Ottawa Committee of Adjustment

The applicant sought a Certificate of Validation under section 57 of the Planning Act to correct a title error.

An owner had mortgaged the subject property while owning abutting land, contravening the Planning Act.

The mortgagee sought to transfer the property under power of sale.

The Committee of Adjustment found the application satisfied the criteria under subsection 51(24) of the Planning Act and granted the application.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit a front-facing garage for a proposed detached dwelling, contrary to the Zoning By-law based on a Streetscape Character Analysis.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the application, finding that the proposal did not meet the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Specifically, the variance was not minor, did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan or Zoning By-law, and was not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, as it would create an unacceptable adverse impact on the streetscape and neighbourhood character.

The applicant sought a minor variance to convert the western half of the ground floor of a 22-storey apartment building from commercial space to residential apartments.

The variance requested a reduction in the required ground floor glazing facing a public street from 50% to 27%.

The Committee of Adjustment found that the application met the four-part test under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting it would provide more privacy for ground-floor residents and fit well within the area.

The unopposed application was granted.

The applicants sought minor variances to permit reduced lot areas and increased building heights to subdivide their property into four separate parcels for detached dwellings.

The Committee of Adjustment authorized the variances for reduced lot area, finding they met the four-part test under the Planning Act and maintained the character of the neighbourhood.

However, the Committee denied the variances for increased building height, finding insufficient evidence that the proposed height would be desirable or compatible with the surrounding area.

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 applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to subdivide their property into four separate parcels to construct four detached dwellings.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

The Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the provision of a grading and drainage plan.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for minor variances to permit a reduced lot width, reduced lot area, and an increased projection for a covered lanai, to facilitate a boundary adjustment and the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling.

The Committee 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 applications.

The applicants sought a minor variance to permit an existing rear deck to be located 2.15 metres from the rear lot line, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 4 metres.

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

Finding that the deck fits well in the area, maintains the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and creates no unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties, the Committee granted the application.

The variance was authorized subject to being restricted to the life of the existing deck structure.

The applicant, 15040787 Canada Inc., applied to the Ottawa Committee of Adjustment for consent to sever a property into three separate parcels to create two new lots for residential development.

The Committee considered the Environmental Impact Study and the City Planning Report, which raised no concerns subject to conditions.

The Committee found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The applications for consent were granted subject to several conditions, including groundwater quality and quantity reports, geotechnical agreements, and road widening conveyances.

The applicants applied to the Committee of Adjustment for a minor variance to permit a rooftop terrace with a 0-metre setback from the exterior walls of the building, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 1.5-metre setback.

The Committee 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 applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act for a lot line adjustment to convey a 24.5 square metre portion of their property to an abutting property for the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act and found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality.

The application was granted subject to conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications and the consolidation of the severed land with the abutting property.

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 residential development, retaining the existing dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, and input from City Planning staff regarding a floodplain on the property.

Finding that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposal was consistent with provincial and municipal policies, the Committee granted the provisional consent subject to several conditions, including requirements for groundwater and geotechnical assessments.

The applicant sought minor variances to permit the construction of two semi-detached dwellings with three units per dwelling, requiring reductions in lot width, lot area, rear yard setback, and rear yard area.

The Committee of Adjustment refused the applications, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate the desirability of the proposal, particularly regarding the functionality of parking spaces and egress from the rear yard for refuse containers.

The Committee also found that the requested variances did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, as insufficient evidence was presented to show the proposal represented orderly development compatible with the surrounding area.

The applicants sought consent to sever their property at 1451 Woodward Avenue into two separate parcels to construct a two-storey semi-detached dwelling.

The Committee of Adjustment considered the applications under section 53 of the Planning Act.

After hearing submissions from the applicants' agent and neighbours regarding a shared driveway and trees, the Committee found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in the public interest.

The applications were granted subject to several conditions, including the approval of concurrent minor variance applications, payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland, and the execution of a joint-use and maintenance agreement.

The applicants sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever their agricultural property to create a new lot for a surplus farm dwelling and to establish an easement for access.

The application was unopposed and supported by City planning staff.

The Committee of Adjustment found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in compliance with the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The application was granted subject to several conditions, including road widening conveyances and zoning by-law amendments.

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 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 applicant sought consent under section 53 of the Planning Act to sever a property containing two existing retirement home buildings into two separate parcels, and to establish reciprocal easements for access and servicing.

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

The application was granted subject to conditions, including requirements for servicing plans, grading and drainage plans, and a common element agreement.

The applicant sought a minor variance to permit an increased building footprint for a coach house, converting an existing garage.

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

Finding 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 Committee granted the application.