Law Times

Page 10 June 26, 2017 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com Unknown if shifts will improve planning process OMB changes mean restrictions on appeals BY SHANNON KARI For Law Times T he proposed changes to the Ontario Munici- pal Board, including renaming the planning agency, are part of legislation with a predictably upbeat title. The Building Better Communi- ties and Preserving Watersheds Act will give communities a "stronger voice" in land use plan- ning, the provincial government stated when it was introduced at the end of last month. Bill Mauro, the provincial Municipal Affairs minister, is- sued a statement saying the changes will "empower" mu- nicipalities to decide how their neighbourhoods should develop. The changes, in response to criticism over the years from some municipalities and resi- dents' groups that hearings be- fore the board were too time- consuming and costly, include renaming the agency as the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. One of the more significant changes announced as well is that de novo hearings before the tribu- nal will be effectively eliminated. The planned reforms may be good for the Liberal government with a provincial election sched- uled to take place next spring, but many lawyers who practise in this area are not convinced the changes will result in an overall improvement in the mu- nicipal planning process. "You hear a lot about the OMB in the press. I don't think the allegations are fair," says Mi- chael Bowman, a partner at Os- ler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP in Toronto. He doesn't agree that the tribunal has tended to tilt in favour of developers. "I don't believe they favour one side or the other," says Bow- man, who is a senior lawyer in the firm's Municipal, Land Use Plan- ning and Development group. The view is echoed by Alan Cohen, a partner at Soloway Wright LLP in Ottawa. "The OMB is a political football the legislature can kick around," says Cohen, who also teaches municipal and planning law at the University of Ottawa. He wonders, though, whether the proposed changes will actu- ally streamline the process. "I think there will be less of an ability to have full and proper hearings. I wonder if the end re- sult will be that we all end up in the courts," says Cohen. There has only been a first reading of the bill so far in the Ontario legislature and it may not be until later this year that it becomes law. Along with the changes to de novo hearings, there will also be some restric- tions on what can be appealed, cases where only written evi- dence will be accepted, as well as the creation of the Local Plan- ning Appeal Support Centre. The existing Ontario Munici- pal Board consists of members appointed by the province. Tri- bunal members can substitute a municipal decision if it is not found to be the best planning de- cision. Under the proposed legis- lation, if the tribunal determines that a decision is inconsistent with or does not conform to pro- vincial policies or local plans, it can send the decision back to the municipality. It would then have 90 days to amend its original planning decision to conform to the tribunal's findings. Only if it is still found to be inadequate a second time could the tribunal substitute its own decision. The provincial government's reforms are "voter friendly," says Sarah Hahn, an associate in the municipal law group at Barris- ton LLP in Barrie, Ont. Whether the changes will make the plan- ning process fairer and less ex- pensive for everyone involved remains to be seen, she says. "Getting rid of de novo might be good. Then you are not start- ing from scratch arguing a case all over again," says Hahn. How- ever, the proposed legislation also takes away the right of ap- peal of certain municipal plan- ning processes, which is a con- cern to all sides, she notes. "A lot of the details will be in the regulations. It is still un- clear," says Hahn. In some cases, this could im- pact the rights of residents' asso- ciations opposed to a local plan- ning decision, suggests Cohen. "Ratepayer groups may be denied the right to appeal. They may be disenfranchised," he says. Other measures, such as re- quiring cases conferences, may not reduce expenses in more mi- nor matters that are less then a full-day hearing at the tribunal, says Hahn. "We already have a process where both sides can go ahead with mediation, if they can ben- efit," she points out. The board in its current format "is very pro- active" in terms of encouraging resolutions without a hearing, says Bowman. FOCUS Sarah Hahn says it remains to be seen whether proposed changes to the Ontario Municipal Board will make the planning process fairer and less expensive for every- one involved. BUILD A BETTER ARTICLING STUDENT AT THE TORONTO LAWYERS ASSOCIATION COURT HOUSE ORIENTATION AND TOURS OF 330, 361 AND 393 UNIVERSITY AVENUE COURT HOUSES Tuesday, August 15, 2017 Thursday, August 17, 2017 Tuesday, August 22, 2017 8:30 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Make sure your Articling Students know: • How to find out what room their motion will be heard in • How to sign in • How to address the judicial officer • Where to go to file documents, and more tlaonline.ca | info@tlaonline.ca Register now or contact us to hold spots for your students. Untitled-7 1 2017-06-20 1:42 PM See Balance, page 12 The OMB is a political football the legislature can kick around. Alan Cohen

• Cover