Martin Vervoort

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a landlocked 1.9-hectare portion of their property to an abutting owner.

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 requirement for an agreement on title regarding groundwater quality and quantity, from which two members dissented.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey detached dwelling and sewage system with reduced setbacks from the Ottawa River.

The City initially requested an adjournment for a planting plan, which was subsequently provided, resolving the municipality's concerns.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under s. 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 application was granted subject to the submitted site plan.

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

The City Planner and the South Nation Conservation Authority raised concerns regarding the capacity of each lot to accommodate a new septic system.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, subject to conditions including the completion of a conceptual septic system design to the satisfaction of the Ottawa Septic System Office, finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced rear and side yard setbacks for the construction of an industrial warehouse.

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 subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed site plan.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback for the construction of an attached garage.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variance met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the rear yard functionally acts as a side yard and the proposal respects the character of the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit the construction of a new detached dwelling and detached garage on a lot that does not abut an improved public street for a distance of at least 3.0 metres, as required by the Zoning By-law.

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

Finding that the proposal improves upon the watercourse setback, features adequate waterproofing for the floodplain, and fits well within the neighbourhood without adverse impacts, the Committee concluded the variance was minor, desirable, and maintained the general intent 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 rural property into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future development, retaining the existing detached dwelling.

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 represented orderly development, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including a cash-in-lieu of parkland payment, road widening conveyance, and groundwater adequacy reporting.

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

The severed parcel would be 45.3 hectares and remain agricultural, while the retained 1.69-hectare parcel would contain the existing dwelling and outbuildings.

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

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

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit the construction of a new detached dwelling 19.9 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 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 concluded that the variance is minor, desirable, and maintains the general intent 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 0.80-hectare portion of their property to an abutting owner.

At the hearing, the applicant's agent requested that the Committee not impose a condition recommended by the City Planner requiring an agreement on title regarding groundwater quality and quantity, arguing it was unwarranted as no development was proposed.

The Committee agreed not to impose the condition, finding the application consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application for provisional consent was granted subject to standard conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit an increased front yard setback and a reduced building height to construct an addition and attached garage on the north side of their existing detached dwelling.

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 will not create any unacceptable adverse impact, 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 applicants sought consent to sever their property to create one new lot for future residential development.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns but requested conditions, including a revised Mineral Resource Impact Assessment and a noise study.

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 consent was granted subject to several conditions, including road widening conveyances, environmental studies, and groundwater adequacy reports.

The applicants sought a Certificate of Validation under section 57 of the Planning Act to correct a title error stemming from a 1985 conveyance that contravened the Act.

The City's planning staff had no concerns with validating the transfer.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application had adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and was in the public interest.

The application was granted and the certificate of validation was issued.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property to create a new residential lot.

The City requested a condition requiring a hydrogeological report and the drilling of a well on the retained lot.

The applicants' agent requested that the condition be modified to only require a well on the retained lot if necessary, as there were no immediate plans to develop it.

The Committee agreed to modify the condition.

The Committee found that the application met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and granted the consent subject to conditions.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced setback of 0.26 metres for an existing shed, whereas the zoning by-law required 0.6 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the 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 sought minor variances to construct a detached dwelling and septic system on vacant land, requesting reduced setbacks to the normal highwater mark of the Ottawa River and the top of bank of a drainage ditch.

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

Finding that the proposal fit well in the area, respected the character of the area, and would not create 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 subject to site plan conditions.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit an increased building height and a reduced front yard setback for a detached garage.

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, Sunshine Sky Farms Inc., applied for consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 2.3-hectare portion of its property to an abutting property owner.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under 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 was in the public interest, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, including the consolidation of the severed land with the abutting property.

The applicant, Maple Ridge Farms North Gower Inc., applied to the Committee of Adjustment for 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 structures, while the retained parcel would consist of vacant farmland.

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

The Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including road widenings and a zoning by-law amendment.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels for future development.

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

Finding no concerns from the City Planning department or other agencies, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, including registering agreements regarding groundwater and soil conditions, obtaining a zoning by-law amendment, and conveying a road widening to the City.