Sharon Lécuyer

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a front-facing garage for a proposed two-storey detached dwelling, contrary to the Zoning By-law based on a Streetscape Character Analysis.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposal did not fit well in the area and was not desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

The Committee also found that the variance did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, as it did not represent orderly development compatible with the surrounding area.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property to create separate ownership for each half of a semi-detached dwelling under construction, along with a minor variance to permit an increased driveway slope of 12%.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the consent application satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and that the minor variance met the four-part test under section 45(1).

Both the consent and minor variance 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 ownership for each half of a proposed semi-detached dwelling.

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 applications were granted subject to conditions, including the execution of a joint-use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into four parcels to construct two semi-detached dwellings, along with minor variances for reduced rear yard setbacks.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposed severances met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and that the variances satisfied the four-part test under section 45(1).

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including tree protection and noise attenuation measures.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels to create one new lot for future residential development, while retaining the existing 27 townhouse dwellings.

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

The application for provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced building stepback, reduced setback between buildings, reduced rear yard setback, and increased building width for a proposed 10-storey addition to an existing mixed-use building.

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 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 currently under construction.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application 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 minor variances to permit front yard parking and a covered porch projecting into the corner sight triangle to facilitate the construction of a new detached dwelling with an additional basement unit.

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 neighbourhood character, and creates no 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 consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into two separate parcels, creating separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

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

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

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to standard conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, independent municipal services, and a joint use and maintenance agreement for common elements.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a Certificate of Cancellation under section 53(45) of the Planning Act regarding a previously granted provisional consent for a conveyance.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns, and no objections were received from other agencies.

The Committee was satisfied that it was appropriate to issue the certificate and granted the application.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling, along with an easement and joint-use agreement.

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 applications were 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 existing commercial and residential buildings, and to grant easements for shared underground parking access, a commercial garbage room, and balcony projections.

The Committee of Adjustment found the applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, satisfying the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications for consent were granted subject to conditions regarding servicing and registration.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to subdivide a property into two parcels to construct two long semi-detached dwellings with a shared driveway, and to establish associated easements and rights-of-way.

The Committee considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement promoting efficient land use and intensification.

The Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, independent servicing, and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property to create two new parcels of land for the construction of a three-storey, semi-detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, and submissions regarding tree protection and neighborhood impact.

The Committee found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality and that the proposal was in the public interest.

The applications for consent were granted subject to several conditions, including tree protection measures, grading and drainage plans, and the execution of a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced rear yard setback, landing and step projections, and front-facing garages to facilitate the subdivision of a lot and construction of a three-storey semi-detached dwelling.

Neighbours raised concerns regarding the removal of a shared boundary tree and other mature trees.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposed rear yard setback exceeded that of the existing building and the proposal respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The applications were granted.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey detached dwelling with an attached garage.

The requested variances included a reduced interior side yard setback and an increased interior rear yard area.

The Committee 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 creating 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 applicants sought consent to sever their property into three separate parcels to construct a detached dwelling and a semi-detached dwelling, requiring the demolition of the existing dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment heard objections from residents and the local community association regarding the scale, density, and incompatibility with the neighbourhood character.

The Committee refused the applications, finding they were not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and did not have adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

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

The Committee of Adjustment heard concerns regarding tree canopy preservation, parking, and water runoff.

The Committee refused the applications, finding that the proposal was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and did not have adequate regard for the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, including the suitability of the land for the proposed subdivision.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the subdivision of a property into two lots for the construction of two three-storey, long semi-detached dwellings.

The requested variances included reductions in minimum lot width, lot area, and interior side yard setback, as well as an increase in maximum building height.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the proposal represented overdevelopment at the expense of tree planting and parking functionality.

The Committee concluded that the variances did not meet the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, as they were not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan regarding the maintenance of the urban forest canopy.

The applicant sought consent to sever land and for a lot line adjustment to create two new lots for the construction of two three-storey, long semi-detached dwellings.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the proposal was not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement regarding efficient land use and intensification, and did not have adequate regard for the criteria specified under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, including the suitability of the land for the proposed subdivision.