Toronto Local Appeal Body
40 Orchard View Blvd, Suite 211 Toronto, Ontario M4R 1B9
Date:
2023-03-13
21 212024 S45 13 TLAB
Slight v. Murphy, 2023 ONTLAB 44
DECISION AND ORDER
Issuance Date:
March 13, 2023
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER Section 45(12), subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (the "Act")
Appellant(s):
RYAN THOMAS SLIGHT
Applicant(s):
REPLACEMENT DESIGN INC
Property Address:
9 SPRUCE ST
COA File No.:
20 233743 STE 13 MV (A0004/21TEY)
TLAB Case File No.:
21 212024 S45 13 TLAB
Hearing Date(s):
Wednesday, February 08, 2023
Decision Delivered By:
TLAB Panel Member S. Gopikrishna
REGISTERED PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS:
People Type
Name
Representative
Appellant
R.T. Slight
Applicant
Replacement Design Inc
Owner / Party (TLAB)
E. Murphy
P. Dineen
Chapnick & Associates
Expert Witness
E.Calhoun
Participant
R. Prior
INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
1The TLAB released an Interim Decision in November 2022 which instructed the Parties that the Hearing respecting 9 Spruce ( the "Site", the "Property") would proceed on February 9, 2023, irrespective of whether the Appellant would attend the Hearing.
2A few days before the Hearing scheduled for March 2023, I was made aware that the Parties involved with this Proceeding had reached a Settlement. A copy of the Settlement was filed with the TLAB.
3The Hearing held on February 9, 2023, was attended by Mr. Eric Murphy, the Applicant, Mr. Paul Dineen, a lawyer and Mr. Richard Prior, the current resident of the existing house at the Site.
4After congratulating the Applicants on reaching a Settlement, I asked them if the variances before the Tribunal had changed as a result of the Settlement. Mr. Prior informed me that there was a "minor change to the angle of the plane, which may have changed by a few inches across the entire width of the structure", as well as "changing the maximum height of the building containing the two storey laneway suite to 6.45 metres from 6.9 metres", both of which impacted variances before the TLAB.
5I encouraged the Applicants to ensure that an updated list of variances would be submitted to the TLAB, alongside with Plans and Elevations that reflected the updated list of variances. After some discussion, we agreed that on the basis of the Settlement between the Parties, and a submission consisting of the updated variances, Plans and Elevations, it would be possible for me to consider hearing the Appeal in Writing, though it would be necessary for the Applicants to bring forward a Motion requesting that the matter be heard in Writing.
6After some discussion regarding the timelines, and the need to submit a comprehensive and corrected set of Plans and Elevations, with accompanying variances, and recommended conditions, I gave the Applicants time until "early March" to complete the submissions.. After the Applicants indicated their agreement with the deadline, and the methodology for proceeding forward, the Hearing was adjourned.
7As of March 10, 2023, no submissions have been received from the Applicant, nor have they contacted the TLAB to inform us about why, or when can they make the submissions.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
8I am surprised that the Applicants did not submit an updated list of variances to the TLAB, reflecting the discussions in Paragraph [4] above, because the bread and butter of TLAB Decisions consists of approving, or refusing variances.
9Given that the change to the variances are "minor", and that a Settlement has been reached between the Parties, I find that Section 45.18.1.1 of the Planning Act, (which requires new Notice to be given), can be waived
10If the Applicants want that the Hearing should be heard in Writing, it is very important that they follow through on the conclusions reached at the Hearing completed on February 9, 2023, which are described in Paragraphs [5] and [6] in this Section, as well as the operative "Decision and Order" below. The Applicants are given time until March 20, 2023, to complete these submissions, failing which a Decision will be reached based on such information that is available to the TLAB.
11It is important that the Applicants understand, and appreciate that not following through on discussions held with the TLAB at the Hearing completed on February 9, 2023, could be fatal to having the variances approved, which would prevent them from constructing a two storey laneway suite at the rear of the existing two storey detached dwelling per their plans- this would mean that may still reach their final destination, notwithstanding how long and arduous journey has been to arrive at a Settlement .
12The TLAB cannot keep any file open sine die, and consequently does not appreciate being put in a situation, where it has to provide extra time to the Applicants, to complete a simple submission. The Applicants should act responsibly, and complete submissions in a timely fashion. The willingness of the TLAB to send out occasional reminders regarding the submission of documents, is to be interpreted as a courteous, helpful gesture, as opposed to auxiliary help, that can be counted upon to generate reminders to the Parties. It is important to emphasize and reiterate that if the requisite submissions are not completed by March 20, 2023, a Final Decision will be made on the basis of whatever information that is available to the TLAB.
INTERIM DECISION AND ORDER
13The Applicants involved with the Appeal respecting 9 Spruce are herewith instructed to submit the following documents, in order for the TLAB to hear the Appeal by way of a Hearing in Writing:
- A perfected Motion, accompanied by a completed Form 7, requesting that the Appeal be heard in Writing
- The submission of the updated list of variances, accompanied by updated Plans and Elevations reflecting the Settlement, and recommendations for conditions to be imposed if the Application were approved
14If the Applicants cannot complete the submissions by March 20, 2023, a Final Decision will be reached by the TLAB on the basis of whatever information is available to it.
So orders the Toronto Local Appeal Body
S. Gopikrishna
Panel Member