Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: September 09, 2021
CASE NO(S).: PL210120
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Nirajkumar and Shefali Thakkar
Subject: Minor Variance
Variance from By-law No.: 150-85
Property Address/Description: 55 Ridge Road
Municipality: City of Cambridge
Municipal File No.: A78/20
OLT Lead Case No.: PL210120
OLT Case No.: PL210120
OLT Case Name: Thakkar v. Cambridge (City)
Heard: August 30, 2021 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Representative |
|---|---|
| Nirajkumar and Shefali Thakkar (collectively “Appellant” or “Applicant”) | Hasan Robah |
| City of Cambridge (“City”) | Did not appear |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY A. CORNACCHIA AND WILLIAM R. MIDDLETON ON AUGUST 30, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This is an appeal by the Appellant, the owner of the property located at 55 Ridge Road, Cambridge, Ontario (“Subject Property”), of the City’s Committee of Adjustment decision to dismiss a minor variance application.
2The Appellant applied for two minor variances to City’s Zoning By-law No. 150-85 (“ZBL”) to permit the construction of a one-bedroom accessory dwelling unit in the basement of the existing house (“Basement Apartment”) on the Subject Property. The ZBL only permits accessory dwelling units in houses located on lots having:
- a minimum lot area of 450 square metres (“sq m”) (4,843.76 square feet (“sq. ft.”); and,
- a minimum frontage of 11 metres (“m”) (36 feet (“ft.”).
3The Appellant requested the following minor variances from ZBL to permit the construction of a Basement Apartment on the Subject Property:
- a minimum lot area of 329.4 sq m (3,545.6 sq. ft.); and,
- a frontage of 9.5 m (31.1 ft.) (collectively the “Minor Variance Application”).
4The City’s Community Development Department reviewed the Minor Variance Application and delivered a planning report, prepared by an unnamed individual, to the City’s Committee of Adjustment (“City Planning Report”). The City Planning Report recommended the approval of the Minor Variance Application, subject to the condition that the Basement Apartment be limited to one bedroom and substantially conforms to the plans submitted with the Minor Variance Application.
5Despite the recommendation from City staff, the Committee of Adjustment refused the Minor Variance Application since it was of the view that the lot area deficiency was not minor.
6The Applicant filed an appeal of the Committee of Adjustment decision with the Tribunal on January 5, 2021. The hearing on this matter was held on August 30, 2021 and Hasan Robah, the Appellant’s agent, appeared for the Appellant and the City did not appear.
7Mr. Robah advised the Tribunal that he is a Civil Engineer, has limited experience before the Tribunal and is not a registered planner. Mr. Robah’s submissions focused on the perceived errors in the Committee of Adjustment decision, the City’s Planning Report, in support of the Minor Variance Application, and other properties within the local Hunt Club Estates community where the City’s Committee of Adjustment had permitted minor variance applications for Basement Apartments (“Local Authorized Basement Apartments”). The Appellant did not summon the author of the City Planning Report as a witness, no other planning witnesses were called and no written evidence of the Local Authorized Basement Apartments was submitted to the Tribunal.
8The only planning evidence before the Tribunal was the City Planning Report, which is part of the Municipal Record. The author of the City Planning Report is not identified. It is unknown whether a qualified planner prepared the report and the author was not available for examination to confirm his or her qualifications, to review the report and to fully explain how the Minor Variance Application fulfilled the requirements of s. 45(9) of the Planning Act.
9After considering the Appellant’s submissions and reviewing the City Planning Report, the Tribunal concluded that it had insufficient evidence to render a decision.
10The appeal of the Committee of Adjustment decision is a hearing de novo of the Application for the Minor Variance. It is the Appellant’s responsibility to come properly prepared to present its case to the Tribunal.
11The Tribunal decided against dismissing this Appeal since the Appellant’s representative was unprepared for the requirements of the hearing. A new hearing date will give the Appellant an opportunity to properly prepare and present its case to the Tribunal including the presentation of appropriate planning evidence from a qualified planner to support the Minor Variance Application, should the Appellant choose to do so.
DECISION AND ORDER
12This hearing is adjourned, and a new hearing will be scheduled by the Tribunal on a date and at a time to be designated by the Tribunal. The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video on Wednesday, November 3, 2021 commencing at 10 a.m.
13Parties and participants are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/787300309
Access code: 787-300-309
14Parties and participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
15Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line: Toll-Free 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373. The Access Code is as indicated above.
16Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the video hearing to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
17No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. In the Tribunal’s Rule of Practice and Procedure, Rule 17 applies to such requests.
18The Members are not seized.
19So orders the Tribunal.
“A. Cornacchia”
A. CORNACCHIA
MEMBER
“William R. Middleton”
WILLIAM R. MIDDLETON
MEMBER
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248
The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.