Marc Daigneault

The applicant appealed a non-decision regarding a consent application for a lot enlargement, arguing that her property consisted of two separate existing lots of record that predated subdivision control.

In the alternative, she sought a consent to sever the property into two lots.

The Tribunal found that the property was a single lot for the purposes of the Planning Act, as an attempted severance in 1970 was abortive and failed to create legally conveyable lots.

The Tribunal also dismissed the alternative severance application, finding that the creation of a new residential lot in the Agricultural Resource Policy Area on a private road did not conform to the upper-tier municipality's Official Plan.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision approving a consent to sever a rural property to create a new residential lot.

The appellant argued the proposed severed and retained lots, each with 75-metre frontages, failed to meet the 100-metre minimum lot frontage requirement for Minor Collector roads under the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

The Tribunal agreed, finding the application did not conform to the Official Plan or Zoning By-law, was inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement regarding the protection of transportation corridors, and did not represent good land use planning.

The appeal was allowed and provisional consent was refused.