Item - 2021.SZ25.2

The Property Standards Committee, Toronto and East York Panel:

1. Confirmed Items Nos. 1 and 2 for the Order to Comply (November 10, 2021) for 390 Dundas Street East - Folder No.: 21 236257 PRS 00IV.

2. Rescinded Item No. 3 for the Order to Comply (November 10, 2021) for 390 Dundas Street East - Folder No.: 21 236257 PRS 00 IV.

Background

On December 13, 2021, three members of the Toronto-East York Panel of the Property Standards Committee (the “Panel”) heard an appeal from a Property Standards Order made in respect of the property at 390 Dundas Street East 55 (the “Property”).  The Order listed three alleged contraventions of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 629, Property Standards (the “Bylaw”). 

After hearing all the evidence and submissions, the Panel voted to confirm Items 1 and 2 of the Order and to rescind Item 3 and indicated it would issue written reasons for the decision.  The reasons are as follows.

Items 1 and 2

Items 1 and 2 relate to concerns about drainage.  The Property Owner did not dispute those concerns, and by the time of the hearing he had remedied these items to the satisfaction of the Property Standards Officer.  These items are confirmed, and have been complied with.

Item 3

Item 3 of the Order is as follows.

The Property Owner’s primary position is that he is allowed to store construction material and equipment on the Property because it is part of his business, and the zoning is Commercial/Residential.

The Panel notes several problems with Item 3 in the Order.

-  The section of the Bylaw referred to is 10.A.  However, 10A reads:

§ 629-10. Maintenance of yards and property.

A.  Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent the lawful storage and keeping of material in or on any non-residential property, if a lawful use requiring that material is conducted on the property and the materials are stored in a neat and orderly fashion.

-  Section 10.A of the Bylaw is an exception, not a standard. It seems likely that the Property Standards Officer meant to reference section 10.B of the Bylaw (“All yards and any other part of a property shall be kept clean and free from accumulations of junk, rubbish, brush, refuse, litter, garbage and other debris, and any conditions that are health, fire or other hazards”) but he did not.  The Order as written does not refer to any section of the Bylaw that is capable of being breached.

-  To add to the confusion about the Order, the Required Action refers to a chapter of the Toronto Municipal Code (“Chapter 623, Property Maintenance- Waste Materials 2A.(4)”) that does not appear to exist. 

The Property Standards Officer candidly conceded that there were deficiencies on the face of the Order in respect of Item 3.  The Panel finds these deficiencies go to the heart of the matter and render the Item unenforceable.  Property owners must know what section of the Bylaw they are accused of breaching, and should not be directed to take remedial action that refers to a statutory provision that does not exist. 

In addition, even if these deficits in the Order were curable, there was no evidence that the Property Owner’s storage and keeping of material was not lawful.  Indeed, the balance of the evidence was that the Property Owner’s family have been running a lawful business at the Property since 1958.  The area is zoned Commercial/Residential.  There is apparently a zoning application for the Property that might bring further clarity to the issue, but in the meantime, and in light of the Property Owner’s evidence about his business, there was no basis for finding that the storage of materials on the Property was not lawful as permitted by Section 10.A of the Bylaw.

At the hearing, the Property Owner expressed that he was unhappy that the physical inspection of the Property took place only from the property of his neighbour (who was also the complainant), and that no one spoke to him directly to address the complaint.  While this Panel does not and cannot dictate how inspections are carried out, we do note that this hearing might have been avoided had someone from Municipal Licensing and Standards spoken with the Property Owner earlier in the investigation and taken steps to verify his business at the outset.  

The Order of the Panel

For the reasons given in this decision, three members of the Panel passed a motion on December 13, 2021 to confirm Items 1 and 2 in the Order and to rescind Item 3 in the Order. 

Appeal of  Order to Comply (November 10, 2021) for 390 Dundas Street East.