Based on our review of the record, the land use planner's evidence is not sufficient to establish a clear breach of the Fence By-law. As a starting point, the planner did not explain the basis for his opinion concerning the intent of the original subdivision plan relative to the Fence By-law. Nor does his opinion refer to Wheeler v. Syrowik, 2017 ONSC 2901, 67 M.P.L.R. (5th) 43 (Div. Ct.), a decision addressing the appellants' property, but which described the northern boundary of the respondents' land as a side lot line – apparently premised on an interpretation of the Zoning By-law proffered by the planner and accepted by the Chief Building Official.[3]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.