Jason Afonso

The appellants appealed the City of Vaughan's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 10-storey residential apartment building.

The City argued the proposal represented overdevelopment and lacked appropriate transition.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the appellants' experts, finding the proposal represented appropriate intensification within a Protected Major Transit Station Area, provided a suitable transition to the adjacent low-rise neighbourhood, and conformed to the applicable provincial and municipal planning frameworks.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, pending finalization of the instruments and a holding provision for servicing capacity.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontroverted land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part on an interim basis, approving the settlement instruments in principle, and withheld its final order pending the withdrawal of a related Ministry appeal.

The applicant appealed the Town of Caledon's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate a residential development.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development consistent with provincial policies and good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the settlement instruments in principle on an interim basis, withholding its final order pending the withdrawal of a related Ministry appeal.

The applicant appealed the City of Brampton's failure to make decisions on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on the uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed instruments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the applicable Growth Plan and Official Plans, and represented good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the settlement.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a 67-unit single-detached residential development on a former golf course.

Following a previous Tribunal decision allowing the appeals, the parties agreed to a revised draft plan that eliminated a cul-de-sac, improved road connectivity, and provided additional parkland.

The Tribunal found the revised plan and zoning by-law amendment conformed to the approved Official Plan Amendment, satisfied the criteria under section 51(24) of the Planning Act, and represented good planning.

The appeal was allowed in part to approve the revised instruments.