Andrew Ferancik

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's denial of consent and minor variance applications to create a three-lot development with one detached and two semi-detached dwellings.

The Tribunal allowed the consent appeals and the minor variance for a reduced rear yard setback in principle, finding they represented appropriate residential intensification consistent with provincial policies.

However, the Tribunal denied the minor variances for increased flat roof height, finding they did not meet the general intent and purpose of the recently enacted zoning by-law.

Calloway REIT brought a motion to dismiss appeals filed by 70 Taunton Storage GP Corporation against an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment that permitted a commercial self-storage facility on Calloway's lands.

The appellant argued the applications failed to provide for intersite connectivity and an easement between their adjacent properties.

The Tribunal found that the appeals did not disclose any genuine land use planning grounds, as a previous Tribunal decision between the same parties had already determined that the issue of an easement and intersite connectivity should be addressed at the Site Plan Approval stage, not the zoning stage.

The motion to dismiss was granted without a hearing, and no costs were awarded.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application to permit a 17-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal, which integrates heritage attributes and provides large family-sized units, represents good planning and is consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

The appeal was allowed in part and the development was approved in principle, with the final order withheld pending the fulfillment of several conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a draft plan of subdivision for a mixed-use waterfront development.

Following mediation and revisions to the draft plan, the parties consented to the approval of the revised plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the revised draft plan of subdivision and associated conditions, save for certain deferred conditions relating to municipal infrastructure, finding the plan consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal to adopt an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 17-storey residential building.

The City argued the proposal exceeded density limits in the North York Centre Secondary Plan, lacked appropriate setbacks, and required the removal of mature trees.

The Tribunal found that the secondary plan's density limits were outdated and that the proposal was consistent with provincial policies encouraging intensification near transit.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence on urban design, transportation, and forestry, concluding the development represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part, approving the amendments subject to finalization of conditions.