Jay Baltz

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to construct a new detached dwelling, while retaining the existing dwelling.

The City's Planning Department raised no concerns subject to conditions.

The Committee found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, promoting efficient land use and intensification within built-up areas.

The Committee was satisfied that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the application met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

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

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced lot area of 912.7 square metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 1,390 square metres, to bring an existing lot into compliance for future residential development.

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 compelling evidence of adverse impacts.

The application was granted subject to conditions regarding the amendment of the Plan of Subdivision and the lifting of a 30-centimetre reserve.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit reduced lot widths and areas for the construction of two detached dwellings.

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, the Committee concluded the variances were minor and desirable.

The applications were granted subject to the submission of a Stormwater Management Brief.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit increased driveway widths for an existing dwelling and a proposed new dwelling on a subdivided lot.

The City's Planning Department raised concerns that the double driveways were not in keeping with the intent of the zoning designation.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal fit well in the area and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

The majority of the Committee concluded that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act and granted the application, with one member dissenting.

The applicant, Ashcroft Leasing Inc., applied for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for two existing townhouse dwellings.

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 subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the provision of independent water and sanitary connections, a joint use and maintenance agreement, and a grading and drainage plan.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 11.12 metres for an already-constructed semi-detached dwelling, whereas the zoning by-law permitted a maximum of 11 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test 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 applicants sought minor variances to permit reduced lot width, lot area, and setbacks to construct two two-storey detached dwellings.

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 neighbourhood's character, and represents orderly development, the Committee concluded the variances were minor and desirable.

The applications were granted subject to the submission of a Stormwater Management Brief.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit reduced side yard setbacks for an addition to their existing garage.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it 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 application was granted.

The applicant applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels and establish easements for the future construction of two townhouse buildings.

The Committee of Adjustment determined that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including the execution of a joint use and maintenance agreement and the provision of independent municipal services.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels for future development and to establish easements for vehicle and pedestrian access and stormwater servicing.

The Committee found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and having adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced driveway widths, increased eaves and stair riser projections, and individual and shared driveways on the same lot for the construction of two back-to-back townhouse buildings.

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 applications were granted.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit reduced front, corner side, and interior side yard setbacks for the construction of a semi-detached dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposed 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 consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling currently under construction.

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

The consent was granted subject to several conditions, including the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, the execution of a development agreement for tree protection, and the establishment of a joint use and maintenance agreement for common elements.

The applicant sought permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to lease a portion of an existing legal non-conforming industrial/commercial building for use as an automobile service station.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposed use was not desirable for the appropriate development of the property and that the applicant failed to establish that the impact of the proposed use, particularly regarding traffic and parking, would be similar to the existing warehouse use.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced lot width and reduced interior side yard setbacks to construct a three-storey, 17-unit stacked dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposal supported intensification, respected the neighbourhood character, and would not create unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee concluded the variances were minor and desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

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

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback, increased cumulative floor area for accessory buildings, an altered garage entrance setback, and an increased driveway width for a detached dwelling.

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, with one member dissenting on the driveway width variance.

The applicant sought minor variances to construct a one-storey addition containing living space and an attached garage, requiring reductions in corner side yard setback, rear yard setback, rear yard area, and accessory structure setbacks, as well as increased garage projections.

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 unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant, Glenview Homes Inc., applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 4.4 metres for an end unit townhouse dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 4.75 metres.

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

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

The Committee found the variance to be 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 applicant, Glenview Homes Inc., applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 4.4 metres for a proposed end unit townhouse dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 4.75 metres.

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

Finding no objections and noting the City Planning Report raised no concerns, the Committee concluded 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 application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit an increased building height and a reduced rear yard setback for the construction of two six-storey mid-rise apartment buildings.

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 aligned with the general intent of the zone and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.