Ryan Doherty

The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding applications for consent, minor variances, and site plan approval to support a multi-phased, mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement prior to the hearing.

The Tribunal authorized the minor variances, finding they met the four tests under the Planning Act, and granted provisional consent subject to conditions.

The site plan appeal was adjourned sine die.

The City of Toronto appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision approving seven variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey detached house at 23 Beechwood Avenue.

The variances related to building length, depth, height, and setbacks.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body dismissed the appeal and confirmed the approval of the variances, finding that they met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's land use planner, concluding that the proposed house would respect and reinforce the physical character of the neighbourhood, which includes large, irregularly shaped ravine lots, and that the variances were minor in nature with little to no negative impact on neighbours.

The applicants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications to permit residential and mixed-use developments with multiple towers.

The parties reached a full uncontested settlement.

Based on the uncontradicted expert land use planning evidence, the Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the Official Plan amendment and approving the Zoning By-law amendment in principle, with the final order withheld pending the fulfillment of certain conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a three-tower mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement, which was endorsed by City Council.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the applicable Official Plans.

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

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's denial of a minor variance to reduce the required percentage of three-bedroom units from 10% to 5% in an eight-storey mixed-use building nearing completion.

The variance was requested because purchasers of five units requested change orders to convert their three-bedroom units to two-bedroom units.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontradicted expert planning evidence that the variance meets the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, noting it maintains the overall requirement for 25% larger family-sized units.

The appeal was allowed and the variance approved.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's decision regarding a minor variance application for an eight-storey mixed-use building.

Following a settlement between the parties, the Tribunal previously approved the variances in principle.

The Tribunal reviewed a revised list of variances based on the City's interpretation of the zoning by-law and, relying on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, found that the amended variances met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

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

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's refusal of a minor variance application and failure to make a decision on a site plan application for an 8-storey mixed-use building.

Prior to the hearing, the appellant reached a settlement with the City and an abutting neighbour.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the settlement proposal was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and Official Plan, and met the four-part test for minor variances under the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, authorizing the variances and approving the site plan in principle, subject to conditions.