A group of residents in a midtown Toronto neighbourhood is vowing to take their fight against a developer to the city’s ombudsman.
The Leaside Residents Association and the Broadway Area Residents Association had been working with city staff and the Gupta Group on a proposed residential tower to be built over a row of five lots on Bayview Avenue just north of the new Leaside stop on the Eglinton Crosstown LRT route.
But in June, about three months after a deal had been struck with Gupta for a 22-storey tower, the developer went to the city’s committee of adjustment and applied for a “minor variance” that would add five storeys to the project. The committee agreed to let Gupta add three more, for a total height of 25 storeys.
“We were shocked,” said Geoff Kettel, co-president of the Leaside Residents Association.
The three additional storeys would mean another 33 units, Kettel said. If those were built on a single lot, it would amount to a six-storey building.
“Does that sound minor?” he said.
The two resident associations say it’s a strategy they’ve been seeing more of in the past year: Developers are using the city’s committee of adjustment to argue for increased heights, long after a deal has been reached.
Other recent cases
Aside from the proposed tower at 1837-1845 Bayview Ave., developers shuttled at least two other projects to the committee of adjustment after deals had been reached with city planners and residents.
One, at 300 Bloor St. W., called for a “minor variance” that would have added five storeys to the 29-storey project, city documents show. That application was turned down last November because “in the opinion of the committee, the variances are not minor.”
However, in another case last December, the committee approved a height increase request from State Building Group on its plan for 316 Bloor St. W. Instead of building a tower of 98 metres they were allowed to build to a height of 121 metres.
But there was a catch. The committee said that in exchange for the added height, “the applicant/owner shall make a cash contribution to the City of Toronto in the amount of $1 million … to be allocated toward community facilities, recreational, cultural space, and/or streetscape improvements.”
Neither the Gupta Group nor State Building responded to inquiries from CBC Toronto.
The committee of adjustment is traditionally used by residents who want to make small changes, called minor variances, to their properties, such as adding a few feet to a fence or building a deck that’s slightly larger than local zoning rules allow, said Kettel.
But Kettel, who’s also co-chair of the Federation of North Toronto Residents’ Associations, said he and other residents’ groups have noticed an uptick in the number of approved projects they’re involved with that are being sent to the committee.
It’s a trend he calls “more than frustrating. It’s an erosion of democracy.”
‘Part of the solution’
Dave Wilkes, president and CEO of the Building Industry and Land Development Association, which represents the region’s developers, said he’s heard nothing from his members about a move toward using the committee of adjustment to eke out higher densities for their projects.
However, he said, builders are increasingly conscious of the need to maximize the number of units they can build on limited amounts of land.
“Density is part of the solution that’s needed to meet the growing population that the city has and the need for new homes,” he said.
Asked whether adding density to new builds could simply be a way of generating more revenue, Wilkes said real estate investors expect a reasonable return.
“There’s no shame in that,” he said. “That investment creates jobs and provides housing.”
No strict limits
Part of the problem, Kettel said, is that it’s difficult to define exactly what’s meant by a minor variance.
Caroline Samuel, the city’s acting director of zoning and secretary-treasurer of the committee of adjustment, said the provincial Planning Act sets out four criteria that have to be met for the committee to grant a minor variance: Do the changes violate the city’s Official Plan, or the local zoning rules? Is the change an appropriate use of the land, and is the requested change really “minor” in the opinion of the committee members?
Samuel said there are no hard and fast limits on things like building height.
“It would depend on the application,” she said. “The committee would have to assess that.”
Samuel declined to comment on individual cases or trends. But she pointed out that provincial regulations used to prohibit developers from going to a committee of adjustment for two years after a deal with a municipality had been struck. But the provincial government lifted that restriction last year, she said.
CBC Toronto asked the office of Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Paul Calandra whether he’s contemplating any changes to address the concerns of residents’ associations but did but did not receive a response.
The Toronto Local Appeal Body hears appeals about committee of adjustment decisions. But those changes to the provincial rules also preclude citizens’ groups from launching or participating in the appeals.
That’s why Kettel and his group have decided to lodge a complaint with the city ombudsman’s office about the committee’s decision on 1837 Bayview.
In a letter dated Aug. 1, they asked that the ombudsman insist city staff appeal the committee’s order.