Martin Vervoort

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into four parcels to create three new lots for future residential development.

A neighboring resident raised concerns regarding the hydrogeological sensitivity of the area and the impact of recent droughts on groundwater supply.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the applications, subject to conditions including a requirement for a hydrogeological and terrain analysis report to demonstrate the adequacy of the aquifer.

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

The applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced interior side yard setback and an eave projection for an already-built garage extension.

The Committee of Adjustment found the 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 applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a portion of their property for a lot line adjustment, transferring vacant land to an adjacent property owner.

The application was unopposed and supported by city planning staff.

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

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a noise warning agreement due to an adjacent active pit operation and the consolidation of the severed lands with the abutting property.

The applicant sought consent to sever their property into two parcels to create a new lot for future residential development, along with a minor variance for reduced lot width.

The City had no concerns, though the applicant contested two conditions proposed by the City's Building Code Services regarding independent services and limited distance separation.

The Committee found these conditions were not reasonable or necessary and declined to impose them.

The Committee granted the consent and authorized the minor variance, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the four-part test under the Planning Act.

The applicant, the Ottawa Catholic School Board, applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 4.75 metres for a proposed secondary school, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 7.5 metres.

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

Finding that the variance would not create unacceptable adverse impacts, fits well in the area, and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the Committee granted the application.

The applicants requested a change to a condition of a provisional consent previously granted by the Committee of Adjustment.

The requested change related to the requirements for the registered reference plan.

The Committee considered the submissions of the applicants' agent and the City Planner, who had no concerns.

The Committee found the requested change to be reasonable, necessary, and minor under subsection 53(23) of the Planning Act, and granted the request.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property at 3698 McBean Street into two separate parcels to create one new lot for future residential development.

The existing dwelling would remain on the retained land.

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

The Committee granted the application, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary, the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, and it satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their industrial property into two separate parcels and to establish an easement for a sanitary sewer.

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

The Committee evaluated the application against the criteria in section 51(24) of the Planning Act and the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024.

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal represented orderly development, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to standard conditions.

The applicant sought consent to sever a portion of their rural property to convey it to an abutting property owner as a lot line adjustment.

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

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, had regard for matters of provincial interest, and met the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted the application subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced setback of 18.48 metres to the normal highwater mark of the Rideau River for the construction of a new detached dwelling, 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 no concerns from the City or the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority.

The application was granted.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to establish an easement/right of way for access over their property in favour of an adjacent property.

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

The Committee found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning 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 applicant sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to construct a detached dwelling 28.2 metres from the normal highwater mark of the Ottawa River, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 30-metre setback.

The application was unopposed, with no concerns raised by the City or conservation authority.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested 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 sever a 1.6-hectare portion of a property for future industrial use.

The application was unopposed, and the City's Planning Report raised no concerns subject to standard conditions.

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

The application for provisional consent was granted subject to conditions, including a hydrogeological analysis and road widening conveyance.

The applicants sought consent for a lot line adjustment to convey a 15.66-hectare portion of their property to an abutting property owner, retaining a 3.24-hectare parcel with an existing dwelling.

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

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

The application was granted subject to standard conditions regarding building code compliance, independent services, and parcel consolidation.

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

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024.

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality, the Committee granted the application subject to conditions, including requirements for a development envelope, hydrogeological reporting, and a mineral resource impact assessment.

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

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

The Committee was satisfied that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, and had adequate regard for the criteria specified under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicant requested a change to a condition of a provisional consent previously granted by the Committee of Adjustment.

The requested change modified the requirement for a registered Reference Plan to conform substantially to a newly filed draft Reference Plan.

The Committee found the requested change to be reasonable, necessary, and minor, and granted the application under subsection 53(23) of the Planning Act.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit existing accessory structures (a shed and a deck with an attached gazebo) to be located 22.5 metres from the normal high-water mark of the Ottawa River, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 30-metre setback.

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

The Committee of Adjustment 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 applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property to create one new lot for future residential development, retaining the existing farm dwelling and agricultural land.

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the application was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a 1.5-hectare parcel containing an existing dwelling from a 41-hectare agricultural property to create a lot for a surplus farm dwelling.

The City raised concerns regarding the lack of frontage on a public street for the retained lands.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions including the registration of a notice on title regarding the unmaintained road allowance.