Estate of Amelia Mendonca and Liberio Mendonca, 2024 CanLII 147143

DECISION

CONSENT/SEVERANCE

Date of Decision: August 30, 2024

Panel: 1 - Urban

File No.: D08-01-24/B-00077

Application: Consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act

Applicant: Estate of Amelia Mendonca and Liberio Mendonca

Property Address: 24 Concord Street North

Ward: 17 – Capital

Legal Description: Part of Lot 1 (North Greenfield Ave.) Registered Plan 48

Zoning: R4UD

Zoning By-law: 2008-250

Heard: August 21, 2024, in person and by videoconference

APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL AND PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION

1The Owner wants to establish an easement/right-of way for parking in favour of the property at 22 Concord Street North.

2The Owner requires the Committee’s consent for a Grant of Easement/Right-of way.

3It is proposed to create an easement/right-of-way over Part 1 on a draft 4R-plan, in favour of the abutting property at 22 Concord Street North, for vehicular and pedestrian access and parking.

4The proposed parking and shared driveway will not be in conformity with the requirements of the Zoning By-law and therefore, a related minor variance application (File No. D08-02-24/A-00187) has been filed by the owner of the abutting property at 22 Concord Street North and will be heard concurrently with these applications.

5The property is not the subject of any other current application under the Planning Act.

PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Submissions Summary

6Thomas Freeman, Agent for the Applicant, and City Planner Elizabeth King were present.

7There were no objections to granting this unopposed application as part of the Panel’s fast-track consent agenda.

DECISION AND REASONS OF THE COMMITTEE:

APPLICATION GRANTED

Application Must Satisfy Statutory Tests

8Under the Planning Act, the Committee has the power to grant a consent if it is satisfied that a plan of subdivision of the land is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. Also, the Committee must be satisfied that an application is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and has regard for matters of provincial interest under section 2 of the Act, as well as the following criteria set out in subsection 51(24):

Criteria

(24) In considering a draft plan of subdivision, regard shall be had, among other matters, to the health, safety, convenience, accessibility for persons with disabilities and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the municipality and to,

(a) the effect of development of the proposed subdivision on matters of provincial interest as referred to in section 2;

(b) whether the proposed subdivision is premature or in the public interest;

(d) the suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided;

(d.1) if any affordable housing units are being proposed, the suitability of the proposed units for affordable housing;

(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them;

(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;

(g) the restrictions or proposed restrictions, if any, on the land proposed to be subdivided or the buildings and structures proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;

(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;

(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;

(j) the adequacy of school sites;

(k) the area of land, if any, within the proposed subdivision that, exclusive of highways, is to be conveyed or dedicated for public purposes;

(l) the extent to which the plan’s design optimizes the available supply, means of supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and

(m) the interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41 (2) of this Act or subsection 114 (2) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006. 1994, c. 23, s. 30; 2001, c. 32, s. 31 (2); 2006, c. 23, s. 22 (3, 4); 2016, c. 25, Sched. 4, s. 8 (2).

Evidence

9Evidence considered by the Committee included all oral submissions made at the hearing, as highlighted above, and the following written submissions held on file with the Secretary-Treasurer and available from the Committee Coordinator upon request:

Application and supporting documents, including cover letter, plans, parcel register abstracts, photo of the posted sign, and a sign posting declaration.
City Planning Report received August 15, 2024, with no concerns.
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority email received August 19, 2024, with no concerns.
Hydro Ottawa email received August 19, 2024, with no comments.
Ontario Ministry of Transportation email received August 13, 2024, with comments.

Effect of Submissions on Decision

10The Committee considered all written and oral submissions relating to the application in making its decision and