Sharon Lecuyer

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for the construction of three long semi-detached dwellings, and to establish associated easements and rights-of-way.

The Committee considered the application under sections 53 and 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions.

The applicant sought consent 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 considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act.

Finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and having adequate regard for the criteria in subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, independent servicing, and noise attenuation warnings.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create two new lots for the construction of two three-storey low-rise apartment buildings.

The Committee considered the application under section 53 of the Planning Act and the criteria in subsection 51(24).

The Committee found that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest, and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary.

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of a concurrent minor variance application, payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, tree planting, and the execution of a Joint Use, Maintenance and Common Elements Agreement.

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

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 promoting efficient land use and intensification.

The Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including a noise attenuation study, road widening conveyance, and a joint-use and maintenance agreement.

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 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 applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to subdivide a property into two lots and establish an easement, after a previous conditional approval lapsed.

The applicant argued the previous application had not lapsed and objected to a new condition requiring cash-in-lieu of parkland.

The Committee confirmed the previous approval had lapsed.

Finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to conditions, including the payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland and a noise attenuation study.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two detached dwellings.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns after a revised site plan addressed tree protection issues.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, promoting efficient land use and intensification within built-up areas.

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

The application for consent was granted subject to conditions, including tree protection and grading requirements.

The applicant sought consent to subdivide a property into two separate parcels to establish separate ownership for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling, along with necessary easements for access.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns, and the Committee found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, including the provision of a servicing plan and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought consent to sever land and establish an easement to construct a three-storey, three-unit townhouse dwelling with secondary dwelling units.

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

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to conditions, including a tree planting plan, grading and drainage plan, and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into three separate parcels for the construction of three new two-storey townhouse dwellings.

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 applications were granted subject to several conditions, including a development agreement for an asphalt overlay and a noise attenuation study.

The applicant applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property to create separate ownerships for each half of an existing semi-detached dwelling.

The proposed severance would create a retained parcel and a severed parcel, each containing one half of the dwelling.

The Committee 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 majority of the Committee was satisfied that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had adequate regard for matters of provincial interest.

The application for provisional consent was granted, subject to conditions including independent servicing and a joint use and maintenance agreement.

One member dissented, finding insufficient evidence regarding the dimensions and shapes of the lots.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a reduced lot area of 143.79 square metres for one half of an existing semi-detached dwelling, to allow the property to be subdivided into two separate parcels.

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

The majority 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, with one member dissenting.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 11 metres for a proposed three-storey detached dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 10 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the requested variance was not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and that insufficient evidence was presented to demonstrate that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan were maintained.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit an increased building height of 6.1 metres for a coach house, whereas the zoning by-law permitted a maximum of 3.6 metres.

The intent was to rebuild a detached garage with a second-storey coach house.

Despite the City Planning Report raising no concerns, neighbours objected due to loss of sunlight and lack of consultation.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposal did not fit well in the area, was not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and was not minor as it would create an unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties.

The applicant sought minor variances to convert an existing three-unit building into a four-unit low-rise apartment building.

The requested variances included a reduced interior side yard setback and permission to provide two parking spaces on a lot less than 450 square metres.

The Hintonburg Community Association opposed the application, raising concerns about soft landscaping and parking.

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 reflected existing conditions and would not create unacceptable adverse impacts.

The application was granted.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit the construction of a three-storey, 8-unit stacked dwelling.

The requested variances included reductions in minimum lot width, lot area, and side yard setback.

The Committee of Adjustment evaluated the application against 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 granted the application as amended.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to create separate ownership for each half of a proposed semi-detached dwelling.

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

Finding that the proposal promoted efficient land use and development within a built-up area, and that a plan of subdivision was not necessary, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the demolition of the existing dwelling and the execution of a joint use and maintenance agreement.

The applicant sought four minor variances to permit the construction of a three-storey addition containing four dwelling units at the rear of an existing building.

The requested variances included a reduced interior side yard setback, a reduced percentage of front façade windows, permission for a motor vehicle parking space on a lot less than 450 square metres, and access to the garbage storage area through a parking space.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the variances for the side yard setback and front façade windows, finding them to be minor and desirable.

However, the Committee refused the variances for the parking space and garbage access, concluding they did not represent orderly development or maintain the intent of the Zoning By-law regarding accessibility and safety.

The applicants sought consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to accommodate a semi-detached dwelling, each with a secondary unit.

The City requested a noise warning condition due to the property's proximity to Highway 417, which the applicants' agent questioned but the Committee ultimately required.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the registration of a noise warning on title and a tree planting plan.