Jay Baltz

The applicants sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit the construction of a detached dwelling with a front-facing attached garage, which was not permitted under the Zoning By-law due to a Streetscape Character Analysis.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application and found that it met the four-part test under 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, subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed plans.

The applicant, 6382924 Canada Inc., applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced residential parking space rate of 1.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit for a residential tower under construction, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 1.2 spaces.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under the four-part test of 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 applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct a semi-detached 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 application was granted subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the execution of a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 27.8% of the lot depth (9.35 metres) to construct a one-storey addition at the rear of their dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal fit well in the area, respected the neighbourhood's character, and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit reduced interior side yard and rear yard setbacks to convert an existing two-storey semi-detached dwelling into an eight-unit low-rise apartment building.

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 fits well in the area and respects the character of the neighbourhood.

The applications were granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit front-facing attached garages for a proposed semi-detached dwelling, which the Zoning By-law did not permit based on a Streetscape Character Analysis.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the proposed variances did not meet the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Committee concluded that the proposal would maximize the visual dominance of the automobile, fail to respect the character of the neighbourhood, and create an unacceptable adverse impact on the streetscape.

The applicant, 2473493 Ontario Inc., applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for a proposed three-storey low-rise apartment building, while retaining three existing apartment buildings on the other parcel.

The application included the creation of easements for vehicular and pedestrian access.

The Committee 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 Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, servicing plans, grading and drainage plans, and road widening conveyances.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to construct a semi-detached dwelling, with the existing dwelling to be demolished.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under sections 53 and 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and met the statutory criteria, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicant applied for consent to sever a property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for a semi-detached dwelling and one lot for a detached dwelling.

The City requested conditions relating to tree retention, grading, and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and met the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications for consent were granted subject to conditions, including tree planting, grading plans, and a joint use and maintenance agreement for the semi-detached dwelling.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit an increased building height and reduced ground floor glazing for a proposed three-storey low-rise apartment building.

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

The proposal was deemed desirable for the appropriate development of the land, maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and was considered minor with no unacceptable adverse impacts on the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit front yard parking and reduced landscaping widths for three existing multi-unit dwellings.

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

Despite City Planning staff having no concerns, the Committee found that the proposed front yard parking would negatively affect the character of the streetscape and neighbourhood.

The Committee concluded the variances were not desirable, did not maintain the general intent of the Official Plan or Zoning By-law, and were not minor due to unacceptable adverse impacts.

The applications were refused.

The applicant sought a minor variance to reduce the required parking space rate for a proposed mixed-use development from 1.2 to 1.04 spaces per dwelling unit.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the reduction in parking spaces supports Official Plan policies encouraging a shift away from automobile-centred development.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide a property into two parcels for the construction of a semi-detached dwelling, requiring reductions in minimum lot area, front yard setback, and rear yard setback.

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 fits well in the area, respects the character of the neighbourhood, and represents orderly development without creating unacceptable adverse impacts.

The applications were granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit a reduced lot width and lot area to construct a four-unit low-rise apartment building.

The existing dwelling and accessory structures would be demolished.

The Committee 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 creating unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee authorized the requested variances.

The applicant sought consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act to sever an existing 8-unit townhouse building into 8 separate parcels with shared access and parking, and to establish reciprocal easements and rights-of-way.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, granting the applications subject to conditions including a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 4 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 7.5 metres, to construct a sunroom at the rear of the existing dwelling.

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

Finding no objections and noting the proposal fits well within the area without adverse impacts, 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 a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 11.89 metres for a proposed three-storey, ten-unit apartment building, where the maximum permitted height is 11.0 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application 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 applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced parking rate of 0.96 spaces per unit for a proposed mid-rise apartment dwelling within a mixed-use development, whereas the zoning by-law required 1.2 spaces per unit.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under section 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 both the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide an existing 8-unit townhouse building into 8 separate parcels with shared access and parking.

The requested variances involved reduced lot areas and lot widths for each proposed townhouse 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 applications were granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever her property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future residential development, while retaining the existing dwelling.

The application was unopposed.

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

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, tree protection, and servicing requirements.