Thank You, Jeffrey Simpson.
Re: Jeffrey Simpson’s column, “Strike a blow for democracy: Scrap the OMB: In an age when municipalities have planning staffs, it’s an affront to suggest they need to have their actions overseen by a nanny,” Globe and Mail, Friday, January 28, 2011. The following is my experience.
On Monday, January 24, 2011, I experienced my first OMB hearing that lasted one day. The adjudicator made her decision on the spot in favor of the developer, that same day. The issue was a proposed 15 storey condo that will destroy 50 % of an existing woodlot, on a high elevation on the corner of Harwood & Rossland Ave., an already overburdened intersection in North Ajax, amidst an established residential neighbourhood of 181 two storey townhouses. No one wanted it.
We first got notice on Christmas Eve 2008. Two years later, I was the lone ‘party’ along with another participant appearing before a team of five ‘experts:’ a lawyer for the developer, planner for the developer, building architect, town planner and town lawyer. Our biggest stumbling block was fear, mostly of legal liability. My neighbours voted against forming a neighbourhood association, were reluctant to contribute to the planner’s $8,500 consulting fee or hire a lawyer.
I have four university degrees and work as a teacher, writer and part-time university professor. I listened to a lot of ‘experts.’ They seemed to be talking about a different neighbourhood than mine, where there is ‘no wildlife of any significance’ in the woodlot (Sharp-shinned hawk, Fowler’s toad, cardinals, woodpeckers, evening grosbeaks notwithstanding), and ‘no traffic concerns’ (despite the fact I walk to work daily amidst dangerous conditions) and transit is wonderful (I am car-free for 16 years and there are no bus shelters, irratic service after 10 pm…). At a December 13 Town of Ajax council meeting I was allowed five minutes to speak. At the OMB hearing I listened to the experts talk from 10 am to 1 pm about a neighbourhood I didn’t recognize. Madame chair asked, ‘Do you realize you cannot appear both as advocate and witness?’ Ummmm. I took one hour presenting my ‘Neighbourhood Analysis’ and pictures of the Sharp-shinned hawk that lives in the woodlot. I spoke of my concerns using phrases such as ‘tower in the park’ and ‘insensitive infill,’ quoting sections of the Ajax Official Plan. At the end I was a gracious loser and shook everyone’s hand and left.
I was not intimidated by the experts and their telephone-book-thick stacks of evidence and slick foam core illustrations, their long-winded posturing and witness testimomy about a neighbourhood they have visited, at most, probably three times. I had done my research. The OMB is established as an impartial venue to hear both sides of planning issues and sometimes ‘the little person’ really does have a chance. I feel proud that I conducted myself with integrity, stood by what I believe in, passionately defended the trees, hawks and toads, and that I didn’t back down. But as an educator, I can’t help but think that as a society we have outgrown this top down, archaic, authoritarian model. There must be more fair and creative ways to make sound and wise planning decisions for future generations. If I assigned the topic as a class project, I bet my high school students could probably come up with some.
