Mike Crough

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment to permit a kennel as a home industry in an existing agricultural barn to house 13 personal dogs.

The Tribunal found that while the proposed use was generally consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement as an 'other rural land use', it did not conform to the County Official Plan due to the barn's proximity to a neighbouring residence and the potential for adverse noise impacts.

Furthermore, the proposal was not consistent with the intent of the Township's Zoning By-law, which explicitly prohibits kennels and defines them as commercial enterprises.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellants appealed the new Official Plan for the Township of Clearview.

The parties reached a settlement narrowing the scope of the appeal to a site-specific Official Plan Amendment redesignating portions of the subject lands from Residential to Commercial.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the amendment consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and in conformity with the applicable official plans.

The appeal was allowed in part to implement the settlement.

The appellant appealed the City of Hamilton's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 69 and Zoning By-law Amendment No. 17-240.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement to implement a site-specific zoning by-law amendment for the subject property, converting the proceeding to a settlement hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed amendment was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and the Urban Hamilton Official Plan, and represented good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, withholding its final order until the related Official Plan Amendment is approved by the City.

The appellant appealed the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 337-unit park model trailer site.

The parties reached a settlement.

The appellant withdrew its appeal regarding the Official Plan Amendment, bringing it into force.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding the Zoning By-law Amendment in part, approving the revised by-law on consent of the parties based on uncontested expert planning evidence.

The appellant appealed the County's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment that would permit a 337-unit seasonal park model trailer site on a 38.6-hectare parcel along Lake Ontario.

During the hearing, the parties reached a settlement that modified the original applications to address concerns regarding seasonal occupancy, wildlife corridors, landscape details, and transportation.

The Tribunal approved the settlement in principle, finding it consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Planning Act, and withheld its final order pending the satisfaction of agreed-upon conditions.

McDonald's sought to declare North Elgin Centre Inc. (NEC) in contempt of a prior court order requiring NEC to provide "all reasonable cooperation" to obtain Planning Act consent for a renewed lease.

NEC filed a report with the Town's Committee of Adjustment proposing conditions for consent approval, which McDonald's argued was a breach.

NEC also brought a cross-motion for declaratory relief and directions.

The court dismissed McDonald's contempt motion, finding that NEC's report, including its proposed conditions, reflected legitimate concerns as the property owner and did not constitute a failure to provide "all reasonable cooperation." NEC's cross-motion was also dismissed as unnecessary given the contempt motion's dismissal, and because a single judge could not vary a panel order.