Michael Testaguzza

The applicant appealed the City of Pickering's failure to adopt an official plan amendment and neglect to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment to facilitate a high-density, mixed-use residential development.

The appeals were heard together with appeals of the City's proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 38.

The parties reached a settlement and presented a revised development proposal, which included increased commercial space, an elementary school, a daycare, and 100 affordable units.

Based on the uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposed amendments were consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed with the applicable official plans, and represented good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part to implement the settlement.

The Tribunal held a written hearing to consider a settlement proposal regarding appeals of the City of Pickering's failure to adopt an official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment for a high-density, mixed-use residential development.

Based on the uncontroverted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised settlement proposal, which includes affordable housing, commercial space, and parkland, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the applicable official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and approved the official plan and zoning by-law amendments.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications to permit an 11-storey mixed-use building and a 4-storey residential building.

Following revisions, the parties reached a settlement proposing an 11-storey building and a 3-storey building connected by a shared underground garage.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested planning evidence that the revised proposal supports residential intensification, provides appropriate transition to adjacent neighbourhoods, and is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement.

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

The appellant appealed the City of Markham's refusal of official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications to facilitate a mixed-use high-rise development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement on a revised proposal for two towers of 36 and 41 storeys.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised instruments consistent with provincial policy and in conformity with applicable official plans.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with final orders withheld pending the submission of final instruments and a Transportation Demand Management agreement.

The applicant appealed the City of Richmond Hill's failure to make a decision on site-specific Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement for a revised 10-storey midrise building with residential and retail uses.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised development constitutes good planning, conforms to provincial and municipal policies, and represents an efficient use of land.

The appeals were allowed in part on an interim basis, with final approval withheld pending the submission of final instruments and site plan approval.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the City of Kawartha Lakes 2012 Official Plan (OPAs 13-18).

The City brought a motion for partial approval (Draft Order 3) to resolve numerous Phase 2 issues based on an Agreed Statement of Facts by land use planning experts, which the Tribunal approved.

The Tribunal also considered Draft Order 4 to implement Minutes of Settlement regarding settlement boundaries.

Fenelon Trails requested a deferral of the Fenelon Falls urban boundary approval, arguing it would restrict growth.

The Tribunal denied the deferral request, noting Fenelon Trails was a non-appellant party sheltering under another appeal that had settled, and approved Draft Orders 3 and 4 to implement the settlement and boundary adjustments.