Katherine Hughes

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's appeal of a zoning by-law amendment without a hearing.

The appellant had not appealed the related official plan amendment, which had come into force and permitted the height and density reflected in the zoning by-law amendment.

The Tribunal found that the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success because the zoning by-law amendment must conform to the in-force official plan, and the appellant's concerns regarding off-site environmental remediation were beyond the scope of the site-specific zoning by-law amendment.

The motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the City of Kitchener's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a 13 and 16-storey mixed-use building on lands designated Arterial Commercial.

The City and Region opposed the development, arguing it was incompatible with the planned function of the area and lacked adequate pedestrian and transit infrastructure.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's expert evidence, finding that the proposed infill intensification was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and applicable Official Plans, and represented good land use planning.

The appeals were allowed and the amendments were approved.

The appellant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's approval of minor variances to permit a 10-storey residential building with 98 units.

The variances sought relief for building height, parking rates, and corner visibility triangles.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and authorized the variances, finding that the proposed transit-supportive development was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan, and met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The applicants appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing a consent to sever a residential lot to facilitate the development of two duplexes.

The Tribunal found that the proposed severance was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conformed to the Growth Plan and Regional Official Plan.

The central issue was whether the proposed lots conformed to the City's Official Plan policies requiring new lots to reflect the general scale and character of the surrounding lands.

The Tribunal rejected the opposing expert's limited study area, finding that a broader contextual analysis demonstrated the proposed lots were similar in size to other lots in the wider neighbourhood.

The appeal was allowed in part and provisional consent was granted subject to conditions.

The applicant appealed the City of Kitchener Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent application to sever a portion of a property to construct a new semi-detached dwelling.

The subject property contained a designated heritage dwelling and a detached garage proposed for demolition.

The Tribunal heard uncontroverted expert planning and heritage evidence that the proposed consent was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conformed to the Growth Plan and local official plans, and had appropriate regard for the criteria in section 51(24) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and granted provisional consent subject to conditions requested by the City.

The appellants appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal to grant consent to sever a property to create three new lots and one retained lot for semi-detached dwellings.

While the proposal met zoning requirements and provincial intensification policies, the Tribunal found it did not conform to the City's Official Plan policies regarding compatibility and fit.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the opposing planning expert, concluding that the proposed lot widths and built form failed to respect the established character of the surrounding neighbourhood.

The appeal was dismissed.