Everything on this site is searchable — a file number, a councillor, a motion, a meeting, or an application.
Committee of Adjustment
September 9, 2026
What was decided (6 motions)
6 carried, 0 recorded otherwise. Every motion below is printed as the minutes print it.
THAT minor variance application A18-2026 seeking relief from Section 7.7 Table 7.7.1.9 of Zoning By-law 124-2024 to permit a minimum building height of 8.10 m for a stacked townhouse dwelling s whereas 10.5 m is otherwise the required minimum height BE APPROVED; THAT minor variance application A18-2026 seeking relief from Section 7.7 Table 7.7.1.11 of Zoning By-law 124-2024 to permit a minimum landscaped open space of 25.6% whereas a minimum of 30 % is otherwise required BE APPROVED; THAT the reasons for the approval of the minor variance application are as follows: the proposed variance application is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the relief requested is considered minor in nature, and desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands; and, THAT pursuant to 45(8) – (8.2) of the Planning Act , R.S.O 1990, c.P.13, the following statement SHALL BE INCLUDED in the Notice of Decision: “Regard has been had for all written and oral submissions received from the public before the decision was made in relation to this planning matter, as discussed in Section 5.2 of Report No. 2026-396”.
Moved by Mark Simpson, seconded by Virginia Kershaw
Carried Unanimously
THAT minor variance application A30-2026 seeking relief from Chapter 478 Section 14.6 of the City of Brantford Municipal Code to permit a minimum lot line setback of 6.3 m, whereas a minimum of 9 m is otherwise required BE REFUSED; THAT the reasons for the refusal of the minor variance application are as follows: the proposed variance application is not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Chapter 478 of the Municipal Code (Sign By-law), the relief requested is not considered minor in nature, and is not desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands; and, THAT pursuant to 45(8) – (8.2) of the Planning Act , R.S.O 1990, c.P.13, the following statement SHALL BE INCLUDED in the Notice of Decision: “Regard has been had for all written and oral submissions received from the public before the decision was made in relation to this planning matter, as discussed in Section 5.2 of Report No. 2026-395”.
Moved by Mike Bodnar, seconded by Mark Simpson
Carried Unanimously
THAT minor variance application A32-2026 seeking relief from Section 2.12 b), Zoning By-law 124-2024 to permit an up to 30 m 2 expansion of the existing legal non-conforming triplex in the form of a deck in the rear yard, whereas no enlargement of legal non-conforming uses is otherwise required, BE APPROVED conditional upon the Owner/Applicant providing a Stormwater Management Brief prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Engineering or his/her designate; THAT the reasons for the approval of the minor variance application are as follows: the proposed application is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land, and that the application will not result in undue adverse impacts on surrounding properties. THAT pursuant to 45(8) – (8.2) of the Planning Act , R.S.O 1990, c.P.13, the following statement SHALL BE INCLUDED in the Notice of Decision: “Regard has been had for all written and oral submissions received from the public before the decision was made in relation to this planning matter, as discussed in Section 5.2 of Report No. 2026-393”.
Moved by Virginia Kershaw, seconded by Mark Simpson
Carried Unanimously
THAT minor variance application A34-2026 seeking relief from Table 6.8.9 of the Zoning By-law 124-2024 to permit a side yard of 1.9 m, whereas a minimum of 5.5 m is otherwise required BE APPROVED; THAT minor variance application A34-2026 seeking relief from Table 6.8.11 of the Zoning By-law 124-2024 to permit a common amenity space of 3.5 m 2 per unit, whereas a minimum of 5 m 2 is otherwise required BE APPROVED, conditional upon a minimum landscape open space of 22% being provided; THAT minor variance application A34-2026 seeking relief from Table 5.3.b.3 of the Zoning By-law 124-2024 to permit a parking rate of 0.86 spaces per unit plus 0.10 spaces for visitors, whereas a minimum of 1.0 space per unit plus 0.15 spaces for visitors is otherwise required BE APPROVED; THAT the reasons for the approval of the minor variance application are as follows: the proposed variance application is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the relief requested is considered minor in nature, and desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands; and, THAT pursuant to 45(8) – (8.2) of the Planning Act , R.S.O 1990, c.P.13, the following statement SHALL BE INCLUDED in the Notice of Decision: “Regard has been had for all written and oral submissions received from the public before the decision was made in relation to this planning matter, as discussed in Section 5.2 of Report No. 2026-400”.
Moved by Mike Bodnar, seconded by Ashish Patel
Carried Unanimously
THAT minor variance application A41-2026 seeking relief from Section 5.8 Table 5.8.a.1 to permit a minimum access aisle width of 4.0 m on each lot to access parking spaces on a 90-degree angle, whereas a minimum access aisle width of 6.0 m is otherwise required BE APPROVED; THAT minor variance application A41-2026 seeking relief from Section 6.8 Table 6.8.9 to permit a minimum interior side yard of 4.7 m for non-residential uses, whereas 5.5 m is otherwise required BE APPROVED; THAT the reasons for the approval of the minor variance application are as follows: the proposed variance application is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the relief requested is considered minor in nature, and desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands; and, THAT consent application B17-2026 to sever a parcel of land from 213 King George Road, having a frontage of 8.9 m and an area of 674 m 2 , and convey it to 205 King George Rd, BE APPROVED, subject to the conditions listed in Appendix A of Report No. 2026-397; THAT the reasons for approval of B17-2026 are as follows: the proposed consent has regard for the matters under Section 51(24) of the Planning Act and Staff are satisfied that the proposed development is desirable and compatible with the surrounding area and will not result in adverse impacts on surrounding properties. The application is in conformity with the general intent and policies of the Official Plan and Zoning B
Moved by Mark Simpson, seconded by Ashish Patel
Carried Unanimously
THAT the minutes of the August 5, 2026 Committee of Adjustment meeting BE APPROVED
Moved by Virginia Kershaw, seconded by Mark Simpson