Terence Otto

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

The Committee 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 provision of an Environmental Impact Statement and a report demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever their property into three parcels to create two new lots for future residential development.

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 Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the conveyance of a road widening if required, and the provision of a report demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer to support the proposed development.

The applicants sought permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to reconstruct a garage that is a legal non-conforming use in the RU zone.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal met the two-fold test relating to desirability and impact, noting no concerns from the City Planning Report and no evidence of unacceptable adverse impacts on abutting properties.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit an increased building height of 12.95 metres for a proposed three-storey detached dwelling with a secondary dwelling unit, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 12 metres.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part statutory test and 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, subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed plans.

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

City Planning staff requested an adjournment to allow for a mineral resource impact assessment.

The Committee of Adjustment proceeded with the hearing and granted provisional consent, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and section 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions including the provision of a mineral resource impact assessment and a groundwater adequacy report.

The applicants sought consent to sever their rural property to create one new lot for future residential development.

The City requested an adjournment due to errors in Official Plan policies, but the Committee proceeded with the hearing.

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

Provisional consent was granted subject to several conditions, including a development agreement, road widening, and proof of adequate groundwater.

The applicant sought consent to sever their property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for future residential development, retaining the existing dwelling.

City Planning staff requested an adjournment due to errors in Official Plan Policies, but the Committee proceeded with the hearing.

The Committee granted the applications, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act, subject to several conditions including cash-in-lieu of parkland and geotechnical/groundwater agreements.

The applicants sought consent to sever their rural property into three separate parcels to create two new residential lots.

City Planning staff requested an adjournment due to pending Official Plan policies, which the Committee denied.

The Committee granted provisional consent, modifying the City's requested conditions by removing the noise attenuation study requirement for the railway corridor and the road widening requirement for Crawford Side Road, but retaining the requirement for a notice on title regarding groundwater.

The Committee found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and 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 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 consent for a lot line adjustment to convey a 1,630 square metre landlocked parcel to an abutting property.

The City opposed the application, arguing it was not consistent with policies protecting prime agricultural areas.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding that the requested conditions for a Zoning By-law Amendment and groundwater agreement were unnecessary.

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

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels for future industrial development.

The City requested conditions including a Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland dedication and an Environmental Impact Statement.

The applicant argued these were unnecessary as they had been addressed during a previous subdivision registration.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the consent, imposing the Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland condition but finding the Environmental Impact Statement condition unnecessary at this stage.

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 consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a rural property into two parcels, each containing an existing detached dwelling, and to establish easements for vehicular access and hydro utility maintenance.

The City's Planning Services raised no concerns after the applicant submitted a revised draft reference plan ensuring the severance line did not intersect unevaluated wetlands.

The Committee of Adjustment found the requested conditions regarding bedrock and groundwater agreements unnecessary.

The Committee granted the provisional consent, finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

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 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 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 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 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.