|
The owners had filed an appeal on the basis that the City had not approved the applications within the timeframes required by the Planning Act. On the eve of the hearing, the City of Vaughan refused the rezoning application despite positive staff recommendations.
Planning evidence in support of the proposal was presented by Alan Young, Weston Consulting. Engineering evidence with respect to the floodplain and municipal servicing was presented by Bill Coffey and David Giugovaz, both of Valdor Engineering. Evidence with respect to the natural heritage characteristics of the property was presented by Rick Hubbard, Savanta Inc. The owners' case was led and argued by Michael Bowman, Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP.
The Board accepted the evidence provided by Alan Young and the City planner, who appeared under summons, that the proposed lots were in conformity with the Official Plan's policies regarding density and neighbourhood character.
The City's planning consultant presented evidence that the proposal should have been considered by way of plan of subdivision rather than consent applications. A subdivision application had, however, never been requested by the City, and the existing lots on Pondview Road had been created by consent applications. The Board found that in the foregoing circumstances it would be unfair to now require the owners to submit a subdivision application.
Based on previous cases relating to engineering standards, the Board found it could not approve the proposed temporary turning circle which had 2-metre boulevards rather than the standard 5.75-metre boulevards. A temporary turning circle had been proposed on the assumption that Pondview Road would ultimately be extended further, consistent with an infill plan adopted by the City three decades previously. However, in refusing the application, City Council also resolved that Pondview Road would never be extended further in the event the appeals were granted.
|
