City Planning: A transparent process PART I

Part I of II: This post is the first part of a review of the development application process, and common myths and misconceptions surrounding the process. Part II can be found here. 

credit: Ambro

With the advent of our new blog, I will occasionally be sharing my perspective on various current issues as they relate to city planning—an area in which I am very active as Chair of the Planning Committee. Planning has long been my wheelhouse, and I have a mix of history and personal perspective to share on many matters, after 20 years in office.

THE DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS

Lately, I’ve received a lot of questions about the approval process for new development proposals, and the role that our on-staff urban planners play in these procedures. I fear there is a fair amount of confusion about the process for development plan approvals, and the role of city staff in the process. Let’s take a tour of the process.

1. A property owner has an idea.

The first step: the owner has an idea of how they’d like to develop their property.

2. The property owner seeks pre-consultation.

At this stage, city staff will listen to the landowner’s initial ideas and will share with him a list of the steps he needs to take before filing his formal application. Steps may include traffic studies, sun shade studies, or other neighbourhood info. Some landowners may also consult community associations or other concerned parties.

3. The property owner files a formal application, which is reviewed by the planner.

The formal application becomes publicly available for review. The city’s urban planner begins the process of reviewing the application package, seeking to develop her recommendation of approval or rejection for the proposed development. When she has reviewed all the provided package, studies, and information, she renders her recommendation to either approve or reject the project.

4. The property owner makes a choice.

If the urban planner rejected the landowner’s proposed plan, he can choose to go one of two ways: he may forge ahead, without the approval of the planner, in the hopes of appealing to the Planning Committee...or, he may rethink his plan and decide to either change his proposal. He may also drop the project altogether.

5. Planning Committee reviews and votes.

At this stage, Planning Committee hears from the planner, the property owner, and sometimes other parties like community associations who may have a vested interest in the matter. After hearing the presented information and reviewing the application package, the committee votes on the plan, and the proposal is either approved or rejected.

  

Now, what doesn’t happen at the pre-consultation stage is any sort of approval or rejection by the city staff. At this point, the staff’s role is simply to provide the landowner with a checklist of all the studies, appeals, and procedures he will need to provide to be sure his formal application will be considered ready for review. It seems there is an urban myth circulating that city staff are able to give approval at this early stage of the process; this is simply untrue. Staff’s job at this level is to provide the landowner with the information he needs for application, but not to offer a favourable or unfavourable recommendation.

credit: Salvatore Vuono

It is at stage 3, or earlier at stage 2, that many applications are dropped. Few property owners choose to forge ahead to the Planning Committee with a negative recommendation letter attached to their application. Most would rather rework their plan to fit the appropriate CDP’s, Official Plan, and other policies. Thus, very few rejected applications end up at the Planning Committee table. The Planning Committee values the expertise and knowledge of our urban planners, and developers are aware of this; thus, they are unlikely to attempt to bypass the planners’ recommendation. This is a good thing for the committee, as it means that many poorly-planned applications are filtered out before they end up monopolizing the resources of the Planning Committee; the downside, however, is that another myth is begun: that the Planning Committee approves virtually every proposal the city receives. In reality, the proposals that reach the committee’s table have usually been more sound, more in keeping with the existing Official Plans, and have been recommended by the city staff--thus, they naturally have a higher rate of approval.

The stages of application are in place to ensure that all potential developers have their 'ducks in a row', and are prepared with solid research to back their proposals. It's is a step-by-step process, with each stage dependent on the results of the last.


So what happens with the many proposals that are declined at an earlier stage? Why is the public not directly informed of all of these discarded plans? And why is there sometimes a wary attitude towards the procedures and the staff who follow them? Read Part II to learn more.

-Peter