Stephen Dykstra

The appellant appealed the Township's Committee of Adjustment decision denying consent and minor variance applications to permit the severance of a property into four lots for 16 residential units (four fourplexes).

The Township opposed the development, arguing it represented overdevelopment and required a 3-metre road widening conveyance.

The Tribunal preferred the appellant's expert evidence, finding the road widening request unreasonable and concluding the proposed infill development was transit-supportive, met the four tests for minor variances, and satisfied the consent criteria under the Planning Act.

The appeals were allowed, variances authorized, and provisional consent granted.

The appellants appealed the City of Brampton's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment that permitted a 360-unit residential subdivision on a 19.99-hectare infill site.

The appellants, representing residents of surrounding upscale executive housing neighborhoods, argued the proposed inclusion of townhouses and smaller lots was incompatible with the area's character and would cause traffic congestion.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, accepting the expert planning, urban design, and traffic evidence of the City and the developer.

The Tribunal found that the proposal represented a modernized form of executive housing that complied with provincial intensification policies while remaining compatible with the existing communities.