City
Bar Bans, By-Laws and the End of Ossington
There's an interesting - and potentially frightening - experiment happening on Lower Ossington right now, and how it turns out could affect how you shop and eat and party for years to come. It's been five months now since Ward 19 councillor and deputy mayor Joe Pantalone dropped a surprise interim control bylaw on the street - a "bar ban" that stopped any eateries and drinkeries from opening while a study was undertaken on where the street was going.
At a public meeting last week, the results of the study were revealed, and among the recommendations is an ongoing ban on patios in backyard spaces of restaurants and cafes and a limit on the potential size of restaurants, among other regulations. From here, the proposed new by-law will go to Toronto and East York community council on November 10, and then to the City of Toronto council meeting at the end of November. "I would fully expect it to be approved," Pantalone tells me.
"They didn't offer any facts," says Pol Cristo-Williams, owner of Sweaty Betty's, a bar at Queen and Ossington that had its hip credentials buffed when Drew Barrymore ditched her own film fest party to hang there. "There are no facts. I don't know why they're calling it a study - all they're doing is copying the College Street by-laws, and College Street is a mess, it's a dying neighbourhood. After they prove that they've screwed up College Street, they're going to screw up Queen West and Ossington."
Cristo-Williams has a lot of complaints about the city's treatment of bar and restaurant owners, most of them centred on masses of red tape, a lack of transparency in dealing with city regulations and by-laws, and the confusing language of city zoning, such as the fact that there's no designation for bars at all. Most of all, though, he's angered by the way Ossington is being turned into a petri dish, whose new by-law, once approved, will probably have an effect on a new city-wide harmonized by-law that Pantalone says he favours, if only for the sake of simplification.
"I think confusion creates more delays and problems," Pantalone tells me. "People, by thinking they're going to open a restaurant easily and open a rear patio easily ... You may open a restaurant not knowing that, thinking it's easy, and then - surprise, surprise! If you have clarity you're better off as a businessman because you remove the unknown."
When Toronto amalgamated in 1998, the varying by-laws of six municipalities were welded together, and the harmonized by-law will finally deal with that, Pantalone says, though he adds that he's not in favour of a potential new regulation requiring every restaurant to provide parking spaces - a demand he admits is completely unrealistic in his dense, cramped downtown riding and on a street like Ossington in particular. He supports everything else in the Ossington study, however, but adds that if someone wants to apply for a rear patio, they can always go to the committee of adjustment for a variance.
Cristo-Williams isn't so optimistic, and says that he's had second thoughts about opening another business on Ossington when the by-law will effectively freeze the street in place as it was in spring of this year. "The businesses that are here will probably do fine, new businesses probably won't move in, and you can't survive without patios as a restaurant, so everybody's going to go down Dundas and to Bloor and Lansdowne. I wouldn't be surprised if they put a by-law in there - 'Oh look - it's going to grow, let's kill it first.'"



Discussion
55 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
The amenities of civilized life are important. These growing bar ghettoes push all that essential stuff out. Taking a closer look at the Ossington case is totally worthwhile.
why the secrecy? which galleries are you referring to?
Maybe they aren't selling enough large overpriced wrought iron black bug-like things. That would have less to do with Joe Pants than a lack of demand for art that few people want.
As much as I like Stintz, her election was a horrible thing for the city demonstrating that being a responsible, reasonable person on planning will lose you your seat. Acting like a tit as Pants, Vaughan, and Giambrone do keeps you in office.
Hell the councilor representing Sherway area opposed the condos going up, even though it's a bleak, industrial/retail area and transit hub. A few locals didn't like it so the councilor opposes and hopes to hell to lose at OMB.
We need unified bylaws that are the most permissive possible, to eliminate interim control orders, and to remove development veto from Ward scum. Get politicians to bring the facts of life to residents - you live in a city, you expressly moved to an area that was commercial, deal with it. These people are crying now that Ossington is safe and not a hangout for mafia types? It's as stupid as the people whining about the Annex being loud - 60 year olds were running bus trips to the Brunny when they were in university, but it's a shocking new development?
The late-night noise from Sweaty Betty's back patio is astounding, not to mention his patrons pissing and puking wherever they choose. Sadly, this bylaw won't effect this patio, but it'll prevent Pol Pot from ruining other people's quality of life.
Where big american box stores are okay, but small businesses owned by
canadians are being driven away!
Hmmm... Might this have something to do with why Toronto is so spread out a car is needed, and is deathly boring compared to more vibrant cities?
i don't understand why joe pants is being so complicated. why not just put a ban on opening bars and nightclubs and leave it at that? right now, ossington has the potential to be a wonderful restaurant scene. delux, union, pizzeria libretto, foxley.... these are all classy, top notch restaurants in my opinion. why make the restaurants suffer? would joe rather go back to the days when there were frequent shootings on ossington, and the majority of the shops were run down karaoke bars and pool halls?
I’ve been really involved with residents around West Queen West who are concerned about bar density in our area, and have been working with the city to try and contain it. Despite being on what most people might see as the “opposite” side of the issue from Pol, I actually agree with most of his points: the municipal (and provincial) processes are really unclear, and create confusion for everyone. One of the biggest obstacles to a solution, as he points out, is the fact that, as far as municipal regulations are concerned, there are no “bars” in the city, just restaurants. (And some “entertainment facilities” in a very few carefully-zoned areas).
Because of the kinds of problems that Pol points out, the solutions that get imposed end up not serving anyone’s interests well – often creating tough restrictions on businesses, in ways that don’t actually address the concerns of residents.
This problem seems to keep happening in different neighbhourhoods. I hope the city can step up and find solutions that are based on the real concerns that people have, and that they can look to other cities as examples for solutions. Thus far, their responses have been pretty disappointing.
my apologies if I don't have some of the legal language correct, but in a nutshell, that's what's going on. I would welcome any corrections or clarifications. Anyways, can someone just open up a quality grocery/fruit & vegetable stand around here?
It can't even get its act together to provide guidelines for proper/reasonable growth of a single street.
The street needs businesses that attract people traffic during the day. People who already live on the street are either going to have to get used to the increased noise or move.
Fruit stands: on Dundas 40 feet east of Ossington; on Dundas at Lakeview; on Dundas at Dovercourt; on Queen at Shaw; and of course several major fruit markets at College and Shaw. M&M (Dundas and Dovercourt) even delivers! Fruit! To your door!
The thing is, as far at the regulatory framework in Toronto is concerned, there are no bars in Toronto. Pretty much any place that you might think of as a bar is probably licenced as a restaurant. As the article mentions - there is no such designation as "bar" in Toronto.
That's why you get ridiculous "solutions" like this one - neighbours feel there are too many bars in the area, so the city bans all restaurants.
A big first step toward useful solutions would be for the city to introduce regulations that recognize that there are bars in the city, and that bars and restaurants need to be regulated differently. (A good regulation woudl also recognize that bar/restaurant isn't an either/or proposition. Lots of places operate as both, and would need to be regulted as both).
Again - lots of cities have regulations that usefully distinguish the activities of bars from the activities of restaurants. It would be useful to have such regulations here.
The proposed bylaw does not ban restaurant/bars on Ossington.
This law - to be called Cocoa's Law - is concisely stated as follows:
"Cocoa's Law
Section 1: As a discussion about Toronto grows longer, the probability that the phrase 'world class' will be uttered approaches 1.
Section 2: A whiny appeal to an unknowable and meaningless standard is fucking stupid and anyone who engages in such behaviour is a dinkus"
Penalties will be determined through a committee process. I hope that all dinkus's can be banned. This is harsh, but we need to send a message.
That you can't even imagine what criteria would be relevant to such a comparison tells me all I need to know about how much you could contribute to the discussion: f*ck all.
wow, grow up, if its not directed at someone I think we are all grown up enough to handle a swear word.
I didn't want to get into it because it's somewhat off topic, but I'm not a big fan of the produce on Dundas, especially M&M. This 'fruit stand' doesn't need to be on ossington, but regardless I'm surprised that entrepreneurs aren't using the appeal of ossington to take advantage of what seems to be a big opportunity in serving the non bar/restaurant needs of a huge residential community. Daytime footsteps are obviously an issue, and I imagine rent is making things prohibitive for many, but to anyone considering doing something a bit different in the area to serve the needs of the locals, if you build it they will come.
THERE IS NO PROPOSED BY-LAW TO BAN RESTOS/BARS ON OSSINGTON
The scene on that street blew up very quickly, and perhaps some modicum of boundary is important to ensure that it doesn't end up a disaster like the Club District.
As a homeowner on Ossington very close to the "strip" south of Dundas, I can tell you that yes, it is loud, but no, I'm not surprised. Sure, it's annoying when disrespectful drunks rip the tulips out of my garden at 2 AM, and no, I don't really enjoy having to walk past skanks in miniscule clothing and their greasy boyfriends while passing Jezebel on my way home, but hey, I signed up for this because I bought this place after Oss started to gentrify. But, as much as my hangouts have shifted towards the Garrison on Dundas to avoid the crowds of douchebags, the issue isn't just about controlling the "905er" influx after dark, or the noise from patios. It's about transforming this neighbourhood in the right way. Bars and restaurants alone cannot support the people who live here.
i have heard that there are sections of new york that have spacing regulations that permits X number of specific type of businesses within certain distance. ex. maximum 5 bars, maximum 5 retail etc. this kind of regulation would ensure diversity on the street. seems like a good idea to me.
How many have actually read the moratorium, or the recommendations of the "study" (no facts presented)? The moratorium disallows the opening of ALL food related business, which are seen by Joe as "gateway" enrty points to obtaining a liquor license. That helps destroy the natural flow of development, which could have the effect of crippling the daytime business it purports to support. With respect to the definition of a bar or restaurant, the City steadfastly refuses to deal with the difficult issues, preferring to stamp carbon copy restrictive "bandaid" solutions on any vibrant area that might emerge.
30 years ago, someone said Toronto was a "city of neighbourhoods" and forever since, NIMBYism has held the fascia. None of us like the mob scene bar-closing scenario, and we all want to see vibrant daytime activity on our local main streets, but City Council and the planning Department have got to start being more accomodating to (small) business, more imaginative, AND more urbane in their thinking if Toronto is to develop into a vibrant place. The proposed by-law recommends disallowing ANY entertainment within a restaurant on Ossington. All restaurants are allowed a small entatainment area. if you want a strip full of 905ers, that's a good way to start. As for parking, Ossington probably has the highest percentage of pedestrian and bicycle riding clientele in town, but very few places to lock up.
The worst part of this whole process is the adversarial way Pantalone has managed relations between businesses and residents. Businesses have been portrayed as purely predatory, and no effort has been made to encourage direct communications between groups. Instead Pantalone has assumed control over the entire process, with nothing happening without first kissing his ring.
Ossington is changing from an industrial area to a commercial/residential area. Fruit stands? Where? Next to the auto body shop or the self-storage place? First, Ossington needs steady daytime foot traffic. A bakery or a lunchtime/breakfast cafe would help here, but Pantalone shut those down too. Insane!
And the dumbest, DUMBEST idea is the parking requirement. Although Pantalone says he opposes this particular provision, the fact that the planner actually proposed it indicates the quality of thought underlying the proposed bylaw. The best way to encourage more area visitors with cars would be to promise more parking. Scrap the whole thing and start again, preferably under the stewardship of a new councillor.
Bottom line: the new restaurants are not displacing fruit stands. They are building the conditions that MIGHT make fruit stands possible in the future, unless this precious entrepreneurial activity is quashed. I understand the complaints about nuisances, but this is how streets develop, grow and ultimately improve. And the community is not helpless, regardless of what Pantalone wants you to think. The best way for the neighbourhood to reclaim ownership of this process is to disregard the top-down self-interested posturing of has-been politicians, and establish direct relationships with the new businesses. Talk to them! Show them that the community will support businesses that serve and respect the neighbourhood. Resist blanket bans, but instead make patio and liquor licenses conditional on good relations with neighbours. Ask them to open for lunch or even breakfast! Ask the City for bike parking!
And above all, don't take Ossington's moment in the sun for granted. The neighbourhood has a rare opportunity to create a complete street, with a nice mix of businesses supporting the community. Growing pains are unpleasant, but growth is preferable to stagnancy. If the entrepreneurs are chased away, there is no reason to think they will return.