T. Mills

The owners appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing variances required to construct a new single detached dwelling.

The requested variances related to front yard setback, building length, building height, number of storeys, balcony area, and front stair projection.

The Tribunal found that the proposed dwelling would respect and reinforce the existing physical character of the neighbourhood and that the variances met the four tests under the Planning Act.

The appeal was allowed and the variances were approved subject to conditions.

The Requestors sought a review of a TLAB decision that approved a revised minor variance application for a reduced front yard setback.

The Requestors argued the presiding Member made several errors of law and jurisdiction, including failing to apply the minor variance test regarding the general intent and purpose of the zoning by-law, requiring a documented rationale for the by-law, and disregarding expert evidence.

The reviewing Member dismissed the review request, finding that the original Member properly considered the intent and purpose of the zoning by-law, appropriately weighed the competing expert planning evidence, and did not make any reviewable errors of law or fact that would have changed the outcome.

The original decision approving the variances was confirmed.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body issued an interim decision setting deadlines for the parties to submit an updated list of variances, plans, elevations, and recommendations for conditions of approval following a hearing on a minor variance appeal.

The parties were given until May 1, 2023, to complete discussions and submit joint recommendations, with a final deadline of June 1, 2023, for separate submissions if an agreement could not be reached.

In an appeal concerning minor variances, the appellants sought to introduce two expert documents regarding front yard setbacks and the Ontario Building Code one day before the hearing.

The applicant objected to the Building Code document on the basis of prejudice due to late disclosure.

The Tribunal noted that both parties had failed to adhere to the prior procedural order's disclosure deadlines.

Consequently, the Tribunal admitted the documents onto the record to ensure a fulsome discussion and scheduled an additional hearing day to allow the applicant sufficient time to prepare for cross-examination on the new evidence.