Jennie Kapusta

The applicant appealed the Township's refusal of a minor variance application seeking retroactive approval for an oversized viewing deck and storage shed built within the required shoreline setbacks of Long Lake.

The applicant argued the oversized deck was necessary for a family member's accessibility needs.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the variances failed the four-part test under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal preferred the Township's expert evidence that the structures posed ecological risks, circumvented proactive buffer policies, and represented overdevelopment of the shoreline inconsistent with the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The appellant appealed the Township's Committee of Adjustment decision denying a minor variance to reduce the minimum separation distance between a residential dwelling and an adjacent gravel pit from 70 metres to 12.2 metres.

The Tribunal found that the appellant failed to provide sufficient environmental assessment testing to demonstrate that the variance would not result in adverse impacts.

Relying on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence of the Township, the Tribunal concluded the variance was inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and failed the four tests under the Planning Act.

The appeal was dismissed.