3 total
Excavation and shoring permit constitutes a building permit, precluding application of Bill 23 parkland fee reductions.
The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's calculation of a cash-in-lieu of parkland fee, arguing that the fee should be reduced under the new provisions of Bill 23.
The central issue was whether an excavation and shoring permit issued prior to Bill 23's in-force date constituted a 'building permit' under the Planning Act and Building Code Act.
The Tribunal applied principles of statutory interpretation and accepted expert evidence that the excavation and shoring permit was indeed a building permit.
Consequently, the Tribunal found that the Bill 23 changes did not apply to the development and dismissed the appeal, upholding the original fee calculation.
Tribunal issues procedural order and schedules hearing for parkland dedication cash-in-lieu appeal.
The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's decision regarding the cash-in-lieu fee contribution for parkland under section 42(10) of the Planning Act.
At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal noted that no requests for party or participant status were received.
The parties presented a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, which were finalized with the Tribunal's assistance.
The Tribunal scheduled a two-day video hearing to resolve the appeal.
Amended minor variances for front yard accessory building and lot coverage authorized on consent.
The applicants appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances to permit an accessory building in the front yard and exceeding lot coverage limits.
Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement based on a corrected, reduced building size calculation.
The Tribunal found the amended application minor under s. 45(18.1) of the Planning Act and authorized the variances, finding they met the four tests under s. 45(1).
