News   Nov 27, 2024
Menkes Welcomes First Occupants to Festival at Assembly Park in Vaughan
 381     0 
News   Nov 27, 2024
News Roundup for November 27, 2024
 457     0 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Better Buy a Boat
 691     0 

OMB Reform

The OMB stopped the horribly suburban Smart Centre plan on Eastern several years ago, for which I for one remain thankful.

Not that I am a fan of the OMB in general, or the Port Authority. Nonetheless, my main fear regarding these new measures is that, despite (perhaps) speeding up the approvals process, the forces of NIMBY will be able to leverage far greater sway than is the now the case. Rampant NIMByism is a cancer... it can wreak real havoc in city-building.

And yes, I am aware of the rich irony of the NIMBY opposition to a Smart Centre in Leslieville!
 
jje1000 said:
I'm largely concerned about NIMBY groups gaining additional power, especially in the suburbs.

NIMBY-ism these days has really shed its traditional grassroots origins (Greenwich Village, Spadina Expressway) and has really become about a largely white, land-owning cohort concerned more about the value of their properties than anything else.

To them anything will always be too tall, too dense, too large, adds too much shade, not enough parking, too much traffic, etc.
Click to expand...
well sometimes. development is too tall, too dense, too large, adds too much shade, too much traffic
 
the OMB has all been about developers. Yes 50 storey condo is too high. European cities have a minscule the size of land we do but do you see high rise condos there? No. The most they are 5-6 storey and that includes ground floor. As a friend from barcelonia said - when I asked her about heights of apartments - she said 5 -6 cause no one likes tall so they don;t build them. Toronto, and Ontario with all this land some how needs 50 sttorey condos on all streets for some reason and the people who live in houses are to be blamed. If there will be 700,000 people coming in 30 years they will not all be individual looking for individual units right? What about the amount of people dying in that 30 year period. Seems to me that will balance the growth in population perhaps. Italy fits into Ontario and has double population of canada but I do not remember seeing tall apartments there.
 
Palma said:
the OMB has all been about developers. Yes 50 storey condo is too high. European cities have a minscule the size of land we do but do you see high rise condos there? No. The most they are 5-6 storey and that includes ground floor. As a friend from barcelonia said - when I asked her about heights of apartments - she said 5 -6 cause no one likes tall so they don;t build them. Toronto, and Ontario with all this land some how needs 50 sttorey condos on all streets for some reason and the people who live in houses are to be blamed. If there will be 700,000 people coming in 30 years they will not all be individual looking for individual units right? What about the amount of people dying in that 30 year period. Seems to me that will balance the growth in population perhaps. Italy fits into Ontario and has double population of canada but I do not remember seeing tall apartments there.
Click to expand...

No, the problem is that modern NIMBYism often also opposes mid-rise intensification (they'll say that the school systems will become overloaded, there'll be too much traffic, the character of the neighbourhood will be ruined, etc.) . They want densities far below those of Barcelona and most European cities.

See: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/toronto-ridiculous-nimbyism-thread.21818/page-35#post-1223159
 
It's about time. I think the OMB (its officers) is highly susceptible to bribes and developers pay offs. I don't think everything that passes through it was on the total up and up. Who sits on the board, what are their qualifications and who appointed them?
 
We pay many qualified city planners who hopefully know how to plan for growth and things like transit, yet the OMB often disregards careful planning in favour of developers demands. We don't listen to planners when it come to our transit plans either, but let highly unqualified politicians (Scarborough subway extension for example) make the decisions. Why do we pay all these planners if their hard work and ideas are disregarded?
 
Seems to me these changes will result in fewer, shorter & less dense buildings. And with a slush fund for area residents to fight appeals I can see the LPAT being even more clogged up than the OMB is now as residents will appeal everything.

Will we still see 50+ storey towers in the core?
 
jje1000 said:
No, the problem is that modern NIMBYism often also opposes mid-rise intensification (they'll say that the school systems will become overloaded, there'll be too much traffic, the character of the neighbourhood will be ruined, etc.) . They want densities far below those of Barcelona and most European cities.

See: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/toronto-ridiculous-nimbyism-thread.21818/page-35#post-1223159
Click to expand...

The Canadian village fetish brought to the big city.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
The Canadian village fetish brought to the big city.

AoD
Click to expand...

@dtopping said:
Just once I'd love to see a story that published NIMBY complainers' names alongside their property values, like so:
Click to expand...

C_9n8QOUMAUKlTf.jpg


https://twitter.com/dtopping/status/864524007466569728
 
Update:
Just over a week ago, the Province of Ontario announced the creation of new tribunal that would replace the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) as we know it today. The Provincial government argues that the tribunal will make the process more democratic, allowing citizens to access to a faster and more cost-effective hearing process. Named the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT), it would give much more weight to elected officials and their communities, in contrast to the OMB, which arguably weighed broad Provincial growth targets over local concerns.
Click to expand...
 
As legislation tom reform OMB and introduce Land appeals board was introduced May 16, how long will it take before it is passes? or will the same thing happen as last time - a motion was introduced to get rid of OMB and next thing you know an election is called and motion dies. Can the same thing happen this time with the Liberals calling an early election and the OMB reform dies? How c0nvienient for politicians
 
Palma said:
As legislation tom reform OMB and introduce Land appeals board was introduced May 16, how long will it take before it is passes? or will the same thing happen as last time - a motion was introduced to get rid of OMB and next thing you know an election is called and motion dies. Can the same thing happen this time with the Liberals calling an early election and the OMB reform dies? How c0nvienient for politicians
Click to expand...

Really depends - some legislation takes up to half a year to move through the process (e.g. Bill 68). FYI the legislation for OMB reform is Bill 139 - just passed first reading:

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&Intranet=&BillID=4936

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top