Residents of a York neighbourhood in Toronto are expressing their outrage after the city’s Committee of Adjustment granted variances to a local construction company, Modcity, facing multiple accusations, including the illegal removal of trees. The situation has sparked numerous investigations into the developer’s actions, one of which involves allegations that Modcity cut down a tree on a property it did not legally own at the time.
On Wednesday, despite these ongoing investigations, the Committee of Adjustment approved variances for a multiplex structure and a garden suite to be built where the trees once flourished. Local resident Stephanie Pacheco voiced her frustration, highlighting the timeline of events: "They cut [the trees] down April 20, they had the survey done April 21. It doesn’t take a genius to see what’s happening." She noted that the trees were cut down in the middle of the night, underscoring the suspicious nature of the actions taken by Modcity.
During the meeting, Ian Flett, the lawyer representing Modcity, repeatedly stated that the illegal removal of the trees was not a factor for the Committee of Adjustment’s evaluation, as it does not fall within the four tests that the committee must consider when assessing property variances. "With respect, that broader context is not before you when assessing the four tests," he remarked, emphasizing the need to adhere strictly to procedural guidelines.
However, some committee members disagreed, believing that the ongoing investigations regarding Modcity’s conduct should inform their decisions. Committee member Katie Plazier expressed her concern about the implications of the investigations on planning decisions, stating, "I do think that the outcome of those investigations would potentially actually have an impact on the decisions that we make here from a planning perspective, so I would prefer to move to a deferral." This perspective, however, did not gain traction amongst other members, with Chair Larry Clay mentioning a lack of concrete evidence to support the alleged misconduct. "They’re allegations at this point. We have no report from Urban Forestry before us, it’s difficult for us to ascribe any opinion to that," he noted, illustrating the committee's hesitance to act based on unverified claims.
Adding to the residents’ frustrations, Councillor Alejandra Bravo submitted a letter expressing her concerns about the ongoing investigations into Modcity’s actions, highlighting the seriousness of the matter. She criticized the committee’s dismissal of her arguments, questioning the dismissal of the investigations and stating, "This is disappointing and I think really concerning that a letter from a city councillor, who’s making the argument that there’s an investigation underway, is dismissed." Bravo indicated her intent to follow up on this issue, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in the committee’s decision-making process.
Following the committee’s decision to reject any deferral request and approve the variances, residents left the meeting feeling exhausted and frustrated. Pacheco articulated the sentiment of many in the community, declaring, "I just think that the system is made for the developers and not for us. What is the point of having a Committee of Adjustments if you’re actually not going to take our concerns to heart?" This sentiment captures the essence of the residents' concern over the balance of power favoring developers at the expense of local community voices.
