ARTICLE
10 February 2015

Parkland Dedication: "How Low Can You Go?"

WL
WeirFoulds LLP
Contributor
WeirFoulds LLP has established itself as one of Canada’s premier regional law firms and has provided strategic, cost-effective and innovative legal advice to our clients since 1860. We partner with our clients to offer full access to our business acumen and insights in four broad areas of practice: (1) Corporate; (2) Litigation; (3) Property; and (4) Government.
In the modern urban environment, parks and public recreational facilities are things that can be both greatly appreciated and taken for granted.
Canada Real Estate and Construction
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

This paper was delivered at the Ontario Bar Association's 2015 Annual Institute Program – Municipal and Planning Law (Changing Landscapes in Municipal and Planning Law)

A. Introduction

In the modern urban environment, parks and public recreational facilities are things that can be both greatly appreciated and taken for granted. We might all agree that parks are inherently a 'good thing' for ensuring the health, well-being and vibrancy of our communities and the people who live and work there; however, where there is often widespread disagreement and controversy is on the more concrete issues of how and where we plan for parks, and who pays for them.

These issues are of increasing importance in an economic and policy environment of scarce public resources and high costs for land and services in the modern land use planning and development context. It therefore comes as no surprise that in the post-Growth Plan era, parkland dedication has become a focal point for discussion and debate among the development industry, public sector bodies such as municipalities and the Province, and the Ontario Municipal Board ("OMB" or "Board").

The purposes of this paper are: (1) to explore the statutory and policy framework for the provision of parks and public recreational facilities as part of the development approval process in Ontario; (2) to discuss the issues that have arisen in the forefront of the discussion and debate about the provision of parkland or cash-in-lieu of parkland as a condition of development approval; and (3) to examine, as a case study, the adjudicative response from the OMB in its recent decisions involving the Town of Richmond Hill Official Plan and its implications for future policy decisions on parkland dedication.

To read the Paper in full, please click here.

The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions made by Tracey Steele, Manager of Parks Planning & Natural Heritage, Town of Richmond Hill, as well as the comments provided by Kim Mullin, Partner, WeirFoulds LLP. Any errors or omissions are, of course, the author's alone.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

ARTICLE
10 February 2015

Parkland Dedication: "How Low Can You Go?"

Canada Real Estate and Construction
Contributor
WeirFoulds LLP has established itself as one of Canada’s premier regional law firms and has provided strategic, cost-effective and innovative legal advice to our clients since 1860. We partner with our clients to offer full access to our business acumen and insights in four broad areas of practice: (1) Corporate; (2) Litigation; (3) Property; and (4) Government.
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More