Elizabeth Howson

The applicants appealed the Town of Oakville's failure to make decisions on their respective applications for Official Plan Amendments, Zoning By-law Amendments, and Draft Plans of Subdivision to permit residential developments.

Prior to the hearing, both applicants reached settlements with the Town.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing and, based on uncontested expert planning evidence, found that the proposed developments have regard for matters of provincial interest, are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conform to the applicable growth and official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the planning instruments to implement the settlements.

The appellant appealed the Town of Halton Hills' comprehensive Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment 7 (Georgetown GO Station Area Secondary Plan) as they applied to their property.

The appellant sought to retain the previous zoning to permit a residential apartment building.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the site was not needed for intensification to meet the Secondary Plan's goals, and that without a specific development proposal, compatibility with the adjacent low-density neighbourhood could not be adequately assessed.

The Tribunal also found that any alleged downzoning was justified by the public interest in comprehensive planning.

The appellant appealed a zoning by-law amendment passed by the Township of Uxbridge that permitted the development of seven single-detached dwellings on private services within a rural hamlet.

The appellant raised concerns regarding lot sizes, environmental impacts, and regional planning policies.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the development was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conformed to applicable provincial, regional, and local plans.

The appeal was allowed in part only to make a minor correction to the Holding provision schedule, and was otherwise dismissed.

The appellants appealed the Township's passing of a site-specific zoning by-law amendment intended to facilitate the construction of a grain milling, seed-cleaning, and blending facility on prime agricultural land.

The appellants argued that the proposed use was industrial and did not conform to the applicable official plans or constitute an agriculture-related use under the Provincial Policy Statement.

The Tribunal found that the official plans, as amended by site-specific amendments passed after the by-law, applied to the analysis and that the Clergy principle did not operate to restrict the Tribunal to former policies.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposed facility constituted an agriculture-related use, conformed to the amended official plans, and was consistent with provincial policies.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant requested final approval of an amended Plan of Subdivision and modified Draft Plan Conditions following a prior Tribunal decision.

The modifications were sought to implement changes resulting from Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks permit requirements and technical reviews, improving stormwater management and heritage protection.

Based on uncontested planning evidence, the Tribunal found the changes to be minor, consistent with Provincial Policy, and representative of good planning.

The Tribunal approved the modified Draft Plan and Conditions.