Brent Varty

The City of Oshawa appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision granting a minor variance to reduce the required front yard landscaped open space from 50% to 45.9% to accommodate a parking space for an accessory apartment.

The City argued the variance would necessitate the removal of a municipal tree and a fire hydrant to allow a curb cut.

The Tribunal found that the practical challenges of operationalizing the variance, such as tree removal, were separate from the planning merits of the variance itself.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's planning evidence, finding the variance met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, and dismissed the appeal, authorizing the variance subject to a condition.

The City of Oshawa appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision granting a minor variance to reduce the required parking space length for an accessory apartment from 5.75 metres to 4.5 metres.

The City argued the reduced length would cause vehicles to overhang onto the municipal boulevard, creating safety issues and violating traffic by-laws.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the City's evidence regarding average vehicle lengths was inconclusive and that some vehicles could fit within the reduced space.

The Tribunal concluded the variance met the four tests under the Planning Act, as it maintained the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, was desirable for the appropriate development of the property, and was minor in nature.