Masha Makula

The appellant appealed the City of Ottawa Committee of Adjustment's refusal of consent and minor variance applications to sever a residential property into two lots and permit reduced lot width, area, and side yard setbacks.

The City did not attend the hearing.

The Tribunal heard uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the proposal represents good planning, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and meets the legislative tests under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, granting provisional consents subject to conditions and authorizing the minor variances.

The applicants appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of their applications for consent to sever and minor variances to subdivide a residential property into two parcels.

The proposal involved retaining an existing dwelling on one parcel and constructing a new three-storey dwelling on the other, requiring variances for side yard setbacks, eaves projection, and a front-facing garage.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the variances met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act and that the consent applications satisfied the criteria under sections 51(24) and 53(1).

The appeals were allowed, provisional consents were granted subject to conditions, and the variances were authorized.