.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced setback for a septic system from the normal high-water mark of the Ottawa River and a reduced garage setback to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

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

Finding no evidence of adverse impacts and noting no concerns from the City or the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable, and maintained the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit reduced front and rear yard setbacks for a detached dwelling on a newly subdivided parcel.

The Committee of Adjustment considered 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 unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants, Minto Greenfield GP Inc. and Greenfield Limited Partnership, applied for consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment.

The proposal involved conveying a portion of vacant land to merge with an abutting property, while retaining another vacant parcel.

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 consolidation of the severed lands with the abutting property.

The applicant, Ottawa Salus Corporation, applied for minor variances to permit the subdivision of a property into two parcels for a 54-unit low-rise apartment building and a four-unit townhouse block.

The requested variances included reductions in lot area, lot width, interior side yard setbacks, and landscaping requirements, as well as permissions for additional walkways and front yard parking.

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

The applications were granted subject to the development proceeding in accordance with the revised site plan and elevation drawings.

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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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.