Mark Condello

The appellant appealed the City of Brampton's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment that facilitated a mixed-use residential development.

Following Tribunal-led mediation, the parties reached a settlement that included modifications to the development's design to address land use compatibility and noise concerns from an adjacent industrial facility.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested planning evidence that the revised proposal represents appropriate intensification, incorporates necessary mitigation measures, and is consistent with provincial and municipal planning policies.

The appeals were allowed in part to approve the revised planning instruments.

The applicants appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to adopt requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit nine detached dwellings along a common element condominium road.

The parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontradicted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with applicable official plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed in part to implement the agreed-upon amendments.

The appellant appealed the Town of Grimsby Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances to permit the development of a two-storey single detached dwelling.

The requested variances sought relief for reduced side yard setbacks and increased lot coverage.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested expert planning evidence that the variances met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Growth Plan.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized subject to tree preservation conditions.

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's denial of a minor variance application to facilitate a 7-unit multiple dwelling building.

The applicant sought variances for lot frontage, internal private roadway width, parking ratio, and landscape buffer widths.

The Tribunal heard uncontroverted expert planning and transportation evidence supporting the variances, which was corroborated by the municipal planning staff report.

The Tribunal found that the variances met the four tests under the Planning Act, being consistent with provincial policies, maintaining the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and being desirable and minor in nature.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were authorized subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed the City of Hamilton's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential redevelopment consisting of single detached dwellings, street townhouses, and condominium townhouses.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

Based on the uncontroverted land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and local official plans, and representative of good planning.

The appeals were allowed and the instruments approved subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the Town of Halton Hills' refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a townhouse development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement for a revised 9-unit development.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan and Regional Official Plan, and represents good planning.

The appeals were allowed and the amendments were approved.