Heather MacLean

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 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 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 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 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 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.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced lot area and secondary dwelling units on undersized lots for the construction of a semi-detached dwelling.

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 area, respected the neighbourhood's character, and would not create unacceptable adverse impacts, 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.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a four-storey mixed-use development with reduced front yard setbacks, a reduced landscape buffer, front yard parking, and a reduced drive aisle width.

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

Finding no adverse impacts and noting the City's lack of concern, 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.

The applicant sought minor variances to construct a semi-detached dwelling with an above-grade secondary dwelling unit at the rear of each half.

The requested variances included a reduced rear yard setback, an increased gross floor area for the secondary dwelling units, and a reduced rear yard area.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding tree protection, drainage, and parking.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fits well in the area and represents orderly development compatible with the neighbourhood.

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

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a portion of their property for a lot line adjustment, conveying it to the abutting property owner.

The City Planning Report raised no concerns.

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 regarding the consolidation of the severed lands with the abutting property.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 8.18 metres for a new two-storey detached dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 8 metres.

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

Finding that the proposed flat-roof dwelling respects interior side yard setbacks, fits well within the neighbourhood, and raises no concerns from City planning staff or other agencies, 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 sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 14.35 metres for a proposed two-storey detached dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 8.5 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the increased height was due to the significant slope of the site and would have minimal visual impact on the streetscape.

The application was granted, subject to conditions requiring the submission of an Environmental Impact Study and a slope stability report prior to the issuance of a building permit.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct a two-storey semi-detached dwelling, requiring the demolition of the existing detached dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposal promoted efficient land use and development within a built-up area, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, including the approval of accompanying minor variances and tree protection measures.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a seniors' retirement community, including an eight-storey long-term care home and a fifteen-storey retirement home.

The requested variances included reductions to front yard setbacks, landscaped areas, drive aisle widths, parking space dimensions, and loading space requirements.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal provided adequate parking and fit well within the area.

The application was granted, with one member dissenting on the drive aisle width variance.

The applicant, Nemorin Group Limited, applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to subdivide a property into four separate parcels to construct four long semi-detached dwellings, each with an additional dwelling unit.

The existing dwelling and detached garage were to be demolished.

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 the provisional consent, subject to several conditions including the provision of easements, tree protection, and infrastructure agreements.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide a property into two lots for a two-storey semi-detached dwelling, requesting reduced lot width and area, and permission for front-facing attached garages.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the lot width and area variances, finding they met the four-part test under the Planning Act and fit well within the neighbourhood.

However, the Committee denied the variances for front-facing garages, as they were inconsistent with the dominant streetscape character and lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate they were desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels, each containing one half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the establishment of a new driveway, payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, and the registration of a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 4.77 metres, instead of the required 9 metres, to construct a sunroom addition.

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

The proposal fit well in the area, maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and was minor in nature with no unacceptable adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property and create a new vacant parcel for future development.

The proposed parcel required variances for reduced lot width and lot area.

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 evidence of adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The variances were authorized.