Tag Archive for: Severance

, ,

Severance of 80 Thirty Ninth Refused at TLAB

Over the course of a 12-day hearing, the TLAB heard evidence from the Applicant, the City and Long Branch residents about a proposal to sever 80 Thirty Ninth Street into two 7.62 meter (25-foot) lots and to construct two oversized homes.

The hearing was chaired by TLAB member Stanley Makuch and was conducted through a mix of in-person and virtual sessions, the latter being required due to COVID-19 measures.

Mr. Makuch’s 10-page decision to refuse the application to sever the property at 80 Thirty Ninth was based on the scale of the homes relative to the proposed lot sizes and preservation of trees that exist on the property and along the property line on the south side of the property.

He states the ”… frontages do not maintain the intent of policy 4.5.1 of the Official Plan” and, combined with the scale of the proposed homes, ”… will give the appearance of an overdevelopment of the lots.”

He further states that it was ”… clear that no attempt was made to design the development in a manner to preserve and enhance the urban forest in a neighbourhood where the forest and canopy are part of its character.”

He had high praise for all parties involved in the hearing, including the LBNA, who formally represented the residents during the hearing.

To read the full text of the decision, click here.

/by
,

Severance of 27 Thirty Ninth Street Refused at TLAB

The proposed severance of 27 Thirty Ninth Street was refused in a May 5, 2021 decision issued by the Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB)

The proposal sought to sever a 15.24 meter (50-foot) lot into two undersized lots. The homes the Applicant sought to build were large in scale, coming in at a Floor Space Index of 0.62 versus a bylaw standard of 0.35 for the Neighbourhood of Long Branch. FSI is a term used to define the density of a home on its lot, and is the ratio of the gross floor area to the area of the lot.

The decision was rendered by former Chair of TLAB Ian Lord in a very thorough and meticulously detailed 101-page written decision.

The hearing, which took 6 days to complete, started on January 8, 2020 but did not conclude until March 12, 2021 due to a lengthy adjournment due to COVID-19 restrictions. The first 3 days were conducted in person while the final 3 days were virtual.

Since the City officially adopted Official Plan Amendment 320 and City Council unanimously passed the Long Branch Neighbourhood Character Guidelines, the TLAB has refused 10 severance applications with the LBNA officially participating on behalf of the Neighbourhood in all but one. Another 3 are currently still being reviewed at TLAB.

In the case of 27 Thirty Ninth, six neighbours participated in giving evidence at the hearing. They were praised by Mr. Lord for providing hard fact-based evidence in the absence of a professional planner who could provide expert opinion evidence.

“On these Applications, neighbourhood concern is evident not only in the witnesses and their evidence and presentation efforts, but also in the history of their engagement at the COA and in fulfilling the somewhat onerous Rules of the TLAB that require early and definitive disclosure, in writing, of positions.”

Key Success Factors

The successful outcomes on all of these TLAB appeals would not have been possible without the following:

  • Active Resident Involvement. In this case, one family elected to get involved as what is termed a Party to the appeal. Doing so gave them the right to call witnesses and to be included in all discussions regarding the application.
  • Active Resident Participation. As noted above, 6 neighbours provided testimony at the hearing for 27 Thirty Ninth. We have seen more than that and somewhat fewer than that at other hearings, but what is common is that multiple residents chose to have a say and were granted that opportunity by TLAB.
  • Factual Evidence. Residents amassed the type of data professional planners use to analyze and justify their clients’ development proposals. They studied other decisions from the OMB and TLAB to learn why previous applications had been approved or refused. They dove into the Official Plan, the Bylaws and Provincial policies to see just how well the applicants’ proposals did or did not conform to regulations.

To read the full text of the decision, click here.

/by
,

Severance of 38 Thirty First Refused

On Friday, April 16, 2021 TLAB Member Stanley Makuch issued a decision refusing severance of 38 Thirty First Street along with the variances associated with the application.

This hearing went on over 8 full days, from its outset on April 1, 2019 to closing arguments on February 22, 2021. The neighbourhood was represented by 5 residents and 3 members of the LBNA.

In his 10-page written decision, the presiding chair of the hearing, Mr. Makuch, agreed with the evidence provided by the LBNA and nearby residents that the proposed severance did not conform to the Long Branch Neighbourhood Design Guidelines and the Official Plan. He wrote:

“The proposed dwellings on the lot frontages requested would not fit the character of the area. Indeed, rather than respecting and reinforcing the character of the are they would diminish its cottage like atmosphere and reduce its feeling of openness and harmony.”

We are convinced the strong participation by Long Branch residents in TLAB hearings is making a favourable impression upon the the TLAB members. We are making well-presented cases with hard evidence and, unlike the OMB, which seemingly discouraged resident participation, TLAB is enabling the voices of the residents be heard as they describe the impact of these kinds of developments on them.

/by
, ,

Severance of 70 Thirty Sixth Street Refused at TLAB

On July 3rd., 2019, the Toronto Local Appeal Body (TLAB) released its decision on a proposed severance of 70 Thirty Sixth Street. Mr. Ted Yao, who was the presiding member for TLAB, refused the appeal in a 23-page decision order.

The owners of 70 Thirty Sixth originally applied to sever the property into two lots and build two new homes. In addition to being opposed by owners of neighbouring properties, the application was opposed by Urban Forestry and Councillor Mark Grimes. City Planning expressed concerns over the severance and variances in their July 24, 2017 Planning Report and recommended deferral. The Committee of Adjustment refused the application on December 7, 2017.

The owners subsequently appealed the Committee of Adjustment decision and the appeal went to TLAB.

At the request of Councillor Grimes’ office, the City assigned one of their lawyers to the appeal and 8 residents were accepted as Participants for the hearing so they could be heard.

The Long Branch Neighbourhood Association (LBNA) was also granted Participant status as well as the right to lead and cross-examine witnesses and make closing submissions. Behind the scenes, the LBNA supported the residents with coaching and preparation, review and filing of documents. The LBNA also liaised with City Legal to coordinate our respective cases and to avoid unnecessary duplication.

The entire hearing required 6 days from July 26, 2018 to June 19, 2019. The number of days was a reflection of the complexity of the case and the elapsed time from start to finish was a function of having to schedule more days than originally planned and finding dates that worked for all Parties.

In his decision, Mr. Yao stated, “the area contains a significant proportion of 50-foot lots, especially in the eastern part of Mr. Ciecura’s (the applicant’s expert planning witness) study area, for which a severance would be destabilizing to the lot fabric.” and “the proposed design is an abrupt change in character, particularly not respecting side yards and lot size characteristics.”

Another factor was the impact of the proposal on the tree canopy in Long Branch. The application proposed removing a healthy, protected private tree and injuring/removing a healthy protected city tree. 

Mr. Yao concluded, “a suitable growing environment for trees will not be enhanced, nor will there be an increase in an existing (tree) canopy.”

This was the second refusal of a severance application on Thirty Sixth Street following a full hearing. In March 2018, the TLAB Chair, Ian Lord, issued a refusal of an application at 38 Thirty Sixth Street. In November 2018, the owners of 32 Thirty Sixth abandoned an appeal of a proposed severance. In May of this year, the Committee of Adjustment unanimously refused variances sought by the owners of 30 Thirty Sixth after their application for severance had been granted by the OMB in 2018, but refused the variances associated with the proposed homes.

A positive side effect from the process was that the neighbours got to work together as a team towards a common purpose and this helped forge new relationships as well as reinforcing existing ones.

As Mr. Yao stated in his decision, “Strong communities are those where people want to live.”

To see the full text of Mr. Yao’s decision, click here to view and/or download a copy.

To see the status of other severance applications in Long Branch, click here to visit our page summarizing severance applications over the past 10 years.

/by