Jocelyn Chandler

The applicant applied for consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act to establish an easement/right of way in favour of an abutting property for vehicular and pedestrian access.

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

Finding no concerns from city staff or conservation authorities, the Committee determined the proposal was in the public interest and granted the provisional consent subject to standard conditions regarding the registration of a reference plan and easement documents.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their agricultural property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling and to establish an easement for access.

The application was unopposed and supported by City planning staff.

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

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including road widening conveyances and zoning by-law amendments.

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

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 applications were granted subject to several conditions, including requirements for independent private sewage systems, well water adequacy reports, and a zoning by-law amendment to prohibit residential development on the retained lands.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a covered porch and balcony to project closer to the interior side lot line than permitted by the Zoning By-law for a townhouse unit under construction.

The application was unopposed.

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

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a covered porch and a covered balcony to project closer to the interior side lot line than permitted by the Zoning By-law for a townhouse unit under construction.

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 fit well in the area and respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The application was granted, legalizing the already-built structures.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to establish an easement/right-of-way for servicing a property.

The Committee of Adjustment previously granted provisional consent for a lot line adjustment, which required this additional consent application to establish the servicing easement.

The Committee found the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, and granted the provisional consent subject to conditions.

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

The application was brought to resolve an issue where the applicants' pool was partially located on the abutting property, as part of a mutual land exchange.

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

The application for provisional consent was granted, subject to conditions including a grading and drainage plan and parcel consolidation.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 29.1 square metre portion of their property to the abutting property owners to the south.

The adjustment was required because a pool belonging to the abutting property was partially located on the applicants' property.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding 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 consent was subject to conditions, including the submission of a grading and drainage plan and a site plan showing the exact location of the sewage system relative to the pool.

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

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 had regard for matters of provincial interest and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including requirements for independent private sewage systems, a noise attenuation study, and a report demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer.

The applicant, Dilworth Developments Inc, applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property to create one new lot for future residential development.

The retained parcel contains an existing single-family dwelling.

After an initial adjournment to address concerns from the City and the Conservation Authority, the applicant provided additional documentation.

The Committee 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 for consent was granted subject to several conditions, including the provision of a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment and a Hydrogeological Evaluation.

The applicants applied for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create one new lot 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 application was unopposed and supported by the City's Planning Report.

Provisional consent was granted subject to conditions including cash-in-lieu of parkland and registration of a reference plan.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to subdivide a property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future residential development, retaining the existing dwelling.

The Committee considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act and the criteria in subsection 51(24).

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, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, environmental mitigation agreements, and geotechnical reporting.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling.

The severed parcel would contain the existing dwelling and accessory buildings, while the retained parcel would consist of vacant farmland.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The consent was granted subject to conditions, including obtaining a zoning by-law amendment to address a lot width and interior side yard setback deficiency.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a vacant property into two separate parcels, one for commercial/industrial use and the other for a future subdivision, and to establish an easement/right of way.

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 Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the provision of a hydrogeological report.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide a vacant property into two parcels, one for commercial/industrial use and the other for a future subdivision.

The requested variances included permitting a lot with 0.0 metres of street frontage, a reduced lot width of 26.0 metres, and designating the southeastern lot line as the front lot line.

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 the City Planning Report and no evidence of adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The applications were granted.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a minor variance to permit an increased lot coverage of 21.62% to construct a one-storey addition and attached garage.

The City's initial concerns regarding the well and septic system were addressed.

The Committee 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 applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create one new parcel for future residential development, retaining the existing detached dwelling on the other parcel.

The City requested that the owners enter into a development agreement to register notices on title concerning groundwater and soil.

The Committee found 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 application for provisional consent was granted, subject to several conditions including the execution of a development agreement with the City regarding groundwater and soil conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced setbacks from lands zoned for mineral extraction (ME2 and ME3) to construct two new detached dwellings on a subdivided property.

The City's Planning Department raised concerns about creating new sensitive receptors near active and potential future pit operations.

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

The Committee concluded the proposal was not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, would not represent orderly development compatible with its surroundings, and failed to demonstrate it would not hinder existing or future aggregate operations.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels for residential development, with a new detached dwelling proposed for each parcel.

The proposed lots were in close proximity to lands zoned for mineral extraction.

The City's Planning Department raised concerns regarding the lack of an acceptable Mineral Resource Impact Assessment and the reduced setbacks from existing and future aggregate operations.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposal was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and did not have adequate regard for the criteria specified under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, nor was it in the public interest.

The applicant sought minor variances to construct a two-storey addition on the east side of an existing detached dwelling, encroaching into the required 30-metre watercourse setback.

The City raised concerns that the cantilevered addition would project closer to the surface water feature, but acknowledged it was unlikely to have a significant impact and that the applicant provided a planting plan to enhance the site's ecological function.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested 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 application was granted.