News   Mar 28, 2024
 176     0 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.9K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.2K     2 

Toronto Councillors and Mississauga Council want their cities removed from OMB

Broken link.

You've also presented no cogent argument as to why the OMB shouldn't exist. Care to elaborate?

Then you do not know how to read the link I posted. "Like the Senate, the OMB dates from the 19th century, when it minded the railways and municipal finances. Up until the 1990s, its members also enjoyed lifetime appointments".

In case you choose not to read, here is another excerpt "For big cities such as Toronto, it seems only fair to allow for a locally-run, arms’ length appeals mechanism to guard against errors of law or lapses in due process. It rankles when non-Toronto appointees to the OMB issue edicts without explanation, undermining years of negotiations and planning work"

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/08/27/how_the_omb_stifles_democracy_in_ontario_cohn.html
 
Then you do not know how to read the link I posted. "Like the Senate, the OMB dates from the 19th century, when it minded the railways and municipal finances. Up until the 1990s, its members also enjoyed lifetime appointments".

In case you choose not to read, here is another excerpt "For big cities such as Toronto, it seems only fair to allow for a locally-run, arms’ length appeals mechanism to guard against errors of law or lapses in due process. It rankles when non-Toronto appointees to the OMB issue edicts without explanation, undermining years of negotiations and planning work"

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/08/27/how_the_omb_stifles_democracy_in_ontario_cohn.html

Palma...if and when Toronto Council and City Planning revises Bylaw 483-86 to a comprehensive overview for the City then you have an argument otherwise your polemics are not useful.....
 
Then you do not know how to read the link I posted. "Like the Senate, the OMB dates from the 19th century, when it minded the railways and municipal finances. Up until the 1990s, its members also enjoyed lifetime appointments".

In case you choose not to read, here is another excerpt "For big cities such as Toronto, it seems only fair to allow for a locally-run, arms’ length appeals mechanism to guard against errors of law or lapses in due process. It rankles when non-Toronto appointees to the OMB issue edicts without explanation, undermining years of negotiations and planning work"

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/08/27/how_the_omb_stifles_democracy_in_ontario_cohn.html

Like the OMB, the Supreme Court dates from the 19th century, when it minded a self-governing British colony focused on building railroads. Up until the 1920s, its members also enjoyed lifetime appointments (today they are appointed until they turn 75).
 
Palma...if and when Toronto Council and City Planning revises Bylaw 483-86 to a comprehensive overview for the City then you have an argument otherwise your polemics are not useful.....

My understanding was that the City has enacted a new comprehensive zoning bylaw (569-2013), and that the only areas of the city that this does not cover are those where a development application had been commenced prior to the enactment. That being said, I don't think that this bylaw varies too greatly from 483-86 - instead it largely regularizes the zoning regime across the city.

What I see as the most significant issue with the OMB is that anyone may appeal the enactment of a zoning by-law or City-initiated Official Plan/Official Plan Amendment.

For example, Toronto's current Official Plan (well, prior to the OPAs flowing from the Five Year review currently under way), was approved by City Council in 2003, but did not come into force until 2006 after all appeals were decided/settled at the OMB.

I think that it is problematic that a duly elected public body is unable to govern (i.e. have legislation that it approves actually enforced) until it is tailored to the satisfaction of a variety of private interests. This is quite a different set of circumstances than is the case for Provincial or Federal legislation, where even if a new piece of law is contested via courts, it is still in effect up until the point an injunction is approved by the court or it is struck down by the court.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the link....I don't usually miss or forget something as big as 569-2013.... it is an interesting read.
Here is something else 2013PG29.16 "Response to Provincial land use Planning Appeal System."..in its amended form (Kristen Wong-Tam) point 4 ..."Toronto and other municipality jurisdiction by majority vote, be granted the option of removal from the OMB's perview...What is head turning about that is the 21 to 11 vote for the admendment and who voted No...D Ford, R Ford and others on the right....I find it kind of stunning that R Ford would vote against this amendment considering he is front and centre in attempts to deny the City legal representation at individual OBM hearings, he consistantly holds motions to that effect and constantly complains about 10K per hearing...
Gee PG29.16 passed in its amended form with a vote of 30 to 5 with 10 absent ...the No's were D Ford, R Ford, G Lindsay-Luby, P Leon and M Thompson...What is with that, they don't want their City to have the responsiblity for its own development?
 
Last edited:
Seeing I haven't figured out how to get someone's attention or direct a post to an individual (what can I say I'm a luddite at heart), I'll just say Hey Palma...
Here is something you might have an interest in...Jennifer Keesmat released a tool kit that could go a long way to getting Toronto off the OMB's radar
have a look at...
www1.toronto.ca/City of Toronto/City Planning/Zoning & Enviroment/Files/pdf/R/Reset_TO_Toolkit_2014.pdf
What do you think?
 
Seeing I haven't figured out how to get someone's attention or direct a post to an individual (what can I say I'm a luddite at heart), I'll just say Hey Palma...
Here is something you might have an interest in...Jennifer Keesmat released a tool kit that could go a long way to getting Toronto off the OMB's radar
have a look at...
www1.toronto.ca/City of Toronto/City Planning/Zoning & Enviroment/Files/pdf/R/Reset_TO_Toolkit_2014.pdf
What do you think?

I saw her on the Agenda on TVO and she talked about this system and I did like what I heard. I had seen the link previously and if I am understanding everything, the document sounds promising - if in the end developers cannot appeal to the OMB. From what I read, there is a statement that "In addition, there is no option for a minor variance application". Does this mean no appeals to the OMB? And what role would the OMB ever play in Toronto then? Considering most of the development happens in Toronto, would that not mean a reduction in members on that board?
 
Get rid of the OMB and land use appeals will find their ways to the courts, just like in America. The current zoning, the harmonization of 483-86, is a joke. Becarful what you wish for, the current zoning code is inconsistent with Toronto's Official Plan, which violates a provincial planning requirement. For selfish reasons I would love to see how the courts will rule. Development of Toronto will continue. As we all know, the courts will look to precedent.
 
If Toronto council would listen to their planning staff (who abide by the provincial planning legislation) and vote based on the legal merits of a project rather than political merits, the OMB wouldn't be the big, bad monster that council says it is. The OMB removes the politics and NIMBYism from the planning process and evaluates a project based on whether it conforms to provincial legislation.
 
I received and email from Rosario Marchese regarding this on the weekend. http://rosariomarchese.ca/toronto-o...ng-free-from-omb-as-bill-20-goes-to-hearings/

I am not totally up to speed on this. Having an active 4 year old leaves little time! But this concerns me. So many projects in this city would never have been built if it was not for the OMB. And certainly the amount of anything tall would be greatly diminished. Some things have been built that were not the greatest, I would easily agree. But many good projects have. We are the fourth largest city in NA. Not a village as some in power would like to pretend.
 
If Toronto council would listen to their planning staff (who abide by the provincial planning legislation) and vote based on the legal merits of a project rather than political merits, the OMB wouldn't be the big, bad monster that council says it is. The OMB removes the politics and NIMBYism from the planning process and evaluates a project based on whether it conforms to provincial legislation.


a great point
 

Back
Top