Jay Baltz

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into two parcels to create a new lot for a three-storey, 31-unit apartment building, and to establish easements for vehicular access and parking.

The retained land would continue to contain two existing apartment buildings.

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 for consent was granted subject to conditions regarding the registration of easements and a reference plan.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for the construction of a detached dwelling while retaining the existing dwelling.

The requested variances were for reduced lot width and area for both the existing and proposed lots.

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 compelling evidence of adverse impacts.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two detached dwellings with additional dwelling units, and to grant reciprocal easements for a shared driveway and parking.

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 provision of a grading and drainage plan, tree protection measures, and the conveyance of a corner sight triangle to the City.

The applicants sought permission under subsection 45(2) of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming dwelling in a DR zone to construct a sunroom.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposed addition met the two-part test for desirability and impact, noting the small size of the addition and the lack of objections from the City or neighbours.

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

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create a new lot for the construction of a detached dwelling, while retaining the existing dwelling.

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 several conditions, including tree protection, stormwater management, and servicing requirements.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever an industrial property into two separate parcels and to establish easements for vehicular and pedestrian access.

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 section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including the conveyance of a road widening, the registration of maintenance agreements, and the provision of independent servicing.

The applicant, 10926221 Canada Inc., applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling currently under construction.

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 Committee granted provisional consent subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan and confirmation of independent municipal services.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey semi-detached dwelling with two additional dwelling units per principal unit, requiring reductions in minimum lot width, lot area, and corner side yard setback.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding privacy, density, drainage, and parking.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal fit well within the neighbourhood and that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed site plan and elevations.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a home-based personal training business occupying 29% of the dwelling's gross floor area, exceeding the 25% permitted by the Zoning By-law.

Neighbours opposed the application, citing adverse impacts including noise, traffic, and parking issues.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the expanded business would likely contribute to additional adverse impacts and did not fit well in the area.

The Committee concluded that the requested variance failed three of the four statutory requirements under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it was not minor, not desirable for the appropriate use of the land, and did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced interior side yard setback of 0.92 metres (instead of the required 1.2 metres) to construct a 6-unit townhouse dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the reduction only affected the southwest corner of the building and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced lot widths and areas to subdivide a property into two separate parcels for the construction of two detached dwellings, each with additional dwelling units.

The City's Planning Department had no concerns, and the Committee found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Committee concluded 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 applications were granted.

The applicant sought consent to grant easements for vehicular and pedestrian access to accommodate a shared driveway for a previously approved severance.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a joint use and maintenance agreement and the submission of a stormwater management brief.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment and to establish easements for vehicular and pedestrian access and servicing over a private right of way.

The City of Ottawa requested a condition requiring a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement, which the applicant asked to be amended or deleted due to an existing agreement.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, subject to conditions including the registration of a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a driveway to be located between the front wall of a building and the street, which is not permitted by the Zoning By-law.

The variance was requested to accommodate a shared driveway and retain an existing City tree.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that it would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties and respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard area and a reduced rear yard setback to construct a one-storey addition at the rear of their existing detached dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposal fits well in the neighbourhood, maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and is minor in nature with no unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for residential development while retaining the existing dwelling.

The requested variances included reduced lot width, reduced lot area, reduced rear yard setback, and increased lot coverage.

The Committee of Adjustment 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 subject to conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two separate parcels for the construction of two single detached dwellings, requiring relief for reduced lot area and rear yard setback.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposed parcels would be wider than typical lots in the neighbourhood and that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted, as the variances were deemed 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 owners applied for consent to sever their property into three separate parcels for future residential development.

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 section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted subject to several conditions, including the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, independent servicing, and tree protection measures.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to construct two single detached dwellings, requiring the demolition of the existing dwelling.

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 several conditions, including the approval of associated minor variance applications and the submission of various technical plans.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property to create one new residential lot while retaining the existing dwelling.

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.

Despite the applicants' request to remove a condition requiring a noise attenuation study, the Committee retained the condition as it is required under the City's Official Plan.

The applications for consent were granted subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications.