Gerry Tchisler

The appellant appealed a decision by the Town of Milton's Committee of Adjustment refusing a minor variance to reduce the minimum office component from 10% to 5% for two industrial buildings.

The Tribunal found that the variance met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting that the reduction allows for market condition-driven flexibility without impacting the built form.

The appeal was allowed and the variance was authorized.

The applicant appealed the City of Burlington's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications to permit a high-rise residential development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised proposal consisting of 22-storey and 17-storey towers connected by a 6-storey podium.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the settlement proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans, and represents good land use planning.

The appeals were allowed in part, with the final order withheld pending the satisfaction of conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision for a complete community development.

Following a settlement on the instruments in a prior phase, this hearing addressed the remaining contested Draft Plan conditions and Subdivision Agreement provisions.

The parties reached a full settlement during the hearing.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning and engineering evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed conditions met the criteria under s. 51(24) and s. 51(25) of the Planning Act, represented good planning, and were in the public interest.

The Tribunal approved the Draft Plan subject to the agreed conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendments, and a Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a mixed-use complete community.

Prior to the hearing, the applicant reached settlements with the City and the Niagara Escarpment Commission, resolving concerns regarding density, visual impacts on the escarpment, and the relocation of an isolated wetland.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested planning evidence that the revised instruments were consistent with provincial policies and conformed to applicable plans, allowing the appeals and approving the instruments.

The applicant appealed the Town of Fort Erie's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit a self-storage facility.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal heard uncontested expert planning evidence that the proposed development on vacant lands within an existing urban area promotes efficient land use and conforms to provincial and municipal planning policies.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals and approved the amendments, finding the proposal represents good planning and is in the public interest.