Deepak Bhatt

The appellant appealed the City of Pickering's Official Plan Amendment 40 and several Zoning By-law Amendments aimed at managing infill and replacement housing in established neighbourhoods.

The appellant argued the instruments were improperly prescriptive, constituted inappropriate downzoning, and failed to conform to provincial and regional planning policies.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the instruments were not improperly prescriptive, the design guidelines were non-statutory, and the new performance standards struck an appropriate balance between public benefit and private interests.

The Tribunal concluded the instruments met all legislative tests and constituted good land use planning.

The applicant appealed the City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment's decision to deny a consent to sever and minor variances for a property to allow the construction of two detached dwellings.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's planner, finding that the proposed development represents appropriate infill and minor intensification that utilizes existing infrastructure.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting provisional consent and authorizing the minor variances subject to conditions.

The applicant sought provisional consent to sever a residential lot and minor variances for reduced lot frontages to construct two new dwellings.

The Town's Committee of Adjustment denied the variances, and the Region's Land Division Committee approved the consent.

The applicant appealed the variance refusals, and a neighbour appealed the consent approval.

The Tribunal found that the proposed development was compatible with the diverse neighbourhood, met the four tests for minor variances under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, and satisfied the criteria for consent under s. 51(24).

The neighbour's appeal was dismissed, and the applicant's appeals were allowed.