TLAB decision regarding 11 Stanley Ave. in Mimico: Severance and variances are refused

Click below to access the decision:

TLAB – Decision -11 Stanley Ave.

An excerpt from the above-noted TLAB decision reads:

Conclusion

I find that the proposal fails the “respect and reinforce the existing physical character of the neighbourhood” test, in the light of a detailed built form analysis. This finding is supported by a comprehensive analysis of social, economic, urban design, natural environment and heritage conservation factors. Intensification has at its heart an environmental impetus. Mr. Cieciura is correct to remind us that otherwise pressure will develop to build outside of urban boundaries. Intensification may come, but not in every location, and only through a sensitive proposal that fits in with, and honours and reinforces the existing physical character of neighbourhoods.

The proposed lot-split / overbuilding projects are sited at 11 and 15 Stanley Ave. Jaan Pill photo

11 and 15 Stanley Ave. in Mimico. Jaan Pill photo

DECISION AND ORDER

The appeal is allowed, and the severance and variances are refused. The decision of the Committee of Adjustment is set aside.

[End of excerpt]

Previous posts

Some previous posts about 11 Stanley Ave. (and 15 Stanley Ave.) include:

11 & 15 Stanley Ave. lot-split proposals in Mimico will be addressed at Toronto Local Appeal Body on Sept. 4 and Sept. 14, 2018

15 Stanley Ave. application in Mimico was refused, in Sept. 14, 2018 TLAB decision

Comment regarding TLAB decisions

It is noteworthy that, to my knowledge, decisions made by Toronto committees of adjustment are unaccompanied by any rationale or explanation, regarding how the decisions were arrived at.

It’s my understanding that committees of adjustment in other jurisdictions do include rationales or explanations.

In Toronto, the lack of explanations for committee of adjustment decisions means that each Toronto Local Appeal Body case must, of necessity, start as a “de novo” hearing.

Please let me know, in the event that I am in error, in stating that Toronto committee of adjustment decisions are unaccompanied by reasons for decisions.

Each decision made by the Toronto Local Appeal Body, by way of contrast, includes a comprehensive and clearly articulated explanation, regarding how the decision was arrived at.

Such an approach to the processes of land-use decision making is commendable and inspiring.

 

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Enter Captcha Here : *

Reload Image