Home / The Four Tests
Every minor variance must satisfy all four tests under Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. Failing any one of them is grounds for refusal. Here is what each test actually asks.
A Committee of Adjustment does not grant a minor variance because the request seems reasonable or because the neighbours do not object. It grants one because the application satisfies four specific tests set out in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act.
All four must be met. A request can be modest in size and still fail, most often because it does not maintain the general intent of the zoning by-law or the Official Plan. This is why the size of the variance and whether it is legally minor are not the same question.
The first test asks whether the requested relief is minor. Importantly, minor is not purely a matter of numbers. A small numerical departure can be judged not minor if its impact is significant, and a larger departure can be minor if its impact is negligible.
What the Committee is really assessing is impact: on light, privacy, overlook, drainage, and the character of the surrounding area. A two-storey addition that shadows a neighbour's yard may be treated as more significant than a larger encroachment on a deep lot with no adjacent effect.
The second test asks whether the variance is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building, or structure. This is a question about whether the proposal represents a sensible use of the site.
A variance that lets a lot be used efficiently, that resolves an awkward existing condition, or that produces a better built result than strict compliance would tends to satisfy this test. One that exists only to extract more floor area with no corresponding benefit is harder to justify.
The third test asks whether the general intent and purpose of the zoning by-law are maintained. Every zoning standard exists for a reason: setbacks manage separation and privacy, height limits manage scale and shadow, coverage limits manage massing and drainage.
The question is not whether you meet the number. You do not, which is why you are applying. The question is whether the purpose behind the number is still served despite the departure. Identifying that purpose and showing it is preserved is the core of the planning argument.
The fourth test applies the same logic one level up, to the Official Plan. The Official Plan sets the policy direction for the area: the designation, the intended character, the density, and the growth objectives.
A variance that is consistent with what the Official Plan envisions for the area will generally satisfy this test. Where a proposal runs against the policy direction rather than a numeric standard, that is often a signal the project needs a rezoning or an Official Plan Amendment rather than a variance.
A strong minor variance application addresses each of the four tests directly and in order, rather than leaving the Committee to infer the answers. It identifies the purpose behind each standard being varied and explains why that purpose still holds.
It is also where applications most often fall down. A request that is small but poorly justified can be refused, while a larger request that is well argued against the four tests can succeed. The evidence matters more than the number.
See the full pricing schedule or the Minor Variance page.
Related guides: What a minor variance costs · How the Committee works
Related guides: How long a minor variance takes · Minor variance vs rezoning
FAQ
Tell us your address and what you want to build. We will tell you honestly whether your proposal can meet the four tests, and give you a fixed fee. No commitment, no hourly clock.
Get a Quote No initial fees or commitment