Jay Baltz

The applicants sought consent to sever a property into two lots, each containing an existing semi-detached home, and requested minor variances for reduced lot area and width.

The applications were unopposed.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the consent, finding it consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under s. 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Committee also authorized the minor variances, concluding they met the four-part test under s. 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 applicant sought an easement to establish a right of way for pedestrian and vehicular access in favour of a neighbouring property.

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

The Committee granted the application, subject to conditions, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced front and rear yard setbacks and an increased building height to construct a three-storey semi-detached dwelling.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding building height, parking, and neighbourhood character.

The Committee of Adjustment (majority) 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, with two members dissenting on the building height variances.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into three separate lots to build a new two-storey detached house on each, along with minor variances for reduced lot area, width, and setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent applications 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).

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including a revised tree information report and stormwater management requirements.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced parking space rate and reduced landscaped buffer widths for an addition at the rear of an existing hotel.

The application was unopposed and supported by the City's Planning Report.

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 application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback of 3.98 metres for a residential addition.

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

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 application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback, reduced rear yard area, and reduced interior side yard setbacks to construct a single-storey addition at the rear of their existing house.

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 application was granted as amended.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate lots, each containing one half of a semi-detached house currently under construction.

Local residents raised concerns regarding the potential need for minor variances for driveways and front-facing garages.

The Committee of Adjustment found that no minor variances were required as the plans did not include driveways or garages for vehicle parking.

The Committee granted the application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions including tree planting and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate lots to build future homes, which would require demolishing the existing house and removing two mature, healthy trees.

City staff opposed the application, arguing that alternative lot configurations could preserve the high-priority trees while achieving the same residential density.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposal was not consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement regarding climate change adaptation and did not have adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, as the removal of the trees was avoidable and contrary to Official Plan policies prioritizing tree retention.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 2.808 metres for a residential addition, whereas the zoning by-law required 7.5 metres.

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

Finding no objections and noting the proposal respected the neighbourhood's character, 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 for consent to sever a property into two separate lots and to create access easements under section 53 of the Planning Act.

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and had regard for the criteria in subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought permission to enlarge a legally non-conforming detached garage by adding a second storey for a coach house, along with minor variances for increased height and reduced interior side yard setback.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested permission met the requirements of subsection 45(2) of the Planning Act, as it was desirable for the development of the property and would not have unacceptable impacts on the surrounding area.

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

The application was granted, with one member dissenting.

The Applicant applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a portion of their property and transfer it to the adjacent landowner as a lot addition.

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

Finding no objections and noting the City Planning Report raised no concerns, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to conditions, including parcel consolidation and independent municipal services.

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment to transfer part of its property to an adjacent owner, along with the establishment of various easements for vehicular access and municipal services.

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

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal represented orderly development, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to standard conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced westerly interior side yard setback and to allow two parking spaces in the rear yard, in order to convert an existing semi-detached dwelling into a six-unit low-rise apartment building.

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 applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to transfer a portion of its property to the owner of the adjacent land.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning 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, including the consolidation of the severed lands with the abutting property.

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for future development, while retaining the existing two-storey office 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 application was granted subject to conditions, including requirements for independent municipal services and a site servicing brief.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings with additional units, and to establish access easements.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including stormwater management, noise control, and tree protection.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two separate parcels.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application, which was unopposed, and found it consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions regarding servicing and registration.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever an existing property into two separate parcels to create one new commercial parcel, retaining the existing three-storey building.

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the application was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and had regard for the criteria in subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions.