Ron Davidson

The appellant appealed the Town's refusal of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment, and the County's failure to make a decision on a Draft Plan of Subdivision, to permit a residential development including detached dwellings and apartment blocks.

The Tribunal found that while the proposed density was appropriate and the environmental features were generally adequately protected, the proposal failed to conform to the County Official Plan's mandatory 30-metre setback from a cold-water stream.

As no application to amend the County Official Plan was before the Tribunal, the appeals were dismissed.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding three related appeals concerning commercial and residential developments in the City of Owen Sound.

The appeals involved two zoning by-law amendments to permit mixed-use and commercial buildings, including a grocery store, and a consent application for an access easement.

Based on uncontested expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposals consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the settlement agreements.

The appellant appealed the municipality's approval of a zoning by-law amendment that increased the maximum lot coverage for a waterfront property to facilitate the construction of a new single detached dwelling.

The appellant argued the development was out of character, would unacceptably impact views of the lake, lacked sufficient environmental studies, and failed to meet setback requirements.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in part, preferring the evidence of the respondents' planning experts.

The Tribunal found the proposed development was compatible with the area, would not have an unacceptable visual impact, and that environmental impacts would be negligible.

The Tribunal approved a revised zoning by-law amendment proposed by the applicants that slightly reduced the requested lot coverage and added specific height and setback restrictions.

The appellants appealed the Township's approval of a Zoning By-law Amendment intended to facilitate the severance of three residential lots.

The amendment rezoned a portion of the subject property to permit residential development while expanding the Environmental Protection zone to protect natural heritage features.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the Niagara Escarpment Plan, Grey County Official Plan, and Township Official Plan.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the Town of Mono's refusal to enact an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a Class "A" Category 3 aggregate extraction pit.

The applicant also sought a licence under the Aggregate Resources Act, which was referred to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal heard extensive expert evidence on geology, hydrogeology, natural heritage, noise, traffic, dust, agriculture, visual impacts, and land use planning.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts, finding that the proposed pit would not cause unacceptable adverse impacts and that appropriate mitigation measures were established.

The Tribunal found the applications consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The appeals were allowed in part, approving the amendments and directing the issuance of the licence subject to the execution of a development agreement and finalization of site plans.