OTTCOA 2023

The applicant sought a minor variance from the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 5.13 metres, instead of the required 6 metres, to construct an addition at the rear of an existing detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment applied 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 will not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct two three-storey, low-rise apartment buildings.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under 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 appropriate infill development, the Committee granted provisional consent subject to several conditions, including cash-in-lieu of parkland, tree planting, and noise attenuation measures.

The applicant sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to expand an existing legal non-complying single detached dwelling by constructing a second-storey addition.

The City's Planning Report raised no concerns, noting the addition would utilize existing exterior wall locations and create no privacy issues.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal met the two-part test under subsection 45(2), as it was desirable for the appropriate development of the property and would not create any unacceptable adverse impact on abutting properties or the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

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 applicant sought minor variances to permit reduced lot widths to subdivide their property into two separate parcels for the construction of a new detached dwelling, while retaining the existing dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment applied 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 authorized the requested variances.

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 applicant sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to permit an increased footprint area of 116.22 square metres for a coach house, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 95 square metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variance met the four-part statutory test, as it 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 Committee declined to impose the City's requested condition for a notice on title concerning groundwater, finding it unreasonable given the minor increase in building footprint.

The application was granted.

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 applicants sought minor variances to permit a reduced setback for a septic system from the normal high-water mark of the Ottawa River and a reduced garage setback to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

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

Finding no evidence of adverse impacts and noting no concerns from the City or the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, the Committee concluded the variances were minor, desirable, and maintained the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of a semi-detached dwelling with two principal units and two additional dwelling units.

The requested variances included reduced lot areas, increased building height, and reduced interior and corner side yard setbacks.

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 fit well in the area and respected the character of the neighbourhood.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming use by replacing an existing rear deck with a new covered deck located 27.7 metres from the normal high-water mark, contrary to the 30-metre zoning setback.

The City requested a scoped Environmental Impact Statement as a condition of approval.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it met the two-part test for desirability and impact.

The majority of the Committee declined to impose the Environmental Impact Statement condition, finding it unreasonable and unnecessary.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into two parcels to construct two new single detached dwellings with secondary dwelling units.

The existing dwelling and garage were to be demolished.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under the Planning Act and found it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement promoting infill and intensification.

Despite some neighbourhood opposition, the Committee concluded the proposal met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and granted provisional consent subject to conditions.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 4.62 metres, instead of the required 7.5 metres, to construct a sunroom at the rear of their dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The variance was deemed minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The application was granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the severance of a property into two parcels, allowing for the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling on one parcel while retaining the existing dwelling on the other.

The requested variances included reductions in lot width, lot area, front yard setback, and interior yard setback, as well as an increased canopy projection.

The Committee of Adjustment applied the four-part test under subsection 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 applications were granted subject to conditions.

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 minor variances to permit a reduced front yard setback, a reduced side yard setback, the principal entrance to face the side lot line, and a covered porch projection for an addition to an existing semi-detached dwelling.

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.

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 applied for minor variances to permit reduced front and rear yard setbacks for a detached dwelling on a newly subdivided parcel.

The Committee of Adjustment considered 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 unacceptable adverse impacts, the Committee granted the application.

The applicant applied for consent to sever its property into two separate parcels, each containing an existing industrial building.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under the Planning Act and found it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland and compliance with the Ontario Building Code.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a wood trellis to project 7.26 metres into the rear yard, exceeding the 2-metre maximum permitted by the Zoning By-law.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no concerns from City Planning and no evidence of adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.