Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 09, 2022
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001425
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 12(2) of O. Reg. 173/16 – Refusal of the O. Reg. 173/16 Community Planning Permits
Subject: O. Reg. 173/16 Community Planning Permits
Description: To permit a secondary suite containing two bedrooms in each of the existing semi-detached dwellings
Reference Number: DP 2021-16
Property Address: 70 Hickory Street
Municipality/UT: Gananoque
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001425
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001425
OLT Case Name: Patterson v. Gananoque (Twn.)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 12(2) of O. Reg. 173/16 – Refusal of the O. Reg. 173/16 Community Planning Permits
Subject: O. Reg. 173/16 Community Planning Permits
Description: To permit a secondary suite containing two bedrooms in each of the existing semi-detached dwellings
Reference Number: DP 2021-17
Property Address: 70 Hickory Street
Municipality/UT: Gananoque
OLT Case No.: OLT-21-001426
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-21-001425
Heard: March 3, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Representative |
|---|---|
| Town of Gananoque | Brenda Guy |
| Larry Patterson and Erin Napholc | Self-represented |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY R.G.M. MAKUCH ON MARCH 3, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1Larry Patterson and Erin Napholc (“Owners”) sought permission from the Town of Gananoque (“Town”) to permit a secondary suite with two bedrooms and an entrance on the same elevation as the primary unit in each of the two existing primary dwelling units located on the property known municipally as 70 Hickory Street.
2The Town’s Planning and Development Department had recommended approval of the application.
3The Planning Advisory Committee refused to grant approval under the Town's Development Permit By-law.
4The application was appealed by the Owners.
5A hearing was scheduled for Thursday, March 3, 2022.
6The parties have since advised the Tribunal that they had reached an agreement as to the proposed development and jointly seek an order of the Tribunal approving the development permit to allow a secondary suite in each primary dwelling unit with an entrance for each secondary suite at the same elevation as the primary dwelling unit.
7The only evidence before the Tribunal is the Affidavit of Brenda Guy, sworn March 1, 2022. Ms. Guy is the Manager of Planning and Development with the Town.
8Ms. Guy explains that following the filing of the appeal, the parties entered into discussions to settle the appeal and have agreed on consent to an order of the Tribunal allowing the appeal and that a development permit be issued subject to certain conditions as follows:
(a) the Owner will complete the development permit within one year of approval or within one year of the Decision of the Tribunal;
(b) parking spaces shall be reduced to 2.7 metres by 6 metres to reduce the coverage of the front yard setback and to maintain the 50% minimum lot coverage for landscaping and to allow for more grass in the side yards; and
(c) a garage door with a man-door shall be incorporated into the design and remain in place to provide access to the secondary suites.
9The Tribunal is satisfied based on Ms. Guy’s uncontroverted evidence that the appeal should be allowed and the development permit be granted.
10Ms. Guy also explained that the Planning Advisory Committee has delegated authority for Class 2 development permits and that the Town’s Planning and Development Department had recommended approval of the application, noting that relief to allow access to the secondary unit on the same elevation as the main dwelling was reasonable.
11The proposal provides that the main dwelling will have a front door access and a garage door with a man-door within the garage door serving as the access for the secondary unit. This results in access for both dwelling units being on the same elevation contrary to the Town’s Zoning By-law.
12The Planning and Development Department also recommended approval of the application citing consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”) and conformity with the Town’s Official Plan, which contain policies to promote increased density and rental housing in the municipality.
13It was further recommended that approval with regards to the two accesses on the same elevation was appropriate, given that even a single-family dwelling can install a garage door that includes a man-door and which results in the appearance of two entrances. It was Ms. Guy’s opinion that the secondary access on the same elevation would have little to no impact on the neighborhood.
14Ms. Guy expressed the opinion that the relief sought from the by-law reflected in the Minutes of Settlement represents good land use planning and that the proposal is consistent with the PPS as it allows for intensification and an additional dwelling unit within the existing dwelling with little exterior change. The inclusion of the additional dwelling unit in her view, conforms with the applicable policies of the Official Plan and is consistent with the intent of the Town’s Development Permit By-law.
15The Tribunal accepts Ms. Guy’s uncontroverted evidence and accordingly, allows the appeal hereby grants approval of the proposed subject to the following conditions:
(a) the Owner will complete the development permit within one year of approval or within one year of the Decision of the Tribunal;
(b) parking spaces shall be reduced to 2.7 metres by 6 metres to reduce the coverage of the front yard setback and maintain the 50% minimum lot coverage for landscaping and to allow for more grass in the side yards; and
(c) a garage door with a man-door shall be incorporated into the design and remain in place to provide access to the secondary suites.
16It is so ordered.
“R.G.M. Makuch”
R.G.M. Makuch
VICE-CHAIR
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: www.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.