Townhomes rejected after unusual move
Toronto council moved to block a 60townhome development in the Humber Summit area after the local councillor pushed his colleagues to ignore staff advice that recommended rejecting the application.
At a meeting Thursday, councillors questioned why staff advice had been ignored and remarked on the unprecedented way that the development in Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti’s Ward 7 (York West) had been brought before council.
“Every application in this city affects every similar application,” said Councillor John Filion on the council floor. “This one is clearly one, from the staff recommendations, that should not be supported and the way that it got here, I’ve never seen that before. It just has an odd something to it.”
Late last year, Mammoliti lobbied for approval of the developer’s proposal for nine townhome blocks on a vacant site on the northwest corner of Islington Ave. and Muir Ave.
A staff report identified several problems with the proposal for a 60-unit development in the Humber Summit area
A staff report identified several problems with the proposal, which had been revised from 136 stacked townhomes to 60 street-level townhomes. Those concerns included, significantly, that there were too many units on too small a property. The development as proposed uses a private road that doesn’t have sidewalks, staff said, as well as driveways that are legally too short to park a car. Proposed heights and setbacks also don’t conform with city rules, staff said.
Staff said they provided possible solutions that would reduce the development to 45 to 50 units. The developer, Caliber Homes, refused to consider those options. In November, Mammoliti moved a motion at Etobicoke York Community Council to receive the rejection report for information and direct staff to bring forward bylaws that would essentially allow the development.
It was an unusual move. Typically, staff present a report recommending the full council either reject or allow a development as proposed. (Sometimes an application is appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board — the provincial tribunal that has final say on most land-use planning disputes — before a final report is written.)
Council can accept the staff advice or reject it by deleting the staff recommendations and replacing them with their own.
What community council agreed to do in November, by approving Mammoliti’s motion, was ask staff to report back with the necessary bylaw changes needed to get the development approved without actually having to ask council to vote yes or no on the staff recommendation. The proposed bylaw changes — not the initial staff rejection — would then go straight to council for a vote.
And that is exactly what happened when in December council approved the bylaw request without debate.
The item then returned to the council floor last week after staff brought forward the requested bylaws.
But at least one councillor spotted the odd path the motion had taken.
At council last week, Filion asked Neil Cresswell, the director of community planning for the Etobicoke York district, whether he had ever seen that process before. In five years, Cresswell said he hadn’t. “So, this is unusual?” “In my experience, yes, councillor,” Cresswell said.
Over the last three years of this term, council has never rejected staff’s advice to refuse an application, according to a Star review of refusal reports and the resulting votes at council. The Star found only one other example where a community council, also Etobicoke York, initially rejected staff’s advice, between 2014 and today.
With the most recent item, council supported a motion from Councillor Shelley Carroll to refuse the application. The application could still be appealed to the OMB.
The vote was 23 to 12. Mammoliti, who missed the two-day meeting, was absent for the debate and vote on the item.
After the meeting, the Star asked Mammoliti by email why he wasn’t at council or why he ignored staff advice. He did not address any of those questions in a statement where he accused council of flipflopping because of the earlier decision that was passed without debate.
“Because it’s silly season, my community lost out on a great development. I am assuming this will now go to the OMB or it may be replaced with a group home that is opposed by the community.”
At council, Councillor Gord Perks said: “This is the kind of thing we would never approve if we were paying attention.”
According to the city’s lobbyist registrar, Mammoliti’s former executive assistant Anthony Cesario lobbied Mammoliti’s office on behalf of the developer, Caliber, between January 2015 and May 2016 about the site and the sale of a piece of land originally owned by the city.
City documents show the city sold a 976-square-metre plot to Cal-Muir Developments Inc. for $705,000 in 2015. The deal was approved by city staff who had the authority to confirm transactions less than $1 million.
Cesario could not be reached for comment. Mammoliti did not respond to questions about his former staff member.
Financial documents show Caliber Homes’ David Di Meo donated the maximum amount — $750 — to Mammoliti’s re-election campaign in 2014. A Daniela Di Meo also donated the maximum amount.
Di Meo could not be reached for comment. Mammoliti did not respond to a question about his relationship with the developer.
The site is still being marketed online and on-site as the Belmont Residences.
At Etobicoke York Community Council in November, local resident Grant Evers, with the Humber Summit Residents’ Association, said their group formed as a response to concerns about the development.
“We’re concerned that the councillor is attempting to see this proceed even though there is a refusal report against it,” Evers told community council. He also raised concerns about the sale of the land.
He accused Mammoliti of fear-mongering, telling residents if they didn’t support the development they risked having a group home in the area.
Arepresentative for the developer at the same meeting noted they had worked with the community through several consultations to significantly reduce the number of units.
“I got the sense the community was very happy with the proposal,” said Ryan Virtanen, from KLM Planning Partners Inc.
Mammoliti said at the meeting he did not want to risk the application going to the OMB and said the circumstances warranted his motion.
“As much as some people might want to tinker with this, there won’t be any more tinkering in my opinion,” he said. “Even if they came back with another application, which they might, I don’t want to take that chance.”
Mammoliti said the community wants the area rezoned and an email about the process sent from his office said the community “welcomed warmly” the revised proposal.
“The Humber Summit Residents’ Association was formed largely to play politics with an incredible development,” the email said.
In January, before the item came to council again, Evers returned to Etobicoke York community council to reiterate their group’s concern.
“Why do we pay our planners hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide their expertise and then in the end say, ‘Well it doesn’t really matter’?”