3 total
Zoning by-law amendment appeal allowed in part to permit residential apartment with site-specific limits.
The appellant appealed the municipality's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a four-storey residential apartment.
A neighbouring property owner was granted party status and opposed the development, citing concerns about density, scale, and neighbourhood compatibility.
The Tribunal preferred the planning evidence of the appellant, finding that the proposed development was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2024 and conformed to the applicable Official Plans.
The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, directing the municipality to amend the zoning by-law with site-specific requirements limiting the maximum height to 14 metres and maximum density to 70 units per gross hectare.
Minor variances for lot coverage and side yard setback authorized for residential patio and shed additions.
The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing minor variances for increased lot coverage and reduced side yard setback to permit a covered patio and pool shed constructed without a building permit.
The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the additions maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, were desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and were minor in nature.
The Tribunal authorized the variances, noting they did not create adverse impacts on the neighbourhood or adjacent properties.
Gaming supplier registration refused due to principal's history of regulatory infractions and non-disclosure.
The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposed Order by the Registrar to refuse its registration as a gaming supplier.
The Registrar based its refusal on the past conduct of the appellant's principal, which included multiple infractions of the OLG Lottery Retailer Manual, convictions under the Smoke Free Ontario Act, and a failure to disclose these infractions and past criminal charges on the application.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the principal's repeated failure to comply with industry-specific rules and his lack of candour demonstrated a pattern of non-compliance.
The Tribunal concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe the appellant would not act with honesty, integrity, or in accordance with the law, and directed the Registrar to refuse the registration.
