Back in my December 2024 column, I asked “will the Ombudsman investigate? I recently received a letter which explains that the Ombudsman Toronto (OT), an independent “accountability officer” in the City of Toronto, conducted an enquiry, an “independent and impartial look at the issues raised by the complaint through the lens of administrative fairness” into the City’s approvals of the 1837-1845 Bayview Ave. development application.
Background
Before we get into the OT’s findings, here is a quick summary of how we got to making our unusual request for an investigation:
- -The Province, in approving the Yonge Eglinton Secondary Plan in 2019, increased the height limit for properties in the Bayview Focus Area to 20-35 storeys from the eight storeys proposed by the City, and the developer submitted an application for a building of 25 storeys shortly afterwards.
- -The neighbourhood organized a new entity, Bayview Broadway Good Planning, which participated in mediation with the City and the applicant, resulting in a settlement for 22 storeys, which was approved at City Council and affirmed by the Ontario Land Tribunal.
- -Shortly thereafter, the developer applied to the Committee of Adjustment for “minor variances” for an additional five storeys. The Committee approved three storeys, as recommended by City Planning, bringing the building back to the height of the original submission, despite the mediated settlement among the three parties.
- –The Ontario Government’s Bill 23 eliminated “third party” appeals in 2023, leaving the only avenue open to residents for appeal of the Committee of Adjustment decision as appeal by the City via a decision of City Council. However, at the time (2024) there was no sitting councillor because of Councillor Jaye Robinson’s death. Efforts to involve other councillors were unsuccessful.
- The Leaside Residents Association decided to submit a request for an enquiry to the Toronto Ombudsman to determine whether the City had followed due process.
The Ombudsman weighs in
The OT requires that the residents/complainants must “allow the City a reasonable opportunity to resolve the complaint through its own complaint process” before their office would investigate. Hence a detailed list of complaints to City Planning was submitted to OT covering such matters as:
- -The appropriateness of staff/applicant negotiations on a submitted application resulting in a City-supported Committee of Adjustment application.
- -The role, process and results of the Committee of Adjustment process.
- -The appropriateness of the Committee of Adjustment’s consideration of the application in the first place.
The OT’s letter states that after considering the City’s responses to our letter, and the circumstances of our complaint, no further action from Ombudsman Toronto was required. They are satisfied that City Planning and development review took reasonable steps to review the complaint and provided a reasonably detailed explanation to respond to the concerns. “In reviewing this response, we have not identified any fairness concerns that would require further review from our office.”
The letter notes also that the OT considered our concern about developers submitting applications to the Committee of Adjustment after already having obtained a size-specific zoning permission. “This is a policy question that was considered and dealt with through the political process. Ultimately, the Planning and Housing Committee chose not to take any further action on this question. We do not have jurisdiction over City Council or its committees, so we cannot review that decision.
The OT noted that they do not have the authority to make changes to provincial legislation and to direct any concerns about the powers of the Committee of Adjustment under the Planning Act to the provincial member of parliament. Finally, the OT noted that their enquiry into our complaint was concluded and determined that no further action was necessary.
Next steps?
So where does that leave us? We are forced to conclude that residents need to work together at all levels to assert our rights, and to oppose the loss of democratic rights over the last few years, such as the changes made by the Provincial government to eliminate residents’ appeals of Committee of Adjustment decisions regarding minor variances (and also of Official Plan amendments and Zoning Bylaw amendments to the Ontario Land Tribunal).
We need City Council to take a stand with Queen’s Park in pushing for reforms to the Planning Act, for example, to counter the abuse of process entailed in development applicants returning to the Committee of Adjustment to add the equivalent of a mid-rise building to a previously approved tall tower.
In the end, it’s frustrating. These are serious issues that merit discussion in the upcoming municipal election. What do you think? Are you frustrated by the current process? We’d love to hear from you!
