The Committee of Adjustment heard 11 minor variance applications at this video conference meeting, denying four and approving seven. The committee also noted a procedural change under provincial legislation: “In November 2022, Bill 23 legislation, the More Homes Built Faster Act, amended the Planning Act to remove appeal rights for members of the public,” meaning only applicants, specified persons, or public bodies may appeal Committee of Adjustment decisions to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

Topics Discussed

LOT SUBDIVISION DENIED ON THIRD LINE: The committee unanimously refused a consent application and two related minor variance applications (CAVA 51 and 52 of 2026) for 275 Third Line that would have split one lot into two parcels with reduced frontages. The applicant sought 18.29-metre frontages instead of the required 22.5 metres. Planning staff opposed the proposal, pointing to the established lot fabric created by the subdivision plan and noting that “the wider lot frontages on Third Line form a part of the overall neighborhood character.” During discussion, a committee member remarked, “This is almost half an acre which is a lot of land for just one family,” while the applicant framed the proposal as intensification, arguing: “The most sustainable form of fashion are the clothes already in your closet and that relates to land that is already within our urban area that's underutilized that could be better used for housing.” The committee ultimately denied the consent and both variances.

SHED BUILT WITHOUT PERMIT REJECTED: An application (A047 of 2026) seeking variances to legalize an unpermitted shed at 266 Jennings Crescent was denied. Committee member Mr. Dicki criticized the request in blunt terms: “He made a mistake and now he's coming in only to comply or to get an exception to the zoning bylaw. Plain and simple. And I'm sorry. I just don't like the looks of it.”

MASSING CONCERNS DEFEAT DALEWOOD APPLICATION: The committee denied a variance application for 312 Dalewood Drive after debate over whether the proposal was “minor” and compatible with nearby homes. The applicant team pointed to other large houses in the area—“There's some massive homes… they look a lot bigger than this”—and argued there were comparable examples close by. One speaker cited a nearby reference property: “This house is actually 288 Delwood Drive on the same street… there's only one house separating this one and the subject property.” Planning staff, however, referenced prior committee history on the street, noting: “the abutting dwelling at 320 Dalewood… came into a committee of adjustment hearing on April 19th of 2016… received a positive staff report but was denied by committee.” Committee member Ms. Price moved refusal, stating: “I find the application does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the official plan and zoning bylaw and is not minor in nature and is not desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands.”

PRE-CONSULTATION SERVICE LAUNCHED: The town highlighted its pre-consultation process introduced in early 2025 for minor variance applicants, described as costing roughly $600–$800 and allowing applicants to meet with planning, urban design, zoning, and engineering staff before filing. One applicant described the iterative nature of the process, saying: “We had staff not supporting the application… and seems that we are further apart and we need to do like couple of rounds maybe to obtain the staff blessing.” The committee heard that revisions following pre-consultation helped some applicants reduce variances and secure staff support.

APPROVED APPLICATIONS: The committee approved seven applications for new construction and renovations, with members repeatedly tying approvals to the Planning Act tests and design changes intended to reduce perceived bulk. In one case, architect Carol Jyn told the committee: “The revised design provides a… sideyard setback of 3.78 meters… We also reduce the floor area ratio from 32.6% to 31.9% resulting in a more balanced building form and reduced overall massing.” Another applicant emphasized roofline and grading constraints, explaining: “We're trying to… create an interest from the street and try to maintain that roof line… the way the city calculates the established grade… makes it a little bit more difficult.” In supporting an approval, Ms. Price cited design elements intended to fit the streetscape: “The lowered roof lines, stepbacks from the first to second story and mixture materials… help to maintain and protect the character of the existing neighborhood and do not present unacceptable adverse impacts.”

Motions

Passed: - Motion to deny Consent application B26/6 for 275 Third Line (moved by Ms. Price, passed unanimously) - Motion to deny Minor Variance A051 of 2026 for 275 Third Line (moved by Ms. Price, passed unanimously) - Motion to deny Minor Variance A052 of 2026 for 275 Third Line (moved by Ms. Price, passed unanimously) - Motion to deny Minor Variance A047 of 2026 for 266 Jennings Crescent (moved by Mr. Dicki) - Motion to deny application for 312 Dalewood Drive (moved by Ms. Price) - Motions to approve seven other minor variance applications (including revised applications following pre-consultation), with conditions where applicable

Deferred: - Application CAVA 65 of 2026 for 384 Wadsworth Street (deferred at applicant’s request due to lack of staff support)

Attendees

• Chair (name not specified)
• Sher McCale (absent with regrets)
• Mr. Dicki (committee member)
• Ms./Miss Price (committee member)
• Planning staff including Mr. O’Hare