Jocelyn Chandler

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling.

The severed parcel would contain the existing dwelling, while the retained parcel would continue to be used for agricultural purposes.

The City initially raised concerns about the size of the severed lot and potential agricultural value of a rear portion, but these were satisfied by evidence that the soil was rocky and not farmed.

The Committee of Adjustment found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and granted the consent subject to conditions.

The applicants sought consent for a lot line adjustment to convey a 4.04-hectare portion of their property to an abutting lot.

The City requested a condition requiring a road widening dedication.

The applicants' agent requested that an existing log fence be permitted to remain within the expanded right of way.

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

The Committee modified the road widening condition to allow the existing fence to remain.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit separate well and septic systems for an existing coach house and a reduced front yard setback of 5 metres.

The City's Planning Department recommended refusal, arguing the proposal did not meet the Official Plan's intent for shared services.

The Committee of Adjustment (majority) granted the application, finding that preserving the existing housing stock was desirable and met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

One member dissented, finding the application did not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to a lot line adjustment under section 53 of the Planning Act.

The proposal involved conveying a portion of vacant agricultural land to an abutting property owner.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property to create a new lot for future commercial/industrial use.

The proposed lot was undersized for a Rural Countryside severance but located within the Carp Airport Special Policy Area, which permits smaller lots if serviced by a private well and septic system.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and granted the application subject to conditions, including requirements for a grading and drainage plan, road widening, and a hydrogeological report.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit the construction of a detached garage with an increased cumulative floor area and building height.

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

Finding that the proposed garage fits well within the area and respects the character of the neighbourhood without creating unacceptable adverse impacts, 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 application was granted.

The owners applied for consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act for lot line adjustments to convey portions of their property to two abutting properties.

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 the applications subject to conditions, including a revised condition for a road widening if required.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 4 metres (instead of the required 6 metres) to construct an enclosed vestibule at the front of the existing dwelling.

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 will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants sought a minor variance to reduce the required setback from a normal highwater mark from 30 metres to 25.37 metres to construct a new dwelling and detached garage.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the new dwelling would improve upon the existing setback and that there were no unacceptable adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 0.32-hectare landlocked parcel containing an accessory building to an abutting property.

The City requested an adjournment to clarify access and the accessory structure's size, but the Committee proceeded with the hearing.

The Committee found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Provisional consent was granted subject to conditions, including a private approach permit and a road widening condition limited to the Third Line Road frontage.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for residential development.

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

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, road widening conveyance, and groundwater/septic impact assessments.

The applicant sought a minor variance to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage from 15% to 19.75% to construct a rear addition to an existing dwelling.

The City raised concerns regarding the lack of undeveloped area for a potential septic system replacement.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the existing shed would be demolished and a new septic system accommodated on site.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels to create a new lot for a proposed gas bar, car wash, and convenience store.

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland and the registration of a reference plan.

The applicant, 1727898 Ontario Inc., applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels for future residential development.

The existing dwelling and detached garage are to be demolished.

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

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

The Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the provision of independent municipal services for both parcels.

The applicant, 1727898 Ontario Inc., applied for minor variances to permit a reduced lot width of 16.74 meters (where 20 meters is required) to subdivide its property into two separate parcels for future residential development.

The Committee of Adjustment considered 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 and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The applications were granted.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their rural property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future residential development.

The applications were unopposed.

The Committee 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 Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, road widening conveyance, and a report demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer to support the development.

The applicants sought consent to sever their rural property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future residential development.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the revised proposal, which increased the frontage and area of the proposed lots to address the City's concerns.

Finding that the application was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the conveyance of a road widening and the provision of a well water adequacy report.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling.

The retained parcel would continue to be used for agricultural purposes.

The City's Planning Services had no concerns, provided that two accessory buildings on the retained parcel were used in conformity with the Zoning By-law.

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

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions, including a zoning by-law amendment to prohibit residential development on the retained lands.

The applicants sought to subdivide their property to create two new lots for future residential development.

They applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced separation distance of 151 metres from an existing livestock facility to a proposed building envelope, whereas the Zoning By-law required 182 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 an addition to their dwelling located within the floodplain of the Rideau River.

The variances requested relief from the 30-metre watercourse setback and the 20-square-metre limit for additions in a floodplain overlay.

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

The application was granted subject to site plan conditions.