Municipal law-Zoning - Legal non-conforming use - Change in use - Test-Property owner acquired land from province subject to condition that land was to be used as municipal park - Municipality passed zoning by-law which zoned entirety of property as open space with specific residential and non-residential uses - By-law was later replaced with by-law which only permitted "existing non-residential uses" in western part of property and residential or "marine facility" uses in eastern part - Owner brought application seeking declaration that its use of property for aggregate extraction was permitted use - Application dismissed - Owner appealed - Appeal dismissed - Application judge did not err in concluding that extraction operation was not permitted use under municipality's zoning by-law and was not legal non-conforming use under Planning Act - There was evidence that once property was no longer used as park, owner may have expressed desire to conduct aggregate extraction - To prove legal non-conforming use, it must be shown that land was actually used for this purpose, intended use of property was not what was important - Until current extraction activity, any aggregate extraction that had occurred on property was minor and incidental, being ancillary to essential character of property as municipal park and campground - Expansion from incidental extraction for municipal purposes to large-scale commercial extraction had altered character of use such that it became different use altogether.
展开▼
