Robert Macfarlane

The appellant appealed a condition of provisional consent granted by the County of Bruce for a lease of greater than 21 years to facilitate a Battery Energy Storage System.

The condition required the appellant to enter into an agreement with the lower-tier municipality if deemed necessary.

The appellant and the municipality reached a settlement to modify the condition to specify exact requirements, including tax payment, entrance permit, site plan approval, and parkland dedication.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the modified conditions were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and had appropriate regard for the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed and provisional consent was granted subject to the modified conditions.

The claimant sought compensation under the Expropriations Act for the expropriation of a portion of its commercial plaza property by Metrolinx for a grade separation project.

The Tribunal determined that the highest and best use of the property was a standalone mixed-use residential redevelopment, rejecting Metrolinx's argument that an assemblage of adjoining properties was required.

The Tribunal awarded $4,570,000 for the market value of the fee simple taking, declining to apply the 'before and after' valuation method under section 14(3) of the Act.

The Tribunal also awarded $50,000 for a temporary easement and $1,321,061 for injurious affection caused by the grade separation and loss of access.

Interest was awarded at 6% from the date Metrolinx acquired legal possession.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision denying a minor variance to increase the permitted lot coverage for an accessory structure from 8% to 11.2%.

The appellant sought to replace an existing temporary structure used for boat storage with a permanent one.

The appellant's planner argued that a variance was not required under the zoning by-law, or alternatively, that the variance met the four tests.

The Tribunal found that a variance was indeed required, but agreed that the application met the four tests under the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed in part and the variance was authorized subject to a condition requiring screening vegetation.