Paul Robinson

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of consent and minor variance applications to divide a large residential lot into four separate parcels for semi-detached dwellings.

The proposal involved creating three 'flagpole' lots with only 0.76 metres of street frontage, relying on a shared driveway and a Joint Use & Maintenance Agreement for access and servicing.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the proposed lots could not function independently or accommodate separate municipal services as required by the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposal did not represent good planning and that a Zoning By-law Amendment for a Planned Unit Development would be the appropriate mechanism for such a shared-service development.

The applicants sought a minor variance to reduce the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) from an existing livestock operation from 81 metres to 39 metres to permit the creation of a new residential lot.

The appellant, a neighbouring property owner, appealed the Committee of Adjustment's approval, arguing that the higher density Type B MDS guidelines should apply.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and authorized the variance, finding that the Type A MDS calculation was correct, the variance met the four tests under the Planning Act, and the proposed rural residential development was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the City's Official Plan.