Skip to content

Spacing

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

Politics

Toronto can and must set up an alternative to the OMB

By

Read more articles by

Christopher Hume, interviewing former Toronto chief planner Paul Bedford, has written one of the best columns I’ve seen so far about the issue of the Ontario Municipal Board. Essentially, Hume and Bedford point out that under the new Toronto Act, the city can set up its own alternative land use review board, and they say Toronto has to seize the opportunity now. Says Bedford, “The time has come for the city to break free of the OMB and take control of its destiny.”

Bear in mind that Hume is no “NIMBY” type — on the contrary, he is generally favourable towards new development and regularly chastises Torontonians for not liking tall buildings. But he recognizes that the current, basically random and arbitrary situation with regard to managing development is resulting in a mediocre hodge-podge of building that does no good for anyone in the long run.

He puts his finger on the problem when he says that the overshadowing presence of the OMB “infantilizes” planning in Toronto. No-one has to take responsibility for their actions. Developers can propose whatever they think they can get away with, with no regard to the city fabric, while local communities can dig in their heels and oppose everything with no regard for the need for the city to grow. There’s no reason to compromise — in the end, it’s the OMB that will decide.

A Toronto-based review body that based decisions on the city’s Official Plan would make a big difference. The Official Plan is a thoughtful, balanced and flexible document that calls for intensification but shapes it in specific, community-friendly ways. As well as controlling the excesses of developers, a transparent process that adheres to established rules might reduce knee-jerk resistance to new plans that fit into this controlled intensification model.

The question is, will Mayor Miller make any serious effort to make this happen quickly? The whole development issue is something of a blind spot for Miller — it doesn’t seem very high on his agenda. But it should be. It’s an issue that gets a lot of politically active Torontonians all across the city very worked up. Some of them, such as the Active 18 group on Queen West, are thoughtful about it and feel that the problem is the wrong type of development. Others, both downtown and in the suburbs, simply don’t want any change at all. If nothing is done about the issue and a decent centre-right candidate can tap into this resentment in the next election, Miller will be in serious trouble not just in the suburbs, but also in his core support in the centre of the city.

I think this is the kind of issue where public pressure and letter-writing/emails/faxes might help. If Torontonians can get the Mayor to realize this is an issue that they really care about and want addressed quickly and decisively, a really positive change could happen quickly. So I’m hoping people will take up Hume and Bedford’s call, and push the Mayor to act. Toronto needs to take control of its own future.

photo by Kevin Steele 

Recommended

7 comments

  1. Send me an email to write to and I’d be happy to write.

    -Jordan

  2. Isn’t it conventional wisdom that e-mail is too cheap to be taken seriously, and that paper mail is better?

    Something addressed to “THE MAYOR OF TORONTO” would probably get delivered appropriately…

  4. I just email Adam Giambrone and asked if he would make his thoughts known on this issue and I ask all Spacing readers to ask their reps and we will post our responses here.

    They all claim they read Spacing, lets see if it true. sd

  5. Let’s hope this stupid OMB decision can be overturned by Cabinet as it should be for about four planning reasons apart from many people being upset with it.
    1) the planning processes really are trashed – and this includes ignoring how a wall of buildings may or does impair fresher air coming inland in ever-worse Smogtown summers
    2) planning for transport means we need to expand, not constrain the transport corridor adjacent to 48Abell for public transit and that’s kinda hard to do when a building is jammed up. (Transport planning is pretty sad here though a gross example being the Front St. road folly which hasn’t looked at about 10 or more transit options)
    3) public transick is becoming trans*it in the core – we can’t really keep on adding more and more and more buildings and residents and then urge people to take the transit to be green while throttling service. TTC Chair Giambrone’s comments made on Friday (on stevemunro.ca) about needing 23 more streetcars on King St. for adequate service is a clear and welcome admission of problems (Now if we could shunt that quarter-billion of Front St. folly to some transit vehicles too!)
    4) the sanctioned demolition of 48 Abell St. is an urban oil spill – we cannot begin to get to “green” if we keep trashing really well built buildings.

  6. Just this past month we attended a Committee of Adjustment hearing for a Plazacorp proposal to build a 21 unit condo at the old TTC Beresford Substation on Annette Street. The proposed building was twice the density allowed for the site, was over 5 storeys high, and towered over its 2 storey neighbours. At the hearing Plazacorp lectured the Committee on how term “minor variance” could be more broadly interpreted to include this development. Neighbours and the Councillor Saundercook opposed the proposal and it was ultimately rejected by the Committee. The New Official Plan worked in our favour. Two years ago another project at the old Bi-Way store had a different result. They proposed a greater density and proposed their townhouse condos be built perpendicular to the street with a driveway and courtyard on each side projecting into the block. It is does not reinforce the street edge nor does it have a purpose built retail space to reinforce the retail nature of the street. This proposal was supported by city planners even though, if the adjacent properties are enlarged to the maximum height, the sunlight to these $500k units will be blocked! At OMB, the residents could only argue on parking and did not have a lawyer or planner. If the Official Plan had been adopted at that time it would have provided ammunition for the redesign of the proposal. The city and by extension, its citizens, have spent millions on the Official Plan, it’s been accepted by the OMB, it is comprehensive, and thus it should be form the baseline for any decisions by the OMB. If this is not the case then we are in serious trouble here on Annette and we need our own City body to deal with these proposals.