John Blatherwick

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

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 subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to standard conditions regarding building code compliance, servicing, and joint use agreements.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct a three-storey, eight-unit apartment building while retaining the existing apartment building.

The applicant also sought minor variances for reduced setbacks, lot area, and landscaping requirements.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent applications satisfied the criteria under the Planning Act and that the requested variances met the four-part test.

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two semi-detached dwellings, each with two additional dwelling units.

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 the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced interior side yard setback and to allow a garage to be the same distance from the front lot line as the principal entrance for a residential addition.

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

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.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback and rear yard area for the construction of a two-storey addition containing a screened porch.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances 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.

The applicant sought permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to expand an existing legal non-conforming gas bar use by adding a take-out restaurant inside the convenience store.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the applicant failed to provide a traffic impact assessment.

The majority concluded that without such an assessment, it could not be satisfied that the proposal was desirable for the appropriate development of the land or that it would not create an unacceptable adverse impact on the surrounding area.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached 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 conditions, including independent servicing, a joint use and maintenance agreement, and removal of illegal hardscaping.

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

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

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal 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 applicant sought minor variances to permit a parking space in the front yard of their semi-detached dwelling, which is generally prohibited by the Zoning By-law.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the statutory 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 would not create any unacceptable adverse impact, the Committee granted the application and authorized the variances.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct four townhouse dwellings and minor variances for reduced rear yard soft landscaping and reduced lot area.

Neighbours objected due to concerns about an existing right-of-way.

The Committee of Adjustment (majority) found the applications met the statutory tests under the Planning Act, noting the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and represented orderly development.

The consent and minor variance applications were granted subject to conditions, with the Chair dissenting.

The applicants sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to construct a third-storey rear addition that would exceed the height of the existing roof by 0.56 metres, contrary to the heritage overlay provisions of the Zoning By-law.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test 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 generally in accordance with the filed plans.

The applicant, Homestead Land Holdings Limited, applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit the development of a 25-storey apartment building as a Planned Unit Development.

The requested variances included reductions in private way width and setbacks, as well as an increase in the width of a double traffic lane.

The Committee found that the unopposed application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as 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 applicants applied for consent to sever their property into two parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings with additional dwelling units, and to establish mutual access easements.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding density, parking, drainage, and snow storage.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement promoting efficient land use and intensification.

The Committee concluded that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the applications satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownerships for two existing buildings that had merged on title.

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 subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the provision of independent services and a road widening conveyance.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling 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 application was granted subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan and various conveyances to the City.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit 10 units in a proposed low-rise apartment building, whereas the zoning by-law permitted a maximum of 8 units.

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 both the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to extend an existing elevated deck at the rear of their dwelling and provide a covered parking space underneath.

The requested variances included increased deck projection and reduced setbacks from the northerly, southerly, and westerly lot lines.

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 subject to conditions.

The applicants applied for a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit a front-facing attached garage for a proposed detached dwelling, contrary to the Zoning By-law which prohibited it based on a Streetscape Character Analysis.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal fit well within the area and respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The Committee concluded that the variance met the four-part test under 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 sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide a property into three separate parcels to create separate ownership for three existing buildings.

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 applications were granted subject to conditions, including requirements for a Common Elements Agreement and compliance with the Ontario Building Code.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings, along with easements for shared access.

The applicant also requested minor variances to permit an increased building height of 11 metres, whereas the zoning by-law permitted a maximum of 10 metres.

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

The Committee also found that the requested variances met the four-part test under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, as they were minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

Both the consent and minor variance applications were granted subject to conditions.