H Savinsky

The applicant requested a review of a TLAB decision that dismissed an appeal regarding applications for consent to sever and associated minor variances.

The applicant argued the presiding Member made errors of law and fact by preferring the non-expert evidence of a lay witness over that of a qualified land use planner regarding the delineation of the geographic neighbourhood and the assessment of Floor Space Index.

The TLAB Chair dismissed the review request, finding that the presiding Member properly exercised his discretion in weighing the evidence and that no compelling reasons were provided to demonstrate an error of law or fact that would have resulted in a different decision.

The appellant sought to sever a lot into two and requested associated minor variances to construct two detached homes.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body dismissed the appeal, finding that the proposed development did not respect and reinforce the physical character of the immediate neighbourhood, which predominantly featured larger lots and lower densities.

Furthermore, the tribunal found that the development would result in the loss of mature trees and a decrease in tree canopy coverage, failing to maintain the tree preservation policies of the Official Plan.