Miles Weekes

The Appellant appealed the County of Renfrew's failure to make a decision on a proposed draft plan of subdivision for 26 waterfront residential lots.

The primary issue was the adequacy and required upgrade standards for a private access road (Pasco Road) located on an unopened road allowance shared by two adjacent townships.

The Tribunal found that because the two townships could not agree on the standard to which the access road should be upgraded, the application failed to satisfy section 51(24)(e) of the Planning Act.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined the proposed subdivision was premature and dismissed the appeal.

The appellants appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing four minor variances required to construct a two-storey detached garage on their waterfront property.

The variances sought relief for slope setback, lot coverage, front lot line setback, and building height.

The municipality only opposed the height variance.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal and authorized all four variances, finding that they met the four tests under subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the appellants' planner, concluding that the proposed garage would not negatively impact the natural landscape or create adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

The applicant appealed the City of Kingston Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application to convert an existing detached garage into an additional residential unit.

The proposal required variances for parking, walkway access, interior setback, lot coverage, and fencing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence and minutes of settlement with the City, the Tribunal found the variances satisfied the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement for a reduced density of six single-detached dwellings, eliminating the need for the Official Plan Amendment.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal approved the Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision, finding they represent good planning, are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conform to applicable official plans.