Clare Riepma

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon Committee of Adjustment's denial of a minor variance to permit the construction of a single-detached dwelling on a property zoned for an accessory dwelling.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement agreement supporting the variance subject to conditions.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposal met the four tests for a minor variance under the Planning Act and authorized the variance subject to the agreed-upon conditions.

Following a 20-day hearing where the Applicants successfully obtained a determination under the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, both parties applied for costs.

The Applicants claimed over $1.2 million, alleging the Respondent acted in bad faith, including failing to disclose the sale of the digester operation.

The Respondent claimed up to $44,880, alleging the Applicants engaged in unreasonable conduct and caused unnecessary delays.

The Board found that while the Respondent acted in bad faith by failing to disclose the sale, the Applicants' counsel also acted unreasonably by showing a lack of respect, failing to comply with directions, and prolonging the hearing.

Concluding that neither party came with clean hands, the Board exercised its discretion to award no costs to either party.

The applicants, neighbours of a greenhouse operation, applied to the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board complaining of severe odour and fly disturbances caused by an anaerobic digester on the respondent's property.

The Board found that the applicants were directly affected by the disturbances and that the digester operation fundamentally changed the character of the rural neighbourhood.

Applying the test from Pyke v. Tri Gro Enterprises Ltd., the Board concluded that the digester was not a normal farm practice in these circumstances.

The Board ordered the respondent to cease the digester operation and decommission the facility.

The appellant appealed the Niagara Escarpment Commission's conditional approval of a development permit allowing the applicant to convert the upper floor of an existing barn into a commercial rental facility for weekend weddings.

The central issue was whether the proposed wedding barn constituted an 'on-farm diversified use' (OFDU) under the new Niagara Escarpment Plan.

The Hearing Panel found that the proposed development, limited to 30 events annually with a maximum of 175 guests, was secondary to the principal agricultural use of the property, compatible with the rural character of the area, and met all applicable development criteria.

The appeal was dismissed and the Commission's decision was confirmed.