Barrister & Solicitor | Integrity Commissioner

Menu

Grey/Bruce

  1. Curtis v. Town of The Blue Mountains

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Residential Development, Severances


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    The Applicants applied for and were granted a consent to sever their lands. The proposal was to create a new 576 square metre vacant residential lot with a retained lot of 3,091 square metres. A neighbour appealed the decision on the basis that the consent does not conform to the Town’s Official Plan.


    Held:

    Appeal is dismissed.


    Reasons:

    The Board finds that the evidence supports the granting of a provisional consent, with conditions, for a new lot as requested. The Board finds that the proposal complies with the Town’s Official Plan policies, as laid out in the evidence. The Board finds that the PPS, the County Official Plan and the Town Official Plan all encourage growth in primary settlement areas through intensification and infilling, such as this proposal.


    Document(s):



  2. Heritage Grove Centre Inc. and Villarboit Development Corporation v. City of Owen Sound

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Commercial Development, Official Plan Amendments, Shopping Centre Development, Zoning By-law Amendments


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    In March 2012, Heritage Grove Centre Inc. and Villarboit Development Corporation applied for an amendment to the City’s Zoning By-law 2010-78. The intent was to increase the permitted Gross Floor Area and to relax or eliminate the Gross Floor Area and unit size restrictions, so as to facilitate a new retail development. However, City Council refused the application, with concerns about potential market impact. The Applicants appealed to the Board. However, after a series of pre-hearing conferences, the Applicants and the City agreed on modifications to the application as well as a draft Zoning By-law.


    Held:

    Appeal allowed


    Reasons:

    The parties were able to agree on a new draft Zoning By-law, which formed part of their settlement. The Board also considered the opinion of expert planner Wendy Nott, who stated, “the settlement is appropriate, in conformance with applicable policy, and represents good land-use planning in the public interest.” The Board found no reason to disagree.


    Document(s):



  3. Breadner v. The Town of Blue Mountains

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Aggregate Extraction


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    Application for a Class A License for the removal of aggregate.


    Held:

    License issued upon settlement


    Reasons:

    The parties had reached a settlement. The Board had received revised Site Plans and Site Plan Notes from the parties confirming the settlement has been properly implemented. Therefore, the Board directs the Minister of Natural Resources to issue a Class A, category 3 above the water table license for the property.


    Document(s):



  4. Northridge Homes Ltd. v. Township of Georgian Bluffs

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Plan of Subdivision, Zoning By-law Amendments


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    Appeal to the Board under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from Council’s refusal or neglect to enact a proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 6-2003 of the Township of Georgian Bluffs to rezone lands to permit the development of a subdivision.


    Held:

    Appeal allowed upon settlement


    Reasons:

    The Board finds that based on the uncontested testimony of both planners that the proposed development represents good planning; is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement; conforms to the Official Plan and is in keeping with the pattern of regulations in the zoning By-law the Board will allow the appeals in part and By-law 6-2003 is hereby amended.


    Document(s):



  5. Northridge Home Ltd. v. Township of Georgian Bluffs

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Plan of Subdivision, Residential Development, Zoning By-law Amendments


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    Pre-hearing Conference to deal with procedural matters arising from the Township of Georgian Bluffs Council’s refusal to approve a Zoning By-law Amendment application and draft Plan of Subdivision by Northridge Homes Ltd. for a residential development that is proposed to be on individual septic systems.


    Held:


    Reasons:

    The Parties agreed to approach the Board to explore resolution through mediation. Once this process is completed, the Parties are directed to contact the Board to set a further Pre-hearing Conference to deal with procedural matters and to set a date for the hearing.


    Document(s):



  6. 1066517 Ontario Inc. v. Township of Grey Highlands

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Commercial Development, Official Plan Amendments, Severances, Zoning By-law Amendments


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    The first Pre-hearing Conference to consider procedural matters for the hearing which will deal with appeals filed by 1066517 Ontario Inc. on Council’s refusal to approve its application for Official Plan Amendment, rezoning and consent, seeking to permit a commercial enterprise and other commercial uses at a 1.4 ha parcel.


    Held:

    Hearing is scheduled for future date


    Reasons:


    Document(s):



  7. 1462478 Ontario Inc. and George H. Fleming and Associates Limited v. Town of the Blue Mountains

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Plan of Subdivision, Residential Development, Zoning By-law Amendments


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    Fleming appealed the conditions of draft plan approval regarding plan of subdivision and the Board allowed the appeal. In that decision the Board also allowed the two appeals filed by Fleming and 1462478 Ontario Inc., respectively, regarding the Town’s failure to amend Zoning By-law 83-40. The parties were directed to work together to finalize the remaining planning documents, however have been unable to reach an agreement. The proceeding dealt with: finalization of the Zoning By-law amendment; objections to the revisions made by the Proponents to the site plan drawings; the conditions of site plan approval; and the appropriateness of wording of certain provisions.


    Held:

    Appeals allowed in part and appropriate amendments made


    Reasons:

    The Board allows appeal by 1462478 Ontario Inc. under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, from Council’s refusal or neglect to enact a proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 83-40. The Town Clerk is authorized to assign a by-law number to the amendments made by the Board. The Board also finds that the appeals by 1462478 Ontario Inc. under subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, regarding the determination and settlement of the details of a site plan for the development of the Block 10 lands and for the determination and settlement of the details of a site plan for a proposed temporary on-site sales centre for the lands are allowed in part. The Board further orders, pursuant to section 51(56.1) of the Planning Act, that the County of Grey shall have the authority to clear the conditions of draft plan approval and to administer final approval of the plan of subdivision for the purposes of subsection 51(58) of the Act.


    Document(s):



  8. 1462478 Ontario Inc. and George H. Fleming and Associates Limited v. Town of the Blue Mountains

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    No categories


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:


    Held:


    Reasons:


    Document(s):



  9. 1462478 Ontario Inc. and George H. Fleming and Associates Limited v. Town of the Blue Mountains

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Commercial Development, Development Charges, Plan of Subdivision, Residential Development, Zoning By-law Amendments


    Court:

    Ontario Municipal Board


    Application/issue:

    This case is regarding future developments for a subdivision in the Town of the Blue Mountains. The Board is dealing with the following matters: an appeal of conditions No. 5 and 6 of the conditions of draft plan approval, imposed by the County of Grey; an appeal of the Town’s refusal or neglect to make a decision within 90 days of the application to rezone the eight lots and the hazard area abutting the eight lots; an appeal of the site plan for a temporary on-site sales centre; and appeal of the Town’s refusal or neglect to rezone Block 10; and an appeal of the Town’s failure to approve the site plan for the Block 10 lands.


    Held:

    Appeals allowed in part


    Reasons:

    The Board finds that the subject lands do not constitute development that benefits from the reconstructed road and it is unreasonable for the Town to impose the local service component charge on the subject lands. The Board orders that the owner shall satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Town of the Blue Mountains concerning the provisions of services and drainage for the site. The Board shall allow the two appeals filed by 1462478 Ontario Inc. to determine and settle the details of the site plan for the development of Block 10 and the sales pavilion. However, the Board will withhold its order amending Zoning By-law 83-40 and approving the site plans pending the receipt of revised documentation.


    Document(s):



  10. The Walkerton Inquiry

    Location:

    Grey/Bruce


    Subject:

    Agricultural


    Court:

    No categories


    Application/issue:

    On June 12, 2000, the Government of Ontario, by Order in Council No. 1170/2000, established a Commission to conduct an inquiry into the following matters: (a) the circumstances which cause hundreds of people in the Walkerton area to become ill, and several of them to die, in May and June of 2000, at or around the same time as Escherichia coli bacteria were found to be present in the Town’s water supply; (b) the cause of these events, including the effect, if any, of government policies, procedures and practices; and (c) any other relevant matters that the Commission considers necessary to ensure the safety of Ontario’s drinking water. The Commission received eight application for standing from groups concerned with issues related to farming and agriculture. The Commission concluded that these groups represent a clearly ascertainable interest and perspective in relation to farming and agricultural issues, and that that interest was important to the Commission’s mandate in Part I. The groups agreed to be represented by OFEC, which was granted standing by the Commission for Part I in relation to farming and agricultural issues.
    The Commission has heard that the establishment of a safe a secure municipal water supply is dependent upon a series of elements: a good source, proper treatment, a secure distribution system, diligent monitoring and an effective response to adverse conditions. It is respectfully submitted that the tragic events of the Spring of 2000 in Walkerton resulted from failures or breakdowns in many, if not all, of these elements. While the evidence is overwhelming that the source of E. coli contamination was cattle manure on the fields adjacent to Walkerton’s Well no. 5, the resulting deaths and illness can be attributed to a tragic coincidence of errors, complacency and, perhaps, negligence, extending back some 20 years, in all aspects of the water supply regime in Walkerton. It is the Ontario Farm Environmental Coalition’s basic argument that, while impractical, if not impossible, to identify and eliminate all potential contaminant sources, or impose super-human monitoring, testing and response requirements, its is practical, possible and prudent to require those charged with the delivery of domestic water to adopt a multi-barrier approach to the sourcing and delivery of municipal water. Indeed, it is respectfully submitted that there was agreement amongst all experts that as to the benefit and necessity of such an approach.


    Held:


    Reasons:

    For full report, go to: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/walkerton/part1/ AND http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/walkerton/part2/


    Document(s):