Jocelyn Chandler

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a portion of their property to an abutting property owner to the north.

The severed parcel contains an existing dwelling and will be merged with the unaddressed northern parcel, while the retained land is vacant agricultural land.

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

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions including a zoning by-law amendment to prohibit residential development on the retained lands.

The applicant sought permission to enlarge or extend a legally non-conforming detached dwelling and deck, and a minor variance to permit a reduced lot area of 440 square metres (whereas 8,000 square metres is required).

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

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act and the permission met the two-part test under subsection 45(2).

The application was granted.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a rural property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future residential development, with the existing dwelling remaining on the retained lot.

The applications were unopposed.

The Committee granted the applications, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had regard for matters of provincial interest, and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The consent was granted subject to standard conditions including cash-in-lieu of parkland, an Environmental Impact Study, and proof of independent private sewage and well systems.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two parcels and for minor variances to permit reduced lot widths for a proposed detached dwelling and an existing dwelling under construction.

The applications were unopposed.

The Committee found that the consent application satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and that the minor variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1).

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought consent for a lot line adjustment to convey a portion of their property to the abutting owners, and a minor variance to permit a reduced lot area for the retained 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 variance met the four-part test under section 45(1).

Both applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit a reduced number of resident and visitor parking spaces for a proposed 28-unit low-rise apartment building.

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

Finding 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 Committee granted the application.

The applicants sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit a reduced side yard setback of 1.98 metres, instead of the required 3 metres, to expand their existing garage.

The application was unopposed and supported by City planning staff.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the statutory four-part test, 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 consent to sever a 40.6-hectare portion of their property to merge with an abutting property, retaining a 1.6-hectare parcel with an existing dwelling.

The City of Ottawa Committee of Adjustment reviewed the application under section 53 of the Planning Act.

Finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide a rural property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future 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, and groundwater adequacy reports.

The applicant, Manotick Tree Movers Inc., applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for a surplus farm dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application alongside a concurrent minor variance application.

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of the minor variance and the provision of independent private sewage and well systems.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to establish easements for emergency vehicle access over several parts of the subject property.

The application was unopposed.

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

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 8.46 metres for an addition to an attached garage.

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 neighbours.

The application was granted as it was deemed minor, desirable, and in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The applicant, Crestpoint Real Estate (Iber Road) Inc., applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever its property at 140 Iber Road into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for two existing industrial buildings.

The Committee 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 regard for matters of provincial interest, and 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 several conditions, including the provision of a grading and drainage plan and a common elements agreement.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a building to be setback 10.26 metres from the normal high-water mark of the Ottawa River, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 30-metre setback.

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 proposed new dwelling improves upon the existing setback and that there were no objections.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought a minor variance to convert an existing covered patio into a family room, which required a reduced setback of 21.70 metres from the normal high-water mark of the Rideau River, contrary to the 30-metre requirement in the Zoning By-law.

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

Finding no objections from the City or conservation authority, and determining that the proposal fit the neighbourhood character without adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit increased front and corner yard setbacks to subdivide their property and reestablish previously independent lots.

The City of Ottawa withdrew its request for a development agreement regarding environmental noise, as the existing commercial buildings are not sensitive uses.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no concerns from the City and no evidence of adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property to create one new lot for future residential development, retaining the existing dwelling.

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

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to several conditions including a noise attenuation study, a rail safety report, and a groundwater adequacy report.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to reestablish lots that had previously merged on title.

The existing buildings, which are commercial and not sensitive uses, would remain.

The City had no concerns and withdrew a requested condition regarding environmental noise and vibrations.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced interior side yard setback of 3.29 metres, whereas the zoning by-law required 5.0 metres, to regularize an existing non-complying dwelling.

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

The variance was 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 application was granted.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 282-square-metre portion of their property to an abutting property.

The application was unopposed.

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 subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the submission of an Environmental Impact Study and the registration of a groundwater covenant.