4 total
Appeal of zoning by-law amendment for townhouse development dismissed as proposal represents good planning.
The appellant appealed the City of Kingston's approval of a zoning by-law amendment permitting a 35-unit townhouse development.
The appellant raised concerns regarding density, parking, and exceptions to zoning standards.
The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the by-law is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Official Plan, and represents good land use planning.
The appeal was dismissed.
Tribunal approves settlement amending Kingston's comprehensive zoning by-law to reduce minimum residential densities.
The Kingston Home Builders Association appealed the City of Kingston's Comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 2022-62, specifically challenging minimum density provisions and maximum bedroom limits.
Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement to reduce minimum densities in certain exception zones to better align with the prevailing neighbourhood character and secondary plan permissions.
Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Planning Act, allowed the appeal, and amended the zoning by-law accordingly.
Tribunal orders new Kingston Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law into effect, save for site-specific appeals.
The City of Kingston and the Kingston Home Builders Association brought motions to confirm that Official Plan Amendment No. 82 and Zoning By-law No. 2022-62 came into effect on their respective statutory dates, save for specific provisions and properties subject to site-specific appeals.
The Tribunal accepted the uncontested planning evidence and ordered that the instruments are in full force and effect, with the specified exceptions.
Appeals allowed and provisional consents granted for rural lot creation following settlement between parties.
The applicants appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of two consent applications to create two new rural lots.
Prior to the hearing, the applicants and the municipality reached a settlement.
Based on the uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the revised proposals complied with Minimum Distance Separation formulae, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and met the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, the Tribunal allowed the appeals and granted provisional consents subject to conditions.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.