Committees of Adjustment and Minor Variances

The Public Gallery wrote no story on this item. What follows is the city’s own record of what happened to it, as filed: nothing on this page is summarised or scored by us.

The decision

2024-01-29 · Planning and Housing Committee · adopted

As filed

The Planning and Housing Committee: 1. Directed the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to review and report back to the Planning and Housing Committee by the fourth quarter of 2024 on whether the City should adopt a by-law under Section 45 of the Planning Act to establish criteria that would limit what qualifies as a minor variance when applicants request additional height for large-scale multi-storey

Show the rest of As filed, 125 more characters as filed

development proposals that already hold site-specific zoning permissions as an outcome of a private application for rezoning.

On the agenda

As the city filed it

My constituents have observed a pattern of Committees of Adjustment making significant changes that appear to undermine the City's zoning bylaws and the public consultations on which they are based. Some of these decisions permit changes that seem far from "minor", such as granting additional height and density to a large-scale multi-storey development despite the city and community having successfully negotiated site-specific zoning for a less intrusive building.

Show the rest of As the city filed it, 833 more characters as filed

In one recent example, a Committee of Adjustment permitted a 27 storey building at 316 Bloor Street West to add 8 more storeys, (a 27.6% increase) just a few years after the developer had negotiated approval for its building by accepting a 27 storey limit. Just weeks before, another Committee gave the opposite result in the very similar case at 300 Bloor Street West, a few doors away. Such apparent inconsistency and lack of clarity undermines public confidence in Toronto's land use decision-making, and in the worth of the consultation processes that we invite the public to. See, for example, the enclosed letter of concern from the Annex Ratepayers' Association. Section 45 of the Planning Act allows a municipality to adopt a by-law that establishes criteria for a minor variance in addition to the tests in the Planning Act.

Staff recommended

Councillor Dianne Saxe recommends that: 1. Planning and Housing Committee direct the Chief Planner to review and report back to Planning and Housing Committee, by Q4 2024, on whether the City should adopt a by-law under Section 45 of the Planning Act to establish criteria that would limit what qualifies as a minor variance when applicants request additional height for large-scale multi-storey development proposals that already hold site-specific zoning permissions as an outcome of a private application for rezoning.

On the record

The item as the City filed it

More from this meeting

The whole meeting