Paul Voorn

The applicants appealed the Town of Newmarket Committee of Adjustment's decision refusing three of four requested minor variances to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling on a vacant lot.

The variances sought relief for maximum building height, finished first floor height, driveway width, and porch step encroachment.

The Ontario Land Tribunal allowed the appeal and authorized the variances, finding that they met the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The Tribunal accepted the unchallenged planning evidence that the proposed contextually-sensitive infill development was compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood, particularly given the site's unique topography.

The applicant appealed the Town of Newmarket Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a minor variance application.

The applicant sought relief from the zoning by-law to permit one of the required off-street parking spaces for a proposed accessory dwelling unit to be located within the garage.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found that the requested variance met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act, was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conformed to the Growth Plan.

The appeal was allowed and the variance was authorized subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed the Town of Newmarket's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment and referred a site plan application for a proposed 79-unit apartment building.

At a settlement hearing, the Tribunal accepted unchallenged expert planning evidence that the development represents appropriate intensification, conforms to the applicable official plans and provincial policies, and represents good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the zoning by-law amendment in principle, and withheld its final order pending the finalization of a site plan agreement.

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent to sever and associated minor variances to facilitate the creation of a new residential lot while retaining an existing dwelling with potential heritage value.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement and the appeal proceeded unopposed.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found that the proposed severance met the criteria under s. 51(24) of the Planning Act and the variances met the four tests under s. 45(1).

The appeal was allowed, provisional consent was granted, and the variances were authorized subject to conditions.

The applicants applied to the Town of Newmarket for a reduction, cancellation, or refund of their 2017 property taxes, claiming an inability to pay due to sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(7) of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Assessment Review Board, acting under delegated authority, reviewed the applicants' financial records.

The Board found that the total household income significantly exceeded the reported expenses, indicating that the applicants were able to pay the property taxes.

The application was dismissed.