City's Future Up in the Air - Toronto has chosen one path...still hope for Vancouver

[insertrealname]

The government can overturn OMB decisions, not the other way around. The OMB isn't the development rubber stamp you seem to think it is.

Surely, though, the developers can make an appeal about OP decisions (at whatever level: municipal or provincial) to the OMB? After all, these are administrative decisions, there has to be some recourse--the OP is not approved simply through fiat!

And no, I don't assume the OMB is a rubber stamp. But its process is a highly legalistic one, and results don't necessarily reflect good planning.

 

[urbandreamer]

I think Toronto's future is quite literally up in the air--aka, highrises.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

We keep hearing the same warnings for Toronto year after year, and bankruptcy is averted by continuously adding debt. Toronto still has leeway in terms of adding new taxes and fees and by raising it's lower property taxes, which it will, until they cost advantage it has enjoyed over the 905 is gone. Then, the real crisis begins. As the tax base drains away and the property values start to drop, what does Toronto do? All glory is fleeting, and empires rise and fall... fall usually due to their own excesses and belief that they are too smart to fail.

What cost advantage? You are assuming those who decide to live in the city chose to do so because of the advantage of low residential tax rates - but I would argue that's a very weak influence on locational decisions. In fact, I can (not that I think this outcome is very desirable) argue raising residential property taxes will actually "encourage" those with lower income (e.g. seniors) to vacate their properties and make way for further gentrification, which is probably a plus on the city's balance sheet for a myriad of reasons (service use, etc).

AoD

 

[taal]

What cost advantage? You are assuming those who decide to live in the city chose to do so because of the advantage of low residential tax rates - but I would argue that's a very weak influence on locational decisions. In fact, I can (not that I think this outcome is very desirable) argue raising residential property taxes will actually "encourage" those with lower income (e.g. seniors) to vacate their properties and make way for further gentrification, which is probably a plus on the city's balance sheet for a myriad of reasons (service use, etc).

AoD

I think that was the cities mistake ... I persume the orginal idea was to keep residents from moving to new suburbs - but really, people don't really look into property taxes too much - in fact many still believe Toronto has *high* property taxes compare to the rest of the 905. Business on the other hand, care, and that's had a huge impace.

 

[MisterF]

Surely, though, the developers can make an appeal about OP decisions (at whatever level: municipal or provincial) to the OMB? After all, these are administrative decisions, there has to be some recourse--the OP is not approved simply through fiat!

And no, I don't assume the OMB is a rubber stamp. But its process is a highly legalistic one, and results don't necessarily reflect good planning.

The OMB is an appeal body for municipal decisions, not for provincial decisions. OPs get approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, and they often send sections back to municipalities. I suspect that's what will happen any time a new OP designates Greenbelt land for development. You're right that OMB process is highly legalistic. Each hearing is a trial de novo, so not having effective lawyers and planners could lose a case. Lack of effective policy to back up a planning decision can lose a case as well.

 

[insertrealname]

The OMB is an appeal body for municipal decisions, not for provincial decisions. OPs get approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, and they often send sections back to municipalities. I suspect that's what will happen any time a new OP designates Greenbelt land for development. You're right that OMB process is highly legalistic. Each hearing is a trial de novo, so not having effective lawyers and planners could lose a case. Lack of effective policy to back up a planning decision can lose a case as well.

Thanks for reminding me succinctly how the OMB actually works--I did know that at one point but tend to look on the whole apparatus as a nightmare, to be pushed out of mind as fast as possible.

The "lack of effective policy to back up a planning decision" is one of the factors in the Greenbelt planning mess, the Greenbelt decisions lack an effective policy implementation that truly preserves these areas from encroachment. The OMB's piecemeal approach to approving OPs does not help matters, somehow the wider intent of the provincial and area plans always get lost in the shuffle: after all, the intent of recent provincial planning in the "Golden Horseshoe" area was not wall-to-wall suburbs and the preservation of parking lots, but that is effectively what is happening!