Al Shaw

The applicants appealed the Township's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a boathouse expansion and new dock.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on uncontradicted expert evidence in land use planning, aviation, and ecology, the Tribunal found that the proposed development is consistent with provincial policies, avoids critical fish habitat, and does not negatively impact the adjacent aerodrome.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part to implement the settlement.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding appeals by the appellants concerning the respondent's Community Planning Permit By-law, Development Permit By-law, and a Draft Plan of Subdivision.

Based on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposed amendments and redline revisions represented good planning and were consistent with the applicable planning regime.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the amended planning instruments and delegating final approval authority to the District Municipality of Muskoka.

The appellant appealed the City's failure to adopt an official plan amendment to establish a secondary plan for a large master-planned community.

All parties except one landowner reached a settlement.

The opposing landowner argued the plan did not conform to the Greenbelt Plan due to proposed collector roads crossing the Greenbelt, and sought to have its lands excluded.

The Tribunal found that the approved Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) established conformity with the Greenbelt Plan and that the Tribunal should rely on it.

The Tribunal also found no planning basis to exclude the opposing landowner's lands from the comprehensive secondary plan.

The appeal was allowed in part to approve the settlement plan in principle.

The applicant appealed the failure of the Township of Lake of Bays, the Town of Huntsville, and the District of Muskoka to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendments, and a draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a 32-lot seasonal residential development on Langmaid's Island.

The Tribunal found that the proposed development, supported by extensive environmental, cultural heritage, visual impact, and engineering studies, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conformed to the applicable Official Plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the planning instruments subject to conditions, including the protection of natural heritage features through conservation easements and the refinement of mainland parking and access facilities.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application.

The appellant sought to rezone a vacant waterfront lot to permit a dock and walkway as the principal use, allowing the appellant to access their backland parcel across the road by boat.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Official Plan and Development Permit By-law do not contemplate a dock as a principal use, but rather as an accessory use.

The Tribunal held that creating a standalone property with a dock as the principal use without tying it to a specific residential property would fail to control the intensity of use and did not represent good planning.