Jay Baltz

The applicant sought minor variances to legalize several existing accessory structures, including sheds, a hot tub, and a play structure, which did not comply with zoning regulations regarding setbacks, height, and the number of permitted structures.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the variances for the sheds and hot tub, finding they supported the residential use and met the four tests under the Planning Act.

However, the Committee refused the variances for the play structure, finding its reduced setback and increased height did not maintain the intent of the Zoning By-law to minimize impacts on adjacent neighbours.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit the construction of two semi-detached dwellings with additional dwelling units on four lots.

The requested variances included reductions in minimum lot width, lot area, rear yard setbacks, and rear yard area.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the evidence, including the City's lack of concerns and the applicant's explanation that the buildings were located closer to the rear lot line to accommodate a future expropriation for a transit project.

The Committee found that the variances 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 applications were granted subject to the revised site plan and elevation drawings.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 8.77 metres for a proposed two-storey detached dwelling containing an additional dwelling unit.

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

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting it 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 increase the permitted gross floor area for an Automotive Service Station from 300 square metres to 840 square metres.

The application was unopposed and supported by City planning staff.

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 applicants sought a minor variance to permit the construction of a storage shed 15.03 metres from the normal high-water mark of the Rideau River, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 30-metre setback.

The application was unopposed, and the City Planning Report raised no concerns.

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 to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit the construction of an attached garage at the front of an existing detached dwelling, requiring a reduced front yard setback and allowing the garage to project further than the principal entrance.

The applicant cited recurring drainage and flooding issues with the existing reverse slope driveway.

The Committee refused the application, finding that the proposed projecting garage would dominate the streetscape and be out of character with the neighbourhood.

The majority concluded that the variances failed all four tests under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that alternate solutions were available to resolve the drainage issues.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit a reduced corner side yard setback and a reduced landscape buffer to relocate two surface parking spaces.

The Committee found that the requested 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 application was granted.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings, each containing additional dwelling units, for a total of 12 units.

Area residents opposed the application, raising concerns about overdevelopment, parking, traffic, and stormwater drainage.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the applications, finding that the proposed lots met zoning requirements and that the development was permitted as of right.

The Committee concluded that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement regarding intensification and satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings, along with minor variances to permit an increased building height of 11.0 metres.

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.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct a semi-detached dwelling with additional dwelling units, along with shared driveway easements.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted subject to standard conditions, including demolition of existing structures and noise attenuation measures.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property to create one new lot for residential development, retaining the existing detached dwelling on the other lot.

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

Finding no concerns from the City and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary, the Committee granted the application subject to standard conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to enter into a long-term lease of more than 21 years over a portion of its property to construct a seven-storey apartment building.

The application was unopposed and the City's Planning Report raised no concerns.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, satisfying the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit an increased lot coverage and driveway width to construct a one-storey detached garage.

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 neighbourhood's character, and represents orderly development without adverse impacts, the Committee concluded the variances were minor and desirable.

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

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced interior side yard setback of 1.8 metres for an addition to an existing building, whereas the zoning by-law required 3 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no objections from the City or the public.

The application was granted, and the variance was authorized.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into four separate parcels for future residential development, while retaining the existing dwelling, and to establish an easement for services.

The application was unopposed.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions including grading, drainage, and noise warning clauses.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels for future development, retaining the existing dwelling on one parcel.

The applicant also requested minor variances for reduced lot area and lot width for the severed parcel.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent application 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).

Both applications were granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a noise warning on title.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a nine-storey mixed-use building with 92 residential units and at-grade commercial retail.

The requested variances included increased building height, rooftop amenity space projections, increased density, and reduced interior side and rear yard setbacks.

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 staff and no evidence of adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted, subject to the variances being tied to the submitted plans.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced interior side yard setbacks and a reduced parking rate for the construction of two four-storey apartment buildings.

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

Finding no objections and noting the City's Planning Report raised no concerns, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, 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 reduced lot width and lot area to construct a two-storey, semi-detached dwelling at 1240 Anoka Street.

Neighbours raised concerns about the potential for a rooming house and overdevelopment.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposed variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the City's Planning Report raised no concerns and the proposal respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The applications were granted.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a minor variance to expand their existing driveway to 9 metres to accommodate a triple-wide garage, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum width of 6 metres.

The City Planner and various agencies raised no concerns with the application.

The Committee applied the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act and found 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 application was granted subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed site plan and elevations.