Julianne Wright

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced setback for a septic system from the normal high-water mark of the Ottawa River and a reduced garage setback to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

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

Finding no evidence of adverse impacts and noting no concerns from the City or the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable, and maintained the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback, a reduced side yard setback, the principal entrance to face the side lot line, and a covered porch projection for an addition to an existing semi-detached dwelling.

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 applied for minor variances to permit reduced front and rear yard setbacks for a detached dwelling on a newly subdivided parcel.

The Committee of Adjustment considered 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 represents orderly development without unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants, Minto Greenfield GP Inc. and Greenfield Limited Partnership, applied for consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment.

The proposal involved conveying a portion of vacant land to merge with an abutting property, while retaining another vacant parcel.

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 the consolidation of the severed lands with the abutting property.

The applicant, Ottawa Salus Corporation, applied for minor variances to permit the subdivision of a property into two parcels for a 54-unit low-rise apartment building and a four-unit townhouse block.

The requested variances included reductions in lot area, lot width, interior side yard setbacks, and landscaping requirements, as well as permissions for additional walkways and front yard parking.

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 applications were granted subject to the development proceeding in accordance with the revised site plan and elevation drawings.

The applicant sought consent to sever its property into three separate parcels for the construction of a long semi-detached dwelling and a detached dwelling, and to grant an easement/right-of-way.

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.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling under construction.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan, independent servicing, and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant, Ottawa Salus Corporation, applied for consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct a 54-unit low-rise apartment building and a four-unit townhouse block, along with associated easements for access, parking, and servicing.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns.

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 applications for consent were granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit 0 residential and 0 visitor parking spaces for a proposed 6-storey, 19-unit mixed-use building.

The Committee of Adjustment considered 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 represents orderly development without unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to convert an existing office building into a mix of residential and commercial units.

The requested variances included reductions to the required commercial ground floor area, driveway width, drive aisle width, parking space dimensions, and vertical clearance.

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 fit well in the area, maintained the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and would not create unacceptable adverse impacts.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought consent for a lot line adjustment and a grant of easement to convey a portion of a property containing surface parking to an adjacent property.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had 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.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced interior side yard setbacks, reduced soft landscaping, and reduced front facade windows to accommodate three additional dwelling units for a total of six units.

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, the Committee granted the application as amended.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide a property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling currently under construction.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan, independent servicing, and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming use by replacing an existing rear deck with a new covered deck located 27.7 metres from the normal high-water mark, contrary to the 30-metre zoning setback.

The City requested a scoped Environmental Impact Statement as a condition of approval.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it met the two-part test for desirability and impact.

The majority of the Committee declined to impose the Environmental Impact Statement condition, finding it unreasonable and unnecessary.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two new single detached dwellings with secondary dwelling units.

The existing dwelling and garage were to be demolished.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under the Planning Act and found it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement promoting infill and intensification.

Despite some neighbourhood opposition, the Committee concluded the proposal met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and granted provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback and rear yard area to construct a four-storey, eight-unit apartment building.

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

Despite some concerns raised by City Planning staff regarding massing, the Committee found the proposal fit well within the area and would not create unacceptable adverse impacts.

The application was granted, subject to conditions regarding construction plans and balcony privacy screens.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit front-facing garages for a proposed semi-detached dwelling, which the Zoning By-law otherwise prohibited based on a Streetscape Character Analysis.

The City's Planning Department raised concerns about the proposal's impact on the streetscape.

However, the Committee of Adjustment found no compelling evidence of unacceptable adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The Committee concluded 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 consent for a lot line adjustment and to grant an easement/right of way over a portion of its property to an abutting property owner.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act.

The Committee found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had 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 registration of a Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement.

The applicant sought a minor variance from the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 5.13 metres, instead of the required 6 metres, to construct an addition at the rear of an existing detached 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 applicant sought consent to sever a property into four separate parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings, each containing a secondary dwelling unit, and to establish associated easements for vehicular access and parking.

The City's Forestry Services raised concerns regarding the removal of a large tree and requested revised plans.

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 applications were granted subject to several conditions, including requirements for tree protection, servicing, grading, and noise attenuation.