[js97]

The money changing hands takes place at the municipal level (i.e. Section 37 bonusing). When a project gets to the OMB, it is simply all out war.

Let's not forget between the councillor & developers...

 

[durandy]

It would also make third party appeals pretty much non-existent due to costs.

This one's key. Right now anyone can appeal any city decision, standing is much looser. Under the courts you'd need a direct interest in the case. I've seen plenty of OMB appeals go the way of the developer, but community groups have a huge impact. They're the reason the power centres are installing sidewalks and bus bays a lot of the time.

Also OMB chairs are planners a lot of the time, or at least have much more expertise than the courts. And determining compliance with the Municipal and Planning Act isn't always just a matter of applying law - the matters of fact are usually hard to separate. My impression is the Board is already bound to consider the issues of law by the standard of review and appeal provisions in the Municipal Act.

 

[torplanner]

As an Official Plan isn't law the way a Zoning By-law is law, could a Court even deal with issues related to it?

 

[durandy]

they're required and described in the Planning Act

 

[torplanner]

Yes, but OPs are more broad policy that is open to interpretation. Zoning isn't.

 

[torplanner]

I just noticed that PGM also recommended that the City setup a local appeal body for Committee of Adjustment applications.

 

[DSC]

I just noticed that PGM also recommended that the City setup a local appeal body for Committee of Adjustment applications.

Yes, at the moment the ONLY apppeal route is to OMB so they need to have a separate City appeal process if the OMB is removed.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Since cities, towns, and other municipalities are still children of the province, the premier (provincial cabinet and legislators) can still overrule decisions made by the municipalities.

 

[TOareaFan]

I am wondering what the rationale for removing these two municipalities and not others. Surely, that would lead to others applying. In Brampton, for instance, it would lead to absolutely no buildings over 6 storeys tall.....so much for intensification and places to grow.

 

[torplanner]

Technically, the motion requested that the OMB be abolished, and as a backup that Toronto be removed from its jurisdiction.

These municipalities can only speak for themselves. Presumably, if other municipalities want out of the OMB, they will pass similar resolutions. Which will also be ignored by the province.

 

[ItsTehBean]

Ontario has a big government that is trying to oversee every little thing, from city planning, to education... And the solution to these problems, is to grow even bigger!
.
OMB is Ontario's planning board equivalent of The Federal Reserve. Both should have been ended long ago.

 

[torplanner]

Um... not really. At all.

The OMB is an attempt to make courts accessible to more people. Removing the OMB just puts appeals into the courts, where they will be largely inaccessible to most people.

 

[durandy]

on mixed fact and law courts will wade right in, just as the OMB do, but presumably not de novo, instead they'll take into account council's decision-making. I wonder if the result would really be so different in substance, compared to the effects on procedure and as a result cost.

 

[torplanner]

on mixed fact and law courts will wade right in, just as the OMB do, but presumably not de novo, instead they'll take into account council's decision-making. I wonder if the result would really be so different in substance, compared to the effects on procedure and as a result cost.

I'm not sure how that would work in practice.

I'm trying to think back to when I worked as a planning in the USA, which was appeals to courts. I think they were virtually hearings de novo because what "point of law" could the court make a decision upon that isn't informed by all others? Density is related to transportation or utilities, for example.

I'm also trying to think what are various points of law that could be the subject of an appeal. For example, if a municipality says that there is insufficient roadway capacity to accommodate a big new condo, is that a point of law to appeal? And if so, and the hearing is scoped to just transportation, what does that impact have on the approval of the application?

 

[ItsTehBean]

Um... not really. At all.

The OMB is an attempt to make courts accessible to more people. Removing the OMB just puts appeals into the courts, where they will be largely inaccessible to most people.

Oh, I think it is. OMB is just another roadblock toward giving control of planning to municipalities. The citizens and the council should discuss and have a final say whether to approve and reject the applications. The courts (whether provincial or federal) should not deal with planning in local areas and their roles should not interfere what building application works for the community. OMB is created by Province of Ontario for bureaucratic interests and it adds more burden to municipalities by adding more bureaucracy. Having OMB to speak whether to like or dislike the development is asinine.

While I do agree that OMB and The Fed function differently, they do in fact have something in common, and that is add unnecessary regulations toward already regressive urban planning.

And I do know this message from Jim Watson: "Has the OMB been perfect? No. Can it improve? Yes, I think it can and I am quite prepared to work with the attorney general to try and ensure that the OMB is more reflective of community values" Enough said. The notion that the government can look after our daily life whether it's education or managing our utility bills is outrageously and oxymoron.