Brian Treble

The appellant appealed the refusal of a minor variance application by the Township's Committee of Adjustment.

The application sought variances to permit a gas station and convenience store on a uniquely shaped property.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal heard uncontested land use planning evidence supporting the settlement.

The Tribunal found that the requested variances met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, as they were minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and maintained the general intent of the official plan and zoning by-law.

The appeal was allowed in part to authorize the variances subject to conditions, including site plan approval to address noise, traffic, and lighting concerns.

The appellant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's denial of a minor variance application seeking to reduce the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) setbacks from nearby livestock facilities to permit the construction of a residential dwelling.

Prior to the hearing, the municipality revised its position to support a partial reduction in the setbacks, while the appellant sought further reductions to maximize the buildable area.

The Tribunal authorized the municipality's proposed variances, finding they represented a balanced approach that provided a reasonable development opportunity while protecting agricultural resources and minimizing impacts on the adjacent farm.

The appellant's requested further reductions were denied as they failed to have appropriate regard for the MDS Guidelines and the public interest.

The appellant appealed the municipality's enactment of a zoning by-law that updated the definition of 'Dwelling, Townhouse'.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that included a new definition and site-specific exceptions for the appellant's lands.

Based on uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with provincial policy and local official plans.

The appeal was allowed in part to amend the by-law in accordance with the settlement.