Toronto Local Appeal Body
40 Orchard View Blvd, Suite 253 Toronto, Ontario M4R 1B9
Date:
2024-02-27
23 213723 S45 15 TLAB
FAR Architect Inc. (Re), 2024 ONTLAB 191
DECISION AND ORDER
Issuance Date:
February 27, 2024
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):
FAR ARCHITECT INC.
Applicant(s):
F. Abdolvahabi
Property Address:
34 Rumsey Rd.
COA File No.:
22 219265 NNY 15 MV (A0689/22NY)
TLAB Case File No.:
23 213723 S45 15 TLAB
Hearing Date(s):
Thursday, February 08, 2024
Deadline Date for Closing Submissions/Undertakings:
January 24, 2024
Decision Delivered By:
TLAB Panel Member S. Makuch
REGISTERED PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS:
People Type
First Initial. Last Name
Representative
Owners
R. Yee
Primary Owner
K. Tiedje
Owner’s Legal Rep.
A. Stewart
Appellant
Far Architect Inc.
Appellant's Legal Rep.
F. Abdolvahabi
Party (TLAB)
City of Toronto
Party's Legal Rep.
D. Abimbola
Party's Legal Rep.
U. Gautam
Expert Witness
M. Barton
Expert Witness
F. Romano
Party (TLAB)
A. Dhillon
Party (TLAB)
S. Dhanju-Dhillon
sdhanju-dhillon@torkinmanes.com
Party (TLAB)
S. Sood
Party (TLAB)
B. Biscoe
Party (TLAB)
A.Bow
Participant
L. Strevens
Participant
M. Federau
Participant
G. Kettel
Participant
J. Sublett
Participant
I. Sublett
Participant
J. Courceles
Participant
C. Walker
Participant
T. Corea
Participant
S. Bellingham
Participant
K. Carr
Participant
Leaside Residents Association
INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
1This motion concerns an appeal by the owners of 34 Rumsey Rd. from a decision of the Committee of Adjustment refusing minor variances to remodel their existing two-storey dwelling through interior alterations and additions.
2The hearing of the appeal was commenced at 9:30 a.m. February 8, 2024.
3The witness statement for the appellants was to be filed by January 2, 2024. It was not filed until January 19, 2024.
4The appellants sought permission to file the witness statement late and requested that TLAB proceed with the hearing on February 8, 2024, or in the alternative that the hearing be adjourned to the earliest possible date.
5Their reasons for the late filing relate to a lack of knowledge on the part of the appellants’ architect and a death in the family.
6Certain opponents responded that the witness statement should not be admitted and that the appellants should not be permitted to rely on it. In the alternative they requested an adjournment of sufficient time to review the appellants’ witness statement and to provide an opportunity to obtain a “third party zoning review”.
7The City also requested an adjournment.
THE LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND FRAMEWORK
8Provincial Interest - S. 2
A decision of the Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB) shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest, enumerated as (a) – (s) in the Planning Act.
9Provincial Policy – S. 3
A decision of the Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB) must be consistent with the 2020 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) for the subject area.
10Under the TLAB’s Rules of Practice and Procedure I have discretion to grant an adjournment and set hearing requirements.
SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE
11All parties and participants at the hearing of February 8, 2024, agreed to the adjournment of the hearing and further agreed to the following respecting the continuation of this matter:
(a) May 2,3,7, and 8, 2024 would be the dates for the continuation of the hearing.
(b) Appellants’ revised witness statement would be submitted on or before February 23, 2024.
(c) Witness statements of parties and participants in opposition would be submitted on or before April 8, 2024.
(d) Appellants’ reply witness statement would be submitted by April 17, 2024.
(e) A revised notice of hearing would be issued confirming the above dates.
(f) If a settlement is reached the appellant could submit affidavit evidence in support of the settlement and a hearing will not be necessary.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
12There are no outstanding issues regarding the hearing of the matter and the matter should proceed in the manner agreed to by the parties.
CONCLUSION AND DECISION
13The matter should proceed as agreed to by the parties. Therefore:
(a) May 2,3,7, and 8, 2024 are the dates for the continuation of the hearing.
(b) Appellants’ revised witness statement are to be submitted on or before February 23, 2024.
(c) Witness statements of parties and participants in opposition are to be submitted on or before April 8, 2024.
(d) Appellants’ reply witness statement are to be submitted by April 17, 2024.
(e) A revised notice of hearing shall be issued confirming the above dates.
(f) If a settlement is reached the appellant can submit affidavit evidence in support of the settlement and a hearing will not be necessary.
S. Makuch
Panel Member