September 16, 1998
To:Chairman and Members of Etobicoke Community Council
From:Karen V. Bricker, MCIP, Director, Community Planning, West Office
Subject:Appeal of Committee of Adjustment Decisions
Purpose:
To advise Toronto Council of a number of Committee of Adjustment Decisions which have been appealed to the Ontario
Municipal Board and to recommend whether legal and staff representation is warranted.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
There will be financial costs associated with the appeal recommended for legal representation.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that:
(1)Legal and staff representation not be provided for the appeals regarding Application No. A-191/98ET, 182 Humbervale
Boulevard; Application No. A-197/98ET, 24 Lorene Drive; Application No. A-192/98ET, 10 King George's Road;
Application Nos. B-38/98ET, A-276/98ET and A-277/98ET, 40 and 42 Elma Street; Application No. A-224/98ET, 35
Loma Road; A-243/98, 30 Algie Avenue; Application No. A-193/98ET, 64 King George's Road; Application No.
A-126/98ET, 4222 Dundas Street West; Application No. A-250/98ET, 12 Clay Court; and, Application No. A-220/98ET,
44 Simpson Avenue.
(2)Legal and staff representation be provided for the appeal regarding Application No. A-218/98ET, 380 The East Mall.
Comment:
The applications and appeals are summarized as follows:
(I)Address: 182 Humbervale Boulevard (Lakeshore-Queensway)
Applicant:Spencer Barrett and Suzanne Barrett
Appellant:Gloria Kells (180 Humbervale Boulevard)
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The site is occupied by a two-storey and partial one-storey detached dwelling. The applicant proposes to
construct two, second-storey additions over the one-storey components of the dwelling. The existing dwelling exhibits side
yard setbacks of 1.08 m (3.5 ft.) and 0.91 m (3.0 ft.) with an aggregate side yard setback of 1.99 m (6.5 ft.) The Zoning
Code requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 m (5.0 ft.) and an aggregate of 4.13 m (13.5 ft.). The proposed second
floor additions would be built in line with the existing walls of the dwelling and relief is requested to recognize the existing
deficient side yard setbacks.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Granted.
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(ii)Address:24 Lorene Drive (Markland-Centennial)
Applicant:Roman M. And Lesia M. Zelyk
Appellant: Stephen and Judith Young (2 Hamlyn Crescent)
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicants propose to demolish an existing dwelling and construct a two-storey, single detached dwelling
with an attached two car garage. The requested variances to By-law No. 1992-23 seek a gross floor area of 336.67 m²
(3,624 sq.ft.) with a corresponding floor space index of 0.45. The variance exceeds the maximum floor area permitted by
17.33 m2 (187 sq.ft.) and the FSI by 0.02. In addition, a dwelling depth of 20.42 m (67 ft.) is being sought, which exceeds
the limit by 3.9 m (13 ft).
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Granted.
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(iii)Address: 10 King George's Road (Kingsway-Humber)
Applicant:Martyn F. Boyce and Patricia J. Boyce
Appellant:Ron Rhodes
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicants propose to maintain and legalize converted attic space and seek a variance to the provisions of
By-law No. 1993-108 which allows a maximum gross floor area of 289.5 m² (3,117 sq.ft.). With the conversion of the attic
space, the gross floor area would be 362.5 m² (3,902 sq.ft.), an increase of 73 m² (786 sq.ft.).
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Granted.
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(iv)Address: 40 and 42 Elma Street (Lakeshore-Queensway)
Applicant:988228 Ontario Limited
Appellant:988228 Ontario Limited
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The site has a frontage of 15.2 m (50.0 ft.). The applicant proposes to sever the lot into two separate
properties, each with a frontage of 7.62 m (25.0 ft.) and a lot area of 290.3 m² (3,124.8 sq.ft.). The applicant would retain
the existing dwelling on one lot and the severed lot would be developed as a single detached dwelling with a shared
driveway. The Second Density Residential (R2) Mimico zone requires a minimum lot frontage of 10.5 m (34.4 ft.) and a lot
area of 325 m² (3,498.3 sq.ft.). In addition, the applicant is requesting a reduced side yard setback for the conveyed lot.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Refused.
Staff Recommendation:The lot area and frontage figures of the proposed lots would be similar to the lot standards
exhibited by a number of properties in the immediate area. Legal representation is not recommended.
(v)Address:35 Loma Road (Lakeshore-Queensway)
Applicant:Juvenal Mateus and Ilona Mateus
Appellant:Juvenal Mateus and Ilona Mateus
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicants propose to construct a 2.67 m high security gate across the side driveway of a single detached
dwelling. The height of proposed gate would exceed the 1.9 m maximum required in the Zoning Code.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Refused.
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(vi)Address:30 Algie Avenue (Lakeshore-Queensway)
Applicant:Winzen Corporation Limited
Appellant:Winzen Corporation Limited
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The site is occupied by an industrial building to which a side lean-to structure was added without a building
permit. The applicant proposes to legalize and maintain the location of the lean-to structure which was built to the side lot
line, while a minimum 3 m side yard setback is required by the Zoning Code.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Refused.
Staff Recommendation:The immediate area contains a mix of small-scale industrial, commercial and low density
residential uses, some of which have limited yard setbacks. Legal representation is not recommended.
(vii)Address: 64 King George's Road (Kingsway-Humber)
Applicant:Philip Norman Stafford and Katheryn Collins
Appellants:Andrew and Anna Chorny (62 King Georges Road)
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The site is occupied by a two-storey and partial one storey detached dwelling with an attached garage. The
applicant proposes to construct a one-storey addition in line with the east side wall of the two-storey portion of the
dwelling. A second storey addition will be constructed over the rear one-storey portion of the dwelling, including the
attached two-car garage. The existing dwelling has a depth of 23.41 m (76.8 ft.). Following the construction of the
proposed additions, the depth of the dwelling will be 24.03 m (78.84 ft.) with a corresponding gross floor area of 328.69m²
(3,538 sq.ft.). The Zoning Code provides for a maximum dwelling depth of 16.5 m (54.13 ft.) and a maximum gross floor
area of 304.62 m² (3,279 sq.ft.).
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Granted.
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(viii)Address:4222 Dundas Street West (Kingsway-Humber)
Applicant:Beta Limited
Appellant: Paul McGregor (4214 Dundas Street West)
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicants propose to demolish an existing animal hospital building and to develop the rear portion of the
lands with a new one-storey and partial two-storey animal hospital. Nine (9) parking spaces are proposed to be located at
the front of the site. The variances to By-law No. 4321 would allow: a coverage of 235 m2 (2,530 sq.ft.) which exceeds the
maximum coverage permitted by 10.5% (81.08 m²/873 sq.ft.); a building height of 9.15 m (30 ft.) rather than the maximum
7.62 m (25 ft.); and, recognize nine (9) parking spaces for the intended use.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Granted.
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(ix)Address:12 Clay Court (Kingsway-Humber)
Applicant:Frank Giordano
Appellant: Frank Giordano
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicant proposes to legalize and maintain an existing driveway on a pie shaped lot. The driveway has a
width of 6.7 m (22 ft.) and a total area of 77.6 m2 (835 sq.ft.) which represents 61.6% of the front yard. The Zoning Code
does not permit driveways with a width greater than 6.0 m (20 ft.) and an area which is greater than 40% of the front yard.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Refused
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(x)Address:44 Simpson Avenue (Lakeshore-Queensway)
Applicant:Peter Lisik
Appellant: Peter Lisik
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicant has partially constructed a detached single car garage with a side storage area without a
building permit. In order to complete the project, variances are required to permit the accessory structures exhibiting a lot
coverage of 16.9% and rear yard coverage of 35.5%. The Zoning Code limits coverage of accessory structures to 10% and
35%, respectively.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Refused
Staff Recommendation:Legal representation is not recommended.
(xi)Address: 380 The East Mall
Applicant:Loblaws Properties Limited
Appellants:A & P Properties Limited and Richard A. Francis
Hearing Date:To be determined by the OMB
Application:The applicant proposes to develop two, one-storey commercial buildings. The main commercial building will
be constructed in the southwest portion of the site and will be occupied by a Loblaws supermarket. The second commercial
building will be constructed in the north portion of the site and will be occupied by a variety of uses. Amendments to
By-law 1997-90 were sought to eliminate commercial floor space and mezzanine floor area limitations for the supermarket
building.
Decision of Committee of Adjustment:Granted.
Staff Recommendation:The minor variances have been requested to permit a larger supermarket and mezzanine area
through the utilization of floor space that would have been allocated to other neighbourhood commercial facilities located
on the same property. The applicant is not seeking to increase the maximum gross floor area of the buildings (8 850 m² or
95,264 sq.ft.) permitted under By-law 1997-90. The applicant has provided an addendum to the original Market Impact
Study which concluded that the impacts of the larger supermarket are acceptable. A peer review has been undertaken and
supports such a conclusion. Given Council's recent approval of this project and support of the By-law at the Ontario
Municipal Board, staff recommend that legal and staff representation be provided in support of the Committee's decision.
Conclusion:
The subject appeals were reviewed by staff who are of the opinion that appeal item (xi) involves substantive planning
issues; therefore, legal and staff representation at the Ontario Municipal Board is warranted for this appeal.
As items (I), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi), (vii), (viii) and (x) do not involve substantive planning issues, legal and staff
representation at the Ontario Municipal Board is not warranted for these appeals.
Contact Name:
Richard Kendall, Principal PlannerTel: (416)394-8227
Community Planning, West DistrictFax:(416)394-6063
Karen V. Bricker, MCIP
Director, Community Planning, West District
