3 total
Consent to sever property for a new residential lot granted based on parties' settlement.
The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent application to sever a property to create a new residential lot.
Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement and the Committee of Adjustment conditionally approved a related minor variance.
Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that a plan of subdivision was not necessary and that the proposed consent was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the applicable Official Plans, and represented good planning.
The appeal was allowed and provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.
Appeal allowed; consent and minor variances granted for lot line adjustment on temple lands.
The applicant appealed the City of Brampton Committee of Adjustment's refusal of applications for provisional consent and minor variances to effect a lot line adjustment and access easement for lands containing a heritage-designated Hindu temple.
The Shree Jagannath Temple Canada, which occupies the temple, opposed the application, arguing it would negatively impact parking and future expansion.
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the proposed lot size would provide adequate parking and allow the temple to continue its current operations.
The Tribunal concluded that the consent satisfied the criteria under s. 51(24) of the Planning Act and the variances met the four tests under s. 45(1).
Minor variance for transportation depot in agricultural zone denied for failing all four Planning Act tests.
The applicants appealed the Town of Caledon's refusal of a minor variance application to permit a 'transportation depot' for a stretch limousine service on a property designated as prime agricultural.
The applicants argued the use was akin to a home occupation and would not negatively impact the area.
The Town maintained that a transportation depot is an industrial/commercial use not permitted in agricultural zones and differs substantially from a home occupation.
The Tribunal agreed with the Town, finding that the variance failed all four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, as it would effectively rezone the property to general industrial.
The appeal was dismissed.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.