OTTCOA 2024

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a reduced parking space rate, a reduced landscape buffer, and zero vehicle loading spaces for a proposed one-storey medical imaging facility.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposed medical facility did not fit well in the area due to deficient parking and distance to public transit.

The majority concluded that the variances were not desirable, did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and were not minor, as they would create an unacceptable adverse impact on clients and visitors.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit a double width driveway, a double width attached garage, and a balcony with no opaque screening for a proposed two-storey detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the variance for the balcony, finding it met the four-part test under the Planning Act.

However, the majority of the Committee refused the variances for the driveway and garage, concluding they did not maintain the general intent of the Official Plan or Zoning By-law and would create an unacceptable adverse impact on the neighbourhood's streetscape character.

The applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property into two parcels to facilitate the construction of a new low-rise apartment building, while retaining an existing low-rise apartment building under construction.

The application was unopposed.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement promoting urban intensification.

The consent was granted subject to standard conditions regarding parkland dedication, municipal services, and grading.

The applicant, Urbanworx Developments Ltd., applied for consent to sever a property into two separate parcels to construct semi-detached dwellings with additional dwelling units, and to establish an easement for access.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the application under sections 53 and 51(24) of the Planning Act.

Finding the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including noise attenuation, grading plans, and a joint use agreement.

The applicant sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming "Business and Personal Services" use within an R4UD zone to construct a one-storey addition for a boardroom.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the two-part test under subsection 45(2) regarding desirability and impact.

Finding no objections from city staff or the public, and determining that the addition would not adversely impact abutting properties, the Committee granted the application.

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

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had regard for matters of provincial interest and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including requirements for independent private sewage systems, a noise attenuation study, and a report demonstrating the adequacy of the aquifer.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit reduced lot areas and a reduced corner side yard setback to facilitate the subdivision of a property into nine parcels for the construction of eight three-storey townhomes.

The reduced setback was requested to preserve the protected heritage view of the existing Vinci School building.

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 applications were granted subject to conditions.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 29.1 square metre portion of their property to the abutting property owners to the south.

The adjustment was required because a pool belonging to the abutting property was partially located on the applicants' property.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the provisional consent, finding that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, had regard for matters of provincial interest, and satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The consent was subject to conditions, including the submission of a grading and drainage plan and a site plan showing the exact location of the sewage system relative to the pool.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit a reduced lot width and lot area to construct a new semi-detached dwelling.

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

Finding 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 Committee granted the application.

The applicants sought minor variances to subdivide their property into two lots for the construction of two detached dwellings, each with two additional dwelling units.

The requested variances included reduced lot widths and a reduction in required parking spaces to zero for one of the lots.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the proposed elimination of the required parking space did not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law, which anticipates higher vehicle ownership for detached dwellings.

The Committee concluded that the proposal did not represent orderly development compatible with surrounding uses and failed to satisfy the statutory four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The applicant sought consent to sever a property into nine separate parcels to create eight new lots for three-storey townhomes, while retaining the existing school on the remaining parcel.

The Committee of Adjustment found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, promoting efficient land use and intensification.

The applications were granted subject to conditions, including the provision of independent services, a joint use and maintenance agreement, and the construction of a sidewalk.

The applicant applied for a minor variance to permit a reduced Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) setback of 68 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 138 metres between a 0.5-hectare building area on a newly created vacant parcel and an existing unoccupied livestock facility.

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

The Committee noted that the actual setback would be at least 103 metres as recommended by an Environmental Impact Statement, and that the variance would not result in any unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

The application was granted.

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

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 applications were granted subject to several conditions, including requirements for independent private sewage systems, well water adequacy reports, and a zoning by-law amendment to prohibit residential development on the retained lands.

The applicant sought permission under section 45 of the Planning Act to expand a legal non-conforming mixed-use building to construct an accessible three-storey addition containing new entrances, stairs, and an elevator.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the proposal met the two-part test for desirability and impact, noting that the addition would introduce barrier-free access and have a smaller footprint than permitted for a low-rise apartment on the lot.

The application was granted.

The applicants sought a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act to construct a new one-storey accessory workshop building, requiring an aggregate area for all accessory buildings of 67 square metres, exceeding the permitted 55 square metres.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part statutory test, noting no concerns from the City Planner and no adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The variance was authorized subject to the location and size being in accordance with the filed plans.

The applicant sought to subdivide a property into four separate parcels to construct four townhouse dwellings, each with an additional dwelling unit.

The applicant requested minor variances for reduced lot area, reduced front yard setback, and to permit front balcony projections.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the proposal respected the character of the neighbourhood and provided gentle intensification.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to subdivide a property into two parcels, creating a new undersized lot for future residential development while retaining the existing dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as development plans, to demonstrate that the variances were desirable for the appropriate development of the land or maintained the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

The applicants sought consent to sever an agricultural property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling, with the retained land continuing to be used for agricultural purposes.

The Committee of Adjustment granted the application, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The approval was subject to several conditions, including a requirement for a scoped Mineral Resource Impact Assessment, with one member dissenting on the necessity of that specific condition.

The applicant applied for minor variances to permit reduced lot areas and lot widths for two proposed single-family detached dwellings.

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 concluded the variances were minor and desirable.

The applications were granted.

The applicant sought minor variances to construct a three-storey, low-rise apartment dwelling, requiring relief for bicycle parking space width, front yard walkway width, and front façade recess.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the requested variances met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting no objections from the City or the public.

The application was granted, subject to the construction being in accordance with the filed site plan and elevations.